Jump to content
IGNORED

Microsoft has acquired Activision Blizzard. Woah. .


MidWalian
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think I might start compiling all the hot takes I’ve read over the past 24 hours and forward them on to Microsoft. Might help them decide if they really want to go through with this after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, TehStu said:

I think my point stands though? I don't think the EU will rubber stamp it because the US will/may.

 

MS have the ace up their sleeves if that's the case:

 

"Your honour, we offer to make our Gamepass service available on both Nintendo and Sony devices through either direct download or cloud based streaming where applicable,  therefore the consumer can still play all games and have the choice of which device to purchase to play them on"

 

That's the long game, same as how you can get Netflix on every single device.

 

Hell anyone with a crappy laptop or phone can already play most of the games through streaming anyway.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, carlospie said:

I'm downloading candy crush right now. Long live Microsoft!

pfft Microsoft already built it into non enterprise versions of Windows 10.

 

HOW DID THEY KNOW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, K said:

I really enjoyed today's Hit Points, apart from the use of 'poop' which made me fly into a xenophobic rage and start pelting cutlery at the walls.


I greatly prefer the past participle ‘pooped’ to the rather unwieldy ‘pooed’, and as I have two small kids and a dog it tends to come up quite a lot. 
 

I do apologise though. If it helps just think of how annoyed my US readers are at all the UK spellings elsewhere. Every time I type ‘monetise’ an American combusts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Robo_1 said:

 

Consumers are still having to pay Microsoft for access though, so I'm not sure that would mitigate such concerns.

 

Of course it would. Disney have the monopoly on making Marvel films but they don't stop anyone watching them however they want as long as they get paid for it through Disney Plus, Blu-ray, PPV or cinema tickets.

 

"It's not fair that we can't play CoD anymore!"

 

"Ok we'll make it available on playstation via Gamepass"

 

"It's not fair that we have to pay for it!"

 

If they sold it as a physical release where do you think the money would go?

 

I'm not sure there is anything legally to stop MS releasing it physically on Playstation but charging £100 for it if they wanted. No one would buy it but they could if they wanted.

 

Also don't forget Sony were offered EA Play first but turned it down as it "offered no value to the consumer"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, dfq23 said:

I'm not sure this is anything to stop MS releasing it physically on Playstation but charging £100 for it if they wanted. No one would buy it but they could if they wanted.

I expect MS might continue to release on Playstation. £70 for the PS version of CoD or get it with GamePass. Just makes a GamePass sub a more appealing deal...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mikeyl said:

Is it really an appealing deal? £70 to keep vs £15 a month for as long as you subscribe? Don’t forget we are talking about those who only play CoD and nothing else.

 

Sounds good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, mikeyl said:

Is it really an appealing deal? £70 to keep vs £15 a month for as long as you subscribe? Don’t forget we are talking about those who only play CoD and nothing else.

 

£70 for the basic game plus expensive micro transactions for every thing else

 

Or the whole lot on GP for free including all extras or extras at a minimal cost.

 

And don't forget to play online games you have to have some sort of subscription anyway on any of the consoles, so it's £70 plus a subscription or just a subscription.

 

MS really do have so many options here 

 

Plus under the terms and conditions for all digital downloads from Apple, Sony etc etc you don't own the item, you own the right to the licence to use it so at any time they can remove it or restrict it and nothing you can do.  Even if you buy a physical game, if they shut the servers down its worthless

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, mikeyl said:

Is it really an appealing deal? £70 to keep vs £15 a month for as long as you subscribe? Don’t forget we are talking about those who only play CoD and nothing else.

Well if you play nothing else but CoD perhaps better to buy outright. However I can see many just stumping up the £10.99 a month and get access to all the other content too. Also on-line play is wrapped into that price which if you were on Playstation you'd have to buy PSN+  too.

 

Edit Actually thinking about it if you factor in the cost of PSN+ into things (£50) and assuming you buy a CoD every year. That's say £120 on Playstation and £131 for a years worth of GamePass with it included (and a whole bunch of other games to play). Sounds like a no brainer to me.

 

Certainly going to be interesting to see how this all pans out long term. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, dfq23 said:

£70 for the basic game plus expensive micro transactions for every thing else

 

Or the whole lot on GP for free including all extras or extras at a minimal cost.

I am in Team Xbox and a big GamePass cheerleader, but you still have to pay for DLC for most games and many have (cosmetic) MTX. 

 

So your statement doesn't really hold. 

 

But even buying CoD yearly for £70 isn't cheaper than Game Pass Ultimate at the moment (using the loophole that everyone knows about and which is around for like 3 years already). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I only play one game and one game only (and these people definitely exist) it may feel like being the biggest High School Musical fan and subscribing to Disney+ purely for High School Musical content instead of just buying the DVDs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankly, I honestly don’t know if Sony can recover from this, whether it’s the beginning of the end for them. Maybe Sony and Nintendo will end up joining to be the Japanese niche console together. 
 

However the title of this thread is misleading. Microsoft is asking permission from the FTC to purchase activision.  The media coverage of it being a done deal, helps the narrative, but there is a (fat) chance that whatever passes for the monopoly and mergers board might speak up about it. 
 

Ah who am I kidding? Might as well just enjoy my free drinks as the industry burns. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, MNFRMTMRRW said:

I am in Team Xbox and a big GamePass cheerleader, but you still have to pay for DLC for most games and many have (cosmetic) MTX. 

 

So your statement doesn't really hold. 

 

But even buying CoD yearly for £70 isn't cheaper than Game Pass Ultimate at the moment (using the loophole that everyone knows about and which is around for like 3 years already). 

 

When Forza came out last year the premium edition with everything included was £85 to buy.

 

Unless you had a Gamepass subscription then it was £35 to buy.

 

Or just get the basic one for free.

 

CoD premium edition for £120 on PS

CoD basic on PS for £70

Plus your subscription to Sony to play online

 

CoD premium edition for Xbox if you have GamePass for £35

CoD basic for Xbox for free

All in the same subscription

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LaveDisco said:

Frankly, I honestly don’t know if Sony can recover from this, whether it’s the beginning of the end for them. Maybe Sony and Nintendo will end up joining to be the Japanese niche console together. 
 

Ah who am I kidding? Might as well just enjoy my free drinks as the industry burns. 


Sounds like you’ve had enough free drinks as it is. The Switch just passed the Wii and PS1 in lifetime sales, all without a CoD or (proper) GTA. 
 

Hardly a niche Japanese console.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Robo_1 said:

 

Consumers are still having to pay Microsoft for access though, so I'm not sure that would mitigate such concerns.


you can buy activision but you have to make call of duty free in perpetuity for all PlayStation owners is a take that would be too hot even for resetera’s diehards. Or CrichStand.

 

it’s a videogame. A monopoly commission could deny, or require them to spin off a studio, or sell the call of duty ip. I don’t think they could force them to publish the game on PS5, but not also switch, stadia, playdate…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, footle said:


you can buy activision but you have to make call of duty free in perpetuity for all PlayStation owners is a take that would be too hot even for resetera’s diehards. Or CrichStand.

 

it’s a videogame. A monopoly commission could deny, or require them to spin off a studio, or sell the call of duty ip. I don’t think they could force them to publish the game on PS5, but not also switch, stadia, playdate…

That’s just made me think. Has anyone been over to era to see how they’ve taken the news? I can imagine there are some amazing takes on there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is one thing that will likely crush any concerns about the deal being stopped.

 

All the games will be on PC and phones via streaming so pretty much everyone will own a device capable of playing them.

 

Doesn't sound that restrictive and no court is gonna be concerned that you have slum it at 1080/30 low settings or with some lag and not at 4k/120 or whatever as long as you have the ability to play them if you so wish.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Doctor Shark said:

 

:lol:

 

Some of the doom mongering in here is hilarious.

 

 

 

Haven't you heard?

 

Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Guerilla, Santa Monica, Bend, Bluepoint, Asobi, Housemarque et al all decided that, because of yesterday's announcement, there was no point bothering anymore because their games won't be on GamePass so nobody will play them!! ;)

 

A friend of mine said something similarly "oh noes, PlayStation is teh doomed" today and I just shook my head at him. It's all a bit silly.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, footle said:


you can buy activision but you have to make call of duty free in perpetuity for all PlayStation owners is a take that would be too hot even for resetera’s diehards. Or CrichStand.

 

Well I clearly need an early night then as that's obviously not what I intended to imply. 😂

 

If the argument is that MS aren't preventing PlayStation users from playing CoD, it's actually Sony preventing Gamepass from being accessible on PlayStation platforms, then I guess the question any anti-trust investigation would have to consider, is how unique and / or important a title Call Of Duty is to the industry, that having access to it is vital to remaining competitive in it.

 

I guess there's two sides to that. Sony could point to the fact that the Call Of Duty franchise has been amongst the best selling series on PlayStation platforms for years now and making it unavailable to their users without opening up their platform to a rival subscription service gives Microsoft a disproportionate competitive advantage over them.

 

Microsoft could of course argue that the Switch is a successful console which doesn't have access to CoD. They could also argue that alternatives are available in the form of Battlefield and that the game will remain available on PC and so there are options to play the game outside of paying for Xbox or Gamepass.

 

I think that would be the nub of the debate around this issue. I hope that makes more sense at least. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, teddymeow said:

 

Haven't you heard?

 

Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Guerilla, Santa Monica, Bend, Bluepoint, Asobi, Housemarque et al all decided that, because of yesterday's announcement, there was no point bothering anymore because their games won't be on GamePass so nobody will play them!! ;)

 

A friend of mine said something similarly "oh noes, PlayStation is teh doomed" today and I just shook my head at him. It's all a bit silly.

 

 


So here’s a point of view from a Sony die hard.

 

Bluepoint is excellent. They did an excellent remake of Shadow of the Colossus. If you try and play this on a PS5 there’s a really annoying bug where textures will drop from high res to low res when you get close to rocks.

 

Sony’s response? Nothing. They aren’t fixing it. Compare this with how Microsoft support almost two decade old games.

 

In terms of service alone I’m looking at making the switch.

 

Sony is at risk and they’ve put themselves here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Unofficial Who said:


So here’s a point of view from a Sony die hard.

 

Bluepoint is excellent. They did an excellent remake of Shadow of the Colossus. If you try and play this on a PS5 there’s a really annoying bug where textures will drop from high res to low res when you get close to rocks.

 

Sony’s response? Nothing. They aren’t fixing it. Compare this with how Microsoft support almost two decade old games.

 

In terms of service alone I’m looking at making the switch.

 

Sony is at risk and they’ve put themselves here.

 

I would agree with this for sure. The service is far less consumer friendly to say the least. 

 

I know people shout about it all the time, but a Bloodborne 60fps patch is something the public have been shouting for. Same goes for The Last Guardian. Microsoft would have pooped out patches very quickly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Robo_1 said:

 

Well I clearly need an early night then as that's obviously not what I intended to imply. 😂

 

If the argument is that MS aren't preventing PlayStation users from playing CoD, it's actually Sony preventing Gamepass from being accessible on PlayStation platforms, then I guess the question any anti-trust investigation would have to consider, is how unique and / or important a title Call Of Duty is to the industry, that having access to it is vital to remaining competitive in it.

 

I guess there's two sides to that. Sony could point to the fact that the Call Of Duty franchise has been amongst the best selling series on PlayStation platforms for years now and making it unavailable to their users without opening up their platform to a rival subscription service gives Microsoft a disproportionate competitive advantage over them.

 

Microsoft could of course argue that the Switch is a successful console which doesn't have access to CoD. They could also argue that alternatives are available in the form of Battlefield and that the game will remain available on PC and so there are options to play the game outside of paying for Xbox or Gamepass.

 

I think that would be the nub of the debate around this issue. I hope that makes more sense at least. 


sony aren’t the only competitor, or even the major competitor if we look at the gaming market as a whole. You’re defining the market in the smallest possible terms, and opening Sony up to questions about their own exclusivity practices. I’d be quite surprised if that went anywhere, but I suppose that’s what we’ll see over the next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.