Microsoft-Activision-Blizzard Discussion Thread (Part 1)

[Hindle]

Cant believe its been a week

[Roronoa_Zoro90]

@Biggzy

I mean Activision is looking to sell and the deal Microsoft has agreed can only really be done by other giant tech industries or sovereign wealth funds. The market, for obvious reasons, is very small.

PS fanboys would have preferred the chinese or saudi prince over MS. XD

[KakkaKarrotKake]

This deal not going through because of Spyro and Crash is one of the dumbest things iv read regarding this whole acquisition

I can understand the CoD debate and why people are questioning concessions having to be made (although I doubt it, if CoD continues coming to PS it will likely be because MS wants it there, not because the gov demands it) but Spyro and Crash?

People think lawyers and officials are going to look at this deal and say well, we will let this deal go through but you gotta let Sony still have Spyro and Crash, two series that.

1. a few years ago were both completely dead and now under current Activision are dead again

2. Havn’t been associated with PS since the PS1 days

3. Arent huge sellers like CoD

[PoderickPayne (Travis Norris)]

This talk of Warzone 2 in 2023 makes me feel like that is going to come early in 2023 after Modern Warfare 2022

Just like how the first one was tied to Modern Warfare 2019 and then Warzone mode was dropped months later in like February/March

Which happens to coincide with the last time I cared about COD. So I’m actually looking forward to next fall and winter for all that

[AllianceOfficer]

People think the US is going to help foreign entities. They want competition, but they don’t want foreign entities outside of their control to have larger portions of the market because they also lose control more then

Politically, politicians in the US also would have no reason to help a foreign company out so I anticipate less political pressure. Especially if consumers are not being hurt.

[Joe_Sinister1 (Joe_Sinister)]

@Boosted_Gear

You will get banned yet again, so that a new MS acquisition can happen. Win/Win for everyone !

That will be when the Sega buyout finally happens i think.

[andrew_schmidt (HaloGaming08)]

@Roronoa_Zoro90

More simply, he’s making up stuff, lmao, Crash and Spyro are strong arguments for FTC, really? It’s like saying it’s now illegal to have exclusive games just because.

Remember what the cult says bad Xbox sony good

[Eduardo]

@Jorge_Alexander_Acos

A settlement might also include guarantees to keep certain IP as console multiplatform as well, Call of Duty being the major one but potentially Crash and Spyro games still releasing on PS.

lmaoooooooooo

[IdiotGuru (Justin)]

@Jorge_Alexander_Acos

A settlement to keep Crash and Spyro games still releasing on PS or this could fall? I may not be an expert in these things, but I feel these guys are not the well informed in the gaming world.

Your hunch has got to be absolutely correct. This is a hilariously bad take for any so-called “expert”.

[AllianceOfficer]

I listened to the XNC podcast with colt. He had Hoeg on and pushed him for a percentage that it goes through. He put chances it goes through at 80-90%.

[Biggzy (Hassan)]

@AllianceOfficer

I listened to the XNC podcast with colt. He had Hoeg on and pushed him for a percentage that it goes through. He put chances it goes through at 80-90%.

That’s what my non lawyer brain puts it at as well. The only reason it won’t go through is simply due to a political desire to prevent the big tech companies from getting bigger, other than that there is no reason why the acquisition should not go through.

[n0tjack (NotJack)]

It’s worth mentioning that Hoeg is a sharp lawyer, but a lawyer’s greatest skill is never taking risks. While Hoeg is saying that he would guess the deal closes, he’s also throwing out near impossible scenarios like the FTC defining Xbox’s market as game subscriptions (which they would hypothetically have close to 100% of the market share) solely so in the off chance a politician wants to grandstand the deal, he can look back and still say he told us so.

If you asked a good lawyer if the sky will fall tomorrow, they’ll say there’s a chance.

[TavishHill]

@Roronoa_Zoro90

More simply, he’s making up stuff, lmao, Crash and Spyro are strong arguments for FTC, really? It’s like saying it’s now illegal to have exclusive games just because.

He does seem to be winging it.

[AllianceOfficer]

@n0tjack

It’s worth mentioning that Hoeg is a sharp lawyer, but a lawyer’s greatest skill is never taking risks. While Hoeg is saying that he would guess the deal closes, he’s also throwing out near impossible scenarios like the FTC defining Xbox’s market as game subscriptions (which they would hypothetically have close to 100% of the market share) solely so in the off chance a politician wants to grandstand the deal, he can look back and still say he told us so.

If you asked a good lawyer if the sky will fall tomorrow, they’ll say there’s a chance.

In game subscriptions they still wouldn’t. Playstation Plus, EA Plus, Ubisoft Plus, GeForce Now etc would have to be excluded for some reason. Because if not Xbox would have a 18ish% market share.

[n0tjack (NotJack)]

@AllianceOfficer

In game subscriptions they still wouldn’t. Playstation Plus, EA Plus, Ubisoft Plus, GeForce Now etc would have to be excluded for some reason. Because if not Xbox would have a 18ish% market share.

That’s fair but we’re on the same side of the issue; I was being lazy with what that market would look like although I’m confident the deal will get approval. Hoeg’s just covering his bases.

[Roronoa_Zoro90]

Guys, by law the deal is almost unbreakable, the only thig are possible MS political enemies. That’s it.

[TavishHill]

@Roronoa_Zoro90

Guys, by law the deal is almost unbreakable, the only thig are possible MS political enemies. That’s it.

That is not how this works. It’s politics that leads to the crafting of legislation that the regulators have to apply, but even then the way the relevant concepts are defined comes down to the judgment of the regulators (‘competition’ and ‘market’ need to be defined based on how the regs feel is appropriate and that is not at all obvious how they would/should define them).

[Roronoa_Zoro90]

@TavishHill

That is not how this works. It’s politics that leads to the crafting of legislation that the regulators have to apply, but even then the way the relevant concepts are defined comes down to the judgment of the regulators (‘competition’ and ‘market’ need to be defined based on how the regs feel is appropriate and that is not at all obvious how they would/should define them).

It obviously is, the fact Apple and Google de-facto duopoly in mobile market goes unchallenged is a proof of that, while you are arguing about MS going from 10% to 15% marketshare in gaming, come on. XD

[TavishHill]

@Roronoa_Zoro90

It obviously is, the fact Apple and Google de-facto duopoly in mobile market goes unchallenged is a proof of that, while you are arguing about MS going from 10% to 15% marketshare in gaming, come on. XD

Huh? Where did I mention anything about 10% or 15% of anything? Wat. o.0

Listen to ppl like Hoeg. He knows what he is talking about more than you do here.

[Roronoa_Zoro90]

@TavishHill

Huh? Where did I mention anything about 10% or 15% of anything? Wat. o.0

Listen to ppl like Hoeg. He knows what he is talking about more than you do here.

I listened him from Colt podcast and he was very positive, outside very farfetched possibilities.