• 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.

drganon

Member
It absolutely is. If the worry is that the acquisition will result in a game becoming exclusive, it's no different than a company buying smaller studios and making their new releases exclusive. What's different is the price tag and size, but that is Sony's problem. Which certainly they seem to understand based on the hysteria
3rd party exclusives are not at all equal to buying a whole fucking publisher. Every company that has been in this industry over the last 30 plus years has had them, including Microsoft. If you honestly believe them to be equivalent, then you're beyond help.

Edit: you know I'm right, shillapple.
 
Last edited:
Sure it's the same thing. How do you think Sony came into possession of their studios? One company has more money for acquisitions than others and now all of a sudden there are all these conditions on when an acquisition should be allowed or not ... people need to get real. Either it's allowed or it's not. Exclusives are an acceptable practice or they're not. If MS can't make the acquisition to stop the practice then that should be the case across the board.
You are right. i just saw my mistake.
 
Wait till Microsoft comes up with Game Pass Ultimate Pro or something like that if the activision buy out goes through, and they put all the COD on that
 

azertydu91

Hard to Kill
X gonna give it to ya.

Dude I know you are new here and maybe i am not the best authority to talk about it but this is not the attitude we are looking for here.And believe me I think I am a bit known for silly gif posts or things like that but maybe try to stay a bit more relevant when you post.
I understand that time is needed to get used to a comunity and believe me if you want to you'll get there eventually but this doesn't seem like a poster that will stay long here if he continues like that.

Edit: New record for the fastest added to my ignore list congrats.

Edit 2: And he is perm'd ...Not surprising.
 
Last edited:
Dude I know you are new here and maybe i am not the best authority to talk about it but this is not the attitude we are looking for here.And believe me I think I am a bit known for silly gif posts or things like that but maybe try to stay a bit more relevant when you post.
I understand that time is needed to get used to a comunity and believe me if you want to you'll get there eventually but this doesn't seem like a poster that will stay long here if he continues like that.
 

dotnotbot

Member
This is one of the craziest things about the ten year deal. That’s an eternity in gaming. More than enough time for Sony to try and create their own CoD, if they’re so worried about losing it. Even though we all know CoD would stay multi platform.

Honestly the time that has passed since PS4/X0 release feels more like a blink of an eye than eternity. Most of the franchises that were big back then grew even bigger now.
 
Last edited:

vj27

Banned
That has been a thing for a while.

[/URL][/URL]

The article actually mentions it:

"Mojang, the Microsoft-owned developer of Minecraft, originally launched Minecraft: Education Edition on Chromebooks in 2020, but this special edition required a school license or an Office 365 Education account. "

So they are expanding the license......ok.
Legit had no idea that existed just assumed the chrome book can’t play games other than some android ones lol. That url doesn’t work but I’m a take your word for it.

Edit: I just googled Minecraft education edition and you’re straight lied bro wth lmao. I forgot they still even did that Minecraft edu stuff, regardless that version is literally not Minecraft. Since I have to be literal ill, we are talking MINECRAFT BEDROCK EDITION.

Unless your trolling then it’s all good but otherwise 🤨

https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/15/23641092/microsoft-minecraft-chromeos-chromebooks-release
 
Last edited:

freefornow

Member
Lulu when her female employees are being sexual harassed, to the point of depression and one commits suicide:

Lulu when Activision is forced to pay millions in damages for running a heinous and oppressive workplace culture:

Lulu when a journalist misquotes her:
giphy.gif
Sure, buuuuuuut.......
dominatrix-bdsm-sex-work-sex-workers.jpg

Thank you for the opportunity to repost this image. I can only bite my bottom lip so much!
 

BeardGawd

Banned
If you can show me where they are offering companies more than 10 years then that will be great.

There are simpler ways around this if they really wanted to make sure call of duty and Activision blizzard's catalogue remained 3rd party and available to all industry players as it is today.
You mean like how they manage Minecraft?
Dude, I'm 100% you're Phil Spencer's personal bot at this point.

Why must everything you post read like slimy spitshined PR? Is this all a ChatGPT experiment gone horribly wrong?
Lol don't hate the man for making great points.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
Legit had no idea that existed just assumed the chrome book can’t play games other than some android ones lol. That url doesn’t work but I’m a take your word for it.

Edit: I just googled Minecraft education edition and you’re straight lied bro wth lmao. I forgot they still even did that Minecraft edu stuff, regardless that version is literally not Minecraft. Since I have to be literal ill, we are talking MINECRAFT BEDROCK EDITION.

Unless your trolling then it’s all good but otherwise 🤨

https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/15/23641092/microsoft-minecraft-chromeos-chromebooks-release

No idea what you are talking about. I'm not lying or trolling. As I pointed out, it is an edu license that is being broadened into non edu chromebooks. Is that not correct?

What is your problem? If I am wrong about something then just point it out. No need to be an asshole.
 
Last edited:

IFireflyl

Gold Member
No idea what you are talking about. I'm not lying or trolling. As I pointed out, it is an edu license that is being broadened into non edu chromebooks. Is that not correct?

What is your problem? If I am wrong about something then just point it out. No need to be an asshole.

Technically it isn't Minecraft. It's a spin-off educational game. It does use the Minecraft assets, but I dont know whether the educational edition is running the same engine that the actual game runs.

V vj27 , calm your tits.
 
Last edited:
There is alot of disingenuous talk around this topic.
Firstly, MS never said that Zenimax games would be multiplatform. Not only did they not say that, but they honoured the existing deals with Sony having exclusive content even when they could have reneged and paid out the damages to Sony for doing it.
Same goes for games that were being developed by the other studios MS purchased such as Double Fine and Psychonauts 2, InXile and Wastelands, Obsidian and The Outer Worlds for instance.
The reasoning behind why people thought that MS may keep Starfield on PS5 was because they believed that MS wouldn't leave the extra income from PS sales on the table. It was wishful thinking more than anything.

The talk around how Sony wasn't buying Publishers so Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to ether is again ignorant. People forgot that they actually have bought a publisher in Psygonois historically, and were one of the parties actively looking at buying Warner Bros when they initially were looking at selling.
The only reason Sony hasn't bought a Publisher if the size of Zenimax or ABK is because they don't have the finances to do it.
They would if they could.

We then have Lulu revealing how Jim Ryan didn't want to do a deal, and rather than people being honest and saying "oh, ok, that's pretty silly of him to say that" they go into full defence moda and say she is the problem for letting people know that Sony was not looking at just securing COD, but rather trying to block the sale outright.

For the record, I don't know if it will go through. I don't think there is any reason for it not to go through, and I don't think that MS should have to keel COD on PS5 if they don't want to either.
I really don't care if it does go through, because as an Xbox gamer it doesn't give me any additional exclusive content.
Give me studios like Certain Affinity, IO, Avalanche, Asobo, etc any day of the week.
 

IFireflyl

Gold Member
There is alot of disingenuous talk around this topic.
Firstly, MS never said that Zenimax games would be multiplatform. Not only did they not say that, but they honoured the existing deals with Sony having exclusive content even when they could have reneged and paid out the damages to Sony for doing it.
Same goes for games that were being developed by the other studios MS purchased such as Double Fine and Psychonauts 2, InXile and Wastelands, Obsidian and The Outer Worlds for instance.
The reasoning behind why people thought that MS may keep Starfield on PS5 was because they believed that MS wouldn't leave the extra income from PS sales on the table. It was wishful thinking more than anything.

The talk around how Sony wasn't buying Publishers so Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to ether is again ignorant. People forgot that they actually have bought a publisher in Psygonois historically, and were one of the parties actively looking at buying Warner Bros when they initially were looking at selling.
The only reason Sony hasn't bought a Publisher if the size of Zenimax or ABK is because they don't have the finances to do it.
They would if they could.

We then have Lulu revealing how Jim Ryan didn't want to do a deal, and rather than people being honest and saying "oh, ok, that's pretty silly of him to say that" they go into full defence moda and say she is the problem for letting people know that Sony was not looking at just securing COD, but rather trying to block the sale outright.

For the record, I don't know if it will go through. I don't think there is any reason for it not to go through, and I don't think that MS should have to keel COD on PS5 if they don't want to either.
I really don't care if it does go through, because as an Xbox gamer it doesn't give me any additional exclusive content.
Give me studios like Certain Affinity, IO, Avalanche, Asobo, etc any day of the week.

Let's not pretend that all of the misinformation/disingenuous talk is heavily one-sided.
 
Last edited:

DForce

NaughtyDog Defense Force
There is alot of disingenuous talk around this topic.
Firstly, MS never said that Zenimax games would be multiplatform. Not only did they not say that, but they honoured the existing deals with Sony having exclusive content even when they could have reneged and paid out the damages to Sony for doing it.
Same goes for games that were being developed by the other studios MS purchased such as Double Fine and Psychonauts 2, InXile and Wastelands, Obsidian and The Outer Worlds for instance.
The reasoning behind why people thought that MS may keep Starfield on PS5 was because they believed that MS wouldn't leave the extra income from PS sales on the table. It was wishful thinking more than anything.

The talk around how Sony wasn't buying Publishers so Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to ether is again ignorant. People forgot that they actually have bought a publisher in Psygonois historically, and were one of the parties actively looking at buying Warner Bros when they initially were looking at selling.
The only reason Sony hasn't bought a Publisher if the size of Zenimax or ABK is because they don't have the finances to do it.
They would if they could.

We then have Lulu revealing how Jim Ryan didn't want to do a deal, and rather than people being honest and saying "oh, ok, that's pretty silly of him to say that" they go into full defence moda and say she is the problem for letting people know that Sony was not looking at just securing COD, but rather trying to block the sale outright.

For the record, I don't know if it will go through. I don't think there is any reason for it not to go through, and I don't think that MS should have to keel COD on PS5 if they don't want to either.
I really don't care if it does go through, because as an Xbox gamer it doesn't give me any additional exclusive content.
Give me studios like Certain Affinity, IO, Avalanche, Asobo, etc any day of the week.
You guys look ridiculous every single time you guys bring up Psygonois.
 

RickMasters

Member
apr 15-23???
Not sure exact date, but its around these dates.


I am gonna need a full bucket of kfc with all the drama once the results are out.
I am expecting something like this.

throw in some corn on the cobs, and a large mash and gravy ...And I got dibs on atleast two of the drumsticks...... :messenger_beaming::messenger_tears_of_joy::messenger_tears_of_joy::messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
There is alot of disingenuous talk around this topic.
Firstly, MS never said that Zenimax games would be multiplatform. Not only did they not say that, but they honoured the existing deals with Sony having exclusive content even when they could have reneged and paid out the damages to Sony for doing it.
Same goes for games that were being developed by the other studios MS purchased such as Double Fine and Psychonauts 2, InXile and Wastelands, Obsidian and The Outer Worlds for instance.
The reasoning behind why people thought that MS may keep Starfield on PS5 was because they believed that MS wouldn't leave the extra income from PS sales on the table. It was wishful thinking more than anything.

The talk around how Sony wasn't buying Publishers so Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to ether is again ignorant. People forgot that they actually have bought a publisher in Psygonois historically, and were one of the parties actively looking at buying Warner Bros when they initially were looking at selling.
The only reason Sony hasn't bought a Publisher if the size of Zenimax or ABK is because they don't have the finances to do it.
They would if they could.

We then have Lulu revealing how Jim Ryan didn't want to do a deal, and rather than people being honest and saying "oh, ok, that's pretty silly of him to say that" they go into full defence moda and say she is the problem for letting people know that Sony was not looking at just securing COD, but rather trying to block the sale outright.

For the record, I don't know if it will go through. I don't think there is any reason for it not to go through, and I don't think that MS should have to keel COD on PS5 if they don't want to either.
I really don't care if it does go through, because as an Xbox gamer it doesn't give me any additional exclusive content.
Give me studios like Certain Affinity, IO, Avalanche, Asobo, etc any day of the week.
gExuZJw.gif
 

Three

Member
Which they will have 10 years to make exclusives to fill the multiplayer void.
2009 was 14yrs ago. If some publisher could have made a game to compete with COD they would have already. they've had more than 10years.

Best selling game by year

2009: COD: MW2
2010: COD: Black Ops
2011: COD: MW3
2012: COD: Black Ops 2
2013: GTA5
2014: COD: Advanced Warfare
2015: COD: Black Ops 3
2016: COD: Infinite Warfare
2017: COD: WW2
2018: RDR2
2019: COD: MW
2020: COD: Cold War (might be AC)
2021: COD: Vanguard
2022: COD: MW2

13 years there and no publisher has been able to emulate CODs success. There is a reason MS aren't making their own game to compete since they lost the deal 8yrs ago and are now paying an unprecedented amount of money for it.
 
Last edited:

Poltz

Member
2009 was 14yrs ago. If some publisher could have made a game to compete with COD they would have already. they've had more than 10years.

Best selling game by year

2009: COD: MW2
2010: COD: Black Ops
2011: COD: MW3
2012: COD: Black Ops 2
2013: GTA5
2014: COD: Advanced Warfare
2015: COD: Black Ops 3
2016: COD: Infinite Warfare
2017: COD: WW2
2018: RDR2
2019: COD: MW
2020: COD: Cold War (might be AC)
2021: COD: Vanguard
2022: COD: MW2

13 years there and no publisher has been able to emulate CODs success. There is a reason MS aren't making their own game to compete since they lost the deal 8yrs ago and are now paying an unprecedented amount of money for it.
When people say Sony should make their own COD it always shows me how ignorant they are to the game. COD has 9 studios working on it and has much more content than it’s competitors. To be able to drop a yearly game every Q4 without missing a beat apart from Black Ops 4 SP is impressive. Most competitors have one game that has a longer life span vs COD. Look at Battlefield for comparison.
 

Warablo

Member
When people say Sony should make their own COD it always shows me how ignorant they are to the game. COD has 9 studios working on it and has much more content than it’s competitors. To be able to drop a yearly game every Q4 without missing a beat apart from Black Ops 4 SP is impressive. Most competitors have one game that has a longer life span vs COD. Look at Battlefield for comparison.
Its not about making a new CoD, its about Sony making a online game they can depend on instead of just CoD. Which they seem to be heading in that direction anyway.

There is a reason MS aren't making their own game to compete since they lost the deal 8yrs ago and are now paying an unprecedented amount of money for it.
Was Halo or Gears not competing with CoD? They certainly had their moments of multiplayer success.

Just like TLOU multiplayer was somewhat a success. I think Uncharted multiplayer was labelled as one too.
 
Last edited:

Three

Member
Its not about making a new CoD, its about Sony making a online game they can depend on instead of just CoD. Which they seem to be heading in that direction anyway.
You're saying they can replace COD which is essentially the same thing.
Was Halo or Gears not competing with CoD? They certainly had their moments of multiplayer success.

Just like TLOU multiplayer was somewhat a success. I think Uncharted was labelled as one too.
How well do you honestly think these went considering what happened to 343i and their latest Halo infinite (7yrs since 5) and TLOU2 concentrating on singleplayer and still not having a new TLOU multiplayer game since 2013, exactly 10yrs.

Do you really believe this is a good replacement for the annual best selling game?
 
Last edited:

DrFigs

Member
Its not about making a new CoD, its about Sony making a online game they can depend on instead of just CoD. Which they seem to be heading in that direction anyway.


Was Halo or Gears not competing with CoD? They certainly had their moments of multiplayer success.

Just like TLOU multiplayer was somewhat a success. I think Uncharted was labelled as one too.
It just seems like Sony is just expected to take on a ton of risk that Microsoft won't have to. Not exactly sure that is in the spirit of competition.
 

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
It just seems like Sony is just expected to take on a ton of risk that Microsoft won't have to. Not exactly sure that is in the spirit of competition.
Yep, pretty much. Leveling the playing field by damaging the competitor, instead of investing within and improving one's own offerings.

ABK games are currently available on both platforms. This is the perfect definition of equal competition, as both companies have all ABK games and have similar opportunities. MS wants to level the playing field and "increase competition" by removing ABK games from PlayStation.
 

Warablo

Member
Yep, pretty much. Leveling the playing field by damaging the competitor, instead of investing within and improving one's own offerings.

ABK games are currently available on both platforms. This is the perfect definition of equal competition, as both companies have all ABK games and have similar opportunities. MS wants to level the playing field and "increase competition" by removing ABK games from PlayStation.
This makes no sense, because they are both in the free market. Its a equal playing field. Just because Microsoft has more money doesn't mean it shouldn't be able to leverage it for bigger deals.
 

DrFigs

Member
This makes no sense, because they are both in the free market. Its a equal playing field. Just because Microsoft has more money doesn't mean it shouldn't be able to leverage it for bigger deals.
This acquisition war is not something Sony can compete with. There really is not an end to how many companies MS can buy out. And with each acquisition, it becomes harder for a new company to enter the market. This is contrary to the idea of a competitive market.

edit: i wasn't as precise as i could have been.
 
Last edited:

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
This makes no sense, because they are both in the free market. Its a equal playing field. Just because Microsoft has more money doesn't mean it shouldn't be able to leverage it for bigger deals.
  • So only one business has the money to buy other companies and foreclose their competitors
  • And even that money is earned by other divisions of the parent company
  • While the other competitor cannot do acquisitions like this because of limited money, despite being the market leader for decades ...
You do realize that's the very definition of anti-competitive mergers and acquisitions, right?
 

Helghan

Member
  • So only one business has the money to buy other companies and foreclose their competitors
  • And even that money is earned by other divisions of the parent company
  • While the other competitor cannot do acquisitions like this because of limited money, despite being the market leader for decades ...
You do realize that's the very definition of anti-competitive mergers and acquisitions, right?
You do understand that saying to Microsoft to just invest within, improver their own offerings, and grow organically is ridiculous when your competitor is so far ahead?

So they use their other strengths to grow. Basically buying marketshare through buying publishers and games.
 
Last edited:

Dick Jones

Gold Member
You do understand that saying to Microsoft to just invest within, improver their own offerings, and grow organically is ridiculous when your competitor is so far ahead?

So they use their other strengths to grow. Basically buying marketshare through buying publishers and games.
You are missing the /s at the end because someone might think you actually mean this.
 

zapper

Member
You do understand that saying to Microsoft to just invest within, improver their own offerings, and grow organically is ridiculous when your competitor is so far ahead?

So they use their other strengths to grow. Basically buying marketshare through buying publishers and games.
how are the competitors so ahead of microsoft and xbox? the xbox division has more revenue than nintendo, it is not far from playstation, they currently have more development studios and employees than playstation and nintendo, in services they are growing and in the cloud they are practically unrivaled after the death of stadia. only if you look at the mobile market could you say that they are behind, maybe, but it must also be said that so far they have practically never tried


Newzoo_Global-Games-Market-per-Segment_Nov-2022-1536x864.png

Has it ever happened, in gaming or others, that a major competitor spends more than a third of the market's total annual revenue to expand?
 
Last edited:

Helghan

Member
how are the competitors so ahead of microsoft and xbox? the xbox division has more revenue than nintendo, it is not far from playstation, they currently have more development studios and employees than playstation and nintendo, in services they are growing and in the cloud they are practically unrivaled after the death of stadia. only if you look at the mobile market could you say that they are behind, maybe, but it must also be said that so far they have practically never tried
Sony has 50% more in revenue compared to the Xbox division. I wouldn't call that slightly ahead. Not to mention they have 100% more console sales. And I think the biggest issue is that last one, console sales. They can release their software on multiple platforms, but Sony also starts doing this now. Probably because they finally noticed how lucrative this actually is. So I can imagine that software sales might decrease for Microsoft if there are more games from Sony coming to PC.

They are indeed ahead in cloud, but that market is still very small. Mobile is one of the reasons they want ABK. Everything from King, Diablo/COD mobile, Heartstone, etc.
 

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
You do understand that saying to Microsoft to just invest within, improver their own offerings, and grow organically is ridiculous when your competitor is so far ahead?

So they use their other strengths to grow. Basically buying marketshare through buying publishers and games.
Xbox has a 40:60 console market share in the UK and a 70% share in the cloud gaming market. They have more money, studios, and developers than PlayStation.

Surely they can "compete" without buying market share?
 
We don’t think a large tech firm might be interested in buying TikTok, but Microsoft’s focus on Bing and ChatGPT could drive interest in adding a video platform like TikTok to compete with Alphabet’s YouTube, especially if the Microsoft-Activision deal fails.

— Mandeep Singh and Damian Reimertz, analysts

I think since Biden is forcing ByDance to sell the USA arm of TikTok, Microsoft will most likely drop Activision. And Just move forward with King and Blizzard. So they can immediately move forward into purchasing TikTok.
 

Poltz

Member
Sony has 50% more in revenue compared to the Xbox division. I wouldn't call that slightly ahead. Not to mention they have 100% more console sales. And I think the biggest issue is that last one, console sales. They can release their software on multiple platforms, but Sony also starts doing this now. Probably because they finally noticed how lucrative this actually is. So I can imagine that software sales might decrease for Microsoft if there are more games from Sony coming to PC.

They are indeed ahead in cloud, but that market is still very small. Mobile is one of the reasons they want ABK. Everything from King, Diablo/COD mobile, Heartstone, etc.
Maybe Xbox should focus on other countries than the US and UK and work on other language localisation to become a global brand. They have more studios than PlayStation and bought a publisher in Zenimax. Should Microsoft be able to stock pile EA and Take 2 next because they are behind in console sales? Microsoft competed in the 360 gen vs PS3 but then decided to throw it all away in one console reveal.
 
Last edited:
This acquisition war is not something Sony can compete with.
So? So Microsoft should compete only on the level that Sony can compete? Maybe Microsoft should wait (till the end of time) for Sony to become a trillion dollar company (won't happen) before competing fairly? That's not how the competition works.

We don’t think a large tech firm might be interested in buying TikTok, but Microsoft’s focus on Bing and ChatGPT could drive interest in adding a video platform like TikTok to compete with Alphabet’s YouTube, especially if the Microsoft-Activision deal fails.
There is no reason to think that Microsoft cannot buy TikTok with ABK. Nothing prevents that.
 
Last edited:

Loomy

Thinks Microaggressions are Real
So? So Microsoft should compete only on the level that Sony can compete? Maybe Microsoft should wait (till the end of time) for Sony to become a trillion dollar company (won't happen) before competing fairly? That's not how the competition works.


There is no reason to think that Microsoft cannot buy TikTok with ABK. Nothing prevents that.
The FTC will block that deal right away. No one is acquiring TikTok. It is more likely to be completely banned in the US and Canada than this happening.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom