Its funny how in the same thread on Ree where they have been saying for a few months now this will have no impact on Sony, they are now watching for their stock price to fall
Microsoft's acquisition of Activison Blizzard
- Thread starter Satoru
- Start date
I based it on Bungie's entire history of leaving when the group they are with don't keep their word. It's fairly obvious.
You don't have to be in the room where you read the statements Sony and Bungie released. It's the same statements they gave the regulators.
What's the fucking point of buying Bungie if the experience leaves. Christ!
Where did this narrative of Bungie leaving because someone didn't keep their word come from?
Bungie split from Microsoft because they 1) wanted to move on from Halo, 2) MS saw Halo as the valuable asset and not Bungie themselves, 3) they sold to MS for pennies in the first place before blowing up with Halo
There was no split from Activision. Activision only ever had a 10 year publishing agreement announced in 2010, while Bungie retained full ownership of the IP. They broke it off towards the end of that arrangement, maybe accelerated by a year by Activision themselves. They had 10 years to prepare themselves for self publishing and executed that once ready
Sony's $3.4 billion purchase is everything they wanted when they split from Microsoft, the sort of returns the Bungie leadership felt they should have gotten for their success on Halo. Its that simple, they executed a plan to start a new IP, retain independence while they grew into self publishinv and then resell themselves for significantly more money and did that.
Anything like independence and publishing where they want are bells and whistles compared to the hundreds of millions they've earned as individuals in the company. And there is no scenario where they are raising billions in capital for some hypothetical buy back.
And we aren't talking about Sony telling Bungie what to make which is the issue they had with MS. They are simply stating where they can publish. I am not saying they will do this, but saying they should
Playstation's just going to have to get back to work and remind people how they became so successful in the first place.
The masks are off. They want Sony to go down. They are too "dominant" in their made up world. Microsoft is the small underdog that will save us.
Ever since this deal was announced, I was expecting it to go through. I'm just taken aback by how sudden this shift was.
However, this is just a correction of one of CMA's previous statements, based on them not properly calculating the impact of the userbase on losing access to COD.
How they came to that conclusion based of a very small sample size, I have no idea.
However, much like before this, I expect this to go through.
However, this is just a correction of one of CMA's previous statements, based on them not properly calculating the impact of the userbase on losing access to COD.
How they came to that conclusion based of a very small sample size, I have no idea.
However, much like before this, I expect this to go through.
It's BS. The previous assessment was accurate, not this one. The impact of loss of access to CoD is the motivation behind the whole deal in the first place.
I had a read of the updated provisional findings - nowhere in there do they state that the recommended remedies of divestiture and prohibition are no longer their recommendations, nor that the situation is now one in which behavioural remedies could be a primary remedy. They've asked for input on how the removal of the console SLC could affect its recommended remedies, however. The cloud SLC is still very much in play, and 10 year deals with existing BYO entrants don't cut it as per the CMA guidelines.
What's the read on this?
What's the read on this?
Would be funny if it was still rejected and Sony had nothing to do with it
OP
OP
Damn it would be hella funny, if it gets surprisingly blocked or approved with heavy concessions. Microsoft biased media would have a meltdown. xD
Tin foil hat: It’s obvious Microsoft made an offer that can’t be refused one way or another to the cma. So with that as the context do You guys think that senator commenting on Japan was a preemptive from Microsoft to try and prevent a Sony response acquisition in Japan?
Or is this the preemptive seeds of the narrative a year or 2 down the road when Microsoft goes after a Japanese company they already have it on record that Sony is 98 percent of the high end market?
It seems extremely random she would say this (of course Ms told her what to say) but the timing of it.
Or is this the preemptive seeds of the narrative a year or 2 down the road when Microsoft goes after a Japanese company they already have it on record that Sony is 98 percent of the high end market?
It seems extremely random she would say this (of course Ms told her what to say) but the timing of it.
The dream is that they still ask for divestiture because of the Cloud. Maybe MS owning Azure is a big enough concern but how plausible is that?
Sony would be 100% clean so it's the best possible outcome for them too.
Interesting thought. Maybe Microsoft knows that Sony will buy Square Enix and they are desperate about it? Could explain this political attack on Japan.
I thought they were having this senator say that because they were just grasping at straws but with More information it’s almost like a preemptive of something.
Of course I don’t think Sony is 98 percent of the games market is going to fly in Japan in a court or anything. How many famitsu sales charts are there where the pie graph is a Pac-Man of Nintendo consoles eating every one?
Depends how long that hearing was/those talks were scheduled for. Senator shillington was always going to shill for MS at their behest. Timing may be a coincidence.
Square is not needed at all. No brain power goes into that acquisition. It's Fromsoftware or Capcom or bust as far as Japan goes. Maybe acquire Konami IP's on the cheap as a small side deal as well. No Japanese Publisher of worth is at risk in Japan - it won't happen, it has never happened - there are political considerations at play, not just business - and they will take precedent.
It's the EU that should be poached, if possible. CDPR in particular atm. Warner gaming is no longer out there on the market per say (and what matters really is the IPs - Rocksteady is unfortunately in shambles). Ubi is too bloated, and a managerial mess. I think there should be and more likely will be a lot of targeted acquisitions of still independent but industry relevant studios - specially western market oriented.
It's a war of attrition for the Western shooter/sports/WRPG audience, not weebs.
It's the EU that should be poached, if possible. CDPR in particular atm. Warner gaming is no longer out there on the market per say (and what matters really is the IPs - Rocksteady is unfortunately in shambles). Ubi is too bloated, and a managerial mess. I think there should be and more likely will be a lot of targeted acquisitions of still independent but industry relevant studios - specially western market oriented.
It's a war of attrition for the Western shooter/sports/WRPG audience, not weebs.
Last edited:
I agree CDPR, Sony is pretty much locked out of western RPG’s wholesale. Only EA and CDPR are remaining in the sector, EA needs to prove themselves after recent times.