-
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
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
TrebleShot
Member
Eventually this ends with game pass on Sony consoles and I think that’s been the play all along.
Everyone on Sony platforms would get it too.
Well played MS I for one welcome our new Game Pass overlords.
Everyone on Sony platforms would get it too.
Well played MS I for one welcome our new Game Pass overlords.
PaintTinJr
Member
But if Microsoft renege on what they have said to the CMA and in the media, the CMA could just as easily force them to divest A of ABK in three or five or 15years - if Sony don't sign any deal. If Sony sign a deal then it might make the CMA actions harder to achieve as they would have agreed to the terms.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
dotnotbot
Member
Sony will never allow GP on its consoles, I can bet a lot on that.
DaGwaphics
Member
The CMA said specifically that they don't care if MS runs a partial foreclosure strategy with CoD, so long as the game ultimately appears on PS. The rules MS will follow will be what is established by these regulatory bodies not MS's own PR spin. If they offered a parity deal that Sony didn't bother to take when the option was there, that's entirely on Sony.
POKEYCLYDE
Member
If the percentage of people who switched from Playstation to Xbox in case of an exclusivity strategy was higher, the math could make sense.
If 50% of PS CoD players jumped over to Xbox, and they all joined the $10 tier of Gamepass, the benefit of making CoD exclusive would outweigh the cost of such.
If 50% joined Xbox, bought CoD and 1 other 1st party title or even a 3rd party title, it would be a viable strategy to make CoD exclusive.
The % of players that switch over has a lot to do with if it's financially logical to do. If 50% switch, Xbox only needs to get those new customers to pay twice as much in their ecosystem over what they were paying for just CoD on Playstation. It's likely that they'd be able to make those costs up with these new customers.
If 25% switched to Xbox, these new customers would have to spend roughly $200 a year in the Xbox ecosystem to make up the lost sales of CoD on Playstation. Even at 25%, I think the CMA could see that it's possible for Microsoft to make money by employing an exclusivity strategy.
As the % of switchers gets lower it gets harder and harder to justify.
CoD being a yearly release really works against the incentive to make it exclusive.
The price would increase for everyone, but the cost/benefit analysis would only take into account new customer gains.
The incentive to do X has to rely on the results of X. (This being the most important part that you keep over looking)
PaintTinJr
Member
But they surely would care given that the overlap would be the Cloud CoD foreclosure strategy they would be running by then. Microsoft probably won't beable to help themselves from pushing Cloud at every possible chance, and doing so with CoD too would be the problem IMO.
Last edited:
This whiner has been removed from thread. You are not a victim.
Hey I'm not the one who is butthurt here over a reply. I made a comment and Topher got into his feelings and started this back and forth and the cheerleaders (you and the other guy) decided to chime in. If he didn't like what I said then he should have just moved on. So all three of you need to crawl back into your hole of idiocy.
Last edited:
DaGwaphics
Member
There won't be a cloud foreclosure strategy because if forced MS will open license cloud access to the full price purchase (meaning any cloud platform available present or future would be allowed to offer the game at the standard advertised rate either via existing stores or as part of a new store). Or simply withhold CoD from their own cloud platform. I doubt MS would go with a timed exclusivity period, but special features and modes available on Nintendo and Xbox being omitted from a PS release (as they are currently omitted from Xbox releases) would certainly be on the table if Sony doesn't take the parity deal they were offered.
Last edited:
phil_t98
#SonyToo
yeah great aint it
HoofHearted
Member
dotnotbot
Member
So much talk over COD meanwhile all other games becoming exclusive like Blizzard games, Crash, Spyro etc would be also a serious hit for Sony and no one even sees that as an issue.
I feel like law is completely helpless when it comes to markets like gaming market, MS could buy out all major publishers and technically you still can't say they're monopoly but in practice they would completely extinguish Sony.
I feel like law is completely helpless when it comes to markets like gaming market, MS could buy out all major publishers and technically you still can't say they're monopoly but in practice they would completely extinguish Sony.
PaintTinJr
Member
If the CMA aren't prepared to block the deal, Sony should float the idea that Microsoft are forced to buy them out of the marketing deal for $10b, and then Sony state they are blocking CoD post acquisition on their platform to make way for a new 3rd party shooter to take that spot.
It would be interesting to see if the need for PlayStation CoD sales would be echoed by MSFT shareholders wanting to cancel the deal or if calling the bluff on a full foreclosure would be taken up by MSFT for a mere $10B more
Last edited:
SoloKingRobert
Banned
I thought they'll be concessions? Looks like Microsoft can make Call of Duty exclusive to Xbox/Nintendo/Windows.
Topher
Gold Member
Phil said they wouldn't
mansoor1980
Gold Member
jim ryan aint scared of microsoft/US senate , he will party all night long and playstation will continue to dominate
GHG
Member
What kind of abomination is this?
AI has gone too far, the only thing left is self-destruction.
Last edited:
DaGwaphics
Member
Obviously any additional perks would get added after the existing agreements have run their course. I'm sure MS would love to have the agreements dissolved early, they wouldn't be buying anything out in a situation where Sony is reneging on the agreements they made however.
fred420170
Member
Why are we talking about the CMA and Sony again? The CMA moved past Sony & PS, they said themselves they don't see an issue and that Sony wouldn't be negatively impacted. They also said MS is free to make any games that they own exclusive to the Xbox ecosystem. In theory MS could yank COD off of PS if no contract is signed although they wouldn't according to the CMA, too much money to be made..
PaintTinJr
Member
Would they be reneging though? The deal isn't what was offered to PlayStation given that every sale of CoD - under MSFT ownership - weakens PlayStation as a business relative to Xbox. The deal in effect has already been breached by ATVI and PlayStation should maybe just sue them for that - if at all possible.
Destroying CoD as it is today would still be a massive win for Microsoft in the short term, but betting against PlayStation crowning a new 3rd party champion quickly would be risky IMO.
Last edited:
Most of GAF falls outside of Activision's demographic. The entire argument is a surrogate for the console wars and COD has always been the focal point of those discussions.
DaGwaphics
Member
They signed a marketing deal with obligations on both sides, obligations that MS will uphold on their side. Including continuing to include the Sony exclusive perks and whatnot until that agreement is complete. If Sony doesn't hold up their side of the obligations and break the contract MS would be suing Sony over that and not the other way around. Even with the 10yr deal Sony is still getting all the bonuses they expect until that marketing deal expires.
PaintTinJr
Member
Yeah, I agree that the deal is that way, but ATVI selling to MSFT removes the "good will" IMO - that is typically listed in contracts - because PlayStation selling CoD for MSFT is actually working against its own interests, which is clearly not in the spirit of the contract PlayStation signed with ATVI - and certainly isn't PlayStation's fault that this has happened.
Last edited:
against Sony.Everything CMA stated is under the magic word "provisional" and they're still looking for feedback on these findings until the end of this month.
Also they didn't state that Sony wouldn't be negatively impacted it's the opposite, they confirmed that COD exclusivity would be an anticompetitive practice but they they don't believe that is likely to happen because of financial reasons.
They stated that a partial foreclosure (marketing rights with exclusive contents) could damage Sony but that and only that can be considered normal competition.
Microsoft simply cannot make COD exclusive for the foreseeable future otherwise they would officially become a company that has fooled regulators and they could be investigated, fined and see all their future deals blocked.
But they could take the benefits that Sony currently has for themselves unless Sony decides to make a deal before the final ruling is done, if Microsoft refuses right now they would create immediate bad faith evidence before the final ruling.
So it's really all about what Sony wants to do and how likely they believe they can get a better result by not reaching an agreement with Microsoft at this stage.
Last edited:
Topher
Gold Member
Someone is begging for the hammer.
The post was deleted but before it was I saw the mod message saying he'd been kicked from the thread.
dotnotbot
Member
jim ryan aint scared of microsoft/US senate , he will party all night long and playstation will continue to dominate
Jim Ryan after a year in USSR
Last edited:
You can start eating crow already.
If there’s an access deal signed, best believe MS would follow it to the letter. EU fines defaulters up to 10% of annual turnover. MS only got away with a $700million+ fine for the browser ballot default by convincing the EU that the default was caused by a bug.
Who’s going to risk a multi-billion dollar fine yearly for COD exclusivity?
nial
Gold Member
Surprisingly, Black Ops 4 did VERY good numbers in the 2018 calendar year in Japan. In the top 11, just behind juggernaut franchises in there like Pokémon, Mario, Monster Hunter, and Super Smash Bros.
Last edited:
mansoor1980
Gold Member
SoloKingRobert
Banned
Microsoft also said PlayStation has 10 years to create a Call of Duty rival before the contract ends.
Last edited:
GHG
Member
Topher
Gold Member
That was theoretical. What Phil Spencer said was concrete. Call of Duty will be on PlayStation as long as there is a PlayStation. I don't think he was lying. Do you?
Bernardougf
Gold Member
Yeah Ill wait... you can put your hand on the fire for your beloved company .. It may be shocking to you but some fanboy in a game forum battling for his favorite plasticbox giving opinios out of his ass dosent inspire confiance on big corporate billionaire decisions ... so Im good for now
Last edited:
These guys don't think this way. If they did they wouldn't sell Destiny's or minecraft respectively
dotnotbot
Member
USSR?
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
Called Russia nowadays, that haircut is like a hallmark of every male living there
Last edited:
What company is simply going to abandon something that practically prints money? It would be beyond stupid.
The only game that is gonna see a shot at exclusivity is Diablo, not WoW, COD, or Overwatch
FBeeEye
Banned
The best female feet in gaming. I could eat dessert off of Lunafreya's succulent toes.
fred420170
Member
yeah, but the CMA said they are not looking at the high end console gaming as part of their concerns anymore. They are only looking at cloud which is why MS is handing out cloud contracts to every cloud provider. Deal is done. I put my bets on the end of May '23 if not sooner.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked