- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: pg 7: Microsoft has finalized its purchase of Activision; trailer: first post on page 8
Posted on 4/26/23 at 1:05 pm to finchmeister08
Posted on 4/26/23 at 1:05 pm to finchmeister08
Microsoft straight up told them they haven't considered increasing the cost of Game Pass yet, and entered in to multiple contracts with other cloud streaming services. The problem is there aren't any real cloud streaming services out there. The CMA is basically blocking a deal over what is a miniscule portion of the gaming market (cloud gaming) and has very little chance of gaining market share any time soon.
I'm wondering if we're entering into a brave new world where these regulatory bodies start getting regularly embarrassed on appeal. I hope so. Even outside of gaming these unelected bureaucrats losing power would be great for humanity.
I'm wondering if we're entering into a brave new world where these regulatory bodies start getting regularly embarrassed on appeal. I hope so. Even outside of gaming these unelected bureaucrats losing power would be great for humanity.
This post was edited on 6/24/23 at 11:41 am
1
Posted on 4/28/23 at 2:34 pm to imjustafatkid
back to the cloud gaming "issue"...
microsoft would be entitled to ALL revenue from sales of Activision games and in-game content.
Microsoft wants not only Sony, but every other potential cloud service to say, "sure we'll host your game for FREE on OUR platform."
microsoft would be entitled to ALL revenue from sales of Activision games and in-game content.
Microsoft wants not only Sony, but every other potential cloud service to say, "sure we'll host your game for FREE on OUR platform."
Posted on 5/1/23 at 8:35 am to finchmeister08
quote:
microsoft would be entitled to ALL revenue from sales of Activision games and in-game content.
It sounds bad, but not crazy. If they own the intellectual property, they own it.
Sony, or whomever, would be making money off their subscription service fee. They should not make money off buying the game or in-game purchases. Maybe a transaction fee at best.
Posted on 5/15/23 at 10:07 pm to DarthRebel
The EU approved the purchase today. Beginning to look like the UK will be the only holdout, which would likely mean the deal closes regardless. The FDA would get overturned if they tried to use the CMA's logic.
Direct link to EU website.
The EU's antitrust chief tweeted out a statement before the ruling was released, where she took a direct shot at the UK CMA's reasoning.
Twitter Link
Direct link to EU website.
The EU's antitrust chief tweeted out a statement before the ruling was released, where she took a direct shot at the UK CMA's reasoning.
quote:
With our clearance Activition Blizzard’s games will also be available on cloud. This is good for competition and innovation and brings games to many more devices and consumers. Microsoft‘s commitments will enable the streaming of games in any cloud game streaming service.
Twitter Link
Posted on 5/19/23 at 9:27 am to imjustafatkid
China has given unconditional approval to the merger.
LINK
With the current deal deadline set for July, it's starting to seem like Microsoft may just push forward and close the deal while the FTC case (which the FTC can't win) and the CMA appeal (which the CMA can definitely win) are sill pending. The UK likely gets carved out in this scenario.
LINK
With the current deal deadline set for July, it's starting to seem like Microsoft may just push forward and close the deal while the FTC case (which the FTC can't win) and the CMA appeal (which the CMA can definitely win) are sill pending. The UK likely gets carved out in this scenario.
This post was edited on 5/19/23 at 9:29 am
Posted on 6/24/23 at 11:29 am to imjustafatkid
FTC hearing to request a preliminary injunction began this week.
So far it is going well for competition in geneeral and poorly for the FTC. There were some real gems during Phil Spencer's testimony yesterday.
Jim Ryan was too much of a coward to show up in person.
Florian Mueller is attending and live-tweeting during each day of the hearing, which will continue on Tuesday the 27th. There are others live-tweeting as well, but Mueller has been dead on about everything surrounding this deal so far, including the outrage in the UK government that the CMA's decision brought about, so I mostly follow his takes. The is US court also allows people to listen in via a Zoom meeting that is audio only. There are limited spots in the Zoom, but I found a YouTube channel that was streaming it yesterday. Unfortunately I won't be able to listen in next week but I'm sure anyone wanting to listen in could find a stream if you try.
Some highlights below from yesterday from Mueller's tweet thread. I won't link each individual tweet, but his entire 121-tweet thread from yesterday can be found on his Twitter page, linked above, along with his tweet thread from the day before. He also does live Twitter spaces every day after the hearings where he talks about the case and the merger in general. Very informative.
There were audible gasps in the courtroom when the above happened. This was a complete beatdown of the FTC's lawyers. Makes it pretty clear that the judge sees no Cloud competition issues whatsoever and she doesn't even think it's relevant.
The FTC called the Google Stadia exec, and Microsoft's lawyers got him to admit that Stadia competed with XBox. This is bad for the FTC (and terrible for the CMA), because they were trying to show there were issues with Cloud gaming competition when that market is virtually nonexistent. The Google guy actually ended up hurting the case the FTC (and the CMA) are trying to make.
Unless there is a complete miracle turnaround by the FTC next week, the judge will not issue a preliminary injunction here and the deal will be able to close in the US before the FTC's administrative hearings.
The deal currently must close by mid-July unless it is renegotiated. If this judge does not issue an injunction against the deal, it is likely that the deal will close over the UK CMA and that MS will hold ABK out as separate in the UK until the appeals there are exhausted.
So far it is going well for competition in geneeral and poorly for the FTC. There were some real gems during Phil Spencer's testimony yesterday.
Jim Ryan was too much of a coward to show up in person.
Florian Mueller is attending and live-tweeting during each day of the hearing, which will continue on Tuesday the 27th. There are others live-tweeting as well, but Mueller has been dead on about everything surrounding this deal so far, including the outrage in the UK government that the CMA's decision brought about, so I mostly follow his takes. The is US court also allows people to listen in via a Zoom meeting that is audio only. There are limited spots in the Zoom, but I found a YouTube channel that was streaming it yesterday. Unfortunately I won't be able to listen in next week but I'm sure anyone wanting to listen in could find a stream if you try.
Some highlights below from yesterday from Mueller's tweet thread. I won't link each individual tweet, but his entire 121-tweet thread from yesterday can be found on his Twitter page, linked above, along with his tweet thread from the day before. He also does live Twitter spaces every day after the hearings where he talks about the case and the merger in general. Very informative.
quote:
That FTC lawyer, Weingarten, has just insulted human intelligence. The most stupid question I ever heard a lawyer ask in an antitrust case.
This FTC "case" is an embarrassment for the agency and for the entire United States government. A disgrace. Let me explain:
quote:
After Phil Spencer confirmed that exclusive deals with 3rd-party publishers are more expensive for Xbox due to market share (compensating publishers for skipping a platform), Weingarten suggested it was contradictory to then pay $70B for Activision.
Apples to oranges!
quote:
Phil Spencer then explained why that didn't make sense: if they pay for an exclusive 3rd-party deal, it's just an expense to get an exclusive, but if they buy a company, they get assets.
Sorry @FTC, you are embarrassing yourself with total economic nonsense here!
quote:
Now Judge Corley is also tired of the FTC*s unreasonableness and stupidities;
When the FTC lawyer wanted Phil Spencer to also make a commitment under oath for making games available on the cloud, she cut it off by saying she doesn*t need that.
FTC on the wrong track!
There were audible gasps in the courtroom when the above happened. This was a complete beatdown of the FTC's lawyers. Makes it pretty clear that the judge sees no Cloud competition issues whatsoever and she doesn't even think it's relevant.
quote:
The FTC (a different lawyer) now trying to get support from Google. They called the guy who was in charge of Stadia. Instead of admitting the real reason for Stadia's failure, he obviously just tries to help the FTC against Microsoft.
The FTC called the Google Stadia exec, and Microsoft's lawyers got him to admit that Stadia competed with XBox. This is bad for the FTC (and terrible for the CMA), because they were trying to show there were issues with Cloud gaming competition when that market is virtually nonexistent. The Google guy actually ended up hurting the case the FTC (and the CMA) are trying to make.
Unless there is a complete miracle turnaround by the FTC next week, the judge will not issue a preliminary injunction here and the deal will be able to close in the US before the FTC's administrative hearings.
The deal currently must close by mid-July unless it is renegotiated. If this judge does not issue an injunction against the deal, it is likely that the deal will close over the UK CMA and that MS will hold ABK out as separate in the UK until the appeals there are exhausted.
This post was edited on 6/24/23 at 9:01 pm
Posted on 6/25/23 at 1:22 pm to imjustafatkid
Another perspective on the hearings from someone who says he is "not the biggest fan of the Microsoft Activision Blizzard acquisition."
LINK
LINK
quote:
if Sony and the FTC are doing everything they can to block this deal, they are doing a very, very bad job of it, as evidenced by this week’s hearings.
What exactly happened this week? Where to start.
quote:
An email was revealed from PlayStation head Jim Ryan saying that he did not actually believe Microsoft would remove Call of Duty from the system, and that they would be “more than okay” if the deal went through, contrary to their public statements.
quote:
One of the most tone deaf moments was when the FTC started asking Microsoft about if it meant that acquisition could produce exclusive costumes or items for Xbox and not PlayStation. This is quite literally exactly the kind exclusive content that was produced for PlayStation as a result of past deals from Activision.
quote:
The FTC tried to “gotcha” Phil Spencer by making him swear under oath he would keep Call of Duty on PlayStation and future PlayStations. He then…swore that under oath. They then tried to make him swear the same about other games and the judge was so annoyed by them attempting to do that she cut them off.
quote:
The FTC has shown a poor baseline understand of the industry they’re trying to regulate here by killing this deal. At one point, the FTC asked Sarah Bond if you needed a Windows key to stream video games (uh you do not), in addition to not knowing how existing exclusivity arrangements are made, and how many Sony itself has done over the years, and continues to do.
The FTC called someone from Google Stadia to the stand to testify about cloud gaming, the reason the deal was blocked in the UK. All the Stadia inclusion really proves is that it’s a tiny market with no real audience that’s deeply hard to find footing in. It almost felt like a witness for Microsoft’s side, as they’re trying to show that cloud gaming is a nascent, difficult market and a fraction of this overall deal.
quote:
Even if on its face it’s easy to say “this deal is probably just too big” no one is doing a good job of making a coherent, legal argument for that in court. I would be genuinely stunned if this did not go Microsoft’s way at this point.
This post was edited on 6/25/23 at 1:23 pm
Posted on 7/11/23 at 10:42 am to imjustafatkid
Posted on 7/11/23 at 11:19 am to s0tiger
kewl. now we'll get to revisit all of this in 5-10 years when MS begins to crawfish on some of the "promises" they made.
another thing:
activision: "we don't want CoD games to be Day 1 Game Pass releases."
guess what activision, you're not the one in charge anymore.
CoD goes to Game Pass Day 1
Handful of PS owners move to Xbox for "free CoD" via Game Pass
Sony gets fricked with $70 CoD
MS monopoly continues
never forget:
Microsoft: "we can spend them out of business."
another thing:
activision: "we don't want CoD games to be Day 1 Game Pass releases."
guess what activision, you're not the one in charge anymore.
CoD goes to Game Pass Day 1
Handful of PS owners move to Xbox for "free CoD" via Game Pass
Sony gets fricked with $70 CoD
MS monopoly continues
never forget:
Microsoft: "we can spend them out of business."
Posted on 7/11/23 at 11:33 am to finchmeister08
quote:
MS monopoly continues
When did it start?
This post was edited on 7/11/23 at 11:34 am
Posted on 7/11/23 at 11:39 am to finchmeister08
quote:
CoD goes to Game Pass Day 1
Handful of PS owners move to Xbox for "free CoD" via Game Pass
Sony gets fricked with $70 CoD
MS monopoly continues
I thought CoD was shite and this wouldn't matter since Sony has far better exclusives
Posted on 7/11/23 at 11:46 am to bad93ex
quote:
I thought CoD was shite and this wouldn't matter since Sony has far better exclusives
PlayStation = CoDStation
You must be thinking of Nintendo.
Posted on 7/11/23 at 12:12 pm to finchmeister08
quote:
activision: "we don't want CoD games to be Day 1 Game Pass releases."
Your quote is misattributed. Phil Spencer stated under oath that Microsoft will keep CoD on PS as long as Sony is willing. The FTC actually tried to claim Microsoft did this with Minecraft, and that actually made their entire arguments fall apart because it turned out that Sony wasn't willing to send Mojang a PS5 dev kit and that's why there's no native PS5 Minecraft. LINK
So the more likely scenario here will be that Sony does the same with Activision and therefore Activision can't make games for the PS6. By all means, though, keep pretending Microsoft is the problem.
quote:
Microsoft: "we can spend them out of business."
Maybe Sony should have realized they were poking a sleeping giant and played nice.
ETA: Just to drive the point home, from the Judge's ruling:
This post was edited on 7/11/23 at 1:36 pm
Posted on 7/11/23 at 12:17 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
Phil Spencer stated under oath that Microsoft will keep CoD on PS as long as Sony is willing.
you misread my comments.
quote:
Maybe Sony should have realized they were poking a sleeping giant and played nice.
Posted on 7/11/23 at 12:34 pm to finchmeister08
After today's decision, the CMA is waving the white flag. They see the writing on the wall and don't want this deal to close over the UK.
LINK
LINK
Posted on 7/11/23 at 12:35 pm to finchmeister08
quote:
you misread my comments
Nope, I didn't. You attributed statements to Activision that were made by Microsoft.
Posted on 7/11/23 at 1:23 pm to imjustafatkid
Posted on 7/11/23 at 1:32 pm to imjustafatkid
Sony made a huge misstep by opposing this deal. They have put themselves on the radar and opened themselves up to scrutiny they absolutely do not want.
ETA from the ruling:
ETA from the ruling:
quote:
the FTC insists Microsoft's offer is simply insufficient. In so arguing, it relies exclusively on PlayStation CEO Ryan's testimony. The FTC's heavy reliance on Mr. Ryan's testimony is unpersuasive. Sony opposes the merger; its opposition is understandable. Before the merger, Sony paid Activision for exclusive marketing rights that allowed Sony to market Call of Duty on PlayStation but restricted Xbox's ability to do the same. After the merger, the combined firm presumably will not agree to such restrictions. Before the merger, a consumer wanting to play a Call of Duty console game had to buy a PlayStation or an Xbox. After the merger, consumers can utilize the cloud to play on the device of choice, including, it is intended, on the Nintendo Switch. Perhaps bad for Sony. But good for Call of Duty gamers and future gamers.
This post was edited on 7/11/23 at 1:54 pm
Posted on 7/11/23 at 2:37 pm to imjustafatkid
Hopefully, Microsoft can put some power behind the anti-cheat software.
Posted on 7/11/23 at 2:52 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
You attributed statements to Activision that were made by Microsoft.
it doesn't matter who said it. the point is that it's going to be on Game Pass Day 1... eventually. no where in my comments did i say "exclusive to Game Pass".
quote:
Microsoft will keep CoD on PS as long as Sony is willing.
might as well say "as long as PS gamers are willing pay $70 a year vs switching to Xbox and subscribing to Game Pass"
if you're so HIGH on Game Pass and what it supposedly offers, you want CoD on Game Pass Day 1. i don't know why you're being so naive about it.
Page 3 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News