Support NeoGAF

[IllegalLemon]

I'm down to ask mods to put a ban on FOSS posts. Who thinks I should?

No. I'm having too much fun reading the insane posts made by these corporate bootlickers. Keep the posts, it's gonna get even crazier from here and it's great to watch and have a laugh with the meltdowns, as they happen.

 

[GHG]

so the CMA knew that MS only started to talk about other consoles only when regulators where looking into it, their plan was to make COD exclusive

Of course they did. Initially the intention was to make the whole catalogue exclusive. Then they offered COD for the remainder of the existing contract with Sony, then it was 3 years for Sony, then it was 10 years for Sony, then 10 years for Sony + Nintendo, then finally 10 years for Sony + Nintendo + any mom and pop shop with a cloud server this side of Mars.

And ultimately the question people need to ask themselves is why 10 years? What's the significance of 10 years? Well the evolution of cloud gaming in that time frame combined with the fact that they would have had full control of all the revenue + content for that amount of time would have been enough to render any competition irrelevant by the end.

 

[BeardGawd]

CMA acknowledged the disagreement of market share in their findings. They explicitly say that their concern is regarding "Microsoft's future position". So even if CAT agreed with Microsoft on the market share percentage, CMA can simply change the percentage and come to the exact same decision.

And let me ask you. What better way to prove irrationality then the CMA making multiple basic level mistakes and always coming to the same conclusion?

 

[Elios83]

Funny thing is that Phil is awfully quiet now. He has not made a single public comment related to the acquisition. Perhaps his way of abolishing himself from the responsibility now, that it was more of a team effort and that Phil wasn't leading this?

He's quiet because he has been told to stay silent because he has not the competence to handle the situation and his open mouth could create more harm than benefit.

Nadella and Smith are equally as responsible about going on with this deal as Spencer.
The problem is that they represent the whole company at a way higher level so they're shielded. If they have to find someone that must pay for the debacle it will be the weak link of the chain hence Spencer, it's also pretty easy to say that after many years with him at at the head of gaming results were simply not what they expected.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Of course they did. Initially the intention was to make the whole catalogue exclusive. Then they offered COD for the remainder of the existing contract with Sony, then it was 3 years for Sony, then it was 10 years for Sony, then 10 years for Sony + Nintendo, then finally 10 years for Sony + Nintendo + any mom and pop shop with a cloud server this side of Mars.

And ultimately the question people need to ask themselves is why 10 years? What's the significance of 10 years? Well the evolution of cloud gaming in that time frame combined with the fact that they would have had full control of all the revenue + content for that amount of time would have been enough to render any competition irrelevant by the end.

Correct.

And it's also why they were unwilling to go beyond 10 years.

Afterall, that gives Sony enough time to make a CoD competitor, per their own words

 

[feynoob]

And let me ask you. What better way to prove irrationality then the CMA making multiple basic level mistakes and always coming to the same conclusion?

The spirit of SenjutsuSage is alive.

 

[DeepEnigma]

According to this forum cloud gaming does neither exist nor work and will never take off.

No, according to this forum most agree cloud gaming sucks for the end user in a myriad of ways, but we also know the same normies that make cell phone games and Fortnite successful, would have no issues adopting cloud gaming in the future with the slow burn/boiling frog approach. They just aren't tech enthusiasts.

 

[Bernoulli]

CMA did their job, they really cooked them they saw through all the bullshit and PR

CMA are the GOATS

Signing the agreements with NVIDIA, Boosteroid and Ubitus while the review process was still going on, could just be a short term incentive for MS, according to the CMA (page 293)

In respect of Microsoft's submission that the agreements prove conclusively that Microsoft is incentivised to distribute Activision content widely, we consider it is relevant that these agreements were entered into in the context of an ongoing merger review process. We consider that Microsoft entering into these agreements does not provide us with reliable evidence regarding its incentives in the same way as other past behaviour which is separate to the Merger and Merger review process, or our general analysis of the Merged Entity's incentives above. Accordingly, we do not consider the fact that Microsoft has entered into these agreements undermines our findings on its post-Merger incentives. Microsoft may have short-term incentives to enter into these agreements to seek to address the competition concerns arising from the Merger, but this is not informative of its longer-term commercial incentives.

Prohibition of the merger also means that MS and ABK won't be able to try again for the next 10 years (page 336)

Prohibition would be effected by accepting undertakings under section 82 of the Act or making an order under section 84 of the Act, prohibiting the Merger and preventing the Parties from attempting to merge for a further period: our normal practice would be to prevent a future merger between the Parties for the next ten years, absent a change of circumstances.

A third party thought that prohibiting the merger could risk ABK entering into a long term exclusivity deal with MS (page 337)

One third party ([REDACTED]) told us that prohibition would not be an effective remedy because it disagreed with the SLC finding, and that blocking the Merger could risk Activision entering into long-term exclusivity deals with Microsoft which would have the same effect, in its view, as divestiture of the CoD franchise. Another third party ([REDACTED]) commented that prohibition would be 'detrimental' for the growth of cloud gaming and [REDACTED] players as they would not have access to the CoD title.

 

[Topher]

And let me ask you. What better way to prove irrationality then the CMA making multiple basic level mistakes and always coming to the same conclusion?

That's not how it works. Microsoft has to prove to the CAT that specific arguments are "irrational" or illegal in the CMA final findings. If that happens, then the CAT sends the case back to the CMA for reconsideration. But again, the CMA can simply address the "mistake". That doesn't throw out their ruling.

 

[Varteras]

The entire planning was fucked up from the start.

It always was what we can least offer to appease the regulators.

Yeah. Between Microsoft's shifting offers with Sony, their attempts to make deals only during the review process, their ludicrous terms in the deals they attempted, the unlikelihood that Microsoft would successfully make CoD at parity on Switch when Activision hasn't, their lack of deals with cloud competitors like Amazon, and their refusal to do anything more than 10-year deals. It seemed pretty clear that Microsoft had no solid plans and had originally thought the deal was a slam dunk.

 

[jm89]

Prohibition of the merger also means that MS and ABK won't be able to try again for the next 10 years (page 336)

Prohibition would be effected by accepting undertakings under section 82 of the Act or making an order under section 84 of the Act, prohibiting the Merger and preventing the Parties from attempting to merge for a further period: our normal practice would be to prevent a future merger between the Parties for the next ten years, absent a change of circumstances.

Looks like MS got a 10 year deal instead.

 

[Kilau]

The MS approach to this deal has always been interesting and perplexing. They’ve treated it like a political campaign trying to score points in the public debate and it’s very strange. The rhetoric from the “influencer” crowd and corporate officials could easily be about a political opponent.

They were able to keep quiet about the deal before announcing but since then it’s been a non stop public PR machine.

I can’t say things would be going differently if they had been less aggressive publicly but I can’t see how it’s helped them at all.

 

[Edmund]

I'm down to ask mods to put a ban on FOSS posts. Who thinks I should?

Keep the posts. We don't want to be an echo chamber like Resetera. We're better than them.

 

[Varteras]

Keep the posts. We don't want to be an echo chamber like Resetera. We're better than them.

 

[Edmund]

from idas

The CMA didn't consider the agreement with Nintendo as evidence that MS was interested in distributing COD to more platforms because the agreement was entered during the review process (page 186)

Regarding the Nintendo agreement, in addition to noting that this theory of harm is primarily focussed on SIE for reasons already explained, we also consider the points discussed in the ability assessment regarding the uncertainty created by certain terms of this agreement also apply to our incentive analysis. With regards to Microsoft's submission that this agreement demonstrates a general intention to distribute CoD on more consoles, we note that this agreement has been entered into during the course of our Merger investigation (and those of other authorities). We therefore do not consider this is reliable evidence of what Microsoft's incentives would otherwise be in the ordinary course.

so the CMA knew that MS only started to talk about other consoles only when regulators where looking into it, their plan was to make COD exclusive and foreclose competitors

Anyone with common sense can tell that MS is doing all these 10 year deals to look like the good guys. They are fake as fuck as its.so nice to see them getting called out.


Nothing more I hate than people who are fake and arrogant.

 

[Varteras]

Anyone with common sense can tell that MS is doing all these 10 year deals to look like the good guys. They are fake as fuck as its.so nice to see them getting called out.


Nothing more I hate than people who are fake and arrogant.

Their deal with Boosteroid and using Ukraine as a "look how noble we are" moment. Classy.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Always the warrior take even when consoles are not even the rationale for the decision. Big reason, I'd say, why he is banned. Just too much of a warrior.

Twitter is definitely his natural habitat.

 

[Bernoulli]

Keep the posts. We don't want to be an echo chamber like Resetera. We're better than them.

about that from the idas summary they are all avoiding to comment about the fact the MS wanted to make the game exclusive from the start and anything that is against the deal

 

[DForce]

The look on Colt's face. LOL.

 

[El Pistolero]

this is insane what is he talking about?

 

[Sanepar]

Of course they did. Initially the intention was to make the whole catalogue exclusive. Then they offered COD for the remainder of the existing contract with Sony, then it was 3 years for Sony, then it was 10 years for Sony, then 10 years for Sony + Nintendo, then finally 10 years for Sony + Nintendo + any mom and pop shop with a cloud server this side of Mars.

And ultimately the question people need to ask themselves is why 10 years? What's the significance of 10 years? Well the evolution of cloud gaming in that time frame combined with the fact that they would have had full control of all the revenue + content for that amount of time would have been enough to render any competition irrelevant by the end.

10 years from now cloud will still be crap for games that need low latency. Hw will still be there as king.

 

[DrFigs]

Remember those couple of weeks when everyone pretended this acquisition was about king?

 

[Dick Jones]

Our dear friend is working hard

 

[DeepEnigma]

"A victory for Ukraine" - Brad Smith

 

[Astray]

CMA did their job, they really cooked them they saw through all the bullshit and PR

CMA are the GOATS

Say what you want about Idas, but his posts are genuinely value-additive even when you don't think he's unbiased. from the same post (LINK), this caught my interest:

MS told the CMA that prohibiting the acquisition would have "huge collateral effects on the way in which Microsoft is able to carry on its business as it wishes to outside the realm of cloud gaming' (page 406)

In its response to our Remedies Working Paper, Microsoft told us that the CMA had 'substantially understated the costs of prohibition', and that other than the RCBs, prohibition would have 'huge collateral effects on the way in which Microsoft is able to carry on its business as it wishes to outside the realm of cloud gaming'.

It added that prohibition would limit Microsoft as to how it would be able to operate in all non-cloud gaming activities where it would be able to use Activision content to pursue its strategic goals. It told us that as the Addendum to the Provisional Findings recognised, there was no basis for competition concerns in relation to these activities and yet Microsoft would be precluded from pursuing legitimate business opportunities. It therefore told us that the proportionality concern could not simply be seen through the prism of provable RCBs: the impact on Microsoft's business freedom was 'very extensive and not justifiable'.

I can't look at this part and not think the Xbox console business is not on borrowed time..

 

[GHG]

10 years from now cloud will still be crap for games that need low latency. Hw will still be there as king.

Well this is what they will want to tell us now, which is highly convenient when they've been spending so much time talking up their cloud offering (along with a few people here who shall not be named).

The reality is that things are indeed progressing in that space, it's probably the area that is being most invested in from an R&D perspective and Nvidia pretty much have a proof of concept out there that proves it can work under the right circumstances (proximity to the server, Internet connection, etc).

I'm not a fan and probably never will be. The most I'm willing to tolerate is in-home streaming but even that I'll avoid unless I have no other option (hence I now have 3 PC's + a steam deck + a PS5 spread across my home). But we need to remember, most people who post on a forum like this are hardcore gamers and will be more sensitive to things like latency and lag than public joe will be. We make up the minority of these companies' customers and public joe makes up the majority. The moment it catches on with public joe, that's the direction we are heading in and we are powerless to fight it, just as we have been with mobile gaming, GAAS and microtracsations/lootboxes.

Everything Microsoft are doing now is with both eyes firmly on the future. You don't propose to invest over 70 billion dollors on a division that has failed to make you money over the course of it's existence (net) unless you see a future where those investments will turn out to be highly lucrative (they also don't throw their toys out the pram in the way they have done since the CMA decision if it wasn't an imperative step from a strategic standpoint). How exactly do they envisage things becoming lucrative? They've been telling us this whole time - it's not console, it's cloud.

If given the opportunity to they will force us in that direction as quickly as they feasibly can. Hence when Phil Spencer mentioned "the acquisition of Activision Blizzard is meant to speed up Microsoft's gaming plans", that's very likely exactly what he was referring to. If we are forced in that direction then outside of owning what will become increasingly expensive and niche gaming hardware (because consoles will no longer be produced at scale, if at all) we will have very little choice but to accept it.

I take a very dim view of everything related to cloud because when I see these huge mega-corporations getting as excited and enthusiastic as they are about things like this it only ever spells trouble for us.

 

[Varteras]

Say what you want about Idas, but his posts are genuinely value-additive even when you don't think he's unbiased. from the same post (LINK), this caught my interest:


I can't look at this part and not think the Xbox console business is not on borrowed time..

It was nearly closed down once before. Shareholders have already shown impatience for the brand. They're not going to wait forever a second time. Either Xbox starts making the company some real money or they will demand Microsoft dip out. They won't want to leave gaming. Plenty of money to be made. But this strategy Xbox has been trying is looking less and less likely to succeed. Meanwhile, Sony and Nintendo are rocking on the traditional strategies.

 

[DeepEnigma]

If Spencer does get fired, it won't be because of this deal. It will be the general MS gaming performance. This deal was bigger than Phil Spencer, at 69bn it was a Nadella deal imo.

MS won't get rid of their brand mascot. Not in the traditional way of sorts.

 

[Astray]

It was nearly closed down once before. Shareholders have already shown impatience for the brand. They're not going to wait forever a second time. Either Xbox starts making the company some real money or they will demand Microsoft dip out. They won't want to leave gaming. Plenty of money to be made. But this strategy Xbox has been trying is looking less and less likely to succeed. Meanwhile, Sony and Nintendo are rocking on the traditional strategies.

Watching Microsoft essentially bring it up is different though.

 

[feynoob]

League one grind is finished. Now I am on championship. Hope I can pull together. I had to rely on my academic kids to survive that hell.

 

[GHG]

Say what you want about Idas, but his posts are genuinely value-additive even when you don't think he's unbiased. from the same post (LINK), this caught my interest:


I can't look at this part and not think the Xbox console business is not on borrowed time..

It begs the question (if we take what they are saying here at face value, which is always iffy as far as Microsoft are concerned), how on earth have they got themselves into a position whereby a $70 billion dollar outlay is the only way they can continue operating the division as they have been for all these years?

Think about that for a second, $70 billion dollars just to keep things going. If that's not bullshit, it's mind boggling. They've really let the rot set in.

 

[Bernoulli]

so Microsoft madeup the fake 150 Million players by counting even the free membership of geforce NOW
but CMA saw through it they really went into it with a microscope genius

"Microsoft was silent on whether CoD would become available to the 18 million free members(geforce free membership). This third party also told us that it would not be 'economically sound' for Microsoft to make CoD available to trial subscribers with free accounts when tens of millions of avid fans were willing to pay $70 to buy the latest game."

No, the third party is saying the only way for MS to hit that number is to include the free memberships, which wouldn’t necessarily be receiving access as a result of this deal, the third party’s accusing MS of obfuscating how many people would benefit from the acquisition by including people who wouldn’t necessarily have newfound access, because they’d be people who already have and can purchase the game elsewhere.

They’re saying the only way MS could ensure that number is by making the game available through free memberships without a purchase

 

[Varteras]

It begs the question (if we take what they are saying here at face value, which is always iffy as far as Microsoft are concerned), how on earth have they got themselves into a position whereby a $70 billion dollar outlay is the only way they can continue operating the division as they have been for all these years?

Think about that for a second, $70 billion dollars just to keep things going. If that's not bullshit, it's mind boggling. They've really let the rot set in.

Fuck traditional gaming.

Fuck traditional gaming.

 

[laynelane]

Well this is what they will want to tell us now, which is highly convenient when they've been spending so much time talking up their cloud offering (along with a few people here who shall not be named).

The reality is that things are indeed progressing in that space, it's probably the area that is being most invested in from an R&D perspective and Nvidia pretty much have a proof of concept out there that proves it can work under the right circumstances (proximity to the server, Internet connection, etc).

I'm not a fan and probably never will be. The most I'm willing to tolerate is in-home streaming but even that I'll avoid unless I have no other option (hence I now have 3 PC's + a steam deck + a PS5 spread across my home). But we need to remember, most people who post on a forum like this are hardcore gamers and will be more sensitive to things like latency and lag than public joe will be. We make up the minority of these companies' customers and public joe makes up the majority. The moment it catches on with public joe, that's the direction we are heading in and we are powerless to fight it, just as we have been with mobile gaming, GAAS and microtracsations/lootboxes.

Everything Microsoft are doing now is with both eyes firmly on the future. You don't propose to invest over 70 billion dollors on a division that has failed to make you money over the course of it's existence (net) unless you see a future where those investments will turn out to be highly lucrative (they also don't throw their toys out the pram in the way they have done since the CMA decision if it wasn't an imperative step from a strategic standpoint). How exactly do they envisage things becoming lucrative? They've been telling us this whole time - it's not console, it's cloud.

If given the opportunity to they will force us in that direction as quickly as they feasibly can. Hence when Phil Spencer mentioned "the acquisition of Activision Blizzard is meant to speed up Microsoft's gaming plans", that's very likely exactly what he was referring to. If we are forced in that direction then outside of owning what will become increasingly expensive and niche gaming hardware (because consoles will no longer be produced at scale, if at all) we will have very little choice but to accept it.

I take a very dim view of everything related to cloud because when I see these huge mega-corporations getting as excited and enthusiastic as they are about things like this it only ever spells trouble for us.

The bolded, in a nutshell, has been one of my biggest worries throughout all this. Consumer choice, to me, is invaluable. Agreed with the rest of your summary too and I think we're already seeing signs of this progression in terms of changing of consumer buying habits, consolidation, etc. That's why, imo, the recent block of the ABK acquisition is so meaningful.

 

[dotnotbot]

 

[Edmund]

Idk why but Don Mattrick looks so much like Greg in Succession to me. Or rather, Greg reminds me of Don Mattrick.

 

[Varteras]

Maybe Microsoft should look into hiring more talent for existing studios with the money they saved?



Playground Games trying to CONTRACT WORK an Encounter Designer for Fable. Really? You don't have the money to just fucking hire someone with great creds? One of the best studios you have is doing contract labor for that?

 

[Varteras]

Plenty of time for Microsoft to make a CoD competitor.

 

[Pelta88]

This is the worst possible outcome for XBOX. The CMA is essentially telling XBOX to go create...

 

[Varteras]

This is the worst possible outcome for XBOX. The CMA is essentially telling XBOX to go create...

 

[Ansphn]

I think Brad Smith is safe and also think he is very persistent. You don't get a job like that if you are not determined.

Phil on the other hand, he has a lot to answer for if it doesn't go through.

Like what his future plan for Xbox now? And why is it worth it for MS to continue to loose money on it ( I think xbox right now is bleeding money)?

Xbox hasn't been making much money (to Microsoft's standards) for a long long time. Gamepass has made it worst. Yeah I agree Phil is gone after this gen. They'll just push him out and he's say he's retiring so they don't get the wraith of his cult like followers online. Xbox will be dead. Brad Smith is persistent but the man is old as hell. No way his persistence is from pure energy and drive like he was hungry to get to the top. The man is already up there in the upper echelon of Microsoft. He's actually panicked fearing for his legacy.

 

[Ansphn]

This is the worst possible outcome for XBOX. The CMA is essentially telling XBOX to go create...

The CMA is literally trolling Microsoft at this point with this 10 year thing. They're showing Microsoft who has the power in the U.K and it's them, not some foreign mega corporation.

 

[Bernardougf]

I agree, I just wonder how do they reprogram their audience. I almost think Microsoft would have to come out with a console under a different brand (SufaceBox?), and just let xbox become just gamepass, or just drop console hardware altogether. It seems like xbox is aiming to become more hardware agnostic in the future anyway.

I just think this day one gamepass AAA games are unsustainable... maybe MS was banking on this ABK purchase to keep this plan... and now they will have to rethink... who knows.. is a trillion dollar company not used to loose

 

[Yoboman]

Prohibition of the merger also means that MS and ABK won't be able to try again for the next 10 years (page 336)

Prohibition would be effected by accepting undertakings under section 82 of the Act or making an order under section 84 of the Act, prohibiting the Merger and preventing the Parties from attempting to merge for a further period: our normal practice would be to prevent a future merger between the Parties for the next ten years, absent a change of circumstances.


Seems fair, 10 years is plenty of time for MS to create a COD competitor

 

[mejin]

Saddest thread ever.

I wish I can find a girl who loves me as much as Senjutsu Sage loves the Xbox.

I can feel his passion through my screen. I know i got banned for my Xbox fanboy tier list but my god this guy is SSS tier. He's like the boss in video-games that you're not supposed to beat. The ones that u do 1 damage on him with your best attack and he instant KOs your entire party.

He and the other xboxed guys are selling the Idea CMA is not a serious entity. A rude awakening is coming.

 

[XesqueVara]

Maybe Microsoft should look into hiring more talent for existing studios with the money they saved?



Playground Games trying to CONTRACT WORK an Encounter Designer for Fable. Really? You don't have the money to just fucking hire someone with great creds? One of the best studios you have is doing contract labor for that?

Contract Work it's normal in the Game Industry, don't see the problem here tbh.

 

[Varteras]

Contract Work it's normal in the Game Industry, don't see the problem here tbh.

There's been a lot of discussion about Xbox's overreliance on contract work and not retaining talent.

 

[XesqueVara]

There's been a lot of discussion about Xbox's overreliance on contract work and not retaining talent.

It really is? For what I know it's mostly a 343 problem, Don't remember other studios having this problems tbh, Like Playground have around 50 jobs opening on LinkedIn so im pretty sure they're still expanding btw.

 

[The Pleasure]

SenjutsuSage is working overtime on twitter.
This guy is something. It seems like he has no life or something. I havent seen someone defend the deal like this. Even Jezz isnt shill like this guy.

This his entire timeline
https://twitter.com/SenninSage

Here's Senjutsu in video form.

 

[Varteras]

It really is? For what I know it's mostly a 343 problem, Don't remember other studios having this problems tbh, Like Playground have around 50 jobs opening on LinkedIn so im pretty sure they're still expanding btw.