I guess it would depend if it was complete exclusivity or just console exclusivity. A fun scenario would be if ABK, MS and Nintendo all got together and worked out a deal where Xbox pays a tidy sum for console exclusivity, but then also works to enable a cloud version for Nintendo. It would help offset the missing Playstation revenue, lower MS’s cost to make the deal and would allow both MS and ABK to spite Jim Ryan and Sony.
I understand that this idea has the structural soundness of cotton candy, but I’m having fun here.
This interview with CMA chief reeks of arrogance, the tone in which she spoke looked like she has some built up anger and was saving the world from cloud gaming dominance lol.
Brad Smith has done the right thing going after UK as a whole, got the attention of the PM, if it passes everywhere, it will be clear the UK CMA is being far overreaching.
Its funny, because as the CMA thinks Xbox will be so dominant in cloud …then the natural result is eventually only Xbox will be able to afford to pay ABK for Call of Duty day 1 on game pass…and they won’t be inclined to pay for other services to get the game.
Xcloud will really be the only choice.
Good response by Bobby. Its weird how despite language barriers and an ongoing war, 7 other territories understood the merger more than the CMA ever will.
Ultimately Microsoft found out the parameters of the game.
Contrary to what Rick Astley has told us, no one really knew the rules, and it could be argued that Spencer has learned now that this business operates a little differently than most.
This industry is absolutely all about moneyhats.
So MS is in the same position Sony was 20 years ago… Where Sony outspent SEGA and Nintendo to get a foothold in the industry. Bigger marketing budgets. Funding more 2nd party efforts. Buying developers.
I think MS can go a step further and buy IPs.
Ultimately, we could possibly be looking back at this in 5 years and thinking of this as a blessing. We could be saying, “wow, just imagine if MS did buy ABK”.
Personally, I feel for the workers at Activision and Blizzard. I think things would have improved for them, significantly. I also feel bad for gamers (actual gamers aren’t happy with the CMA’s decision) that are missing out.
For the sake of the gaming industry, I hope MS appeals and still fully pursues this. The CMA’s ignorance of the gaming industry will hurt all players involved. If some British developer makes the next Minecraft and would like to sell to MS for $1 billion, they are screwed. Those new studios formed by Playground Games alumni? They’re forever indie, now. None of the big 3 console makers can buy them so it’s only Tencent or Saudi Arabia that could.
I wonder if that breakup fee could be considered a down payment for COD exclusivity.
It seems odd that MS would have to pay this when they went to the end to get this done. Hopefully there’s a little more to that money (including exclusivity deals) tied to that.
Yakuza 8 already announced the platforms so that’s set in stone.
I also think Japanese game moneyhats in particular could backfire like they did in the 360 days, where games later came to PS3 with exclusive new substantial features. I also think an absolute arm and leg would be charged to MS to make major JP games exclusive something like Persona or Monster Hunter, which may even be having their next entries planned to also be on Nintendo (so MS would also have to cover this cost too). And there would also be another extra major premium charged because, I know this is annoying to hear, but franchises like that being timed exclusive to Xbox kind of does damage to those brands, in the JP market especially.
And then none of it matters after 6 months or 1 year or whatever MS negotiates for because they are not gonna be able to lock any of it down like Sony did the FF games. The nanosecond the period is up those games appear on PS/Nintendo.
Well I mean MS is the only company with the means who really wants to get this off the ground. This is part of the reason all of those smaller cloud companies were on board. They know MS could be a behemoth in the future, but they also know they won’t even get off the ground without help. So killing it completely may not be accurate, but delaying it decades until there is so much natural coverage, speed, latency, etc… that small companies can just jump in is almost the same thing. It’s going to take A VERY LONG TIME if there isn’t a company to spearhead the effort. We’ll probably need a global effort to make internet a utility with governments getting involved beefing up the internet backbone to get there so I wouldn’t hold my breath…
I was certain this deal was dead following the CMA block but now I’m not sure so many bizarre things happened in this case the CMA getting caught fudging numbers and dropping the console SLC, and now blocking the deal using more fudged numbers about a nonexistent market. I don’t think we can compare this case to past cases something seems really off with this one and I think there’s still a decent chance Microsoft can succeed in an appeal
In the interview, Kottick says the lawyers think there is a way to accelerate the appeal process and that the conclusion was so flawed that they should be able to get an accelerated result. Also they have a briefing next week for more details on the timeline.
Some absolutely baffling assumptions being made by CMA.