Lol of course some 3p pubs love the deal. No cod on ps means less competition for battlefield, gta online etc.
UK regulator posts six studios’ responses to Microsoft-Activision deal, all saying it should go ahead
- Thread starter John Elden Ring
- Start date
Well, to EA certainly it is good that the deal goes through. It's their biggest chance yet.
Not just EA, Ubisoft, Take 2 etc also probably see this as better investment opportunities.
Whatever nefarious reasons they might have behind it, they are mostly in favor of it going through. Whatever lesson or input CMA takes from this, is a different topic.
AdamGPT manages to Human centipede with itself. Amazing.
Good. Pretty much all big publishers and developers are for the deal to go through.
It's better for the gaming industry as a whole
Even if all big publishers were for the deal, it's irrelevant. They stand to gain or lose nothing over this acquisition since their market will not be impacted whatsoever. It's irrelevant wether Microsoft, Tencent, or the Saudi Prince of Bel Air owns Activision.
But my guess is that your AI model is still not prepared to deal with that kind of logic, so you just repeat the same shit over and over again.
I wonder why the only released 6 statements and redacted 5 names. My suspicion is that they actually got a lot more than that (most major western publishers have at least one branch in the UK, to say nothing of selling games there and lots of smaller studios and indies exist too.) My suspicion is that they actually got feedback from way more than that but only released info the respondents themselves okayed for release. One let everything out, five let out all but their name and the rest let nothing out?
Going back after replying to more recent posts to reply to an older one ... hey bud, you OK? Your recent string of posts is coming off pretty salty these days.
So far, almost all publishers and developers reached out to by the regulators have been positive on the merger, for whatever weight it holds in the regulators eyes.
I guess these might be 6 picked at random.
Looks like a copy posta from a great source, i dunno.
Last edited:
Thin ice, taking the piss out of other membersGoing back after replying to more recent posts to reply to an older one ... hey bud, you OK? Your recent string of posts is coming off pretty salty these days.
So far, almost all publishers and developers reached out to by the regulators have been positive on the merger, for whatever weight it holds in the regulators eyes.
I guess these might be 6 picked at random.
Looks like a copy posta from a great source, i dunno.
I sincerely hope this courtesy is also extended to the post I was quoting, it'd only be fair right ?
Nah, I'm only stating the fact that MS has a tiny gaming company market share, in the low tens, and small console market share where their direct competitor dominates them with more than a 2:1 difference even when heavily supply constrained. Also in the game subs, where they want to focus, they are aso outperformed by 2:1 in subs and more in revenue, and unlike them they must be profitable.
And I also know that the acquired company also represent a tiny percent of the global gaming market share, being most of it from mobile, and in the area where they directly compete against Sony wouln't hurt them so much, Sony would compensate it the users lost with the acquisition in a handful quarters. But would engage Sony to improve themselves even if their market position won't be compromised.
It wouldn't be mass consolidation because before the acquisition MS had a small market share and after it will continue having a small market share. MS and Sony will continue acquiring, but regulators, who have the real, proper, updated and accurate market data would stop them if it could become something remotely dangerous and their are far from it. They are considering very rare supposed cases making bold assumptions that would mean big market shifts that aren't likely to happen at least in a decade or so.
Without the acquisition Sony would be too distant leader, too confident and probably would become arrogant again. With better competition they'd push harder their own products and would offer better deals to big 3rd parties and indies, so everyone would be benefited.
Apart from the No More Robots response who are run by an unhinged fanboy, it's clear that competition would be reduced if MS were to acquire ABK and make them exclusive, as other pubs/devs would no longer need to compete with CoD or other titles on PlayStation or Nintendo platforms. Fewer titles to compete with theoretically leads to more profit. The competitive landscape within the Xbox ecosystem doesn't change in their eyes since those games were always on Xbox (but in reality it becomes worse because instead of competing with a B2P CoD they now have to compete with CoD on GP). Short sighted, stupid, profit-driven.
CMA will see right through them.
CMA will see right through them.
I was on the camp where MS is buying things because it can.
But seeing how much noise they are making on social media, the reasons must be big, doubt it’s for the cloud, no company would waste this much money, resources and time just for it.
D
Deleted member 417
Guest
Amazon make more profit from their cloud than they do any other department. Cloud counts for 26% of their profit but only costs 13% of their costs to run.
Microsoft would get their 76 billion back a lot quicker by snatching 400 million users from AWS. Not to mention they can leverage the back end against Sony and make then pay through the teeth for it.