My pet peeve here and elsewhere. Read. Before. You. Post.
Not only does it avoid double, triple, quadruple posting but also it’s plain rude not to read what others have said.
10 Likes
I think you’re grossly misrepresenting the situation. I also find it a bit ironic that you say you don’t want an echo chamber, yet you don’t want people to express their displeasure towards a poster’s pattern of behavior that stretches back 12+ months.
You could have just said you disagree and laid out why instead of trying to shame him, and anyone else who feels similarly, as being a “blind fanboy”.
To be honest, I’ve found Zappy to be incredibly annoying at times and I’ve even voiced my displeasure at him on at least one occasion. It’s not just that he’s been overly negative (because he has been overly negative, almost comically so at times), but because he’s presented his opinion in a way that would lead one to believe he was an expert on the CMA and UK law and that he somehow has a better grasp of the situation than a nearly 3 trillion dollar company and their obscenely high priced lawyers who do this stuff for a living.
Now, does that make him a troll? No, and I honestly don’t believe he is. But you can hardly blame people for getting that idea if you actually read what has been posted (often ad nauseum) from him and his seemingly zealous crusade to counter anyone one with an opposing viewpoint. I honestly kind of enjoy Zappy’s contrarianism at this point, but I know I’m weird.
Anyway, I agree with the intent of your message, and I don’t like posters taking overt swipes at others unless it’s all in good fun. Just wanted to give my thoughts against my better judgement. 
7 Likes
Absolutely, and even more MS shouldn’t be obligated to have any restrictions on COD at all. This thing should be cleared without any restrictions in first pkace.
2 Likes
This - also applies to users chastising a community when the one chastising is not aware of the all the interactions they’ve had with another user. That is all.
8 Likes
It does seem like thteis a rush to post the newest thing from Tom Warren without checking it has already been posted.
I think your first point is perhaps falling into the “tolerant people should tolerate intolerance” fallacy - things get a bit loopy if calling out echo chamber behaviour is in itself representative of an echo chamber. All I want is a discussion where people can discuss something they like while not necessarily needing to share the same opinions as one and other. To your larger point though - yeah, maybe I could have worded that a bit more…diplomatically.
But in this case, we’re talking about a discussion that arose entirely unprompted because one user decided to take a dig at Zappy, not even based upon any specific recent post, with other users going so far as to tag them in further ridicule - all based on a criticism they can’t possibly defend because it’s a vague takedown of past posts in a discussion they’ve been active in for over a year.
Now, am I saying Zappy has been completely right this entire time? Nope. Of course they’ve been wrong about stuff - but everyone has been wrong here often enough. I bet I could dig through everyones posts in this thread and find something they were wrong about and post it and insist they “take the L” It’s just unnecessary and only adds additional negativity and hostility to the discussion. Maybe I’m not perfect on all of these things either though 
Mostly though, my criticism of “blind fanboyism” doesn’t just refer to any one specifically here because I’ve seen this same thing occur constantly during my time here. Anything that does not fit within a specific Xbox positivity mindset is dismissed, ridiculed and called doom posting or trolling. Hell, I remember once someone came into the Sony acquisition thread and accused everyone of doom posting for discussing…Sony acquisitions. No one was actually being negative, but Sony acquisitions are bad for Xbox so it’s doom posting? It’s exhausting.
3 Likes
This information was shared above
The fact that MS went from guaranteeing COD for 3 years to signing multiple 10 year agreements with cloud providers really ahows how MS was willing to fight tooth and nail for this, how bad they wanted it
There were so many people who thought MS would fold and walk away at the first sign of resistance
Also remember some people stated this would be closed by September last year. Even I didnt believe it would literally take 18 months to close but its coming down to the wire
6 Likes
I think mostly what I’ve said about the CMA has turned out to be true. In the end they are getting the structural remedy I said probably was the way to do the deal…divesting xcloud…
They weren’t going to be able to backdown without something that preserved their usual resistance to behavioural remedies. Microsoft has chosen to move around the CAT precisely because they must know their chances there aren’t great. I know lots of people think Microsoft could do what they want but all I’ve ever said is the reality is slightly different to that and ultimately I think I’ve ended up right on the U.K. side.
So I’d defend my record there. I have said all along the us stuff is just my scepticism about how the law works there we all know this deal is a good thing for consumers but I just don’t trust it over there, but I mean should this be closed on Monday I will be delighted.
I also think now that it’s hard to see what can stop the deal. Regardless of Monday or not it should happen within the next few months at the latest.
4 Likes
I think they were always prepared to offer 10. They offered 3/5 as an opening. Sony and Nintendo accept. You did shrewed business and gave up less than was needed.
They fight and offer 10, regulators see you as reasonable. Honorable.
2 Likes
This is also likely true, start low and give yourself breathing room
Just like when you want something, ask for as much as possible and negotiate
2 Likes
I agree with everything in Peter’s post. Based on the economics, there is nothing of concern in this acquisition at all.
About 18 months ago, shortly after the acquisition was announced, I posted this:
I stand by everything in that post, though I probably could have phrased a couple of points more clearly. What I completely failed to account for was the amount of politics/ideology/regulatory capture that was going to infect the proceedings.
In a more economically rationale world the regulators would have done their analysis without trying to gerrymander markets or prognosticate what the industry would look like ten or more years down the road - something they have literally zero ability to do - and reached a swift conclusion that there was no problem with the deal. Unfortunately, that didn’t happen. But it looks like rationality will win out at the end of the day regardless.
Economically the deal didn’t need any conditions at all. However, I think the EU conditions are actually pretty good and will help the cloud market grow so I don’t really have a problem with them.
As far as the FTC specifically, when its expert came back with a “worst case” scenario that PlayStation might lose 5% market share that should have been the end of its investigation. Economically, who cares if the market leader with 70% global market share loses 5%? It’s a complete non-issue. The amount of intellectual dishonesty required for the FTC to carry on after that point is completely mind blowing. I can’t even process it.
I truly hope we are coming to the end of this long saga over the next few days - and I truly hope some regulators have learned a few lessons from this that will encourage them to behave better in the future.
Edit: This is not an “I was right” post. If you go back and read the linked post you can clearly see I was very wrong about how this played out. I really didn’t think the deal would encounter nearly as much trouble as it has. Rather, this is me saying, “I was wrong, but it looks like everything is still ok.”
7 Likes
https://twitter.com/insidergamingig/status/1679861768602910721?s=46&t=O_AGT9SEnlptKOF_2SxtqQ
If true and goes exclusive, ooooooh what luck.
12 Likes
But so far it looks like the only thing they’re divesting is the game stream rights in the UK for ABK games. So Xcloud would still be there they just aren’t going to be the ones making the deals for the UK streaming.
At least this is what I’m getting from all of this.
2 Likes
Maybe that would be a good result I guess compared to selling their streaming service in the U.K. as has been suggested.
2 Likes
Divesting the game streaming rights for just the UK seems like such a nothing burger that I’m surprised it would be enough to convince the CMA
Then again, maybe they really are desperate to just get something to make this go away finally
UK CMA’s only SLC was cloud, and if MS no longer has that in the UK, they kind of have to relent.
6 Likes
Interesting that Microsoft still hasn’t filed their opposition brief yet.
2 Likes
Feels like so many people are forgetting this. There’s one tiny issue they need to fix.
1 Like