phil_t98
#SonyToo
No they ain’t but if somebody walks in and looks for a game they are all looking to compete to get market space ain’t they. Why else has the switch sold so much
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
No they ain’t but if somebody walks in and looks for a game they are all looking to compete to get market space ain’t they. Why else has the switch sold so much
ChorizoPicozo
Member
That comment is not about the market, is about the complementation between different devices.
CatLady
Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
Totally off topic but looking at you avi, I see you are no longer a furry hooker. I'm now reminded I no longer need to wear this this horror of an avi anymore either. Today is a good day.
Sorry for the interruption everyone, please return to your pointless circular arguments.
onesvenus
Member
Doom is not. Why do you think that's the only way of doing it?
And even if it is, that would go against your point about not being technically able to run it.
Last edited:
onesvenus
Member
That's a conjecture at best,
It doesn't have to sell 10M copies to be profitable. If it will or won't be is anyone guessing.
feynoob
Member
Doom is a good port. But that doesn't negate my point.
Re would be available on Switch through cloud.
Some games can be ported, while others can only run through cloud.
Last edited:
Topher
Gold Member
Why? I'll show you why.
Generally, still games and thus compete in a very generic sense, sure. That list, however, puts an exclamation point behind the fact that there are more differences than similarities between Switch and PS/Xbox when you look at them as actual games and not generic widgets.
phil_t98
#SonyToo
Why? I'll show you why.
Generally, still games and thus compete in a very generic sense, sure. That list, however, puts an exclamation point behind the fact that there are more differences than similarities between Switch and PS/Xbox when you look at them as actual games and not generic widgets.
and yet the full chart includes Nintendo games
The Last of Us Part I tops the UK boxed game charts in first week of release
The Last of Us Part I, the remake of the 2013 game The Last of Us, tops the boxed game charts this week, as last week's contender Saints Row drops to number 6.
ukie.org.uk
onesvenus
Member
You were saying
which is false.
They could get a port like Doom or a cloud game like RE which supports my argument that if it doesn't exist is only because Activision doesn't want to, not due to any problem with the hardware
Topher
Gold Member
and yet the full chart includes Nintendo games
The Last of Us Part I tops the UK boxed game charts in first week of release
The Last of Us Part I, the remake of the 2013 game The Last of Us, tops the boxed game charts this week, as last week's contender Saints Row drops to number 6.
And yet when we look at the details of each platform the story dramatically changes.
Switch has a huge install base, so the motivation should be there for a port. Whether or not the system's components and online infrastructure can handle it are uncertain to me.
But the idea of cloud based MW2 on Switch should be dismissed and never mentioned again. Unless you are suggesting Switch play some mobile only version with cell phones. 60 FPS is the baseline, and 120 FPS is the best experience. Any lag above and beyond what opponents have will make it a very poor experience.
phil_t98
#SonyToo
And yet when we look at the details of each platform the story dramatically changes.
And yet when we look at the details of each platform the story dramatically changes.
So because Nintendo sell so well on their own platform we should discount them?
And when we look at best selling games on PS4?
List of best-selling PlayStation 4 video games - Wikipedia
Topher
Gold Member
So because Nintendo sell so well on their own platform we should discount them?
And when we look at best selling games on PS4?
List of best-selling PlayStation 4 video games - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
I said nothing about "discounting" anything. Factually, we are talking about a much different subset of games selling on Switch. Games that sold well on PS4 doesn't change that.
Menzies
Banned
Pick your poison: -
Either Nintendo is a competitor in the TV/couch surfing arena, and there is a crossover audience for players who enjoy Elden Ring and Zelda, Xenoblade and Persona or DOOM and…DOOM. And the presence of CoD isn’t inherent in platform success OR;
It’s a two-horse race with Sony and their only rival Xbox, CoD is essential input on equal terms (lol) and Sony just outsold their one and only rival by 60+ million. Is a substantial lessening of competition even a concern here??
To what end is it the regulator’s concern that Nintendo has been more successful in differentiating itself against Sony taking less risks and choosing not to? When predicting the future do you not look at the past? Sony is in a better position today than any competitor ever was when taking risks and trying to adapt.
Either Nintendo is a competitor in the TV/couch surfing arena, and there is a crossover audience for players who enjoy Elden Ring and Zelda, Xenoblade and Persona or DOOM and…DOOM. And the presence of CoD isn’t inherent in platform success OR;
It’s a two-horse race with Sony and their only rival Xbox, CoD is essential input on equal terms (lol) and Sony just outsold their one and only rival by 60+ million. Is a substantial lessening of competition even a concern here??
To what end is it the regulator’s concern that Nintendo has been more successful in differentiating itself against Sony taking less risks and choosing not to? When predicting the future do you not look at the past? Sony is in a better position today than any competitor ever was when taking risks and trying to adapt.
Topher
Gold Member
I'm not going to rehash all the Nintendo stuff yet again, but I'll say I have no doubt in my mind that Sony would be able to compete without Call of Duty. The arguments I've made about Nintendo were never to suggest otherwise. I also think it really doesn't matter at this point unless we are saying Phil Spencer is outright lying, or not being entirely forthcoming, about his commitment to Call of Duty on PlayStation.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Take-Two CEO has no concerns with Microsoft's planned Activision deal (NASDAQ:ATVI)
Take-Two Interactive (TTWO) CEO Strauss Zelnick said he has no issues with the Microsoft's (MSFT) planned $69 billion purchase of Activision (ATVI) and most of his competitors feel the...
seekingalpha.com
Last edited:
Cheezewizz
Banned
To expand it a bit further...
If we assume that Nintendo is completely irrelevant to COD here, it still doesn't address the overall question of whether or not COD is vital to Playstation being competitive as a platform.
Let's assume Nintendo is completely irrelevant for a moment. Let's say that it's a two horse race between PS and Xbox, and that Sony is correct in their claim that having access to COD is absolutely vital in order to succeed. Hell, we can go all the way to assuming that not only is having access to COD vital to success, but that there must be parity between that access, such as Sony's stated fears of COD going to Gamepass.
Even if we assume all that... Sony still doesn't have a leg to stand on because they've been enjoying exclusive COD content for years. If Sony's argument is that they must have not only access to COD, but equal access to it as well. Then by their very own claim, they've been guilty of committing anti-competitive behavior by paying Activision for exclusive content and access for years.
We can shift the narrative any which way we want to try and give Sony the benefit of the doubt here. We can shift the narrative not just completely off the page, but off the desk entirely. Ultimately none of it matters because once logic is applied, it all ends up the same.
Either COD is essential to platform success or it isn't.
If it is, then comparing Nintendo is completely relevant because they do in fact have a successful console platform that doesn't have access to COD. It also means that Sony has been knowingly engaging in anti-competitive behavior by paying for exclusive content and features for years.
If it's not, then Sony has no argument at all. It just means that Sony is simply claiming it is in order to maintain it's current advantage to COD going forward.
No matter which way we spin it, it makes Sony look bad, and for good reason. Because they're arguing in bad faith no matter what.
The people bringing up Nintendo know there is some crossover but they are regarded as separate by the commission.
The commission currently sees Apple and Google as a duopoly. Could Apple and Google counter by saying Windows exists as competition? After all there could be some overlap there too, right?
I can use my handheld computing device to play, work and connect to a monitor and do most things like you would on a Windows machine.
The commission currently sees Apple and Google as a duopoly. Could Apple and Google counter by saying Windows exists as competition? After all there could be some overlap there too, right?
I can use my handheld computing device to play, work and connect to a monitor and do most things like you would on a Windows machine.
Last edited:
DarkMage619
$MSFT
Aren't Apple and Google companies while Windows is a product? I don't see how they would be compared anyway. Switch , Xbox, and PlayStation are all game consoles and are all in direct competition. The sales charts put them together and there are games that can be played across all the platforms. To act like they aren't in direct competition is ridiculous.
Bloody hell, clearly Apple and Google are considered a duopoly in the smartphone OS space and windows is the product they can bring up as to why they are not a duopoly because of overlap by arguing "they are all OS' ".
Why can't they be compared do you think but Nintendo Switch can? That's the point. People use excel on their phones, play games, can hook up to a monitor, things like DeX exists, pretty much do what windows does.
Could it perhaps be that market overlap is not that big even if overlap in functionality exists?
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Translation:
This is why MS didn't bother with responses in phase 1 for the CMA or EU.
Last edited:
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
But, as I understand it, concessions could be that cod must be multi platform, or are they hunting something else?
Still ludicrous that you can buy to own a company you literally don't own lol.
Imagine buying a car under the concession that everyone on the same block you live in are allowed to drive it equally as much as you.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Considering that's the main thing Sony/CMA are complaining about, CoD's guaranteed existence on PS platforms will likely be the primary concession. No one has said anything about anything else, no comments on King, other Activision IP etc. So it's just CoD that seems to be the main thing.
And MS are probably going to agree to it without much issue if it means it clears the hurdle for the deal to go through.
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
I could imagine Sony would try to sneak a concession called it must never reach gamepass and Sony are allowed to make their own exxlusivities in the game like they always did.
But, what if Microsoft made a new call of duty mobile game, would that mean that it also has to get a ps release?
It's still crazy to think you own a property you technically don't own.
feynoob
Member
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I'm gonna guess that's precisely why they refused to provide any more responses to either CMA or EU in the "you have 1 week to respond before we move to phase 2" stages. They're letting it go to phase 2 for this kind of thing.
feynoob
Member
If Sony does that, MS can simply counter it.
feynoob
Member
That is the reason for phase 2.
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
How?
It's sonys biggest income, it's hard to say it wouldn't affect Sony.
And regulators seems to care more about Sony rather than competition on the market.
feynoob
Member
Sony doesn't own Activision. They have no power in deciding against gamepass.8
Plus regulators need concrete reason to accept Sony requests.
Remember, MS has xcloud, which uses gamepass. So day1 gamepass is required from them.
feynoob
Member
Mobile and pc market.So MS is about to pay 70 billions to acquire a company without being able to make the content exclusive.
King and Blizzard are the main butter.
Cod would increase gamepass. So exclusive won't matter.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
It was gonna go in phase 2 regardless cause that's where they do the more indepth investigations and reach out to other publishers and such. I don't think at all this would have been resolved in phase 1 under any major jurisdiction.
So MS is about to pay 70 billions to acquire a company without being able to make the content exclusive.
Last edited:
feynoob
Member
Cod is the hold back here. Otherwise, the deal would have passed faster here.
SSfox
Member
feynoob
Member
As long as cod is on gamepsss, they don't care.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
feynoob
Member
Those games don't matter here.Activision also makes more games besides CoD as well
COD is much bigger than all Activision games combined.
From Era:
First 23 minutes.
- Very, very high possibilities to close a deal in phase 2 with concessions
- Highy difficult if not impossible to terminate a phase 2 without concessions
- If Microsoft clarifies EU Commission doubts, no problem, it closes
- more
L'UE BOCCIA l'acquisizione Microsoft Activision? - Il Cortocircuito
Il Trio delle meraviglie torna live per una puntata veramente epocale de IL CORTOCIRCUITO: insieme a Pierpaolo, Alessio e Francesco, in questa puntata abbiam...
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
For the sake of this deal, CoD is the be-all end-all but so many people forget the treasure trove of IP owned by Activision. MS aren't looking to buy just Call of Duty.
From Era:
First 23 minutes.
- Very, very high possibilities to close a deal in phase 2 with concessions
- Highy difficult if not impossible to terminate a phase 2 without concessions
- If Microsoft clarifies EU Commission doubts, no problem, it closes
- more
L'UE BOCCIA l'acquisizione Microsoft Activision? - Il Cortocircuito
Il Trio delle meraviglie torna live per una puntata veramente epocale de IL CORTOCIRCUITO: insieme a Pierpaolo, Alessio e Francesco, in questa puntata abbiam...
www.youtube.com
Thanks, pretty much in line with what I thought was gonna happen. They'll save the official pen-on-paper concessions for phase 2.
Last edited:
feynoob
Member
MS is interested in King, which would open the mobile door for them.
While Blizzard would help them on pc front.
In essence, those IPs are pretty much useless in console space. They shine better on PC, which Sony doesn't have any foot in.
Little Chicken
Member
Microsoft could just create numerous CoD spin-offs and keep them to themselves.So MS is about to pay 70 billions to acquire a company without being able to make the content exclusive.
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
I wonder what concessions they want. If they really want to keep COD off gamepass I don’t see the point.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Activision Blizzard rises as Raymond James upgrades on likelihood Microsoft deal closes
Activision Blizzard (ATVI) shares rose in premarket trading on Thursday as Raymond James upgraded the video game publisher, noting that the likelihood its deal with Microsoft (MSFT)...
seekingalpha.com
Bernkastel
Ask me about my fanboy energy!
COD is not the only thing they make. Even without regulators they still said since the beginning that COD will be multiplat. ButSo MS is about to pay 70 billions to acquire a company without being able to make the content exclusive.
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/bliz...ct-in-within-an-existing-blizzard-ip.1630316/
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
Did God of War and HZD suffer from being multiplats?
Iced Arcade
Member
keeping COD on PS is smart business not to mention putting COD on gamepass day 1 is just as good as something being exclusive.So MS is about to pay 70 billions to acquire a company without being able to make the content exclusive.
doing anything other than that would be foolish.
Last edited:
Activision also makes more games besides CoD as well
It is in those games where the interesting thing is. Know if there will be concessions also on them or everything is reduced to COD.
From what is distilled, MS has its red line on them and they have only expressed the possibility of concession regarding COD Ip for its weight in the market and rivals
PS
ABK going up today because Raymond James Financial (an investment bank) upgraded Activision Blizzard on the likelihood of the deal closing.
Activision Blizzard rises as Raymond James upgrades on likelihood Microsoft deal closes
Activision Blizzard (ATVI) shares rose in premarket trading on Thursday as Raymond James upgraded the video game publisher, noting that the likelihood its deal with Microsoft (MSFT)...
Banjo64
cumsessed
Microsoft aren’t hurting for quality IP. They are already sitting on a treasure trove from Rare (that they’ve never tapped in to) and now Zenimax.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked