Microsoft is trying to acquire Activision Blizzard (UPDATE: CMA says NO!).

[RubberJohnny]

Just now, Stanley said:

bu I don’t see how you can make the money COD does selling 15 million in its first week or whatever at full price by sticking it on a premium subscription service that most people aren’t interested in. 

 

Probably how CoD mobile pulls in a billion a year despite being free? And Game Pass isn't even free, so you're getting much larger amounts of guaranteed income!

[David Kenny]

7 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

 

There is no reason to do it, other than say "sure, you get all the 3rd party games of AB in GP while you pay them 80 bucks to play them in our system, but we give our super charged AAA in the subscription". 

 

But they can't do that because of the strategy they have chosen, hence why are losing their minds over the AB deal. They really have no answer to that.

But they're not losing their minds. They're putting arguments forward as to why they think the deal would give MS an unfair advantage, and put them at a disadvantage. I don't think they really believe them, but they don't want to allow anything to happen that benefits MS and hurts them. As others have pointed out it's just business.

 

I doubt that MS are going to get near to Sony's numbers this gen even if this deal goes through, and I'm pretty sure Sony doubt it too. Maybe MS are planning for next gen but I feel like we've been saying that since the original Xbox.

[Stanley]

1 minute ago, Talk Show Host said:

 

GP is just getting started. Subscribers will shift when they realize a bunch of super games can be played on GP while they cost full price on PS5. It is the future Sony is scared of and for a good reason in my opinion.

Sure, it’s just getting started - it’s been going for six years. 

[Stanley]

4 minutes ago, RubberJohnny said:

 

Probably how CoD mobile pulls in a billion a year despite being free? And Game Pass isn't even free, so you're getting much larger amounts of guaranteed income!

Yeah the difference being that it isn’t free. How would COD mobile fare at £10.99 a month? There’s also a free to play COD, Warzone or whatever it’s called, I think people would rather just play that than give MS money every month, the rest will buy COD as they usually do - and I doubt those customers will all buy an Xbox if this deal goes through. 

[Talk Show Host]

7 minutes ago, David Kenny said:

But they're not losing their minds. They're putting arguments forward as to why they think the deal would give MS an unfair advantage, and put them at a disadvantage. I don't think they really believe them, but they don't want to allow anything to happen that benefits MS and hurts them. As others have pointed out it's just business.

 

I doubt that MS are going to get near to Sony's numbers this gen even if this deal goes through, and I'm pretty sure Sony doubt it too. Maybe MS are planning for next gen but I feel like we've been saying that since the original Xbox.

 

I agree to those things, of course it's business. That doesn't mean their arguments make sense, they are totally off. 

 

As for Microsoft reaching them this gen, they are not going to. What they are doing now will benefit them next gen. And, down the line, if GP grows with more and more games people pay full price on other systems, Sony will be in serious trouble. If they only needed their AAAs then there would be no problem. But they still need 3rd parties to be competitive. 

 

7 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Sure, it’s just getting started - it’s been going for six years. 

 

No, not really. GP has only become Microsoft's main strategy this gen, the same way Sony's AAAs became their main strategy last gen.

[Stanley]

How are their arguments off? You’ve admitted they can’t afford to do what MS are doing, because they don’t have that kind of money. Therefore they’re at a disadvantage aren’t they? 
 

Also correct me if I’m wrong but the strategy for Game Pass was in place well before this generation began. 
 

Yeah just checked and first party titles arriving on Game Pass day and date with retail started back in Jan 2018, with the first wave of games shortly after in March, it’s been their main strategy ever since, so at least two years before this generation began. 

[RubberJohnny]

8 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

No, not really. GP has only become Microsoft's main strategy this gen.

 

It's been going since 2016, literally closer to the 360 gen then than this one. Gaming subscription services in general have been going since 2013, a decade at this point.

 

You're talking about them doubling down on it in 2020 when they saw rapid growth during the pandemic, but all that growth just fell off again in when restrictions were removed in 2022 and subscriptions were the first to be cut as inflation bit. I'm sure they'll be the future longterm as people will grow up with them, but portraying them as rapid-growth slam-dunk business models is almost the out-of-touch take at this point.

[thesnwmn]

You two have been at it for a day and at this point I've no idea what either of you is even trying to say 😅

 

Both companies will twist the truth and lie to get what they want, or at least steer the decision in the direction that favours them. Trying to parse their statements for anything more that saying anything to get the deal through or block it seems pointless.

[Talk Show Host]

5 minutes ago, Stanley said:

How are their arguments off? You’ve admitted they can’t afford to do what MS are doing, because they don’t have that kind of money. Therefore they’re at a disadvantage aren’t they? 
 

Also correct me if I’m wrong but the strategy for Game Pass was in place well before this generation began. 

 

Microsoft doesn't have Sony's AAA or their exclusive deals either, so they are at a disadvantage as well. What I am saying is that Sony has a way to counter GP, its not about the money. They can "built" their own GP and put in their AAAs day one as Microsoft does, but they can't do that because of the way they have built their strategy. 

 

Just now, RubberJohnny said:

 

It's been going since 2016, literally closer to the 360 gen then than this one. Gaming subscription services in general have been going since 2013, a decade at this point.

 

You're talking about them doubling down on it in 2020 when they saw rapid growth during the pandemic, but all that growth just fell off again in when restrictions were removed in 2022 and subscriptions were the first to be cut as inflation bit. I'm sure they'll be the future longterm as people will grow up with them, but portraying them as rapid-growth slam-dunk business models is almost the out-of-touch take at this point.

 

I think there is a difference between a subscription service as a bonus and as the main strategy of a platform. This only happened this gen and it really changed imo how Microsofts acts in the market.

[Stanley]

5 minutes ago, thesnwmn said:

You two have been at it for a day and at this point I've no idea what either of you is even trying to say 😅

 

Both companies will twist the truth and lie to get what they want, or at least steer the decision in the direction that favours them. Trying to parse their statements for anything more that saying anything to get the deal through or block it seems pointless.

I don’t know either! One the one hand, Sony are overreacting, on the other Sony are screwed 

[David Kenny]

9 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

 

I agree to those things, of course it's business. That doesn't mean their arguments make sense, they are totally off. 

 

As for Microsoft reaching them this gen, they are not going to. What they are doing now will benefit them next gen. And, down the line, if GP grows with more and more games people pay full price on other systems, Sony will be in serious trouble. If they only needed their AAAs then there would be no problem. But they still need 3rd parties to be competitive. 

 

 

No, not really. GP has only become Microsoft's main strategy this gen, the same way Sony's AAAs became their main strategy last gen.

This is somewhat contradictory, you're arguing the same thing as Sony, but somehow their arguments are totally off. 

 

As an aside I'm pretty sure every platform holder's strategy would be "Make really good games that people want to play". It's just that Sony have had a bit more luck with it than MS. I'm not sure MS's delivery of Gamepass was deliberately at the expense of making compelling games, it just panned out that way.

[footle]

24 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

 

GP is just getting started. Subscribers will shift when they realize a bunch of super games can be played on GP while they cost full price on PS5. It is the future Sony is scared of and for a good reason in my opinion.

 

let me introduce you to Steam users.... I don't think it's anywhere near as cut and dried as that.

[RubberJohnny]

1 minute ago, Talk Show Host said:

I think there is a difference between a subscription service as a bonus and as the main strategy of a platform. This only happened this gen and it really changed imo how Microsofts acts in the market.

 

But Microsoft have backed off saying it's their main strategy, now saying it'll maybe be 15% of their business?

[Talk Show Host]

5 minutes ago, thesnwmn said:

You two have been at it for a day and at this point I've no idea what either of you is even trying to say 😅

 

Both companies will twist the truth and lie to get what they want, or at least steer the decision in the direction that favours them. Trying to parse their statements for anything more that saying anything to get the deal through or block it seems pointless.

 

I agree to all of that. My main point is that Microsoft getting AB to GP is something Sony can't counter with their current strategy. They have no answer to GP's expansion and that is not because they cannot compete, its because the strategy they have chosen does not allow them to compete at this point.

[Stanley]

1 minute ago, Talk Show Host said:

 

Microsoft doesn't have Sony's AAA or their exclusive deals either, so they are at a disadvantage as well. What I am saying is that Sony has a way to counter GP, its not about the money. They can "built" their own GP and put in their AAAs day one as Microsoft does, but they can't do that because of the way they have built their strategy. 

 

 

I think there is a difference between a subscription service as a bonus and as the main strategy of a platform. This only happened this gen and it really changed imo how Microsofts acts in the market.

Does Sony need to counter Game Pass? From where I’m standing they’re doing better without it. 
 

Also, your first statement contradicts your second. Either that or I’m going mad 

[Talk Show Host]

Just now, RubberJohnny said:

 

But Microsoft have backed off saying it's their main strategy, now saying it'll maybe be 15% of their business?

 

Yeah, I don't think saying otherwise would help their case during the acquisition phase.

[Talk Show Host]

1 minute ago, Stanley said:

Does Sony need to counter Game Pass? From where I’m standing they’re doing better without it. 
 

Also, your first statement contradicts your second. Either that or I’m going mad 

 

They will need to, yes, when more and more games are on GP and people need to pay full price to play them on the PS5.

[Stanley]

4 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

 

I agree to all of that. My main point is that Microsoft getting AB to GP is something Sony can't counter with their current strategy. They have no answer to GP's expansion and that is not because they cannot compete, its because the strategy they have chosen does not allow them to compete at this point.

But this is where I don’t get what you are saying. 
 

There are two strategies in play; selling your games full price or giving them away on Game Pass. You’re saying they can’t compete with MS on this, but also it’s not about money. 
 

I mean what should they do then? 

[Talk Show Host]

1 minute ago, Stanley said:

But this is where I don’t get what you are saying. 
 

There are two in play; selling your games full price or giving them away on Game Pass. You’re saying they can’t compete with MS on this, but also it’s not about money. 
 

I mean what should they do then? 

 

I don't know, maybe put their AAAs on PS+?

 

But they can't do that. And that's because of their strategy. 

[Stanley]

Just now, Talk Show Host said:

 

I don't know, maybe put their AAAs on PS+?

But you’ve already said they can’t afford to do that. 

[Talk Show Host]

1 minute ago, Stanley said:

But you’ve already said they can’t afford to do that. 

 

Yes, because of their strategy, not because Microsoft has a ton of money. They chose this strategy when Microsoft chose another.

[Stanley]

Just now, Talk Show Host said:

 

Yes, because of their strategy, not because Microsoft has a ton of money.

Right, but it’s having a tonne of money that has allowed MS to buy AB for $68 billion isn’t it. 
 

Also, the only strategy here really is making and releasing games, that’s not going to change for either of them however they acquire them. 
 

So again, either they can afford to put all their games on PS+ or they can’t, there’s no other strategy here, no third way. 

[scoobysi]

5 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

 

They will need to, yes, when more and more games are on GP and people need to pay full price to play them on the PS5.

Most gamers play very few games, I think it’s still to be proven whether the numbers that MS need are going to jump onto GP. I suspect this deal is a bit of a safety blanket, they’ll make huge profits from COD, Candy Crush etc. irrespective of GP.

[Talk Show Host]

Just now, Stanley said:

Right, but it’s having a tonne of money that has allowed MS to buy AB for $68 billion isn’t it. 
 

Also, the only strategy here really is making and releasing games, that’s not going to change for either of them however they acquire them. 
 

So again, either they can afford to put all their games on PS+ or they can’t, there’s no other strategy here, no third way. 

 

This is where we disagree. Microsoft built their strategy so their AAAs can be on GP day one. Sony didn't do that. This is way before any AB acquisition. My point is that Sony could compete with GP if they could do that, but they can't. And they know it.

[Stanley]

Just now, Talk Show Host said:

 

This is where we disagree. Microsoft built their strategy so their AAAs can be on GP day one. Sony didn't do that. This is way before any AB acquisition. My point is that Sony could compete with GP if they could do that, but they can't. And they know it.

I am completely lost now 

[Superunknown]

17 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

Microsoft doesn't have Sony's AAA or their exclusive deals either, so they are at a disadvantage as well.

 

This is entirely within Microsoft's control. They just haven't executed as well as Sony in this respect. Poor execution is not a regulatory concern.

 

15 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

I agree to all of that. My main point is that Microsoft getting AB to GP is something Sony can't counter with their current strategy. They have no answer to GP's expansion and that is not because they cannot compete, its because the strategy they have chosen does not allow them to compete at this point.

 

This is incorrect. Microsoft acquiring AB is something that neither Sony or Xbox can do, because neither has that kind of money. The AB merger is only possible because Xbox can leverage its parents vast wealth to remove third publishers and high profile, massive-sellers from the 'open' market. This negatively impacts their rivals ability to compete by reducing consumer choice. This is why regulators are examining the proposed merger.

 

Sony could create their own GP - it won't address the reduction in consumer choice that this acquisition presents.

[Talk Show Host]

Just now, scoobysi said:

Most gamers play very few games, I think it’s still to be proven whether the numbers that MS need are going to jump onto GP. I suspect this deal is a bit of a safety blanket, they’ll make huge profits from COD, Candy Crush etc. irrespective of GP.

 

I do not doubt that. That is why I have said way back, this will only be a big problem for Sony as long as GP works. And AB can make it work more. Problem is Sony's only answer to that is putting their AAAs to their service. But they can't do that.

[David Kenny]

@Talk Show Host It reads very much like you think the CMA should block this merger. Which is fair enough obviously.

[Talk Show Host]

11 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

 

This is entirely within Microsoft's control. They just haven't executed as well as Sony in this respect. Poor execution is not a regulatory concern.

 

 

This is incorrect. Microsoft acquiring AB is something that neither Sony or Xbox can do, because neither has that kind of money. The AB merger is only possible because Xbox can leverage its parents vast wealth to remove third publishers and high profile, massive-sellers from the 'open' market. This negatively impacts their rivals ability to compete by reducing consumer choice. This is why regulators are examining the proposed merger.

 

I do not doubt why regulators examine the proposed merger, they very well should. But this is how the market works and Sony has also done it by using exclusive deals since day one which shaped the entire market. The merger will go through because Sony is already in a much stronger position and it certainly won't destroy them. But it is Sony's strategy which does not allow them to put the AAAs in their service, which could be a great answer to Microsoft. 

 

It was a poor choice in my book to go down that road in the first place.

 

[Stanley]

8 minutes ago, Talk Show Host said:

 

I do not doubt why regulators examine the proposed merger, they very well should. But this is how the market works and Sony has also done it by using exclusive deals since day one which shaped the entire market. The merger will go through because Sony is already in a much stronger position and it certainly won't destroy them. But it is Sony's strategy which does not allow them to put the AAAs in their service, which could be a great answer to Microsoft. 

 

It was a poor choice in my book to go down that road in the first place.

 

What strategy? You keep saying this but it doesn’t make any sense.