• 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 lawyers respond to CMA by offering no remedies/commitments

Status
Not open for further replies.

CatLady

Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
Sony and others want the commission to force Microsoft to offer guarantees that they will be able to access all games “on equal terms and in perpetuity”.

Why should Xbox have to offer Sony their own game to Sony on those terms? Sony certainly didn't do that for Xbox in all the years they've been blocking content on Call of Duty, a game they don't own.
 

BlackTron

Member
Nintendo doesn't need CoD. They went and created their own MP shooter and shattered sales records with it.

Sony could do the same thing, but they seem uncomfortable stepping TOO far out of their third person action adventure comfort zone. They seem to have built a strategy out of churning them out while other genres get filled in by third parties, they have no idea what it's like to be Nintendo while all their bread and butter moved to a competitor (Playstation lol).
 

The_Mike

I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
uh, a remake/reimagining? If thats the best thing that can come out in years, the chances of it dying might just be less than an 'if'.
Imagine doom and gloom a game you don't even know anything about lol.

It's a sequel to MW19.

Warzone has declined a lot, but the main game is still popular.

Even more when it arrives to GP.
It'll happen eventually (who knows exactly when), it's currently on the decline and nothing stays on top forever.

A new "formula" will come out of nowhere and become the new hotness.
Well we had Battle Royale five years but that didn't stop the cod train.
 

Elios83

Member
How did you all get to this conclusion, especially OP since he posted exact verbiage from article?


"Microsoft opted not to offer any remedies to the CMA at this stage because there were no obvious commitments the UK regulator would be likely to accept, according to people with knowledge of the situation.


Meaning Microsoft understood there was nothing they could offer that would prevent regulators from proceeding with their investigation. If anything it is UK regulators with "big dick energy" or "based". Lol, children.
Unfortunately in the distorted perception and desire to set the narrative on message boards of some people, a deal going into a deep second phase probing in UK and Europe for anticompetitive concerns and the risk of being blocked, is actually a positive big dick energy moment :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
The drama continues, buckle up everyone.
The drama:

Tired Pbs Nature GIF by Nature on PBS


Nothing stops this train.
 

Infamy v1

Member
You're the ones using words that make no sense given the context. Whether you like it or not, the CMA hold all the cards in this situation.

You got exposed for not correctly reading my post, and then you move on to say the CMA holds all the cards? You realize they're not the final authority, right? That's what courts are for.

This was moving to phase 2 regardless, like every other big deal. Their silly proposal to Microsoft was ignored for a reason.
 

GHG

Gold Member
Why should Xbox have to offer Sony their own game to Sony on those terms? Sony certainly didn't do that for Xbox in all the years they've been blocking content on Call of Duty, a game they don't own.

Because Microsoft have been free to outbid them all of the years that Sony had those deals in place.

Or are you going to try and tell me poor little Microsoft couldn't couldn't muster up the cash to compete in such a way all of those years?

Exclusive content/pre order bonuses isn't something unique or new when it comes to 3rd party marketing deals.
 

Knightime_X

Member
Microsoft should just forget about Activision/Blizzard and go for Take-Two. It would be much cheaper and better for them...
No. Take-Two would not be good in the long run.
Look how long it took to make GTA 6. (1 and only game that's interesting from them)
Sure it'll sell VERY well, but TT would be best left 3rd party.
 
Because Microsoft have been free to outbid them all of the years that Sony had those deals in place.

Or are you going to try and tell me poor little Microsoft couldn't couldn't muster up the cash to compete in such a way all of those years?

Exclusive content/pre order bonuses isn't something unique or new when it comes to 3rd party marketing deals.
They are outbidding them. They are acquiring them outright. the ultimate outbid.
 

Banjo64

cumsessed
That's corporate protection not consumer.
How are the concerns spelled out, that MS could leverage its in house cloud infrastructure alongside its brand power and library to stop or suppress any future entrants in to subscription/cloud based gaming corporate protection?
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
They are outbidding them. They are acquiring them outright. the ultimate outbid.
Precisely and thats why they have left themselves open to judgement, and now have to offer concessions in order to buy them outright.

Had they simply paid off Activision $200-300 million for gamepass rights every year, no one would be able to do anything about it.

But a $75 billion acquisition has to go through the proper regulatory channels. It's literally how things are done. Everyone plays by the same rules which makes the question below odd to say the least.

Why should Xbox have to offer Sony their own game to Sony on those terms? Sony certainly didn't do that for Xbox in all the years they've been blocking content on Call of Duty, a game they don't own.
 

Kagey K

Banned
How are the concerns spelled out, that MS could leverage its in house cloud infrastructure alongside its brand power and library to stop or suppress any future entrants in to subscription/cloud based gaming corporate protection?
How is it consumer protection?

Meta already addressed why this line is nonsense also.
 

Banjo64

cumsessed
How is it consumer protection?
Because Microsoft with its cloud infrastructure, subscription service, ability to eat costs and potential first party game line up with Activision could prevent any serious competitor from entering the cloud based/subscription market which means NO CHOICES FOR YOU, THE CONSUMER.

Just read the CMA findings for fucks sake :messenger_tears_of_joy:

Meta already addressed why this line is nonsense also.
You corporate cuck :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
Last edited:

Guilty_AI

Member
That wasn't either. The only confusion seems to be caused by you.
It is called Modern Warfare, which i remember playing back in 2007. It even has captain Price on the cover. Its still confusing

Imagine doom and gloom a game you don't even know anything about lol.

It's a sequel to MW19.

Warzone has declined a lot, but the main game is still popular.

Even more when it arrives to GP.
Not really me doom and glooming it. I know people who play these kind of games rather often and are more familiar with MP scene in general, they all say COD is declining in quality and are jumping ship.
 
Last edited:

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Meta (aka we spy on and sell consumer information) says it's nonsense? Well then that settles it!
Meta, we buy up all main social media rivals and had to go through the very same process, says it's nonsense.

Some goofy corpo thot takes on here lately. Careful what you wish for with the Meta take cheerleading to support your fanatical window dressing.
 
Last edited:

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
This thread is sad. Are Xbox fans really so down bad that you read this as a W? Jeuse, go play some games.
This is neither a win or a loss. It's just proof that Jimbo was right and Phil wasnt being honest when he said his intent was to keep CoD on playstation. He was talking in riddles using words like intent that I remember calling out earlier this year, and clearly didnt want to keep CoD on PS forever.

And not that he should. If you are paying $75 billion for something, you should get to do with it as you please, but that simply means exposing yourself to this process which may or may not go your way. I personally think the deal will go through like all these like this eventually go through. These regulatory bodies are just as corrupt as every other govt branch, and they have let bigger companies merge and acquire before.
 

ChiefDada

Gold Member
My conclusion is that MS is doing nothing wrong in trying to acquire Activision whether they intend to ever make CoD exclusive or not. Acquiring ABK and even other big dev studios later down the line does not constitute a monopoly when you have other big players in the market.

If you look at my comment history on this, you'll see that I agree with this for reasons you listed and many others (my personal opinion, but I acknowledge merits of the opposing view). That doesn't make these comments any less silly when considering the context of this particular exchange between MSFT and UK regulators.
 
This whole situation is funny and over citing the importance of COD. I know it can close the gap by maybe a few percentage points...they making it seem like xbox outselling ps 3:1 if this deal goes through. But im for governments putting pressure on companies even if just posturing.
 

The_Mike

I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Not really me doom and glooming it. I know people who play these kind of games rather often and are more familiar with MP scene in general, they all say COD is declining in quality and are jumping ship.
People been saying that since cod 4: modern warfare.

People said the same about wow for over ten years.

CoD is still among the top games soldso while your friends have dropped off there's millions of others who jumped on.

I left at MW19, but having it on GP would make me play it again.
 

Guilty_AI

Member
People been saying that since cod 4: modern warfare.

People said the same about wow for over ten years.

CoD is still among the top games soldso while your friends have dropped off there's millions of others who jumped on.

I left at MW19, but having it on GP would make me play it again.
So you too left the game after all huh....
 
Last edited:

GHG

Gold Member
You got exposed for not correctly reading my post, and then you move on to say the CMA holds all the cards? You realize they're not the final authority, right? That's what courts are for.

This was moving to phase 2 regardless, like every other big deal. Their silly proposal to Microsoft was ignored for a reason.

They are not the final authority but they are the authority at this stage of the deal. If they were to approve the deal right now would you still be saying they don't hold all the cards?

Frame it however you want to cope, makes no difference.

What's funny about all of this is how the talk in all the original threads was about how the deal will go through smoothly without a hitch and that the regulators wouldn't look into this one etc. And now that they are it's flipped to "oh it was going to phase 2 regardless"? Kidding yourselves, every step of the way.
 

CatLady

Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
Because Microsoft have been free to outbid them all of the years that Sony had those deals in place.

Or are you going to try and tell me poor little Microsoft couldn't couldn't muster up the cash to compete in such a way all of those years?

Exclusive content/pre order bonuses isn't something unique or new when it comes to 3rd party marketing deals.
They did outbid them to the tune of $67B. For that amount of money they should be able to lock content away just as Sony has done for so many years now.

Afterall "Exclusive content/pre order bonuses isn't something unique or new when it comes to" buying the damn game.
 

Banjo64

cumsessed
I have a bunch of money in Activision for the easy stock win, so of course I want it to go through.
And that’s fine, but you can want it to go through for personal gain whilst still acknowledging the potential (not guaranteed) future harm it may cause to consumers.

And it is all hypothetical at this point, predicting the likely hood of the market moving one way or another.
 

The_Mike

I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
So you too left the game after all huh....
Yes, I got tired of restarting every year and lose my progress. An online sequel is not worth 60 buks for me.

Didn't help i felt MW19 was its peak and I hated they replaced it a year later.

But if I get it with GP then I would jump back in.

I still play cod 4 modern warfare from time to time, still active on xbox.
 

Mr Moose

Member
Why should Xbox have to offer Sony their own game to Sony on those terms? Sony certainly didn't do that for Xbox in all the years they've been blocking content on Call of Duty, a game they don't own.
What's your thoughts of when MS was doing that when they had marketing rights for CoD?
At least there's no 30 day wait for maps now.
 

Kagey K

Banned
And that’s fine, but you can want it to go through for personal gain whilst still acknowledging the potential (not guaranteed) future harm it may cause to consumers.

And it is all hypothetical at this point, predicting the likely hood of the market moving one way or another.
I bought at 74 and keep adding while it's low. I'm guaranteed 95 on closing. It's not guessing.
 

Liamario

Banned
I would like to see Microsoft curate some IPs, rather than just buying up the place. It is anti- competitive for sure. Call of Duty can't be compared to the average property. Making the game exclusive is only a chess move to damage the competition, rather than make Xbox more appealing.
I get it, welcome to capitalism. But this is not good news for the consumer.
 

graywolf323

Gold Member
How are the concerns spelled out, that MS could leverage its in house cloud infrastructure alongside its brand power and library to stop or suppress any future entrants in to subscription/cloud based gaming corporate protection?
which it’s weird how some people here were explaining Microsoft was buying AB not because of PlayStation but as a preemptive strike against the other tech giants to discourage them from getting into gaming, seems some of the government entities have that same concern 🤔
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Just read the CMA findings for fucks sake :messenger_tears_of_joy:

We did, it pretty blatantly states that the CMA is worried about Sony's ability to compete :messenger_tears_of_joy:


The CMA is concerned that having full control over this powerful catalogue, especially in light of Microsoft’s already strong position in gaming consoles, operating systems, and cloud infrastructure, could result in Microsoft harming consumers by impairing Sony’s—Microsoft’s closest gaming rival—ability to compete.
 
Last edited:

GHG

Gold Member
They did outbid them to the tune of $67B. For that amount of money they should be able to lock content away just as Sony has done for so many years now.

Afterall "Exclusive content/pre order bonuses isn't something unique or new when it comes to" buying the damn game.

If they were just purchasing the IP and/or doing a multi year exclusive deal then this would have been a lot more straight forward for them.

Both of which would have been far more straight forward than what they will have to go through to get this deal over the line.

If you go to buy a car and the dealer says you've been outbid do you:

A) offer more money

or

B) buy the whole dealership

Does B sound like a rational response to you in that context or do you need to have other reasons for wanting to leap to option B?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom