Microsoft is trying to acquire Activision Blizzard (UPDATE: CMA suggests no COD)..

[Transient Curse]

 

Seems like Sony have been outgunned to me.  That Microsoft are speaking publicly about this must say something about the state of negotiations.

[bear]

Call of Duty would be some form of cloud version right? 

[rgraves]

Doubt it - the agreement is with Nintendo, not Switch - I'd say we'll see the first CoD out of the agreement on whatever hardware platform Nintendo has up next.

[geldra]

I’d be interested in a Switch port of the OG MW1+2 with decent online mp like. 

[thesnwmn]

14 minutes ago, Transient Curse said:

Seems like Sony have been outgunned to me.  That Microsoft are speaking publicly about this must say something about the state of negotiations.

 

I dunno, my take is that in the US and UK the regulators could get involved. Maybe not in a preventative way but in at least seeking promises/commitments/contracts around ongoing cross platform support or splitting certain parts of the business.

 

The US:

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/23/exclusive-feds-likely-to-challenge-microsofts-69-billion-activision-takeover-00070787

 

The UK phase 2 issue statement:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/63494c7de90e0731a80088e7/Issues_Statement_-_Microsoft_Activision__final.pdf

 

Which includes this as the "Theories of Harm" section

 

Quote

In its Phase 1 Decision, the CMA found that the Merger gave rise to a realistic prospect of an SLC as a result of vertical effects arising from:

 

(a) Microsoft withholding or degrading Activision’s content—including popular games such as CoD—from other consoles or multi-game subscription services; and

 

(b) Microsoft leveraging its broader ecosystem together with Activision’s game catalogue to strengthen network effects, raise barriers to entry and ultimately foreclose rivals in cloud gaming services.

 

This, and other public statements are clearly meant to see off questions over big franchises like CoD becoming platform exclusive. But does it go far enough? Are there other titles being questioned?

[Mr. Gerbik]

I just want Activision's Tenchu titles on Xbox BC, the rest is not important

 

[Uzi]

Sony must be livid that the wii u version of black ops 2 is being ported to the switch 

[RubberJohnny]

I am confused what they get out of it for making it multiplatform for a decade, I know the answer, like Minecraft, is “money”, but it still beggars belief to spend eleventy billion on a publisher that effectively just makes one game and then not actually get that game as an exclusive for multiple generations.

[layten]

12 minutes ago, RubberJohnny said:

that effectively just makes one game

lol

 

Take Diablo 3 for example. It sold over 6 million copies in its first week alone back in 2012 (and over 30million by 2015). Sony have just been shouting to everyone how GOW Ragnarok has smashed their first party week 1 sales numbers with 5 million.

 

The upcoming sequel is going to do mega numbers.

 

Plus Microsoft have already said they want to get their hands on the huge back catalogue of IP the company owns, bring older titles to GamePass as well as new games based on well regarded IP.

 

Activision would no longer be a COD house, because being part of Microsoft they are no longer dependant on that annual income to keep the coffers full.

[thesnwmn]

4 minutes ago, RubberJohnny said:

I am confused what they get out of it for making it multiplatform for a decade, I know the answer, like Minecraft, is “money”, but it still beggars belief to spend eleventy billion on a publisher that effectively just makes one game and then not actually get that game as an exclusive for multiple generations.

 

My initial reaction was that they make loads of stuff. Then I checked and it is a fair bit less than I actually thought. From 2020 to now for Activision it's CoD x5, Crash Bandicoot: It's All About Time, and Tony Hawks Pro Skater 1+2. And Blizzard have Diablo Immortals and Overwatch 2 (plus ongoing service games).

 

But there's a difference between the game being available on all platforms and it being "free" (as part of Game Pass) on theirs, offering additional in-game content for it on theirs, and generally providing a smoother experience.

[MattyP]

5 minutes ago, RubberJohnny said:

I am confused what they get out of it for making it multiplatform for a decade, I know the answer, like Minecraft, is “money”, but it still beggars belief to spend eleventy billion on a publisher that effectively just makes one game and then not actually get that game as an exclusive for multiple generations.

Don't the Acti/Blizzard group own lots of mobile content? (Candy Crush etc) so maybe a route into the mobile market for MS? Who knows.... does seem odd though.

[moosegrinder]

Thinking that Activision make one game and Microsoft only bought them for it is spectacularly dumb near sighted. Unless RubberJohnny was joking.

 

https://www.pocketgamer.biz/news/80125/activision-blizzard-reveals-its-third-quarter-financials-with-mobile-now-accounting-for-52-of-the-gaming-giants-net-revenue/

 

Their mobile arm is stupidly profitable. Obscenely profitable. Microsoft get all that shit we hate plus a back catalogue of IP Activision are doing fuck all with.

[Transient Curse]

18 minutes ago, moosegrinder said:

Thinking that Activision make one game and Microsoft only bought them for it is spectacularly dumb. Unless RubberJohnny was joking.

Bit harsh?

[alex3d]

1 hour ago, rgraves said:

Doubt it - the agreement is with Nintendo, not Switch - I'd say we'll see the first CoD out of the agreement on whatever hardware platform Nintendo has up next.

 

Super interesting M&A tactics there. MS/Activision could just release botched up CoD Switch/Playstation versions, satisfy the agreement and have the proper CoD (no framerate issues e.g.) as an "exclusive" on Xbox.

[footle]

2 minutes ago, Transient Curse said:

Bit harsh?

not really. It just requires you to deliberately turn your brain off when talking about the deal in the deal thread: Microsoft have repeatedly said the point is the combination of activision and king - and mostly king.

 

(some of that will be posturing - but the deal wouldn’t be anywhere near as attractive without king)

[moosegrinder]

Edited in case I hurt anyone's feelings. But it is. It's like saying Nintendo only make Mario games. Well, to a degree. I can understand why people don't know about King unless you've read about it but all you need to do is Google "Why did Microsoft buy Activision" to see the billions of reasons why.

[Mr. Gerbik]

1 minute ago, alex3d said:

 

Super interesting M&A tactics there. MS/Activision could just release botched up CoD Switch/Playstation versions, satisfy the agreement and have the proper CoD (no framerate issues e.g.) as an "exclusive" on Xbox.

Theoretically, since the PS5 is fully backwards compatible with the PS4 - could they get away with only releasing a PS4 version to satisfy the terms of the agreement? That'd be funny

[thesnwmn]

Oh shit, yes. Forgot about King in my summary of Activision earlier.

[rgraves]

MS don't care if CoD is on other platforms - it's money for them.

 

What they do care about is - it's on GP day 1 for subscribers. You can play it on PS5 for £70, or you can get it on Xbox for 'free' - and then people are in the ecosystem and boom. That's the plan here, you can get CoD everywhere but that everywhere now includes GP.

[Uzi]

Just now, rgraves said:

MS don't care if CoD is on other platforms - it's money for them.

 

What they do care about it - it's on GP day 1 for subscribers. You can play it on PS5 for £70, or you can get it for 'free' - and then people are in the ecosystem and boom. That's the plan here, you can get CoD everywhere but that includes GP.

Its not on gamepass and won't be for a while even after the acquisition goes through. A previous agreement in place has stopped that for at least a few years so there will be no COD on gamepass for the foreseeable future.

 

Also Gabe Newell says "thanks but no thanks MS" to trying to give steam special rights:

 

Quote

Microsoft offered and even sent us a draft agreement for a long-term Call of Duty commitment but it wasn’t necessary for us because a) we’re not believers in requiring any partner to have an agreement that locks them to shipping games on Steam into the distant future b) Phil and the games team at Microsoft have always followed through on what they told us they would do so we trust their intentions and c) we think Microsoft has all the motivation they need to be on the platforms and devices where Call of Duty customers want to be.

 

[rgraves]

CoD will be on GP, they'll work that out. Back catalogue might take a while, but future releases will be there - unless you think Acti have deals in place for games that are not even out yet with Sony?

[Uzi]

6 minutes ago, rgraves said:

CoD will be on GP, they'll work that out. Back catalogue might take a while, but future releases will be there - unless you think Acti have deals in place for games that are not even out yet with Sony?

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/call-of-duty-wont-be-seen-on-game-pass-for-a-number-of-years-report/1100-6508411/

 

Prior contract in place prevents it. No COD on gamepass for "years" which means going forward

[Clipper]

So sony are pissing their pants in court just to delay the deal or get more sweeteners? And they pay for 3rd party games not to appear on Gamepass?

 

If anyone goes to bat for their favourite multi-billion dollar corporation for any reason whatsoever they just need to read these examples and realise these corporations are not your friends. Sony are not for the players, Phil Spencer isn't your best mate, they just want to screw you for as many pennies as they can whether that is £70 AAA Dad simulators or £11 a month for a ton of indie games fodder.

 

The best thing you can do is enjoy the games you want on the platforms you want and game their system where you can (legally )

 

[rgraves]

57 minutes ago, Uzi said:

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/call-of-duty-wont-be-seen-on-game-pass-for-a-number-of-years-report/1100-6508411/

 

Prior contract in place prevents it. No COD on gamepass for "years" which means going forward

I think that's for existing titles (and maybe whatever was also currently in dev) - so no existing games will show up on GP. I'd expect the new ones going forward to pop up though (unless Acti signed a deal that said 'future, currently unspecified CoD titles will not be on GP either' which feels like it would be madness.

[Uzi]

It specifically says call of duty titles. I doubt Sony would place an agreement in place for years that would become outdated that same winter and which wouldn't even be relevant now. The restriciton will end at whatever date or condition was stipulated in the contract 

[Thor]

Just read about the CoD deal with Nintendo. Are Nintendo about to release a new console that's at the very least as powerful as a Xbox Series S then? 

[Lorfarius]

2 minutes ago, Thor said:

Just read about the CoD deal with Nintendo. Are Nintendo about to release a new console that's at the very least as powerful as a Xbox Series S then? 

 

Wouldn't have thought so just yet. They are 6 years into the Switch lifespan and 8 seems to be the norm for generations.

[Hitcher]

It'll be cloud based surely like a lot of other Switch games.

[Thor]

5 minutes ago, Hitcher said:

It'll be cloud based surely like a lot of other Switch games.

Hmmm. Streaming games is a bit shit. I did it for God of War 1 and 2 on PSN very recently m, it was alright, but not as good as native on a machine. Stadia is the best example of it working, and even Google with its billions is shutting that down. 

[Mr. Gerbik]

8 hours ago, Thor said:

it was alright

And that's good enough for the bigger casual audience. I was talking to someone recently who is going to get her son a PS5 this Christmas, but to be honest she said - it's mostly so that me and my husband can play the newer games. Ragnarok, Miles Morales, they're avoiding playing the PS4 versions to play them in full glory on PS5.

 

I said yeah those are amazing on PS5. Especially if you have a good telly to go along with it. She said yeah we do, we just bought a big one a few years back. It does have a delay with the controls for some reason but that's fine hahaha

 

Anecdotal of course, but it does tell me that probably a lot of people don't care about lag even when they notice that it's there and know what's causing it.