Breaking: UK's CMA investigation has provisionally concluded that "Microsoft’s proposed acquisition of Activision could result in higher prices, fewer

[MScarpa]

Seems like most people just want to play good games. Yet if MS is in charge of COD, that means COD which is already at the 70 meta level with Vanguard will go down even further......I don't think Blizzard is lighting any fire as far as consoles are concerned with their games and games like Tony Hawk, Spyro/Crash etc... will just die out because these games did their best on PS, even when they became multiplat.

I look at it like this. Getting all the COD games and Diablo, etc on Gamepass day 1 would be great, and i know I'm in the minority here and that's okay. To me it's about the games and REFUSING to buy games new for 70$, So if MS or Sony wants to add to the subscription service I'm in.

Also MS getting Activision would make me use my Series X way more.

 

[MScarpa]

You can always buy a PlaySyation… it is safe.

I have a PS5, and 4 and 3, and so on. Not sure why you didn't think I owned 1.

 

[MScarpa]

I think PlayStation has you covered!

As of right now it's probably 75/25 playtime split PS/MS.

And thank you for the gift.

 

[ethomaz]

I have a PS5, and 4 and 3, and so on. Not sure why you didn't think I owned 1.

Because you asked for games

 

[KiryuRealty]

I look at it like this. Getting all the COD games and Diablo, etc on Gamepass day 1 would be great, and i know I'm in the minority here and that's okay. To me it's about the games and REFUSING to buy games new for 70$, So if MS or Sony wants to add to the subscription service I'm in.

Also MS getting Activision would make me use my Series X way more.

Have you not read anything?

MS isn’t getting Call of Duty under any acceptable version of the deal.

 

[Dr Bass]

I look at it like this. Getting all the COD games and Diablo, etc on Gamepass day 1 would be great, and i know I'm in the minority here and that's okay. To me it's about the games and REFUSING to buy games new for 70$, So if MS or Sony wants to add to the subscription service I'm in.

Also MS getting Activision would make me use my Series X way more.

So you want a bunch of expensive to make games, but you don't want to pay the people that make them? Ridiculous. And entitled.

 

[KiryuRealty]

So you want a bunch of expensive to make games, but you don't want to pay the people that make them? Ridiculous. And entitled.

Some would call that scumbag behaviour, and his post history on GAF makes it clear that that is what he is.

 

[MScarpa]

So you want a bunch of expensive to make games, but you don't want to pay the people that make them? Ridiculous. And entitled.

" So you want a bunch of expensive to make games"?

I don't follow, sorry. If you're asking me why I choose not to buy new and enjoy subscription services, well the answer is that's what I prefer. Most games nowadays are broken on release, and/or drop in price dramatically. Sorry if you disagree with my purchasing habits.

 

[MScarpa]

Some would call that scumbag behaviour, and his post history on GAF makes it clear that that is what he is.

Scumbag behavior because I don't want to buy a new game for 70$? When I could wait for it to drop in price or show up on PSPlus or Gamepass? I am flattered you know me from GAF.

 

[anonpuffs]

Scumbag behavior because I don't want to buy a new game for 70$? When I could wait for it to drop in price or show up on PSPlus or Gamepass? I am flattered you know me from GAF.

So don't buy it? Sales come regularly, sometimes within 6 months of launch. There are other subscription services besides gamepass as well. Nothing requires Microsoft to own these properties for you to get cheap access to them.

 

[Bryank75]

@KiryuRealty calm down, no name calling please.

Everyone else, try to avoid dog-piling.

If you disagree with someone, let them finish their back and forth with one person first and then begin your discussion after.

<3

Also try to get things back on topic.

 

[MScarpa]

So don't buy it? Sales come regularly, sometimes within 6 months of launch. There are other subscription services besides gamepass as well. Nothing requires Microsoft to own these properties for you to get cheap access to them.

I agree, which is why I said PSPlus as well. Only difference is MS will put it day and date. But I do decide to wait and either buy used or usually wait a few months and buy digital. (I'm not a fan of physical)

 

[thelastword]

I look at it like this. Getting all the COD games and Diablo, etc on Gamepass day 1 would be great, and i know I'm in the minority here and that's okay. To me it's about the games and REFUSING to buy games new for 70$, So if MS or Sony wants to add to the subscription service I'm in.

Also MS getting Activision would make me use my Series X way more.

Yeah, but the downside to that is "game quality" will take a terrible jolt.....If MS spends all this money on a deal, their spending does not stop there. Absorbing all these new workers, having to fund all these AAA games just to put it on a shaky service with a few million subs is not going to return their investment, it's a huge gamble....And like you've seen with gamepass, trying to create games for such a service means MS would need to dial down on the ambition to keep game budgets in check and to keep a healthy gamepass cycle of new games. Yet we all know how MS is already struggling with development. Having to man a big ship like Activision is not gonna make it easier or smoother sailing......

 

[MScarpa]

Yeah, but the downside to that is "game quality" will take a terrible jolt.....If MS spends all this money on a deal, their spending does not stop there. Absorbing all these new workers, having to fund all these AAA games just to put it on a shaky service with a few million subs is not going to return their investment, it's a huge gamble....And like you've seen with gamepass, trying to create games for such a service means MS would need to dial down on the ambition to keep game budgets in check and to keep a healthy gamepass cycle of new games. Yet we all know how MS is already struggling with development. Having to man a big ship like Activision is not gonna make it easier or smoother sailing......

I'm personally not worried about what MAY happen, I don't think ANYTHING is getting dialed down, I think MS would do fine with WHOEVER they purchsse. Activision/Blizzard themselves isn't doing great as it is, there is a reason they are selling. I also don't want to get into a back and forth about MS on a forum which the majority of members dislike/hate MS. End of the day More games at a better or cheaper price I'm good with. If they are shit games, they go out of business, simple as that.

 

[One eyed jacks]

I'm personally not worried about what MAY happen, I don't think ANYTHING is getting dialed down, I think MS would do fine with WHOEVER they purchsse. Activision/Blizzard themselves isn't doing great as it is, there is a reason they are selling. I also don't want to get into a back and forth about MS on a forum which the majority of members dislike/hate MS. End of the day More games at a better or cheaper price I'm good with. If they are shit games, they go out of business, simple as that.

The revelations in the CMA files shows this kind of business model is not sustainable and Microsoft knew it but was hoping they could buy enough publishers so they would have all the IP’s locked up behind a subscription that they would most definitely increase the price to whatever they want and there would be nothing you can do about it.

A lot of us were savvy enough to have figured that out already and that’s why we don’t support devs through a subscription because that’s not actually helping them or the industry you claim to support grow. Microsoft is teaching its base not to support devs by buying there games (especially on release) which is the most dangerous thing to do to the industry and an insult to all the people who worked on those games that people would refuse to support there games on release until it ends up in a bargain bin somewhere.

 

[Deleted member 417]

I'm personally not worried about what MAY happen, I don't think ANYTHING is getting dialed down, I think MS would do fine with WHOEVER they purchsse. Activision/Blizzard themselves isn't doing great as it is, there is a reason they are selling. I also don't want to get into a back and forth about MS on a forum which the majority of members dislike/hate MS. End of the day More games at a better or cheaper price I'm good with. If they are shit games, they go out of business, simple as that.

I agree with the gist of your post. My spending in the industry has gone from 1000's/year about 15 years ago to about £250 since 2015. (That will change when i pick up a PS5 and VR2). 99% of games are not worth playing, let alone paying for. Gamepass for me is a place to play what used to be bargain basement games - those gems that cost a fiver each or three for a tenner. Games that were janky and low budget but had some amazing charm and quality to them, games like that don't exist anymore.

However, the big problem with MS - and as much as I was a huge fanboy up until Kinect, is that MS have no consequences for their actions. Without consequences they can't calibrate to go in a direction that works. Xbox 1 and Xbox 360 worked. Kinect, X1 an the series haven't worked, yet MS/Xbox are still in business.

If MS suffered consequences like Nintendo and Sony did, we would see their version of coming back guns blazing, like Nintendo do with the Switch after the Wii U or Sony did with the PS4 after the PS3 (not that it was a bad console, it just lacked focus).

So, MS buying up publishers only hurts us as gamers, as they can destroy IPs (Gears, Halo, Fable, everything of Rare) and never realise consequences of their poor actions. That's why, for me at least, I want Microsoft to suffer for their mistakes. Not because I hate them, but because I want them to go back to being the company I loved; the company that took risks, launched power hardware and focused on the core, enthusiast market first and foremost.

 

[AshHunter216]

Based on what I've been reading, it's rare that the CMA accepts weak behavioral remedies or changes their mind between provisional and final reports, but it has apparently happened. Does anyone have any insight into the precedent here for this type of case?

 

[MScarpa]

The revelations in the CMA files shows this kind of business model is not sustainable and Microsoft knew it but was hoping they could buy enough publishers so they would have all the IP’s locked up behind a subscription that they would most definitely increase the price to whatever they want and there would be nothing you can do about it.

A lot of us were savvy enough to have figured that out already and that’s why we don’t support devs through a subscription because that’s not actually helping them or the industry you claim to support grow. Microsoft is teaching its base not to support devs by buying there games (especially on release) which is the most dangerous thing to do to the industry and an insult to all the people who worked on those games that people would refuse to support there games on release until it ends up in a bargain bin somewhere.

We can agree to disagree, it's okay to have a different opinion on matters. I never claimed to help or support ANY COMPANY, game or otherwise. I'm not loyal to a specific company whatsoever. If there are good games to play I will play them, whether I wait for a sale on digital or I buy used at my local shops. I don't owe anybody anything,

 

[MScarpa]

I agree with the gist of your post. My spending in the industry has gone from 1000's/year about 15 years ago to about £250 since 2015. (That will change when i pick up a PS5 and VR2). 99% of games are not worth playing, let alone paying for. Gamepass for me is a place to play what used to be bargain basement games - those gems that cost a fiver each or three for a tenner. Games that were janky and low budget but had some amazing charm and quality to them, games like that don't exist anymore.

However, the big problem with MS - and as much as I was a huge fanboy up until Kinect, is that MS have no consequences for their actions. Without consequences they can't calibrate to go in a direction that works. Xbox 1 and Xbox 360 worked. Kinect, X1 an the series haven't worked, yet MS/Xbox are still in business.

If MS suffered consequences like Nintendo and Sony did, we would see their version of coming back guns blazing, like Nintendo do with the Switch after the Wii U or Sony did with the PS4 after the PS3 (not that it was a bad console, it just lacked focus).

So, MS buying up publishers only hurts us as gamers, as they can destroy IPs (Gears, Halo, Fable, everything of Rare) and never realise consequences of their poor actions. That's why, for me at least, I want Microsoft to suffer for their mistakes. Not because I hate them, but because I want them to go back to being the company I loved; the company that took risks, launched power hardware and focused on the core, enthusiast market first and foremost.

Ya, sorry but I don't see it like you do, and that's ok. I have no issues with companies buying publishers, again, as long as I'm enjoying games still, I don't care who buys what and where it comes from,

 

[Deleted member 417]

Ya, sorry but I don't see it like you do, and that's ok. I have no issues with companies buying publishers, again, as long as I'm enjoying games still, I don't care who buys what and where it comes from,

I don't understand. The only way we are not seeing it in the same way if you don't care about the quality of games. There have been fewer quality experiences in the past 10 years, than the 10 years before that.