In expected news, the Federal Trade Commission has failed in its attempts to delay Microsoft’s eye-watering $69 billion buyout of Activision Blizzard. Earlier this week, the US regulator lost its court case against the trillion dollar tech titan, meaning it was unable to impose a temporary injunction on the deal closing. The department appealed, but its request was rejected, and then the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals also shot down its request for emergency relief.
All of this is relevant because there’s an 18th July deadline on the deal looming, although the Redmond firm still needs to overcome its issues with the Competition and Markets Authority, which is the UK’s regulator. Most recently, the two parties returned to the negotiating table to hammer out some kind of resolution, although notably a spokesperson for the British agency said it “stands by” its decision to block the acquisition and that discussions are still in their infancy.
“We appreciate the Ninth Circuit's swift response denying the FTC's motion to further delay the deal,” said chuffed Microsoft bigwig Brad Smith. “This brings us another step closer to the finish line in this marathon of global regulatory reviews.”
Of course, all of this raises questions for PlayStation, and it’s something we analysed in a reaction piece earlier this week. With the deal looking likely to close any day now, Sony is going to have to be swift and shrewd in shoring up its business, as the potential for more third-party acquisitions could seriously impede its position in the market.
[source eurogamer.net]
Comments 205
I can't wait until this finally goes through. Gamepass will become a must own subscription and Sony will be forced to up their game to compete. PC gamers benefit the most tbh.
All Sony needs to do is keeping making great games. The sky is not falling.
@Splat This, spot on mate. Our best games of the last few years have been exclusives, on wards and upwards.
I was more gutted about Bethesda than this one, no Wolfenstein or Doom
I wouldn't worry too much. Microsoft aren't getting their 69 billion dollars back in a hurry if they make their games exclusive.
A couple of things leave a bad taste in my mouth with this case.
1) Microsoft languishing in 3rd place for decades managing to spend 69 billion dollars on such a large publisher (instead of collapsing like Atari or Sega.) They really have transcended conventional market forces everyone else is exposed to!
2) The fact this merger was trying to be blocked despite talking about buying exclusivity as a norm. Maybe the industry needs some sort of legislation here.
Anyhoo, life is fluid. Who is to say Call of Duty is irrelevant in 10 years time.
The only thing I was interested in with Activision was a THPS 3&4 remake. But since they binned that off, it's not a huge loss. Still, Microsoft are scummy.
@MickOnYourFace It's amazing THPS 3+4 didn't happen. The 1+2 remake seemed to do well enough.
@Triumph741 Must own subscription my a@%e lol
I saw someone online earlier talking about how CoD releasing on Game Pass next year would force Sony to release their games on PS Plus Day 1.
There seems to be a genuine lack of understanding related to where budgets come from.
Sony are doubling down on their own strategy too. They're in South Korea atm pursuing partnerships there. The latest rumour was that they might possibly acquire a minority stake in Pearl Abyss and secure some kind of exclusivity around Crimson Desert.
I didn't pay much attention at all to video games last gen, but whatever happened to Halo? It feels like that ip was among the giants, and now I don't hear about it at all.
I hope I won't wonder the same thing about these ABK titles one day.
US Logic:
“Meta is becoming too big, we need to break Meta”
“Amazon is too big, we need to split the company in smaller companies”
But:
-“Crosof who already has a negative impact on the video game industry wants to obliterate competition by buying (one of) the biggest studio out there?”
@Triumph741
Opinions like this are just so short sighted. Apart from the negative of quickening the rise of subscription and streaming services, which both will lower game quality, it doesn’t account for one player being orders of magnitude richer than the other. Consolidation is coming, and the poorest will struggle to compete with the likes of MS. The only hope for long term competition now that this precedent has been set is if Amazon or Apple make a push 🤮
@Triumph741 Only game I'm interested in on Game Pass is Hi-Fi Rush, the Addition of COD is hardly an enticing reason to sub to it. Maybe once they pull their finger out and have bangers releasing all the time, I'll get on board. Until then my PS5 and Switch have my gaming needs covered!
Even in this day and age, that $69 billion price tag is so unfathomable, it’s nearly impossible for me to see anything outside of all the people that could be fed, watered, clothed and sheltered instead. It’s just so much money. What a world.
@Jimmer-jammer
In fairness, spending billions feeding people is completely different from spending billions on a company where you then get billions in assets, IP, and future profits. In some respects no real money has been spent at all, especially as it will likely reduce immediate reported profits and thus tax.
Not saying companies like MS can’t or shouldn’t spend money helping people, just that this deal cannot be discussed as an equivalent to doing so.
Sony will be great, so will Nintendo. I see it leveling out the gaming industry a bit, which was needed, and hopefully this will lead to more competition.
We as consumers will benefit from that. As a player on all 3 consoles, I actually think this weeks news was good for me and the industry
@Shepherd_Tallon that would make Plus more competitive and better for players.
@Triumph741 Not sure why you get that impression. Sure we'll see Diablo IV on the service, but I don't think blizzard gamers care all that much about Game Pass unless WoW suddenly appears. you're still going to be buying your season passes. That being Said a good chunk of CoD's profit comes from the premium release and many gamers only play CoD. I don't see game pass changing that since the price of a sub is still the cost of the final game. Why would you keep paying for a game yearly you could pay once for and skip the next years cod entirely if you don't like hte studio. Case in point CoD WW2 or anything made by Sledgehammer like WW2.
This won't improve game pass at all. That isn't even the reason they are buying out ABK. It's for the mobile games division. They'll let these games flounder in obscurity for 10 years. Destroy those IP. Then asked why no one cares about these games once they do go exclusive.
This isn't going to change anything for sony. As someone who games on PC. Zero interest in gamepass. We see enough sales on PC that it makes game pass pretty irrelevant.
“Eye watering”
@GrailUK Microsoft needs to be broken up. Problem is the US government has become a slave to the european elite (no offense) and doesn't care. I mean we're selling plots of our land to china for crying out loud.
Anyway solid points. Biggest problem I see here is that CoD and Blizzards IP will no longer be relevant in 10 years. That's just Microsoft's track record. When was the last time Halo meant something other than some old husk of a franchise past its prime. When was the last time Gears of War was a reason to buy an xbox? Where the hell is Conker? Perfect Dark? Didn't take long for Killer Instinct to dry up in its renaissance. Dare I pose the question about FABLE?
Biggest problem I have here is Microsoft consolidating big names under their umbrella only to see them wither on the vine. Sure state your issues with CoD, but it does have its place in the industry and those studios are home to developers enhancing their skills so they can one day work at the big names on big projects. Forces the industry to basically reboot its self prematurely. We might see a breif boost in Microsofts position, but I guaranty you, in 10 years they'll be right back where they started. As you said about market powers, this is not normal. Under US law at this point they should be under investigation for a split. I think the Xbox Brand needs to be divorced from Microsoft. You don't release a piece of kit like the One X or the Series X without having deep pockets.
We've seen MS take the lead before, so it's not anything sony is doing to control the market. They keep shooting themeselves in the foot.
Anyway hope everyone is ready for a few of years without a steady stream of games before the wave of quality titles comes again from exodus this cuases from these studios.
@thefourfoldroot1 I get your point - this ain’t a lemonade stand we’re talking about. I just think that, amongst all of the discourse and discussion, there’s value to that tiny voice in the corner reminding everyone just how obscene a $69 billion buyout of anything is.
@Sekijo To be fair, any true capitalist injects profits back into the economy and prioritizes philanthropy. To your point, considering the size of this buyout, we’re putting that much more economic trust in that much fewer people, and yeah, I’m not convinced this will be for any greater good.
Means less ***** games on PlayStation. Great news.
@Sakai
MS flat out buying a publisher bigger than Sony themselves evens things out? Just because they sell fewer plastic boxes? Not sure that holds up no matter how often MS screech it
@MickOnYourFace Ditto. Even Hawk himself seemed at a loss as to why they pulled away. Although it seem to me they were trimming the fat to look more appealing to M$...
@Triumph741
Hahaha must own subscription? Just for CoD? Are we living on the same earth? I mean sure CoD is making money (why may you know. It's always the same trick) But I think it's kind of funny that people seriously think this would be the end of Playstation. Simply hillarious!
ABK don't really make games that I gravitate towards, but this is bad for the industry. The few IP's that M$ don't put out to pasture will rot as that is what they typically do.
The majority of ABK's catalogue will be but a memory in 5 years, and M$ will be sniffing around for the next behemoth to kill.
@thefourfoldroot1
I don't think Activision is bigger than Sony Computer entertainment. But it comes close. even with this acquisition, Microsoft still remains the smallest of the big three. Who knows, there will suddenly be a surprise from Sony and they will buy take two. And that's not impossible. It seems that Sony wants to sell their financial branch. And that is very big in Asia. Also make billions.
@NotSoCryptic "This won't improve game pass at all."
That's a whole entire mountain of copium. The idea that adding ABKs library of old and future games like CoD and Diablo doesn't improve gamepass at all, is frankly bananas
@thefourfoldroot1 yes it does even it out. That's the whole point of what I said. Unless you refuse to play games on anything but a Playstation, this deal is a win for gamers
This changes very little for playstation. Call of duty will still be the best selling game on ps nearly every year. Sony will still get their cut to fund 1st party games. It will be interesting to see what MS does with the IPs that ABK barely touched. Protocol, spyro, crash, etc might be exclusive to xbox if they ever do anything with them but abk making those games was extremely rare to begin with. Xbox has been very hands off with their acquired studios so it might be business as usual at abk (CoD and WoW factory).
PS+ will need to improve but that's a good thing for ps gamers.
I'm glad the deal is making it through. It should be a good thing for the industry.
@Sekijo and if Sony would stop buying third-party exclusives
Couldn't care less from a PlayStation owner perspective, seeing as I also own an Xbox. I do care from a consumer perspective though. I'm heavily opposed to mergers, so I'm bummed it's going through.
@GKT when bungie left, Microsoft handed Halo over to 343 industries, and if you look at their track record, they only have a history of building maps for other games.
@Darkashura Different parts of the government. Since Biden has been in office, the FTC has been very anti-merger.
This is a sad day for gaming in general, the fact is once Microsoft become the market leader both Sony and Nintendo don't have the finances to challenge them in any way possible, then if Microsoft continue to buy and buy once they become market leader then that will just end up pushing sony out of the business. They now have control over 5-6 of the biggest 10 IP's around that they can (already some have) make exclusive to their ecosystem at a click of a finger. Something none of Sony's Acquisitions have ever had the power of.
If that happens then I hope sony sell it's brand name and all of its studios and IP's to either Google, Amazon, Apple or Tencent so that they can continue the PlayStation brand but also have the same wealth as Microsoft to actually challenge them.
Those cheering this acquisition are either blind to the future consequences or xbox fanboys that would love nothing more than to see Sony disappear.
@NotSoCryptic Not like Activision really cared about their old IPs. I think Microsoft will be worse though. We probably won't be seeing many new games like Crash, Spyro, or Tony Hawk.
@Deshalu I love what 343 has done with the single player of halo. 5 and infinite are both amazing campaigns IMO. I'm excited to see what they do with the open world formula they started with infinite.
@Deshalu but buying a game or helping with development cost for exclusively isn't as damaging as buying an entire publisher at least in my opinion because xbox could do the same with others
@CreepingShadow how when the game that is being bought or help funded to be exclusive, is keeping it from another competitor?
It’s the same thing.
It cost Sony a lot less with other publishers to make a game exclusive, then it does Microsoft and the difference is is Microsoft actually loses money because they don’t have the consumers to balance it out
@Somebody know I agree with you. I don’t think the halo games are bad but to others it’s awful.
Even though the game is getting somewhere between an eight out of 10 rating on average
Forza horizon five got nines and tens and tens, and still couldn’t bring consumers over.
That’s another reason I think that Microsoft is resorting to buying popular eye peas, and to be honest with you it makes sense
@UltimateOtaku91
Nah i don't believe Sony can be pushed out. They are way to big in the gaming world. I simply don't believe it will do that. After all, it's only CoD that brings in money. If Sony comes up with a big CoD competitor (and they will, Sony is not stupid) Then MS will have it checked. Because if COD was really that good, activision blizzard wouldn't be for sale either.
It's worth pointing out that the last time xbox (or anyone) seriously threatened playstation they responded with one of the best console gens of all time, ps4. Sony has been showing signs of that ps3 arrogance again lately.
Playstation is at its best with a healthy and aggressive xbox.
If Sony gets CoD for another decade then I don’t see a problem. Last gen as the Wii U lay dying there was a lot of talk about console’s being dead. Lots and lots of talk. Obviously that didn’t happen but as technology gets better that possibility increases as at some point tvs will be gaming consoles and phones will output to TVs. Switch was just the beginning and now we have Steamdeck and a couple of others.
The PS5 may become discless, PS6 in another few years will be all digital, and PS7 will just be a chip in your phone or tv after that. And consoles will be dead. And MS doesn’t make TVs, but Sony does.
Consoles will have had a good run of 50+ years, but like film cameras, landline phones and CRT TVs they’re end will come. 🤷🏻♂️
This seems more like a psychological win for MS than anything meaningful that wasn’t going to happen on its own eventually anyway. Business likes consolidation.
@Mostik Same. Don't care about Activision. It's the Bethesda that saddens me the most.
@rjejr
Don’t see the problem for the next ten years you mean? I presume. If you ignore the fact people can plan for the future within those ten years.
And don’t see the problem with business consolidation either it seems…
@Somebody
What have consoles got to do with the future of gaming? We are moving to subscription and streaming models like all other media, and if MS can just buy all the most popular content (as well as having all the data centres) we are heading for the least competitive status gaming has ever had. At least until Apple/Amazon enter the market.
Lets be honest here, people will still buy Playstation to play Sony's 'exclusives'.
I can't see people opting to buy a Series X and pay for Game Pass Ultimate to play Call of Duty instead of sticking with PS5, playing with their friends on their preferred platform etc for a LOT less cost, as well as play Sony's exclusives.
When it comes to PS6, Call of Duty will still be 'multi-platform' so again unlikely to pull fans of Sony and Sony's exclusives away from Playstation.
Instead of it being Forza, Gears and Halo from MS vs Uncharted, LoU, Horizon, GoW, R&C, Spider-Man, Wolverine, Gran Turismo, Ghost of Tsushima etc etc, MS can add a few more 'IP's' to be more 'competitive'. It won't be so one-sided with Sony having 4x or 5x the number of Exclusives...
I doubt MS will suddenly 'pull' CoD from releasing on Playstation Hardware in '10yrs'. Abandon all those Fans of a MS owned IP and another Revenue stream. Of course if Sony abandon Hardware for a subscription based 'Streaming' service, I can see Sony having to negotiate terms (if it isn't F2P by then) - otherwise how will MS make their 'money'? But whilst Hardware 'exists', they will want to keep their 'fans' happy.
Fans of 'Minecraft' are still fans of a MS owned property - even if they 'choose' to play on Playstation/Switch and MS hasn't abandoned those Fans because ultimately, they are fans of an MS owned product.
We have Microsoft to blame for the acceleration of the gaming industry consolidation going forward. Buying two publishers will have consequences, particularly because buying two in two years was not a red line. They'll keep doing what Microsoft does and buy until they find the red line. Then, they'll buy the judge a yacht, so they can cross the red line.
@thefourfoldroot1 it's interesting that you don't think Apple or Amazon have entered the gaming market.
If Jim Ryan is to be believed, we are not moving towards a subscription only future. He gave a video testimony saying publishers unanimously don't like that model.
I don't think there has ever been a more competitive time in gaming history. 3 major console producers, all thriving. New handheld consoles(that dock to any hdmi display) are entering the market regularly and offer native access to multiple storefronts (xbox, steam, epic, etc.)
@Jimmer-jammer I say Sony and Microsoft liquidate all their assets and fire their combined 350,000 employees and take that money and feed and shelter people around the world.
Anyone who engages in gaming is a greedy capitalist that enjoys watching good money and resources go to frivolous activities instead of feeding starving people.
@Somebody
They are dipping their toes. It’s coming. And the competition comment was clearly brought up in relation to when MS buy up all the most popular content for Gamepass, which they are now clearly given a pass to do.
Not surprising. Hopefully it’ll be over soon. I know not good for Sony, but I’m over it.
I read somewhere, @Sekijo, that even after the ABK buyout, Sony will still have more developers. Not studios, but individual developers. If true, it might explain why Xbox is not able to make any AAA games, or at least not in a timely manner. If that really is the case, it's kind of crazy when you think about it...
@Sekijo I’ve committed a lot. Which part are you referring to?
People still play COD? Why?
@Sekijo @Fiendish-Beaver fiendish you are correct.
Also, think about this, the last call of duty took 15 studios to make, the previous Call of Duty took 13.
Microsoft has three studios under 50 developers.
One of Sony‘s studios has 4000 developers - XDev. Insomniac, Bungie, and one other have around 900 developers each. Naughty dog I think has around 800.
@Splat I believe Sony's worry is that if COD were to become exclusive to Xbox they would lose our on billions in gross revenue.
@Sekijo we said developers, not studios.
@thefourfoldroot1 there has never been a console game released exclusively into a subscription service. If you don't like subscriptions there will never be a reason forcing you to. Storefronts like steam, playstation and switch are way too appealing to exclusively offer a game to subscribers.
**gamepass hack - pay for one month and treat it like a Costco membership. Buy a bunch of the gamepass games digitally for 20% off and they are yours forever. It only takes a couple games to save more than the single month sub.
@Sekijo as far as third-party studios go. Sony can pay for exclusives and still get money in return.
Microsoft hast to pay more for third-party exclusives and loses money, because they don’t have the consumers to make up the cost.
That’s why I under Phil Spencer they haven’t been doing exclusives like that anymore.
@Sekijo but developers matter more than studios because if I have more developers, I can produce games faster while still keeping the quality of a AAA title
@Sekijo Example Insomniac has 900 developers that’s why they’re working on two games at once Spider-Man and wolverine
@Ludacritz I understand that but Xbox would be fools to do that. They will sale very few copies on Xbox because of Gamepass. They need it to be on PS for those sales.
@thefourfoldroot1
imagine what sony can do in ten years.
@rjejr One big factor that hasn't been brought up by others is that there's a big contradiction present in Microsoft's strategy which says a lot about the future. They say they intend to bring back dormant IP like Guitar Hero and Skylanders but at the same time say they're not going to sabotage CoD. Those are contradicting statements given CoD is the reason other Activision IP is dormant in the first place.
Either Microsoft lied about reviving dormant IP which would harm the value of Game Pass or we're going to see that for example 10 years of CoD only means like 3 games maximum which would be seen as malicious intent to try and kill off Playstation.
@thefourfoldroot1 No, I don't see a problem after 10 years either b/c I don't think there will be consoles after another 10 years, give or take. Well not as we know them anyway. Nintendo will probably keep making handhelds b/c kids need their Pokemon fix. Though I suppose the entire industry could be "3rd party" in another 10 years as phone and tv tech gets better. Nintendo has really been pushing their mobile kart racing game Mario World Tour while we haven't seen a new console kart racing game in over a decade since MK8. So given enough time anything is possible.
Never said I didn't see a problem w/ business consolidation, that's just the way it is.
Wow! So many points that can be challenged, @UltimateOtaku91.
Just how many gamers will sell their PS5s now, and buy a Series X/S do you think, mate?
The PlayStation has 40% more gamers that the Xbox. 40%..! That's a crazy imbalance of players on one platform than on the other. It is why, as I have said before, many, many times, that the Xbox has not had a single AAA third-party exclusive this generation, and the PlayStation has had several.
I've said it before, for Xbox to overtake the PlayStation, they need to attract 21% of gamers away from the PlayStation and over to the Xbox. We are talking about around 50 million gamers swapping from the PlayStation over to the Xbox in order for the Xbox to move ahead of the PlayStation. I know you like to post these THE WORLD IS DOOMED posts, and truthfully, your abject pessimism is why I respond to your comments so often. However, just look at the situation realistically; do you honestly see 50 million gamers giving up on the PlayStation and moving over to the Xbox because Microsoft bought ABK? I'd be surprised if the dial moves at all. After all, even after this acquisition, the Xbox will still have fewer individual developers than Sony. Yes, Xbox will have more studios, but 100 smaller studios cannot pump out AAA games unless they take a decade to do it. Sony has studios with so many developers that they can knock out a AAA game in 3 years. There is a big difference, and there still will be even after the acquisition.
Finally, you say Xbox gamers want Sony to die, but it is so rare to see such a comment on the likes of Pure Xbox. I honestly don't remember seeing them. However, I have seen many comments such as that aimed against the Xbox and Microsoft on this site. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I swear I've seen it numerous times on this site. I get that you are a PlayStation first and foremost guy, even though you own an Xbox, and that is absolutely fine, but sometimes you do need a little more perspective...
@Sekijo the whole “Microsoft has to pay more because they have a smaller player base” is a weak argument.
You might think it’s a weak argument, but it’s a true argument, and in order to be $1 trillion company you can’t just throw cash away, you don’t have an endless supply of it, otherwise it wouldn’t be a called a $1 billion or trillion dollar company, it’d be called endless, which isn’t a real thing. come back to the real world. You can’t just throw money away, it’s call a business.
And I did answer your question it’s in another comment about third-party exclusives
@Sekijo but they didn’t. you’re not looking at Microsoft whole operation that’s why they started game pass. They’re trying to get PC gamers, Console gamers, Steamdeck, smart TVs, and mobile gamers with GamePass.
@Sekijo they’re not focus on console as a whole. They lost the console wars Phil Spencer said this in 2017, and he’s not wrong.
How is he trying to form a monopoly? They literally have games on everything.
They’re not like Sony trying to force you to one specific platform
@Grumblevolcano "Guitar Hero and Skylanders"
Well I don't see toys to life coming back anytime soon, though I did see a Luigi amiibo in Target the other day. 😂
And of course they lied. The history of MS is the history of lies. They're a large American monopoly, if they told the truth the entire planet would explode like Alderaan.
@Sekijo Sony also announced within a year that they were already making profit on the PS5. Shortly after they put in a cheaper heat sink and increase prices on the Ps5 everywhere except the US because of Microsoft. Shortly after that they put it in even more cheaper heat sink in. Now they’re releasing articles and people are complaining about the PS5 overheating.
Before the systems even came out, Sony wanted to raise the standard price of video games to 80 bucks. It was confirmed that Sony was the loudest voice of raising the standard price of video games to 80. Why because they knew they could get away with it.
But a bunch of other companies fought back against it because it would kill the Indy developers and Microsoft said they would stay with $60
@Sekijo I think you need to quit reading journalist sites because if you watch the interviews with Phil Spencer, not one time, did he say that the Bethesda franchises would stay on PlayStation. His exact words was existing IP’s would remain multiplatform.
This is what people don’t realize existing IP is elder scrolls Skyrim. Elder scrolls six is not an existing IP, the word that all you guys were looking for was existing franchises and that’s not what Phil said.
I want this to be over. Then hopefully Sony will start releasing some exclusive games on PS5.
@Deshalu Actually IP means the whole "intellectual property" of that game, so existing IP's mean everything to do with Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Doom etc will stay on playstation new and old. Franchise and IP mean the same thing.
So yeah Starfield anf Hi Fi Rush are new IP's so them being exclusive to xbox is fine but Elder Scrolls 6 and Fallout 5 being xbox exclusive would mean Phil lied.
@Sekijo so wait a minute you’re mad because Phil’s taking games away from Sony. Sony has literally been taking games away from Xbox. You’re trying to say that you’re OK with Sony doing it but not Xbox?
See, I actually think this merger is a good thing because for the first time people are actually talking about Xbox, getting ips for once. Which means better competition.
And as far as game pass goes, you’re upset about that, but PlayStation could literally do the same thing and be better. In a matter fact Jim Ryan even said that.
And that’s what Brad Smith said about Sony trying to be the blockbuster of gaming industry. They’re refusing to change and the reason they’re refusing to change is because right now there are monopoly in the market.
@UltimateOtaku91 the gaming industry is different so elder scrolls 6 in that time doesn’t exist. It’s not an IP that’s actually paid for yet. The gaming industry works a little different but yes I get what you’re trying to say.
I think you need to do a little more research on it but trust me I get what you’re trying to say, you’re wrong, but I get it
@GreatAuk Aggressive sarcasm noted, I’m just not entirely sure why…?
@Fiendish-Beaver So far this generation playstation is 18 million sales in front, but in terms of the whole ecosystem including Xbox Gamepass on PC, Mobile, TV's and Consoles then you could say Microsoft has more gaming users no? Sony is only ahead in console sales, and if over the next 5 years 50% of console sales are for xbox due to people switching to them via these acquisitions then they would be in a way closer position to sony than they was last generation, and then next gen all they would need to do is make Call of duty exclusive and that would attract the 10+ million or so COD players on playstation to move over to Xbox's ecosystem and I'd wager the majority of those won't bother getting a playstation console as well especially if they are just casual players.
The CMA is embarrassing itself worse than the FTC did. The deal is going through at this point. The CMA doesn't get to choose that anymore. All it gets to choose is if the UK gets any say in how it moves forward or not. If they keep pouting Microsoft will just move forward without them. If they actually talk then they get some say in possible concessions or stipulations.
I'd rather this deal didn't happen but it's already set in stone at this point.
@Deshalu the "Elder Scrolls" name is the actual IP, the number 6 is just the entry number of that game in that IP. So Elder Scrolls is already an existing IP on playstation consoles.
Its like when when Embracer bought the IP rights to tomb raider or IO interactive bought the rights to the Hitman IP, they didn't just pay for the past games they paid for any game with that name. So when Phil said any existing IP's will stay on playstation that means all past and future ones of those game series.
@Triumph741 must own?,with regards to what exactly ? Couldn't tell you last time I bought an Activision game ,and my last bethesda game was skyrim,if I was only an xbox player ,I'd be more worried about sonys response to this deal, to be honest.
@Sekijo hissy fit are you talking about Jim Ryan and him flying all around to other countries crying and then having the nerve to come to I think it was the White House correct me if I’m wrong complaining about the monopoly and then the lady literally telling Jim that she needs to go back to his parent company in Japan and blame them for allowing their monopoly when they own 98% of Japan?
Look we are clearly not going to agree. So let me ask you this. How do you believe it’s a monopoly and keep in mind that no other regulators have been able to prove that it’s a monopoly. And in the FTC case, Sony literally came out with that 90 minute video that pretty much saved Microsoft in that whole case. How do you believe it’s a monopoly?
If you look at the forms and stuff, it sounds like a lot of you weren’t gonna jump ship so it’s not gonna help Microsoft out. And last I checked, it’s not illegal to make money. They’re keeping call of duty on PlayStation.
I didn’t see none of you guys complaining about Spider-Man being exclusive and war Final Fantasy 16.
The games are getting them or consumers so they’re not taking away.
The only complaint, I’m finding is the rich get richer, which last I checked that’s not a legal
@UltimateOtaku91 but thats presuming that those 10 million cod players ,exclusively play only cod, and nothing else ,they might be forced to add an xbox to there gaming ,but whether they will give up their playstations ,is a different matter.
@UltimateOtaku91 I get what you’re trying to sell that’s not how it works.
Let’s say you’re right Microsoft hasn’t made anything exclusive that’s existing then because StarField wasn’t existing yet neither was RedFall. Neither was the Indiana Jones game.
They never existed on PlayStation. So, you still don’t have a lie from Phil.
But look, I see good things for PlayStation in the near future. I can’t wait for the next twisted metal and socom. Maybe will run into each other. I seriously see good things for Sony’s PlayStation.
@Texan_Survivor "Time for Sony to embrace the Nintendo policy and to rely solely on itself in order to sell PlayStation hardware."
What works for one company doesn't necessarily work for another.
For example, Nintendo can charge full price for games that came out several years ago. Sony can't, no matter how good those games are.
@rjejr
I don’t think consoles will be anywhere near as significant in 10 years either. That’s the problem. In the world of subscription services content is king, so if one company is valued 20 times higher than their next largest competitor, has shown a desire to buy all the most popular content, the ability to make it exclusive, and own the hardware necessary to make streaming a success, then competition goes completely out the window (amongst the current 3 at least). We are about the go from a relatively balanced market to a completely unbalanced one.
@UltimateOtaku91 do you know how many movies are called the forest
@TommyNL
Nowhere near as much as a richer competitor if buying all the most popular content is allowed by the review bodies.
@tallythwack I don't think they would sell their playstation console to get an xbox but in the future if they are yet to buy a PS6/PS7 then they might buy the new xbox instead if Call of duty is exclusive to it. To me Call of duty is a game heavily associated with casual gamers, and do casual gamers really care what console they get? Same can be said about similar games like Fifa and Madden, they will flock to where that game is especially if they have been religiously buying it year after year, I cant see them just stopping playing it just because it's gone exclusive to another console, they will just get the other console to play it and then make a decision if its worth it to buy the original console as well, but most wont.
@UltimateOtaku91 Phil Spencer did not say "take existing IP" you are putting words in his mouth. It was "take existing games" elder scrolls 5 and elder scrolls 6 are entirely different games. The 6th one was never announced for ps5 so it cannot be claimed that he has taken it away.
@Deshalu Well that's on the film maker to trademark the "forest" as their IP. But then again is it possible to trademark such a word. Pretty sure the energy drink Monster have been suing other companies for using that word in their titles, and that's because they trademarked the world "Monster".
But Trademarks and IPs are different.
@Sekijo look I’m not upset about the Spider-Man. I bring it up because you’re upset about Microsoft making stuff exclusive but it’s OK for Sony. You’re kind of being real hypocritical.
As far as all the rare titles that you bring up, correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Nintendo sell rare to Microsoft that kind of negates your whole argument.
The FTC literally talks about what the definition of a monopoly is. And Tony has literally done every single one of them with the PlayStation.
@Somebody im sorry but the exact words from the person I was originally commenting to were
His exact words was existing IP’s would remain multiplatform.
He said that before I started commenting to him, so how am I putting words into his mouth?
@Triumph741 to compete with what? It's Xbox upping their game to compete with PlayStation.
@UltimateOtaku91 look I don’t agree with you, but I don’t have an issue with you.
He’s only reason I’ve pointed you out a couple times I’m just lost on while you’re on the Xbox website went on the PlayStation website you literally said you traded your Xbox in but you still pop over to make comments. Talking about how Microsoft has no IP. But they don’t release any first party games but they’ve literally had a ton of first party games come out all year and I think five of them came out on PlayStation.
I ain’t got no issue with you, but I do think competition is good and the fact that we’re all talking about this means that Microsoft is stepping up their game, which is putting everybody on notice, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, because better competition equals better games and better prices
@UltimateOtaku91 "this deal was not done to take games away from another player base" Phil spencer 11/17/2020
Doesn't promise bethesda ip always being locked to multiplat
@UltimateOtaku91 @Somebody I think I did use the word IP’s, somebody
But like I said, I think this is a good thing because the fact that we’re all talking about this and are going on about it means that Microsoft is stepping their game up, which I do think is better for competition. Competition should equal better games and better prices.
@UltimateOtaku91 @Somebody when he said that I think he was just referring to call of duty, because I do believe Diablo Crash Spyro and some other titles will be exclusive. I don’t thanks they wanted to compete this way in the console market because I think if you get them in a room by themselves, I think they would’ve ditch the Xbox a while ago and just a game pass but because Sony has such a hold on the console market. They could literally demand a percentage of income from GamePass being on PlayStation.
So Microsoft has to it’s Xbox, Console
@Deshalu I agree exclusive IP are a good thing for xbox to have more of.
I was trying to say that Phil spencer never promised all ip will remain multiplatform. I thought I was disputing phils actual quote not yours.
@Sekijo but they do have games to compete. The problem is why go to xbox when you’re so used to the games that are on PlayStation. that’s the problem they need existing IP’s in order to convince you to come over.
Forza Horizon five is an amazing game, halo infinite still got good reviews. Age of empires just came out. It’s been getting phenomenal feedback and reviews.
Again, if I’m used to my PlayStation titles like Gran Turismo, why try Forza?
You might hate this, but it makes perfect sense of why they’re buying these companies. And they’re not buying these companies maliciously these companies are wanting to sell to them.
As far as Spider-Man goes, they actually give a reason why they didn’t buy it if you look it up. It was a pretty good reason.
@Deshalu I haven't said Microsoft don't have any IP? And lately I don't comment much on Purexbox, I only post in the "What are you playing" articles and will do so going forward, and yes I did trade in my series S earlier this year and have mainly been playing gamepass on my Logitech G Cloud.
If phil Spencer never said existing IP's would remain multiplatform then fair enough there's no issue then with Elder Scrolls being xbox exclusive, but I court he did say future Activision games would remain multiplatform so will be interesting to see if they stick to those words.
Its just with Bethesda and now ABK they hold a lot of power with the games they have and can take a way more series from playstation if they wanted. They now have over twice the amount staff employed than sony and nearly double the studios than sony and more IP's than Sony, a better subscription service than sony which has had a massive head start and huge casual games to be exclusive to their service, and a massive head start on PC gaming which sony don't even touch. Sony are only ahead in console sales and even that will dwindle eventually. These huge Microsoft acquisitions might not make a difference over the next couple of years but I've the next 10-20 years there will be no competition to Microsoft especially with their unrivaled wealth to but anyone they want.
Whilst all playstation can really do with their finances is get timed exclusives and individual developers, even with their timed exclusive deals those games don't sell any where near enough to be considered system sellers like their own first party games, FF16 has sold around 4-5 million yet call of duty and elder scrolls sell 10+ million on their system. Playstation also rely on third party revenue from the big games like call of duty, Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Diablo so taking that revenue away effects the amount they can spend on their own games meaning less quality games and longer development cycles and also less acquisitions. The more popular games microsoft takes away they less quality playstation will become. You have to see people's concerns with these acquisitions.
@Somebody I know I said it wrong but either way I know for a fact he hasn’t lied yet. I have yet to catch him in a lie. he’s been pretty consistent on the message that he’s been trying to send out.
Like I know, a lot of people were making fun of them when he said in the trial that they’ve lost a Console war, but he actually said the same thing in like 2017 and if you actually listen to his reasonings, he ain’t wrong. Plus, it’s also why they haven’t been keeping track or announcing Xbox Console sales.
He’s even said back in 2016 or 17 that he sees a future with no exclusives, and the only competition is who offers the better features
@Jimmer-jammer It's the logical conclusion of your point. Gaming is 100% a waste of resources, time and money.
@UltimateOtaku91 see, I agree with what you’re saying there, but my issue is since the PS4, when they didn’t have no competition, and Microsoft was almost out of the console wars, Sony got really complacent.
I think you’re the guy that I told, like if you look at there big IP’s they’ve had in the past they never came out during the PS4 era. Literally twisted metal has been on every platform that Sony has produced except during that era. Even had twisted metal on PSP vita.
Socom was literally their first online multiplayer game from first party. Plus, I think socom 3 was the first real battle royale game that actually came out, and that was during the PS2.
@Sekijo my issue with you is if you go and look at their reviews for their first party games actually haven’t been bad. Their ratings of actually been pretty good.
The problem was during the Xbox one era Dan Merrick, I think was the guy that was running at Xbox at the time, ran it down to the ground by his Kinect security spying, digital only advertising, always connected online. Is what killed them not their first party games.
The studios that they own also produce different games that don’t necessarily appeal to everybody but are rated high
since the Xbox one sales also killed them, and they lost a lot of their developers
Gosh so many salty comments. Yikes. Anyway, I keep hearing Bethesda being brought up. Despite what was said in the trial about Sony money hatting Bethesda and as a result MS bought Bethesda, MS and Bethesda had a long relationship well before any game was produced for PS. Bethesda started as a PC company and eventually produced a few exclusives for Xbox before releasing on all platforms. People keep bringing up that Sony "cultivates" their studios and had long relationships with the ones they bought. Doesn't the same hold true for MS and Bethesda? You can't look at it with blue colored glasses. Be rational and stop being one sided to fit your narrative. As I have said before, consoles are not a religion. And Sony will be just fine after MS buys Activision. Sony has become arrogant just like they did with their overpriced electronics. They have done everything they could to try to destroy the competition. This time, they picked the wrong fight with a larger and more diversified company who has the funds to compete and a company that has grown tired of the Sony's underhanded anti-competitive tactics.
@Deshalu I agree Sony have got complacent, especially with letting the niche games go and shutting down the Japan studio, especially as I mainly play Japanese games so knowing their won't be another Gravity Rush, Soul
Sacrifice, Rogue Galaxy, Dark Cloud, Freedom Wars, White Knight Chronicles and Knack is quite depressing. I don't care for spiderman, uncharted, death stranding etc I'm not the biggest fan on live service games either but I understand that's where the money is at and that to continue to make big budget games they need money makers. Gaming as a whole is going downhill for me which focus on cloud, live service and subscriptions, big budget single player games will get less and less also. This is why lately I mainly play on Nintendo a lot as they focus more on single player games and games that are fun and less stressful even when online. Give me Pikmin 4 and Mario Rpg over Spiderman 2 any day.
@Sekijo actually, Activision was actively looking for somebody to buy their company, not the other way around.
Again, you use the word monopoly but you haven’t given any real examples of a monopoly. This is just more of a classic case the rich get richer and you don’t like it.
Exclusives come and go. Every console has them.
Dude, you’re missing the point. If I’m a PlayStation gamer, which I’m a whole Gen ahead of the Xbox, and when the PS2 came out correct me if I’m wrong, but the Xbox didn’t come out until the year two or three later. Why would I need to jump ship if I’m used to this used to these other IP’s?
Plus, I’m used to the consul interface. I’m used to the controller. I also have kids who will play on my PlayStation that I bought and the chances are they will actually grow to be PlayStation fans to.
Face it that Xbox one era really killed them. Which Phil has acknowledged
@UltimateOtaku91 call dude 100% agree with you with his online service subscription live service games.
It’s killing Ubisoft. Ubisoft is definitely trying to hard to find their cash cow (like Fortnite).
I read a rumor somewhere that Sony is trying to release 15 live service games from their own studios. Supposedly socom is one of them. The last of us factions was or maybe still is one them
@Deshalu My main gripe with Microsoft is going after Publishers instead of individual developers like Sony do. Microsoft have always been mega wealthy and could of bought tonnes of studios during the xbox 360 and xbox one gens. But they didn't, I just don't understand why, it's like they wanted to be the underdogs so they could be in the situation they are in now to buy the biggest third party publishers knowing the regulators won't do anything as Sony are infront by quite a bit.
They could of bought CD Project Red or got the studios SE sold to embracer.
@NotSoCryptic @GKT you not knowing about halo games just shows that you live in ps bubble. Halo infinite hype was huge. and it's the most successful one in the franchise https://www.purexbox.com/news/2022/01/halo-infinite-is-officially-the-biggest-launch-in-franchise-history
@UltimateOtaku91 if you, Google you’ll find when Xbox first came around Sega actually wanted Microsoft buy them. Bill Gates thought that they could be successful without buying big publishers.
I know there’s people out there that don’t believe this, but I don’t think Microsoft is a malicious company that would buy people without wanting to be bought. I do think they want money and sometimes yes, it leads to monopolies, but I haven’t seen them maliciously buy anybody yet.
There was a game informer, and an interview with Evan Wells the CEO of naughty dog that Sony hostel bought them and they found out that Sony was getting ready to buy them, so the hurried up and sold the crash bandicoot IP because they didn’t wanna get stuck, making crash bandicoot games for the rest of their lives.
Fun fact, it’s actually a trivia question and one of the game informer magazines
@Sekijo let’s go with your point about the NES versus PlayStation so I’m trying to figure out how old you are.
But when the PlayStation came out, they went disc base which was 20-50 times cheaper than the NES cartridges, so it was easier to make games for so literally almost every third party went exclusive to PlayStation, because of how much cheaper it was to make games for. Nintendo had the same logic as Sony about being blockbuster and not wanting to change.
You still haven’t proved how it’s a monopoly. The only thing you brought up is bad decisions made by companies. But you still haven’t brought up how it’s an actual monopoly.
You sound like the FTC. How does this hurt consumers and the competition?
Sony is too big and too strong. This one merger right now isn’t gonna hurt them.
Pay attention and see how powerful the Sony fan bases heck go to websites and pay attention to the websites. In the comments they make even the Xbox websites are Sony fans.
You really think this one merger is gonna hurt them, and take away the top spot? Activision‘s biggest title is still going to remain on PlayStation, as long as one exists.
The proof is look at Minecraft, Minecraft came out in I think 2012 or something, still remains on PlayStation, and there’s no advantage of having it on Xbox. Matter fact, correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t Minecraft on PlayStation extra?
@Sekijo turn 10 and playground games have consistently delivered 9/10 games for years!
@UltimateOtaku91 they only bought Bethesda because sony kept paying them to make games exclusives to Sony if MS hadn't bought them starfield would probably of been a Sony exclusive too.
@Sekijo @Toot1st Sekijo do you really think Sony started all their studios? They bought the majority of them, and they were proven studios before Sony bought them.
Sony hasn’t done everything in the up and up like you guys keep advertising.
Like Toot1st said and I already said Microsoft makes good games. You’re just stuck and don’t need it because you feel successful with your PlayStation, which is totally fine.
But don’t get upset because Microsoft is getting exclusives, Sony, Nintendo, Amazon, Apple, and Google are doing the same thing.
In my opinion, Sony’s leading the pack.
Everyone really needs to be scared of Tencent.
There have been rumors that Tencent is working with logitech to make their own console. Tencent has more studios and developers combined.
I think things will start to go very bad for Sony come PS6. The seeds have already been planted, focus on Live Service, bloated production cost and time for 1st party games, smaller JRPGs are going exclusively to Nintendo, losing COD and Elder Scrolls.
I can't see Sony recovering from this. PS5 will be their last succesful console.
This is coming from a PlayStation die hard fanboy, but I think I'm gonna need a Nintendo Console in the next generation, no way in hell I'm buying an Xbox.
@GreatAuk I see. With all due respect, I believe my comment has been grossly misinterpreted here, to the point I’m not sure where to begin recalibrating our discussion. Perhaps I’ll start here: I’m a passionate advocate for capitalism (and have always been so on this platform) and believe in a free market economy, albeit with some necessary government regulation. However, this does not mean that I am blind to the pitfalls, shortcomings or points of exploitation that exist within such a system (hence the necessary gov reg). Checks and balances are an integral part of any healthy, functioning economy and it is my very belief in such a system that compels me to call out a point of concern within it, though truthfully I was less making a direct point and more lamenting the exorbitant price tag of this deal in an attempt to maintain a grounded level of awareness amongst the discussion of just how much money this is 😳 Hopefully you can now understand my confusion with your initial response.
Microsoft is a few days away from being Sony's most important 3rd party developer.
@Sekijo Sony bought every developer and studio that makes those games. They made TVs, Walkmans and VCRs. They had no in-house studios. They bought every talented person who makes their amazing games.
If you genuinely want to talk about credibility in the games industry and home grown talent then Google Nintendo.
Some people on here really don't care about the truth and looking at the games industry objectively.
They're so lovingly devoted to anything Sony does or says and they love to shout loudly against anyone who has a rational point against that.
It's pathetic, childish and genuinely boring.
@Sil_Am I don't think you need to worry that much.
CoD will be a loss (in ten years assuming it gets pulled by MS), but Sony have already been reacting to and planning for this.
They're apparently selling the majority of shares in their financial arm to raise additional funds for investment in entertainment and tech, and they've set aside another 13 billion for investments and mergers.
They've been investing and buying shares around the industry for the last two years on top of the acquisitions they've already made and are currently talking to publishers in South Korea about new partnerships and IP investment opportunities.
The acquisition of ABK/CoD is shocking and Sony will be stunned by it, but it's not a deathblow.
And their new focus on live service is in addition to their single player titles, not instead of them.
As for the cost of AAA games, as the platform holder they can definitely afford it and the individual games make the budgets back on their own. Don't get me wrong, the games cost too much to make, but it's not a loss given how much money they continue to pump in to Sony's bank account.
Next gen will probably be a more balanced affair, and Xbox might even take the lead, but PlayStation will be fine. If one or two of those live service games they're working on turn out to be hits they'll forget about CoD.
We've been hearing about the death of consoles and PlayStation in one form or another for 10 - 15 years now, but the brand just keeps getting stronger.
@Jimmer-jammer I appreciate your detailed response and we are basically in agreement.
I've just seen multiple arguments made over the years about how "if such and such money was spent on feeding the poor or housing people it would be so much better" from people who have no understanding of economics.
@AsterZero Totally, Xenoblade and Fire Emblem are amazing games and cost a fraction of what it costs sony to make their big games. I'd rather Nintendo spend £200 million on making 4-5 Fire Emblem, Pikmin, Xenoblade, Zelda games than spend that much making one game who's total sales would be less than those other games put together.
If Sony don't want to do that with their current studios then that's fine, but they need to buy a few developers/publishers who will make the smaller niche titles, like Square Enix or Focus Entertainment. And maybe get Bluepoint to make remakes of Sly Cooper, Ratchet and clank and Jak and Daxter, those three games would easily make people forget about Crash and Spyro.
Then partner with a Japanese Studio to bring back Dark Cloud, White Knight Chronicles and Rogue Galaxy.
So many options to increase their Exclusives output, instead of us getting just two big games per year, we get two smaller titles in between as well and the odd live service game every now and then.
@TommyNL “Hahaha must own subscription? Just for CoD?” More like Doom, Fable, Starfield, COD, Gears, Forza, Diablo, Flight simulator, Wolfenstein, Indiana Jones, Elder Scrolls, Fallout, etc etc etc. i mean as a owner of both consoles, that’s a strong service lineup. Not like Sony is hurting for great games. It’s a great time to own both and game as much as we can. Lot’s of options and great games coming to both platforms.
Sekijo wrote:
If Sony's first-party IPs were that awesome, they wouldn't need to pay third parties to keep games and DLC off Xbox in order to remain so relevant.
@Somebody the rumor as to why Phil was wearing a Hexen shirt is Raven and ID made Hexen. Those two are now owned by MS. Maybe MS pulls raven from COD and lets them and ID work on a new Hexen game exclusive to Xbox/PC. That would be a cool new surprise from ABK.
Deshalu wrote:
You hit the nail on the head. If Sony is the market leader and pays a little price to keep Zenimax and ABK games or content off Xbox as they have been doing in recent years, the only solution for Microsoft is to buy those publishers. Paying for exclusion deals doesn't make sense for Microsoft because they are a multiplatform business and need games for Game Pass.
Moreover, Sony doesn't do the exclusion deals thing because is "better" for consumers. If they could afford it, they would buy ABK. When the acquisition started, they contacted both ABK with an special offer (not disclosed but probably more money for early access and exclusive DLC) and Microsoft, crying about the future of Call of Duty. When Sony was asked by the judge if they would make Call of Duty a Playstation exclusive if they could, they didn't give a straight answer because the real answer is, "Yes, we would. That's why we pay for what we can afford: early access and DLC."
@Shepherd_Tallon Good points, all, but consider one more X factor, a decently powered Nintenso console would also mean Japan publishers would be inclined to skip PS altogheter for the more popular Nintendo console. PS going the way of Xbox in Japan is a guarantee that no jrpg will get relesead on it, other than From Software games.
@Banjo- And Nintendo doesn't do 3rd party excslusives? You're all hypocrites.
Sil_Am wrote:
I'm trying but I don't understand your answer. How does the fact that Nintendo pays for third-party exclusives invalidate my comment or make me a hypocrite?
@Sil_Am A fair point. I've often wondered why Nintendo have never gone that route myself actually.
Then again their strategy seems to be to maximise profits from underpowered hardware. (I'm not complaining btw, I love my Switch.)
atm the speculation (from Activision I think it was actually) is that the next Switch will be close to the PS4 in power levels.
If that's true it's more than enough for the games Nintendo makes and a lot of other devs too, but it won't let the bigger AAA devs push the limits that they're always trying to push.
Still, it's a good point.
Removed - harassment
@GrailUK Microsoft will make their money back in less than 3 years based on the earnings of ABK.
@Sekijo Yep. Every company in the world should just shut it's doors and give any money they've earned to homeless and starving people. It makes perfect sense.
Removed - flaming/arguing
@Sakai I agree 💯
When where sitting here at the same point next GEN and PlayStation 6 and the switch 2U are still out selling Xbox negative-1 by a two to one margin how long before microsoft higher ups finally take the Xbox division out to the back of the barn?
Removed - flaming/arguing
@crazykcarter What benefits would you get from that? All third-party games come to PS anyway and PS is the market leader already.
Removed - flaming/arguing
Bit weird that it was the same judge who oversaw the original case who had the decision on the appeal? I mean are any American appeals successful under those circumstances?
But whatever. Enjoy paying £10 a month to rent call of duty I guess Xbox fans.
@HonestHick
Yes I know gamepass has more games. But I meant what was written. After the acquisition of Activision, gamepass should be a must own subscription... Ehm okay.
@Deshalu I did some digging and I can't find any information about that crash statement. I did find this though.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.playstationlifestyle.net/2021/03/13/naughty-dog-crash-bandicoot-games/amp/
Naughty Dog stopped making crash bandicoot because of their relationship with Universal Interactive, and it was Universal Interactive who owned the Crash Bandicoot IP so Naughty Dog couldn't of sold it as it wasn't theirs to sell.
Universal Interactive then changed to vivendi, which was then bought by Activision hence why they now own the crash IP.
Balosi wrote:
The first appeal has to go to the same judge but the FTC's appeal has also been denied by the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. About Game Pass, you can pay just for Call of Duty on Xbox, if you wish so.
Removed - flaming/arguing
@TommyNL GP or not, PS, Xbox and Switch all have some great games and however people want to play them is up to them. But GP is going to take time to build up that always available first party lineup. But adding all the ABK games along with others sure is a decent service and hard to argue it’s cost to content wise. 😊
Removed - disrespecting others
I just want to say with all the senseless arguing and fighting ,Is this what this industry is really about? Fighting and arguing over video games? This hobby is suppose to bring us worlds to interact with and escape the pressures of the real world. It’s suppose to bring us moments of joy, laughter and holy crap did you see that moments. Not fighting with one another cause we like a certain game or console brand more. Think about the legacy we are leaving behind for the future gamer kids. We are looking like fools arguing and being mean to each other. To quote the great Colt Eastwood: BE NICE!
@HonestHick I can see MS using some of the new IPs they will own soon but I'm not sure they pull teams off Call of Duty.
ABK is a well oiled machine that is spitting out best selling Call of Duty games every year. It would also look bad if MS slowed down production on CoD after Sony made such a stink about how important it is to them. It would not look good if MS made all those 10 year promises then released 3 games in that period instead of the expected 10. I think Call of Duty would benefit from a different approach rather than yearly but I think they need to stick with it at least for the next few years.
@UltimateOtaku91 I think you have the wrong Banjo. To receive this message when I have done nothing nor commented is upsetting to say the least. I am frankly disappointed.
"I wish Microsoft would hire better developers"
"I wish Microsoft invest in better games"
I really hate these comments as they are an insult to the people who pour their heart and soul into making games.
Just because Microsoft isn't making Hollywood mov — err, AAA cinematic third-person action games doesn't mean that Microsoft has terrible developers or isn't investing in games.
Microsoft isn't being Sony. Microsoft is trying to forge its own gaming identity.
Obsidian has insane talent
The Coalition has insane talent - they are absolute masters of Unreal Engine
Id Software has insane talent
Rare has insane talent - Sea of Thieves has been turned around completely
InXile has insane talent
Turn 10 has insane talent
Ninja Theory has insane talent
The list goes on and on.
Should Microsoft perhaps reel in the studios a little bit to avoid scope creep and the like?
Sure.
Does Microsoft lack talent? Is Microsoft not "investing enough"?
No.
It's fine if you don't like Microsoft output, don't insult the people making the games.
Look at the movie industry.
What sells most?
High-budget spectacle blockbusters.
That doesn't mean the rest of the movies out there are trash and haven't invested in talent or not put enough money into the films. The other movies are just a different focus.
@BANJO oh wow sorry dude didn't know there was two banjo accounts even though I used lower case in my tag, I think it's because I have him blocked so it assumed I meant you.
So sorry, I will remove the tag, didn't mean no dis respect towards you 😥
@BANJO Forgive Otaku. They definitely replied to the wrong Banjo.
@HonestHick Yep. It's getting a bit pointless right now.
It's an interesting topic and I'd love to discuss it with my fellow enthusiasts, but lately there's no guarantee someone won't just try pull you in to an argument.
@Somebody yeah good point for sure. I don’t think letting Raven team with ID for a Hexen game would slow down COD much. Yes i agree they can’t do 3-4 COD’s over the next 10 years. They need to pay back the closing cost’s and of course keep the gamers happy. But wow a new Hexen game would be really cool. Also it’s rumored that Blizzard has 3 new IP’s in the works not just the one they announced. So again i see this being Xbox/PC exclusives. This deal is more than just COD. King is the real play here. MS will launch a mobile store front now and I believe try to acquire more mobile talent as well. This merger was to strength all 3 key areas MS wants Xbox to be a part of. Just glad it’s over so we can all talk games. 😊
@Shepherd_Tallon Not "replied", he attacked, see #157.
@Shepherd_Tallon yeah it’s sad to see so many gamers fight with each other instead of just playing the games they love and supporting the whole industry. I could be petty and go back to receipts on here saying the deal would be blocked and how the judge was a Microsoft insider. Even tho MS wanted the case to be in Washington and the FTC choose California with that judge. A judge backed by the Biden administration which is also backed by the FTC. But thats all public info if anyone wants to really know the facts. Me throwing in faces and starting arguments does nothing positive for the forums, industry or future friendships we all could be building. I want to thank PUSH and Pure websites for all their hard work in covering all the ABK news and gaming news as of late and given us a place to chat. I do think PUSH did a bad job of not showing both sides of the story. But thats their business. Again can’t say it enough: Be Nice. I have talked to you before and find you to be a great gamer that keeps it cool and honest. I appreciate that. 😊
@UltimateOtaku91 Sorry, but I felt I had to say something as I was receiving emails basically for no reason at all. On the plus side, as I don’t comment often it highlights me to the heated discussions going on. 😅
@HonestHick Ah well thank you for those words. 😊 I could say the same for you.
Why spend our energy arguing when we could be learning from each other's perspectives?
This deal is more or less done now and we'll all move on.
It won't be the end of PlayStation by any means. If anything they appear to be on a mission to invest in and acquire more IP.
As for XBOX, I won't pretend that I play anything by ABK — I try Diablo every now and then because I love the setting but I always struggle to stick with it — but I am always interested in what Blizzard does next because I love fantasy games so much.
@BANJO Haha, well you should visit here more often, there's heated discussions daily 😂
@Banjo- I know, this acquisition is a fiercely debated topic.. Sorry I have got involved really by absolute chance 😅
@UltimateOtaku91I'd say "energetic" or "engaging" to put it mildly😂
Although heated is definitely a more accurate description.
We all get in to it sometimes to be fair.
@HonestHick @Shepherd_Tallon @BANJO Unfortunately, some people can't be reasonable so they become angry towards others.
@Shepherd_Tallon Understood, I like Frank discussion.. But dislike being critisised when I am minding my own business. Regardless, I'm a Nintendo and Microsoft dude but I actually got a PS4 slim today, so I support everyone 🤣
@Shepherd_Tallon Of course, we all have different opinions and perspectives which will always cause argument's, would be boring if we all just had the same opinions 😂
Where you can access Game Pass, @UltimateOtaku91, is not the same as actual subscribers. The last confirmed Game Pass subscribers was some months back now and was said to be between 20 and 25 million, and subscriptions are rumoured to be stalling. People that are subscribed to the various tiers of PlayStation Plus, was last put at 45 million.
You cannot just say that 18 million more PS5s have been sold than Series X/S, because that completely ignores all those that are still gaming on the PS4, PS3 and the Xbox One and 360s. There are more people playing on the previous generations than on the current. That will steadily change to the current generation as more and more games are made for the current generation only, however, if you keep an eye on the monthly report here on Push Square, you will see how each and every month considerably more PS5s and sold than Xboxes.
It's not me making figures up. The sales are reported here each month. And as for the 70% gaming on the PlayStation and 30% on the Xbox stats, they were provided right at the beginning of the process of the ABK acquisition. There are quite literally tens of millions more gaming on the PlayStation than on the Xbox. These are figures provided by both Sony and Microsoft. The gap between the two is huge. The swing from PlayStation to Xbox required to put Xbox ahead of the PlayStation is vast, and honestly, likely beyond reach. The ABK acquisition will likely add no more than a couple of million new Xbox/Game Pass subscribers to the Xbox numbers. The impact on the numbers gaming on the PlayStation will be minimal...
@Shepherd_Tallon I'm all for a heated discussion as long as we all play fair...
@Fiendish-Beaver Yes that's because to play playstation games you need a playstation console, but to play xbox games you can play them on Console, PC or Mobile. So yes whilst the charts track physical sales, xbox may be neck and neck with playstation once you count the amount of digital sales and PC sales, and if the game is on gamepass then you also need to count the players playing it on there. Take Scarlet Nexus for example it had 1 million sales on playstation but also had 1 million players on xbox because of it being on gamepass.
So yes playstation may get more console players but that doesn't necessarily mean they get more players in total as Microsoft has more ways for players to play, especially their first party games which also release on PC day one.
So them being third in the gaming market is based on what, Console market? Yet they are leaders in the Cloud Subscription Market and beat sony easily in the PC market. So are they really struggling that bad in the gaming market as a whole?
@Banjo- Always your number 1 supporter. 😃
@BANJO Thank you very much! Me too! You're great.
@Texan_Survivor Why did you pick Techland!?
Bickering and drama over here too. Oh the internet.
Both boxes are as plastic as each other. No need to go to war for either.
@Sakai not even remotely copium. You're world view is just tiny.
Microsoft is pushing into mobile. They want to be on every device, that's their shtick from the very start. They are after king. Not Activisions library of largely forgettable titles, not an old subscription model for an mmo dying a slow death, not diablo a franchise that is just going through the motions, not some tired shooter that stifles the industry. No sir, it's king, it's candy crush, it's that entire user space that they could start pulling into the gamepass fold. That trash fire generates more revenue than both blizzard and Activision combined.
@saffeqwe also its biggest failure. You're the one living in the bubble. Can you give me anything after launch? How does halos numbers line up with other single platform ip? How many of those numbers are including the free to play mp that is available separately? Can you explain the low use case numbers?
As far as bubbles go. Mine is a dev bubble. Straight face, no lie, considered a failure internally. It's part of the reason they are switching to ue5 and had their leadership swapped.
I don't care about your day one hype, it all depends on the legs of a release, hard-core fans will always be there release day. They are the last to leave. All dreaming of days when they sat in a dorm room with their xboxes linked together. This numbers will be slow to deplete. What comes after, ya that's the true measure of hype. No one was talking about it beyond the launch window and it fizzled out, nostalgia was defeated before hype could take hold.
@Lanmanna can't argue with that logic.
@Shepherd_Tallon i agree. Yeah it’s a done deal. Then we will have to see if Sony or someone else is sitting on deals waiting for this one to be final. So i am sure there will be more exciting news around the corner. 😊
In the end, money wins. Sony will sell Microsoft products.
Good maybe Sony can finally stop holding back and announce what their studios are working on.
@Texan_Survivor I doubt all third party games will be gone. But if that ever happens, Sony may be forced to go third party, unfortunately.
@Texan_Survivor not every studio is interested in selling , so the possibility of this happening is slim to none.
@NoToSheep (Selling my Series X when GP expires I don't want nothing to do with Microsoft anymore.)
I'm thinking of doing the same thing. I don't need microsoft in my gaming.
@Deshalu I'm not disagreeing with you just saying Microsoft on a business scale are enormous compared to Sony and were the ones to start the exclusive game in the way we see it today getting games with either exclusive content or keeping it off playstation in the 360 era. Microsoft just want to end Sony playstation not to compete with them. Sony obviously could never drop 70 billion on anything I think they are only worth 80 billion themselves. Where Sony was forced to invest in 1st party studios microsoft became to comfortable relying on halo gears forza everything else slipped by the wayside.
I'm rambling now suppose in short I just think this deal should never have been allowed to go ahead because eventually after the timed deals run out and nothing Activision makes (if its still relevant) will be on anything but xbox game store and game pass will 3 times the price.
Hope I made some sense just woke up
@NotSoCryptic King may be the bigger play, but that doesn't mean gamepass won't improve at all, like you tried to say. That was just a completely false comment
@NoToSheep money is king, can’t deny that claim. Thats why the Big 3 exist.
@CreepingShadow
Sony were doing the exclusive games thing back in the 90s (Tomb Raider 2) before MS moved into the Console business. They were the big boy financially and used that muscle to leverage their way into a dominant market position. They outspent the competition on marketing, they had their own manufacturing plants to keep costs down, they could afford to eat losses on hardware and undercut the competitions licensing fees, they had their own established chain of retail outlets. That’s how it works. Nintendo were the industry big boys, then Sony came along as a bigger boy, now MS are the million-pound gorilla.
@GrailUK but Microsoft aren't languishing in third place. They are one of the most powerful, valuable companies on the planet, and xbox is a tiny slice of their action. If they wanted to, they could buy Sony and Nintendo 10 times over
@electrolite77 Very true. Didn't mean Microsoft were the 1st to ever do it more that In the modern era which I'd for me started with the 360. xbox had a good grip on the console market initially due to having a headstart and just being easier to work with. I mean a notable deal was the Dlc for gta 4. so roughly 2008-2009 Sony changed focus to a more exclusive strategy with priority on 1st party and 3rd party extras with playstation. around 2010-2011 started to catch and overtake with the ps3. We all know what happened with the next generation and I think things were so bad at xbox that they thought to do game pass and rather cultivate and grow their studios organically are buying publishers with already established ip. In the end I've never thought game pass was a good thing sure for short term but long term I think it's not the right way but we are the journey now and in 10 years we'll know for sure, whether it be us commenting on push A or playing gears on our playstation.
@Rapthorne I'm talking about their gaming division. It maybe needs splitting up from the Microsoft (for the sake of fair competition within that market.) I dunno, there are loads of avenues to explore after this merger.
But your argument does not hold up, @UltimateOtaku91. As I said, the places people CAN play on the Game Pass, does not mean that everyone IS. If everyone who has access to a device on which they CAN utilise the Game Pass were to do so, then Xbox would not be in third place, they would be in first place and by a long, long way.
The figures we last had for Xbox Game Pass subscribers were provided a few months back now, and put the number at between 20 and 25 million. That is the total number. Including on devices that are NOT consoles. That is why you comment does not stack up. I have no idea how many devices are out there that can support Game Pass, but I think we can both agree that there will be a lot more than 25 million. It will be well into the 100s of millions given that every gaming PC is Game Pass capable, and that's before you consider mobile telephones.
You also need to look at gaming revenue. The last set I could find showed Sony bringing in 8 billion more in revenue than Microsoft. Sony were on 24 billion, Microsoft were on 16 billion. That dial will undoubtedly move now with regards to the purchase of ABK as Sony's will fall to some extent, and Microsoft's will increase more than Sony's will fall. Will it be enough to put Microsoft ahead of Sony (in terms of gaming revenue)? That remains to be seen. I guess it depends on how many people change where they play the likes of CoD. Obviously Microsoft are banking on it being a sizable shift, but the majority that already play it on the PlayStation will likely continue to do so.
These are certainly interesting times...
@CreepingShadow
I’m totally confident you won’t be doing what you say in your last sentence. This is the nature of business, any market leader anywhere should be under attack and should feel like they are. It wards off complacency and arrogance.
Sony are in a well deserved position as market leader with a huge amount of well deserved trust in the brand. MS have realised this and are taking a different angle (zigging where the competition is zagging, so to speak), it’s now up to Sony to respond. That doesn’t necessarily mean through acquisitions but focussing on what they do so well. Up the first party output, don’t leave established franchises going mouldy on a shelf, leverage existing relationships with third parties. Competition is good and I’m hopeful Sony will respond in a way that’s good for us as gamers and consumers.
@electrolite77 hopefully
@NotSoCryptic "How does halos numbers line up with other single platform ip?" as far as I know it's better than Killzone or resistance numbers, dev bubble man
@electrolite77 "Competition is good"
Competition is what got us into this mess and Playstation only gamers now won't be able to play several third party franchises they used to have access to. It can be both good and bad. It's not just good. In this case, it's pretty terrible.
@Sakai Sorry, but gamepass will not improve with the arrival of ATVI or Blizzard games coming to gamepass.
Sure. You'll get the base core game for free. However the battlepasses, the free to play elements, you're still paying for those. So that's strike one against this acquisition benefiting gamepass.
Now what about the single player. Well considering the bonus' for the dev's comes out of that content and you just essentially neutored it with game pass on PC and potentially xbox. That's going to mean less of a return for those devs. A good chunk of money comes out of that premium product. You've just killed it by putting it day one on game pass. You think people don't care about single player now, wait till the dev's on those titles finally just give up. I know I personally would start looking for another job because the pay wouldn't be as good without that bonus. Going from 200k in a year down to 110k maybe 130-140k in a year best case, ya I don't see that helping the cause of Game Pass content. So that's strike two. Thats the activision side.
What about the blizzard side.... ya all that ***** is wrapped up in gamepass. OW2 is f2p now. You won't see WoW on gamepass. Diablo 4 could very well appear on the service, but I beg the question, is it cheaper to simply own the game at that point? Putting that a side, you won't be seeing more gamepass titles released yearly from blizzard. You know how many games they released last gen? Just one. That was Overwatch. You could make a case for Diablo 3, but that was a port. Which brings another fact to light, what happened during that era of PS3? Starcraft II? That didn't even come to console. I'm willing to mark this as strike 3.
Way I see it there isn't much in this deal for them between ATVI or BLIZ. Might help their PC space a little sure, but most PC gamers are going to ask themselves "why" in the first place. Steam sales are often and frequent. At 120 dollars a year where maybe Diablo 4 and a handful of other sales of indies and other titles not on the service, OW2, maybe if we see FF16 this year.... I dunno man. I don't even have Game Pass for Halo Infinite, it was cheaper for me to just buy the game and play the mp free.
I can't see this adding value. Even the skew of players is mostly PlayStation for CoD. Certainly have CoD players on PC, but turn off that cross play feature and you'll be spending 45 minutes waiting for a match during high traffic hours on PC. Xbox isn't much better. PlayStation you won't even know the difference.
So I don't see it. Game Pass has peaked. I don't think MS will hold the value you long for these properties and studios they purchased. I'm pretty sure we'll start to see layoffs in 5 years. Restructurings that ultimately hurt the release cycle further. I will not be surprised if Blizzard becomes the next RARE. Game Pass does nothing for the PlayStation gamer either.
this is a trainwreck. In 10 years we'll see the once mighty ABK reduced down to nothing but mobile games, a dying MMO, a competitive gaming scene that has evaporated, and a bunch of youtube videos outlining "The rise and fall of activision". If we are lucky we'll see some franchises like Singularity or Hexen revived, but I'm not holding my breath.
@NotSoCryptic your too emotional, that was a really really long way to say that adding ABK games to gamepass improves the service.
@Sakai Yet I did not say that. I don't have time to fix your reading comprehension problem. Please don't respond to me further I'll just ignore you.
@NotSoCryptic like I said, way to emotional for that kind of mental gymnastics.
@saffeqwe I was simply asking a question, which appears to have upset you for some reason. My apologies 🙄
@naruball
In the big picture yes competition is good. The nature of the industry at the minute is that exclusives are a thing. I’d rather they weren’t and everyone competed on other fronts but that’s how it is.
Without competition you finish up with all games on one platform and one company having all the power about when games are released and how much they cost, which would be an utter disaster.
@electrolite77 That's not true at all. If Sony with no competition were to charge 100 or 150 USD for each game, gamers wouldn't simply buy the games. Many would stop gaming altogether, whereas others would wait for a price cut, as many are doing already. Even during the ps2 era when Sony had very little competition Sony exclusives didn't perform particularly well. Consumers will force the market to adjust accordingly.
@saffeqwe lol dude we are talking about current events not defunct decade+ old shooters that youngest generation of gamers have never even heard of. Might as well start citing halo 3 numbers with logic like that.
I'm sorry, but halo infinite hasn't even managed to touch a modern Sony releases sales. Even ff16 with 3.3m out the door in its first week has trounced on the 2m infinite sold in its first year.
Anything else on the subject is halo fanboyism or willful ignorance. You need to wake up.
@thefourfoldroot1 "We are about the go from a relatively balanced market to a completely unbalanced one."
Will it be though? There are probably more video game players on PC and mobile than on console now, and MS basically has no skin in the mobile game. And PC seems to be pretty much Steam. Nintendo will keep making Pokemon hardware - can you believe there is a Pokemon Plus + Ball - but even there handhelds will be all digital by Switch 3 in 8 years. Not cloud streaming, Nintnedo will never get that working well enough, but digital downloads.
So MS buying yet another big publisher is just par for the course. How did the Zune turn out? I'm not impressed by MS's track record besides Windows and Office. Even w/ an OS monopoly Chrome is still bigger than Edge. Buying a company is easy, making it work is another thing. Just ask Elmo how Twitter is doing.
@NotSoCryptic 1) Don't call me dude, i'm not your friend
2) why are you comparing an FPS and an action game? are you okay?
@saffeqwe 1) what ever yo usay dude.
2) Now you're just asking stupid questions. Why travel down that road yourself, if you're just going to back peddle out of it half way through the conversation, dude.
@naruball
It is true. It’s the basic law of the market. Competition benefits consumers.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...