• 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)

Do you believe the deal will be approved?


  • Total voters
    886
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Yoboman

Member
YG4HOux.jpg
kDZlq97.jpg
 

feynoob

Banned
Don't get mad the two are not the same. Taking away games is a bigger dick move and that's something that both have done.
I am not comparing it to that. I am just saying taking specific content is much shittier than just normal timed exclusive.
Taking a certain content from live service is not a good thing, since it's important to have those content day1 in those games.

Destiny 1 is clear example of that.
But it was OK when Microsoft did it.
Who says that it was ok?
 

Varteras

Gold Member
I would imagine expanding their audience should be a priority now they’re lamenting about sales underperformance of many of their titles. But Square’s been making weird decisions lately, so…

I would agree if Final Fantasy was underperforming. It's not. It's these other projects they just throw out there. The sales aren't meeting their expectations on any platform. So they need to figure that shit out. Don't spend as much money on them? Reduce the number of projects and focus your teams on more likely hits? Don't ever pull a Forspoken again? It just seems like for every game Square Enix nails they feel they need to match it with an equal disaster or two. I've said for a while now. That company needs a whole new management team.
 

Poltz

Member
I just image a bunch of people playing their switches in room and one person looks up for a sec and says “ yeah whatever “ and then continues playing. 😁
Also, regarding the Call of Duty series, which is the globally popular game software of the Activision Group, there are many games that are more popular in Japan. For this reason, the company group's position in the business of developing and publishing games for game consoles is considered to have a limited impact on competition in the market for the multi-game subscription service business for game consoles. Therefore, even if the indirect network effect is taken into consideration, the company group concerned does not have the ability to implement the closure of inputs. Therefore, it is recognized that the closure of inputs will not cause the problem of market closure or exclusivity in the downstream market.

Pretty much.
 
Last edited:

feynoob

Banned
Also, regarding the Call of Duty series, which is the globally popular game software of the Activision Group, there are many games that are more popular in Japan. For this reason, the company group's position in the business of developing and publishing games for game consoles is considered to have a limited impact on competition in the market for the multi-game subscription service business for game consoles. Therefore, even if the indirect network effect is taken into consideration, the company group concerned does not have the ability to implement the closure of inputs. Therefore, it is recognized that the closure of inputs will not cause the problem of market closure or exclusivity in the downstream market.

Pretty much.
Does that mean MS can technically make COD exclusive in Japan?
 

MistBreeze

Member
About ActiBlizz deal…

I think these big publishers Activision - EA - ubisoft are failing or something

EA : battlefield flopped hard .. and ironically they are now relying more in single player campaigns

Ubisoft: look at there recent cancellations and delays

Activision: put more than 10 studios on COD only is waste of talent despite success it only Cod company now

Maybe these mergers for better I would rather play any Capcom or tecmo game instead

Heck what Housmark doing or solo cap is infinitely more interesting

Imagine Sifu with AAA budget

We need these shakeups in the industry it stagnating
 
Last edited:

aries_71

Junior Member
I am not comparing it to that. I am just saying taking specific content is much shittier than just normal timed exclusive.
It's probably worse, but not by that much. In a digital market accustomed to the immediacy of things, purposely delaying a title for one year is very damaging for the impacted platform. It creates a sense of frustration or even uncertainty about the platform future, all of it at a small fraction of the cost of making it fully exclusive. So, I don't buy the narrative that "full exclusive" is bad, but "timed exclusive" are OK. Legislator should put an end to these practices.
 

Poltz

Member
It's probably worse, but not by that much. In a digital market accustomed to the immediacy of things, purposely delaying a title for one year is very damaging for the impacted platform. It creates a sense of frustration or even uncertainty about the platform future, all of it at a small fraction of the cost of making it fully exclusive. So, I don't buy the narrative that "full exclusive" is bad, but "timed exclusive" are OK. Legislator should put an end to these practices.
That is how the gaming industry has ran for decades.
 

Three

Member
I am not comparing it to that. I am just saying taking specific content is much shittier than just normal timed exclusive.
Taking a certain content from live service is not a good thing, since it's important to have those content day1 in those games.
That sounds crazy to me. Especially when that specific content is timed anyway. I don't see any instance where timed exclusive content can be said to be shittier than a timed exclusive game. It's even worse when you realise that the latter includes games that are live service like PUBG, Valheim, Fall Guys, ARK2 etc.
 

aries_71

Junior Member
The problem is many devs rely on it for funding at the indie level.
Not only that. Controlling the exclusivity practices and deals may be impossible or very difficult. But 780 pages testify that this is a real issue. We wouldn’t be discussing mergers and acquisitions if the exclusivities, timed or not, were a moot point. What we see is the market reacting to this model.
 
Last edited:

Poltz

Member
Not only that. Controlling the exclusivity practices and deals may be impossible or very difficult. But 780 pages testify that this is a real issue. We wouldn’t be discussing mergers and acquisitions if the exclusivities, timed or not, were a moot point. What we see is the market reacting to this model.
All those day 1 Game Pass indies would vanish overnight.
 

Yoboman

Member
Not only that. Controlling the exclusivity practices and deals may be impossible or very difficult. But 780 pages testify that this is a real issue. We wouldn’t be discussing mergers and acquisitions if the exclusivities, timed or not, were a moot point. What we see is the market reacting to this model.
Not really. As I've heard over the past week a few times "it was never announced for that console"
 

Topher

Gold Member
Not only that. Controlling the exclusivity practices and deals may be impossible or very difficult. But 780 pages testify that this is a real issue. We wouldn’t be discussing mergers and acquisitions if the exclusivities, timed or not, were a moot point. What we see is the market reacting to this model.

These acquisitions are not about exclusives. Microsoft's first party content fell far behind and everything up to and including Bethesda was an effort to correct that situation. ABK being up for sale was a situation that was a result of their internal scandals. Bobby Kotick is trying to salvage a big pay day for the stockholders and himself while pushing all the problems on to the new owner. Perfect situation for Microsoft to swoop in and pick up a major publisher.
 

feynoob

Banned
That sounds crazy to me. Especially when that specific content is timed anyway. I don't see any instance where timed exclusive content can be said to be shittier than a timed exclusive game. It's even worse when you realise that the latter includes games that are live service like PUBG, Valheim, Fall Guys, ARK2 etc.
For tmed exclusive games, you are at least getting full product at a later time.

While timed content, you are getting inferior product, even though you spent the same money as the other platform user, all because MS/Sony decided they wanted to be a dick about it.
 

Three

Member
Who says that it was ok?
Because it was back then, nobody was really complaining about xbox timed exclusive content for GTA, COD, FIFA or anything. They were actually gloating, didn't care or were secretly hoping Sony would die from it.

For tmed exclusive games, you are at least getting full product at a later time.

While timed content, you are getting inferior product, even though you spent the same money as the other platform user, all because MS/Sony decided they wanted to be a dick about it.
That's ridiculous, you get the missing content at a later time much like you do the missing entire game.
 
Last edited:
I am not comparing it to that. I am just saying taking specific content is much shittier than just normal timed exclusive.
Taking a certain content from live service is not a good thing, since it's important to have those content day1 in those games.

Destiny 1 is clear example of that.

Who says that it was ok?

Not being able to play the game is worse. At least people can play those games even though they might miss out on some content.
 

phil_t98

#SonyToo
Because it was back then, nobody was really complaining about xbox timed exclusive content for GTA, COD, FIFA or anything. They were actually gloating, didn't care or were secretly hoping Sony would die from it.


That's ridiculous, you get the missing content at a later time much like you do the missing entire game.


As Sony has done with PS exclusive advertising or stickers all over the software boxes. both as bad as each other
 

Three

Member
As Sony has done with PS exclusive advertising or stickers all over the software boxes. both as bad as each other
Sony were advertising exclusivity on the box? colour me surprised.

not sure how that's relevant to users not only being Ok with exclusive content but gloating and hoping Playstation fails. Again, I guess the tag really is accurate even when there is no relevance.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom