We’re on the cusp of peak corporate pettiness, so batten down the hatches and brace yourselves, because the Federal Trade Commission’s attempt to temporarily halt Microsoft’s unfathomable $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard is about to get underway. A number of high-profile witnesses have been called to comment, including PlayStation’s very own Jim Ryan.
And in new, mostly redacted documentation, the FTC appears poised to argue that Xbox’s decision to make Bethesda titles like Starfield and Redfall exclusive is “powerful evidence of incentive to foreclosure”. In other words, the US regulator is going to claim that the Redmond manufacturer may attempt to take Activision Blizzard games away from PlayStation as well.
As it summarises: “Microsoft's actions following its 2021 acquisition of Zenimax’s speak louder than Defendants' words. Defendants put great stock in Microsoft’s concerns about 'infuriating gamers' if it were to foreclose rivals’ access to Activision content. But those same concerns did not stop the Zenimax decision.”
Of course, the elephant in the room here is that Microsoft has offered Sony – and various other platform holders – a contract which it promises will keep Call of Duty games on PlayStation platforms for at least the next ten years. There is, however, still debate about what would occur beyond that decade – and also what would transpire with other Activision Blizzard properties, like Crash Bandicoot and Diablo.
The FTC’s case is slightly different to the pending appeal against the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority, as the latter has blocked the deal on the basis of cloud gaming concerns. That case is scheduled to be reviewed on 24th July, which means we’ve got well over a month of corporate courtroom drama to look forward to. Yay?
[source cand.uscourts.gov, via eurogamer.net, gamesindustry.biz]
Comments 93
Ugh, can this buyout just be over and done with already...
-grabs popcorn-
Can't wait to watch the film adaptation in a couple years. I think badger from breaking bad would make a perfect Phil but who could play Jim?
@Americansamurai1 Haha, I don't have any suggestions but I'm eager to see what others come up with!
Would be hilarious if all of this drama gets PlayStation a starfield port
Ehh. How about no?
Mainly because Microsoft actually offered a 10-year legally binding contract for COD that Sony refused to sign?
I mean they're right.
Microsoft were coy around the last buyout, and the second the probing from authorities ended, they were suddenly very confident. All these franchises they just purchased would be exclusive to their platforms now.
It's just up to them to decide whether or not this is considered a problem.
Okay, I just can't get behind that kind of an argument. ALL consoles have exclusives, even Playstation. So, are the Spider Man games being exclusive to PS hurting the industry? Mario and Zelda being exclusive to Nintendo? Does Sony WANT Redfall on its system? All consoles move numbers on their exclusive content, that's just the way it is. To try and argue now that exclusives are bad, or that it means Microsoft will keep future Bethesda games exclusive with no actual evidence, is rather asinine, in my opinion. And even if they did, Sony has games from studios it owns that are exclusive (IE not on any other system), and they don't hurt the industry either. It breeds competition, innovation, and growth.
I am very bored of hearing about this buyout, but I also don't want Activision to be bought by MS.
What surprises me is the change in perception with the deal. Sony are positioned as the babies throwing their toys out of the pram now, but in reality Microsoft just have zero right to buy Activision. Screw their "deals" and "offers". If Microsoft can't create meaningful IP with the many many talented studios they already own (including the 7 billion dollar Bethesda buyout), like Sony and Nintendo have done, then they deserve to fail.
And for the record I want Microsoft to succeed, competition is always good. There is no Gamepass without PS Plus, and there is no PS Extra without Gamepass.
Before the ink was even dry on the contract, Microsoft took Bethesda games away from PlayStation.
@get2sammyb could you imagine if it's a PlayStation studios production lol
I'm past the point of caring with this crap. Do it or don't. Just quit with the drama of one of the wealthiest companies in the world trying to buy the scummiest video game publisher. It's exhausting.
@Americansamurai1 I'm thinking Bricktop from Snatch would be a good Jim Ryan
@Americansamurai1 Harry Hill? Haha
I find it slightly amusing that the FTC is concerned that after a decade CoD and other IPs could become exclusive and not appear on rival platforms. Yet, Microsoft could in theory say, f**k the deal, let's just pay from this moment onwards to make cod and any other ActiBlizz exclusive for the next 10 years using the money reserved for our acquisition. A perfectly legal and competitive practice that would immediately result in the very thing that the FTC are deeming hugely damaging to the market.
Obviously this won't happen, but Microsoft probably have the finances to bankroll it should they ever want to.
Redfall 😂😂 has to be a wum. Nobody wants that.
@Godot25 Isn't that only one generation? I wouldn't have gone for either.
If memory serves, there was actually a PlayStation port in active production when the ZeniMax deal went through and MS actually cancelled it, even after saying assurances to the contrary. It’s one thing to not create a port, but when there was already one halfway finished and then to axe it, that’s much more intentional. I mean, I’m fine with MS having done that as it was their prerogative, but it’s coming back to bite them now, given historically they backtracked on previous promises. It would have been better for them to just say their intentions from the start.
@Highlar The difference is Sony and Nintendo actually finance and develop their own IPs, they don't go out and buy a publisher and call it the same, not when most of those 3rd party IPs performed better on PS on the fact that it had a way bigger install base.
Both Starfield and Redfall started out with PS5 versions in mind until Xbox decided to end them, a fact confirmed by the main devs (Todd Howard, Harvey Smith) of each game.
@Highlar Prudence, prudence. That’s how you know. It’s not a matter of if we have exclusives or not, it’s if a giant corporation has the right to buyout the whole industry at the expense of all the consumers and citizens.
MS is just trying to buy everything out, which is hugely different.
@Godot25 so that means mid next gen Microsoft could make COD exclusive. 10 years isn’t really a long time.
What a flimsy argument, I would have thought they would have come up with something a lot more water tight than that to argue for a PI.
A console argument rejected by every other regulatory body around the world, including the UK. facepalm
Too much money involved that will go through.
So can't wait to play starfield.
@Neither_scene think about it, COD sells 75+% on Playstation. To get timed exclusivity Microsoft would have to cover that 75+% an then a bit more to make it an attractive deal to Activision. Plus they would never make that back as sales would drop massively, espesh if they put it on Game Pass. No way would they go for that. A business can’t intentionally give itself 10 year losses!!
Hmm. Less bothered about Starfield, I'd almost say fair play Xbox, as it is a totally new IP that they wanted to make exclusive. But taking established games like Elder Scrolls and Fallout would be better evidence for this FTC stuff.
But I've stopped caring, long ago.
It'd be funny if they had to release Starfield on PS5 after all of this, almost as a good will gesture, all whilst Sony releases a new wave of major platform exclusives 😅😅
@Highlar you mention the spider man games being exclusive to playstation forgetting that it's not a console thing. Sony owns spider man as a franchise not just the games. There is nothing to be said about spiderman being exclusive to playstation.
I don't think MS would be too sad if the deal fell through - they are vastly over-paying. Kotick will freak though.
I mean, yeah of course they're going to make games Xbox exclusive. Why else would they bother? They're buying a game publisher and stable of developers to get the games. This isn't rocket science. Sure keep CoD multiplat, because i doubt CoD sells systems anymore, but future Bethesda games will no doubt be Xbox exclusive.
This is like when your power company or internet provider changes up how you're billed for their service. They're for sure not doing it so that you pay them less.
@Americansamurai1 My vote would be for Victor Meldrew. I mean what Victor says is pretty much what we are all thinking.
As for Bethesda, the biggest loss was to PS VR as I think there was about five or so PSVR games. No upgrade for Skyrim VR is pretty sad.
I don't want this deal to go through, though it can be a 2 edged sword. If they succed in integrating all of AB franchises and makes them exclusives it could bankrupt Sony, yet if MS fails to handle all those new studios and employees, it may fail big time, to the point of disaster.
I hope the second thing happens.
Well Microsoft, it looks like the United States may be "closed for business" also
Oh, so much fun…I’ll be happy when this is over, one way or another
Both games were being made for ps, then because ms bought Bethesda, they aren't on playstation. Consolidation is bad for everybody except ms.
Nothing to add to this anymore, and @Th3solution said it perfectly anyway. Both sides have exclusives, and always have, but one side is now attempting to buy up the industry and make multiplatform games already in production for rivals exclusive as well.
Three things immediately spring to mind:
1. If Microsoft had bought Bethesda, do we honestly think that Bethesda would have given that extra 2 years that Microsoft enabled them to have? Starfield would (and still may, of course) have released in a terrible state much like Fallout 76 did. It would not have the scale and polish that it appears to have right now.
2. I believe Microsoft have offered Game Pass to Sony. Now for obvious reasons, we know why that offer was never likely to be accepted, but that would have meant those that game exclusively on the PS5 would have been able to play the game natively. And let's not forget, the game is not exclusive to the Xbox. It will also be releasing on the PC, including on Steam.
3. The ratio of gamers, as shown from this very attempted acquisition, shows 70% of gamers playing on the PlayStation as opposed to just 30% on the Xbox. It would have to be an almighty, unprecedented swing to Xbox in order for them to foreclose the PlayStation. It's pure fiction, and I believe the FTC know this. The fact that they even mention this as a possibility is frankly incredulous...
Well the fact that we all know Starfield was in development for PS5. So MS buying Zenimax was a net loss for PlayStation consumers, which a fair number conveniently forget that.
From a profit standpoint, Bethesda exclusively on Xbox only is a really dumb business decision. Especially when you rank in the bottom of profit.
@TheArtfulDodger according to the FTC and CMA securing these titles as exclusives would significantly impact levels of competition. Therefore Microsoft would see significant hardware and software sales growth by virtue of such a deal. Yes, the first few years would probably see them incurring losses, but this would be offset in time by gaining monopoly level control of both the cloud gaming and home console markets (according to CMA and FTC). Gamepass has shown that Microsoft have no issue with taking big losses for long term gain. I'm sure $69 billion would secure an exclusivity window of sufficient length to force all competition to withdraw from the market.
Again, I make this point, based solely on the idea that both the CMA and FTC are correct in their appraisal of the ActiBlizz merger.
@Intr1n5ic True, but Xbox/PC game sales are FAR behind Sony and Nintendo. So the argument of exclusivity only works if you’re on equal footing.
Do we want Redfall?
It's smart of the FTC to take into account Microsoft's actions, which often don't match their words.
@Americansamurai1 Kenneth branagh for Jim Ryan. Perfect fit
@arsmolinarc Not to mention the usually pro XB Peter Hines of Bethesda PR was super positive about Bethesda taking advantage of the Dualsense tech which they had pre launch dev kits & its uses for stuff like firing a bow for Elder Scrolls!
Wish the "But we offered 10 year deals for COD!", defence were shown up for the PR Stunt it is. None of the streaming platforms are in direct competition with Microsoft's offerings & if some leaks are to be believed the revenue goes entirely back to M$!🙄
As for Ninty,Activision/Bobby Kotick thought so little of the Switch market for COD revenue they haven't bothered with one since the Wii U!🙄
Who's to say post buyout like Zenimax,they retool a future update/expansion of Diablo IV into a separate Reaper of Souls type release & use it as an excuse to go PC/XB exclusive?
Snake oil "Gamer" Phil has talked a lot about "gaming for all",but the reality is they are using the corporate credit card to continually take previously 3rd party AAA publishers,& IP's off Playstation not continue on...then have the audacity to claim they're a poor struggling 2.3 trillion dollar indie who hasn't got a monopoly in Windows,Office,Azure,A.I & other areas & couldn't possibly compete against big bad monopoly Sony without COD....whilst also claiming Sony could easily make their own COD but 69 billion says they're incapable of doing the same!🙄
@Neither_scene The CMA dropped the home console theory of harm. They are not concerned with that anymore, only Cloud
@Americansamurai1 I’d be happy with that! If that was the concession that they had to make!
@Sakai I know, that's why I mentioned both cloud and home console with regards to CMA and FTC. FTC latest statement points to home console market, while the CMA are only concerned with the cloud gaming market. Either way, they're both stating significant risks to competition should exclusivity be a component of the acquisition.
Once again there are some truly pathetic and childish comments on here.
"I hope the deal goes through and then Microsoft and the studios fail!"
"I'd love it if this forced Microsoft to release Starfield on PlayStation!"
"I hope that the deal gets blocked but Sony get to keep all their exclusives!"
Some people seriously need to grow the **** up.
@Highlar
Microsot were given the opportunity to develop a Spider-Man game by Marvel after the contract with Activision (previous titles were developed by Beenox) ended. Microsft declined the offer and decided to focus on deleoping their first party roster. Marvel then approached Sony who accepted giving the title to Insomniac to develop.
Spider-Man not being on Xbox is not Sony's fault.
Counter point: Minecraft, Minecraft Legends, Minecraft Dungeons. CoD will remain multiplat.
Future games from ABK? Yea all that other stuff will be exclusive, but nothing other than CoD is impactful enough to tilt the market, not even a potential Diablo 5.
@Fiendish-Beaver I don’t know if the ‘GamePass on PlayStation’ offer has ever been officially proposed from either side, but I do wonder if that’s been in the cards. It may still happen, depending on how things play out.
And honestly, I think that may have been a sticking point to the ‘COD for 10 years’ offer — I suspect that MS would allow for continued existence of COD on PlayStation but that it would have to be played through an MS cloud service or through a GamePass app. I’m pretty suspicious that was the tethers that were given in order to keep COD.
So in that scenario, it doesn’t really serve Sony nearly as much if PS gamers get COD but only can access it through GP or the cloud, since Sony won’t be getting their cut of the COD sales and MTX sales that they now get when the game is purchased through the PlayStation Store. It’s millions and millions of dollars. People forget that COD sales alone are on par with the cumulative sales of the entire Sony first party. It’s like apples and oranges to anything else. COD is the issue. It’s sales tower over everything else in the industry.
Removed - inappropriate
@Americansamurai1 that’s easy, Sloth from The Goonies!
@Godot25 aye but the fine print is absolutely insane on all of those 10 year contracts they offered out. 100% of the proceeds go to MS. No game that sells on any system gives 100% of the proceeds to the publisher.
@__jamiie Usually when you use quotation marks the text contained withing them is usually, you know, an actual quote. There's pathetic and childish comments on both sides of the argument, go on any article on Pure Xbox about the whole saga and you will see people in there that would love for the deal to go through and MS to make all ABK games exclusive to try and kill Sony off. Sony, MS and Nintendo all have their own element of more extreme fans that would love the competition to be killed off and their platform of choice be the only one out there, it's best to just ignore them and carry on about your business.
@FuzzieGinge88 Sony does not own spider man they just rent the rights to create games for now , films of spider man is another matter they do own the film rights but marvel have a huge say, marvel own the rights to spider man fully on everything apart from movie
And all this crap about Microsoft should create thier own stuff .... Like Sony created the character spider man or the final fantasy / call of duty / FIFA games, the difference being Sony rent the stuff for Thier console but Xbox buy the stuff for Thiers , it it was the other way round 99% of the ppl on here would b praising Sony for a great business deal
@Kevw2006 I used the gist of the comments rather than direct quotes as I didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings. 🙂
If this acquisition goes through we all know it sets a precedent that no merger between two publishers in the gaming industry is too big (as this is the biggest!). Microsoft will then attempt to gobble up every other mainstream publisher and completely sideline their main competitor through exclusivity. Making Playstation a niche choice for gamers. Whether you're an xbot or a pony this will be doomsday for our favourite hobby, with one of the greediest all consuming companies in the world having a monopoly over gaming. Any steps enacted to make this acquisition difficult, I see as a damn good thing.
For this reason alone
https://www.gamesradar.com/the-random-gamers-suing-microsoft-say-they-have-uncontroverted-evidence-that-xbox-wants-to-put-playstation-out-of-business/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_content=gamesradar
Just block the deal, I don't mind Microsoft buying devs to get great games but when their main reason for the purchase is just to put sony out of business then that's just disgusting.
"Just block the deal, I don't mind Microsoft buying devs to get great games but when their main reason for the purchase is just to put sony out of business then that's just disgusting"
Try getting FACTS RIGHT if that was said in the email it was 2019 and nothing was being discussed about activison back then so buying activison isn't about that , the activison buy is about the mobile ( Google/apple ) ,mobile acti sales dwarf consoles sales , come next year when mobiles open up to other stores it's gonna b a massive money maker , imagine the let's say 30% that apple /Google making now off acti stuff . I wouldn't mind that loose change on my pocket
I don't get why people here are tired about hearing about the buyout. It's a major event and will affect the gaming industry for years if it goes through. It'll also set dangerous precedents that will further decay the power of the consumer.
That being said I continuously see gamers shooting themselves in the foot so I've just about given up. They mocked diablo mobile and yet that game has racked in millions upon millions. They decry a game's price hikes and yet still buy them day one. They complain about the broken state that games release in nowadays and yet still preorder or buy day 1. What's the point in trying to show gamers that they have the power to request satisfying meals when the majority of them are content to root around in the dumpster in the alley? There's just no point anymore, nobody values money.
@Highlar The hole in your argument is MS buying away what used to be 3rd party publishers that released there content on all consoles. Sony and Nintendo both grew there studios and exclusive IPs organically.
Honestly, I think it’d be funny if this back and forth went on forever. While this is partly just because I really don’t want Microsoft to buy ABK and know that they’re not going to give up, it is morbidly entertaining to watch two mega corporations squabbling like children. Gives me something to laugh at every now and then.
@UltimateOtaku91 welcome to capitalism: attempting to bring back the gilded age monopolies since 1901.
Well, yes.
They both are publishers and are making their games exclusive and the same will happen with Activision Blizzard. I have no impressions that it will be anything else. No matter how much Microsoft lies about it. One would have to be unbelievably gullible to think otherwise. Nor would MS have reason to do anything else. That is why they are trying to buy them.
If I cared any less about this petty exchange, I'd fold into myself and form a singularity. Two corporate behemoths deciding who gets the shooty bang bang games. Quelle surprise.
It's one thing to have games or franchises that have always been exclusive (Uncharted, God of War, Halo) and another thing when when somebody wants to pull out their johnson financially and make titles that have previously been multiplatform (Elder Scrolls, Fallout, CoD) and make them exclusive. I'm not sure why people are having such a hard time making that distinction.
@FuzzieGinge88 They own movie rights not video game rights. Even then Marvel did ask Xbox first if they wanted Spider-Man for a game and they turned it down.
@Fiendish-Beaver I always loved Microsoft's argument of "We tried to put GamePass on PlayStation but they didn't wantnit there."
Like yeah, no *****. But were you asking them to out PS+ on Xbox?! Saying getting their mits into/onto the PS platform is a sign of good intentions is laughable if MSFT weren't also willing to let the competition get their mits on THEIR platform.
Is Microsoft out here begging to let everyone play nice together? Doesn't seem that way. They think "Xbox on everything" is fair and goodwill, but anyone on their platforms is bad. Which... makes no sense.
@Ken_Kaniff Hogwash. Nintendo maybe but not Sony.
They can keep it I'm good 👍 😌
It's a valid concern from the FTC, but I just don't see it really holding much weight in court.
Microsoft was extremely coy on its intentions with Bethesda - stating the whole "game-by-game" basis.
But Microsoft has been more open with the ABK acquisition regarding its intentions.
The judge can't really make a decision based on what they feel will happen in the future - Minority Report anyone? - only on what evidence is being presented now.
Current evidence is showing a willingness to push games to other platforms. Anything else is speculation.
While not entirely the same thing as buying a whole publisher, Sony has bought studios only for them to never make a third-party title ever again. Bungie is the first I have ever seen where Sony came out and said they would stay independent. But Sony could still change its mind on that, too.
Sony very well could pull the plug on Destiny and make Bungie only make PlayStation titles. Again, while not the same magnitude, the act of making studios only develop for Sony consoles still stands.
@Yanksfan70 New IP’s, which was said would be on a case by case, as to where older franchises with install bases would be supported. Just wanted to give more context to it. 😊
@cburg So The Last of Us, Uncharted, Ratchet and Clank, Horizon and the many other IPs were not all created organically by studios they have built up and molded over the years?
@Neither_scene It's not about the exclusivity.
It's about ownership and control of the IP.
@Neither_scene i don’t think sales would alter much if they did make COD exclusive. No Playstation gamer is gonna drop Playstation an switch to Xbox for COD. Big COD fans will just buy an Xbox, Series S if money’s tight, everyone else just won’t play COD. I have PS5 an Series X so i’d be fine, if i could only afford one console tho no way would i drop Playstation just to play Call of Duty. An i was talkin about Xbox getting timed exclusivity of COD if the Activision deal collapses. They’d lose money on COD sales for ten years.
I would just love for the buyout to be stopped, but Microsoft inking a deal to keep CoD exclusive for 10 years, without buying Activision, much less scrutiny frankly I’m annoyed about Sony’s position, when they pay third parties to keep their game exclusive to their platform like no other, case in point, that little game coming out tomorrow (which I already preordered by the way).
@Kanji-Tatsumi I 100% agree with you!! If they can't make anything good with all the talent and studios they have bought up then they shouldn't be in the gaming business period! Their trying to buy their way to producing good games. Yes I know sony has bought studios too but they have produced great games that's the difference and their studios dont wind up being throwed to the wind.If Starfeld is good that will be the first good game that has come out since the X launched.
@Jamesblob They started playing the game, approaching pretty much every publisher trying to lock games out from the competitor.….someone with a bigger wallet came along, why should they play by Sony rules?
@Casco Xbox does 3rd party deals too. People just gloss over it because PS does it a lot these days. Nintendo also does these deals, just not as often as the other two.
@Jamesblob who sets the limit? If Sony had the resources, don’t you think they would do it? They attempted to score exclusivity deals with every major publisher, scored a few, Microsoft upped the ante.
Ok dude. So Sony, the market leader sets the rules for competition. Got it. Let’s try to keep games out of competing platforms, but only up to the extent my wallet allows. Anything else is not fair.
This is what I've been saying for a while now...and all the Xbox fanboys said that it'll never happen, yet Microsoft have already done it!!!! So why wouldn't they do it again??? Especially considering that call of duty is even bigger than the Bethesda titles.....it calls to a MUCH wider array of customers.
@Godot25 Sony knows that deal is only being offered to appease the regulators. Microsoft are playing the long game and at the first chance they get of pulling games from PlayStation they will.
Remember when the ZeniMax deal was being scrutinized Microsoft said they had no motivation to deprive gamers from PlayStation. As soon as the deal went through Redfall & Starfield were announced as Xbox exclusive when Starfield at least was already running on PlayStation hardware.
Bethesda are none to happy that MS has made them go Xbox exclusive either by the sounds of it
https://metro.co.uk/2023/06/27/microsoft-forced-bethesda-to-do-xbox-exclusives-and-theyre-not-happy-19024969/
@Captain_crash199 More like "Sony knows that COD will stay on PlayStation but they have a chance to get a good deal from Microsoft so they are faking concern."
Even CMA and EU said that there is no economic sense in dropping COD from PlayStation. That is saying enough.
And about "Bethesda not happy." I'm sure that you read that comms between Hines and Microsoft. It's more about "you shoud gave me a heads-up. How we will explain this to the public when they will ask?" as oppose to "I'm ***** mad that we won't release our games on PlayStation."
@Godot25 There was no economic sense in making the Bethesda titles Xbox only but they still did it. If you follow the link you will see Bethesda were none to happy about it as it went against what they were lead to believe. News came out today that Phil Spencer told them not long after the deal had gone through all upcoming titles would be xbox only. Spencer is surely the biggest fraud in gaming.
https://metro.co.uk/2023/06/29/phil-spencer-made-elder-scrolls-6-fallout-5-xbox-exclusives-in-2021-19041140/?ico=mosaic_gaming
@Godot25
Arguably the biggest revelation of the week was an email from Bethesda marketing boss Pete Hines, which revealed that the decision to make all new Bethesda games Xbox exclusives was one that was forced upon the publisher by Microsoft.
Now we know exactly who made the decision and when: Phil Spencer eight months after Microsoft completed their acquisition. We also know it includes all Bethesda games too, not just new IP.
The revelation came from messages between Xbox chief financial officer Tim Stuart and Xbox Games Studio head Matt Booty in November 2021, talking about a monthly business review meeting with Xbox and ZeniMax.
During this meeting, Xbox boss Phil Spencer had apparently decided to make all ZeniMax games exclusive and not just new IP.
Stuart was clearly surprised by this and says, ‘All games going forward? Not just new IP but all games going forward? Wow.’
Booty then replies: ‘Phil told them all titles going forward, Xbox exclusive.’
Stuart’s surprise is no doubt because this means that The Elder Scrolls and Fallout will also now become Xbox console exclusives.
Being the money guy, he then voices concern that this will eat into their profits, since it’s apparently not how the deal was originally planned.
@Captain_crash199 Of course there is an economic sense to make Bethesda games exclusive. Starfield will sell consoles and subscription.
And while yes, even COD exclusive would push Xbox consoles and subs, question is that if rate of "user conversion" from PlayStation would be high enough to cover loss of revenue on PlayStation especially since COD is yearly published title with heavy reliance on microtransactions (ie. as much users as you can have).
Even FTC had to made up bogus number (20% users that would switch) which even judge called them up for.
Even CFO of Xbox said that in case of Minecraft PlayStation generates twice revenue of Xbox and Nintendo twice a revenue of PlayStation. That should tell you enough how Microsoft treats Minecraft (cash cow) and how they will treat Call of Duty (cash cow).
And CFO of Microsoft literally said in her deposition that whole ABK purchase is made with financial model that keeps multiplatform releases and she expects ABK to generate profit immediately after competition of merger. Which you can hardly do if you pull COD from PlayStation.
Not to mention oath from Spencer and Nadella and 10-year contract offered to Sony.
And of course article you sent failed to mention that Microsoft had 5 models for future Bethesda content ranging from "we keep everything multiplatform" to "everything will be exclusive" completed with financial impact. They chosed fifth option.
But whatever. Not that I care that much about ABK content. If this deal fail, I have no doubts that Microsoft will reinvest them into other purchases of publishers...
@Godot25
During the inquiries into Microsoft buying ZeniMax Phil Spencer said MS had no incentive to withhold games from the PlayStation platform. As soon as the deal went through he told Bethesda all games moving forward with be Xbox exclusive even to their surprise. This is proof the man and his company are liars. He truly is the biggest fraud in gaming with his I'm your best pal act. Remember he was as much to blame as Don Mattrick for the anti consumer moves with the Xbox one launch.
MS have already stated they want to outspend Sony out of business. Just look back at this immoral companies history where they have broken every anticompetitive law going back in the 90's & 00's where the slogan Microsoft is evil came part of everyday language.
The Activision buyout is bad for gaming and needs to be stopped and Micro$ofts bullying and play to win approach halted.
@Captain_crash199 That's false. Microsoft's merger strategy regarding ZeniMax did not have a model for ZeniMax games going exclusive pre-merger . CFO of Xbox confirmed yesterday that in february 2021 (one month before acquisition was completed) Microsoft had 5 separate strategy for ZeniMax content going forward. They chose exclusive one in november 2021, 8 months after merger was completed, because they crunched numbers and they found out that this strategy would be most beneficial one long term.
You can only be glad that few internal emails from Sony were published during FTC trial because you would be probably surprised what Sony think about driving Xbox out of console business. Oh wait...you don't need to. You can just point to constant moneyhats as a proof...Forspoken, Deathloop, GhostWire, Final Fantasy VII, Final Fantasy XVI, KOTOR Remake...clear goal to deprive Xbox of content to drive players into PS ecosystem. I don't blame them. I actually like aggressive platform holders. But it goes both ways of course.
As I said. I'm not loosing my sleep over ABK, since I don't care about ABK games. If Microsoft will loose, I'm sure they will buy another gaming company and then they will make all that content exclusive so fanboys can cry some more while championing "smart business" from Sony about depriving Xbox from AAA content.
@Godot25
Phil, is that you?!
The case revealed numerous interesting details about what’s been going on behind the scenes in the industry over the last few years, with Microsoft’s public proclamations about the exclusivity of Bethesda games bearing no resemblance to what they’d actually decided to do about it behind the scenes.
Their pretence that they haven’t decided about the exclusivity of The Elder Scrolls 6 appeared to be patently untrue and made Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella’s suggestion that the company would like to put an end to exclusives seem even more disingenuous.
Not only that but, according to Sony, Xbox pays for games to be kept off PlayStation Plus. At the same time, Microsoft’s claim that the CMA is the only worldwide regulator to have an issue with the deal had to be corrected by the CMA’s Canadian equivalent.
@Captain_crash199 Mate. I listened to 90% of actual trial live. So I know that you are spewing *****
Yes. They decided to go exclusive with Bethesda games. And they decided about it in november 2021. They had 5 models to go forward and the chose full exclusivity. And yes, in pre-merger analysis there was nothing about going "full exclusive" in terms of economic impact.
But, you can go ahead and point me to the article where Microsoft says "Bethesda games will be multiplatform" before merger completed.
I agree that TES VI "I have no idea about platforms" is nice play by Spencer, because game don't have any platforms annouced and is so far away, that there is no stuff (in terms of hard evidence) that can get him in trouble for saying that.
And yes, Microsoft likes money. And if there would be a world where there is no exclusives, I have no doubts that Microsoft would happily live in that world so they can fight with quality of hardware and services alone. But sadly such a world does not exist. Consumers in XOne generation sent Microsoft strong message. Sony won because of exclusives. If you don't have exclusives, we will go and buy PlayStation. So Microsoft basically have no choice even if they would like to publish Starfield multiplatform to generate most possible revenue. It's just nature of console business.
And yes, standard marketing contracts include exclusion from competing subscription services. Duh? It's standard practice on both sides and I never understood why people made such a big deal about it. Since Sony had marketing rights for Hogwars Legacy for example, there was no chance of game being in Game Pass until that marketing contract expires. It is why Microsoft could not put this year's Call of Duty into Game Pass even if they owned ABK - because Sony has marketing rights that prevents game going into Game Pass. But I can't blame Microsoft for using that info in court. It is about other side of lawyers saying "you are doing it too." Same like in FTC court case FTC lawyers actually said that Microsoft can benefit Xbox COD players by providing them access to more content...while Sony is doing exactly same thing for almost a decade with COD games.
@Godot25
Spencer is still being obtuse about whether Elder Scrolls is going to be exclusive or not. The guy is a total fraud. They may not have said implicitly that all games would by multiformat but they certainly tried to give that impression so much so that those at Bethesda were clearly surprised when ordered to make everything Xbox exclusive going forward.
I've nothing against exclusives as they give a console an identity and are a good way of a giving a console maker opportunities to supplement any genre of games that 3rd parties are neglecting. MS and most of the rest were saying single player, story driven games and certainly there were far fewer of the games on the market - Sony picked up the kind of games that were being neglected and the masses showed they wanted those games.
MS have been in the gaming industry for years now they should have a plethora of top gaming studios that they built up and nourished themselves. They've failed to do that so they have decided to go the pay to win route and buy up the biggest 3rd party gaming studios for the sole purpose of depriving gamers on other platforms. It's sad that you seem to approve of this.
@KAIRU My thoughts exactly, sick and tired of hearing about it!
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...