Microsoft - Activision Deal Reportedly also concerns Google

[RE4-City]

Man I wonder how long until google buys a big publisher?

 

[Bernd Lauert]

 

[Dabaus]

Reporting from TweetTown, who seem to be one of the few places covering it from different angles.

I think hes saying "theoretically google could say this as an argument" but we dont actually know i they are. I hope they are though lol.

 

[Vertigo]

I appreciate the attempts of the industry to cockblock MS. Their behavior is despicable so the battle of the corporations is fun to see.

 

[CloudStrife]

Oh dear..

 

[Papacheeks]

Oh dear..

 

[Sircaw]

its the slightly cracked up butt-hole that is worrying me.

 

[Eternal_Wings]

Microsoft seems desperate. They did tweet how it benefits gaming lol.

 

[Lord Mittens]

Microsoft seems desperate. They did tweet how it benefits gaming lol.

Nothing new
That's been out since Sept 1st.

This is new however

Take Two CEO endorsing the idea

https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/take-two-strauss-zelnick-xbox-activision-purchase/

 

[Eternal_Wings]

Nothing new
That's been out since Sept 1st.

This is new however

Take Two CEO endorsing the idea

https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/take-two-strauss-zelnick-xbox-activision-purchase/

The tweet is from today - 11th October.

 

[Lord Mittens]

The tweet is from today - 11th October.

Correct, I was referring to the blog which was posted on Sept 1st

 

[Shmunter]

Nothing new
That's been out since Sept 1st.

This is new however

Take Two CEO endorsing the idea

https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/take-two-strauss-zelnick-xbox-activision-purchase/

All competing devs will endorse such a deal if it means removal of competing titles on PlayStation

 

[CloudStrife]

Nothing new
That's been out since Sept 1st.

This is new however

Take Two CEO endorsing the idea

https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/take-two-strauss-zelnick-xbox-activision-purchase/

I don't know if I would call this "endorsing"

Zelnick told the outlet that he believes that the acquisition won't have a negative impact on Take-Two, or on competition throughout the video game industry. The crux of Zelnick's argument is that good games will continue to draw in audiences regardless of what Microsoft does.

He just seems unbothered by it. Which is understandable. It doesn't affect his business much. The same guy also doesn't believe the Game Pass model works for his business.

 

[Lord Mittens]

I don't know if I would call this "endorsing"



He just seems unbothered by it. Which is understandable. It doesn't affect his business much. The same guy also doesn't believe the Game Pass model works for his business.

Give them enough money and it will, I recall the 'remasters' for the older GTA games coming to the services.

 

[Yobo]

All competing devs will endorse such a deal if it means removal of competing titles on PlayStation

Plus any CEO of a company that could potentially be acquired themselves would be fiscally irresponsible to speak against it in the eyes of stakeholders

 

[CloudStrife]

Give them enough money and it will, I recall the 'remasters' for the older GTA games coming to the services.

Remasters are one thing, but day one games like GTA6, The next Red Dead, etc would cost an absolute massive amount of money. MS might have plenty of cash but no way they are paying Take Two what they would loose in potential sales by putting their games on Game Pass.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/take-...ck-agrees-with-playstations-subscription-plan

Zelnick:

"We've supported various subscription services and we're happy to do so," Zelnick said during his keynote. "Our scepticism has been around making frontline console products available day and date with subscription. That doesn't make any sense to us, because economically speaking, we don't think consumers are prepared to pay for that. And we can't afford to turn our business upside down in a way that doesn't make sense economically. There always has to be an intersection between what the consumer wants and what the publisher is able to do. And you know, it doesn't make sense to do that for our properties. That's our opinion, and I think Sony agrees with us, because it said so.

"It can potentially be great for catalogue properties, sales of properties that have been in the market for a while and their price has been reduced. It can make economic sense to offer those on a subscription basis."

 

[Bryank75]

All competing devs will endorse such a deal if it means removal of competing titles on PlayStation

Exactly, I mean does anyone expect a CEO to complain about competition being removed from one of the most lucrative platforms?

Nothing-burger.

 

[Lord Mittens]

Remasters are one thing, but day one games like GTA6, The next Red Dead, etc would cost an absolute massive amount of money. MS might have plenty of cash but no way they are paying Take Two what they would loose in potential sales by putting their games on Game Pass.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/take-...ck-agrees-with-playstations-subscription-plan

Zelnick:

I agree, those titles will never go to a service, especially day1.

 

[peter42O]

Google's tech for Stadia was great but their pricing model sucked, they had no studios, no exclusives and didn't want to invest any money whatsoever. It's no one's fault but Google's as to why Stadia bombed. Blaming Microsoft is so pathetic. Google has basically the same amount of money that Microsoft has but didn't want to spend any of it on Stadia and then wonders why it failed. Gee, what could it be. SMH.

Buy years old games which reminded me of Wii U that was streaming only at full price plus also had to pay for a Google subscription on top of it. Wow. Add in the fact that again, Google didn't want to invest any money into Stadia and well, it deserved to die. Either invest into your platform or get the hell out. Google choose to get the hell out.

 

[Papacheeks]

Hollyshit!!

Microsoft sounds like a fucking child now.



Here's where some of the worry with CMA is: