Ahh yes, the braindead PR that the CMA fell for. "We'll allow our games on numerous cloud platform. Except, you know, on platforms held by our biggest competitors. But we pretend those don't exist."
Microsoft's acquisition of Activison Blizzard
- Thread starter Darth Vader
- Start date
So what is this? EE are gonna include gamepass/xcloud as part of their pay monthly deal and they are gonna include xcloud/gamepass app part of of their phones they sell?
I mean it's completely irrelevant, as EE is not a cloud provider.
Last edited:
Sony only objected to the requirement that anyone cross-playing with Xbox have an Xbox live account, and in other instances have supported cross-platform online since Final Fantasy XI, but keep up that bullshit narrative about them somehow looking weak by sticking to their guns.Microsoft and Nintendo have been using an "the enemy of my enemy is my friend concept" for years. Remember when Microsoft team up with Nintendo for Minecraft and Sony didn’t allow crossplay? They really forced Sony into allowing crossplay.
Sony is looking weak in almost every way
Epic Games forced Sony hand over cross-play, not Nintendo and especially not Microsoft. People forget today, but Microsoft also had to be pressured into reversing their policy.
Almost overnight, Xbox seized the high ground by pretending they were never against it.
they always were against it. bethesda did their bidding also. m$ are scums.
The Rocket League devs were gutless fucks through that whole drama. Their own game had PC/PS cross play from the start, but they themselves never once mentioned that little fact when everyone shat on Sony for not wanting PS gamers to be forced to create Xbox Live accounts to play games on PlayStation consoles.
These are simply pre-loaded software deals that expand Xcloud's reach, none of these deals have touched on competition so far, they've only benefited MS.
In the same vein, it's crazy to see fans and MS themselves use their horrible sales performance as reasons why the acquisition should go through. As if it wasn't the result of market competition -which this acquisition would distort- that got them there in the first place. By that logic which CMA used to drop the console concerns, the worse that MS performs today allows them the right to buy up any publisher and lock them away after 10 years.
Hopefully regulators come to that conclusion as well. These no-name cloud providers (outside of Nvidia, but that one is also BYOG) are just MS's way to Embrace smaller would-be competitors before they grow into actual competition. Extend 10-year COD deals out to them, and then what after the 10 years are up? Extinguish the deal/partnership afterwards as well as potential future growth of these no-name providers now that they aren't getting this content anymore?
The way I see it these 10-year deals they have so far is just them using these other platforms as an advertising spot for their content and Game Pass. Keep in mind Microsoft never wanted to make these deals in the first place, so of course they are absolutely reluctant to provide these deals for COD access to actual cloud or mobile storefront competitors like Google, Amazon or Apple.
Speaking of which I am surprised the mobile storefront part of all this hasn't become more of a talking point among regulators, since Microsoft have revealed that's a massive reason they want the acquisition to be approved. As-is it'd seem like they can offer mobile storefront exclusivity of COD and most of the ABK content (I suppose Candy Crush would still be multi-plat among mobile storefronts) or could leverage the content for partial foreclosure of content offerings not available on other mobile storefronts. That might be something worth looking into.
To think that in two weeks we'll know officially if CMA decides to save the Xbox division by letting them buy their way out of last place, or if they'll stick to their guns and force a divestment. I predict even if they're allowed to buy, that the concessions will basically keep COD multiplatform for the rest of the gen.
They already backtracked on the requirement for a divestment when they did a 180 on their provisional findings. Now it remains to be seen if Google wants to attack MS by leading to blocking the deal or not.
Google seem to be attacking the deal indirectly.
They've attacked microsofts behaviour in the cloud services market. Some of those criticisms have similarities to what microsoft can do in the cloud gaming market.
Amazon could have attacked the deal as they have luna to use against MS and CMA have identified them as a key cloud competitor.
But maybe amazon are lining themselves up for a big acquisition themselves, so they rather not set a precedent by going against it.
Last edited:
I don't think they ever directly said they've changed their minds about remedies, but it wouldn't surprise me given their other 180.
Safest bet for Sony is to just start locking down key partners before it's too late.
Last edited:
That's right. They never changed their minds about remedies, and the cloud market is even more highly disrupted by this deal, and Microsoft's 10 year contracts may as well be written on toilet paper because all they're good for is flushing. They only benefit Microsoft and don't allow access to key inputs to the actual competition. Even the paid researcher who wrote to the CMA noted this inadvertently.
The gamer lawsuit is true, sony got subpoenaed and understandably didn't resist and are gonna give over documentation.
That lawsuit is old and a judge already dismissed it. They are appealing and seeking documents from Sony.
now I have no idea if this is a good or bad thing ahaha.
I just want this to be over.