Microsoft Microsoft/Activision Blizzard Acquisition - Information Thread, update: The Deal Has Closed

[BloodyHell]

1 hour ago, Paperclyp said:

You’re jumping to simple, massive conclusions without a lot of nuance to them. 
 

We don’t have their numbers of where most of their revenue comes in. We do know for certain Sony has been the stingiest by far of the companies with things like crossplay, and a primary reason for that is the cut they get when people buy content on their store - not just exclusive games, but DLC and multiplatform games and essentially anything that is sold through their store. 
 

THAT is why MS “only cares about game pass,” THAT is why there is a massive legal battle between epic and apple, THAT is why Sony is reluctant to even allow their games to play nice with other platform versions. Just at least open yourself to the possibility that even losing “millions in console sales and exclusives,” they would still be better off holding on to their financial power in that way. And that’s besides the point where there’s so much context we don’t know yet: ie will MS actually withhold call of duty or any number of unknown factors. 
 

Sony will not allow game pass on their machine until they have determined there’s absolutely no other choice. 

Oh, I agree Sony won't allow it. 

 

And that is what is going to move them to 3rd place in the console wars, as they keep losing ground this generation. 

 

And please? We don't know if CoD will be exclusive? Living on hopes and dreams there. If Sony doesn't allow Gamepass, they will never see another new AB game after the current contracts are fulfilled. They didn't spend 70bn to keep releasing games on Sony consoles. 

 

Theres a damn good reason Sony lost 20bn in value after this news. Some of you just don't want to see the obvious. People were doom and gloom about Bethesda. Bethesda is a drop in the bucket next to this.

[Paperclyp]

3 minutes ago, BloodyHell said:

 

And please? We don't know if CoD will be exclusive? Living on hopes and dreams there. If Sony doesn't allow Gamepass, they will never see another new AB game after the current contracts are fulfilled. They didn't spend 70bn to keep releasing games on Sony consoles. 

 

The general feel from industry insiders is already that bare minimum Warzone will remain multiplatform. It's not hard to fathom a world where they keep the multiplayer there as well. Remember, now MS gets a cut every time a skin is sold on PSN whether game pass is allowed or not. Again, not as simple as you're making it. 

 

Minecraft has remained on all platforms brining in more than 1.5 billion in revenue last year, for instance. 

 

I feel like people adopted this "the ONLY thing MS cares about is Game Pass" thing and took it to an absurd degree lol. Yeah they want to make that thing into gaming netflix, but they're not fucking idiots either. They're going to assess things and make nuanced decisions about them. 

[SuperSpreader]

21 minutes ago, BloodyHell said:

. If Sony doesn't allow Gamepass, they will never see another new AB game after the current contracts are fulfilled. 

 

There might be an easy workaround. Move all the studios under Microsoft Game Studios and close Activision Blizzard permanently. That's how EA was able to lay people off in countries where there are strong employee protections. They created new labels, moved people under them, then closed the label. Or make the only AB game Candy Crush.

[Chris-]

Business discussion aside, this more or less cements that I will get a Series S at some point. Bethesda and Blizzard properties make up a substantial portion of my gaming interests, and there is enough else to like with GamePass that it is more or less a no brainer.

[SaysWho?]

19 minutes ago, Chris- said:

Business discussion aside, this more or less cements that I will get a Series S at some point. Bethesda and Blizzard properties make up a substantial portion of my gaming interests, and there is enough else to like with GamePass that it is more or less a no brainer.

 

While Blizzard doesn't right now for me, they certainly did on PC with both Starcraft games. I've been tempted to sink a ton of time replaying all of them.

 

Side note, the whole "how is this different than insomniac?" gets funnier and funnier. And it was already hysterical after Bethesda.

[BloodyHell]

2 hours ago, Paperclyp said:

 

The general feel from industry insiders is already that bare minimum Warzone will remain multiplatform. It's not hard to fathom a world where they keep the multiplayer there as well. Remember, now MS gets a cut every time a skin is sold on PSN whether game pass is allowed or not. Again, not as simple as you're making it. 

 

Minecraft has remained on all platforms brining in more than 1.5 billion in revenue last year, for instance. 

 

I feel like people adopted this "the ONLY thing MS cares about is Game Pass" thing and took it to an absurd degree lol. Yeah they want to make that thing into gaming netflix, but they're not fucking idiots either. They're going to assess things and make nuanced decisions about them. 

Minecraft was already on the platform. I agree warzone isn't going anywhere. We're talking about future CoD games, (or blizzard, or anything else).

 

MS is giving sony one option. Gamepass or no new games. MS qill absolutely honor current contracts, thats the law. But it ends there.

[BloodyHell]

2 hours ago, Chris- said:

Business discussion aside, this more or less cements that I will get a Series S at some point. Bethesda and Blizzard properties make up a substantial portion of my gaming interests, and there is enough else to like with GamePass that it is more or less a no brainer.

And there are millions more like you. The majority of console  players don't even realize that these companies make up the large bulk of their play time. Blizzard makes two of my all time favorite games. I don't give a damn about CoD, but even terribly reviewed ones end up on yearly best sellers lists, and they launch nov-dec.

Like I said earlier in the thread, there is now no way I could recommend ps5 over Series X.

[Spork3245]

2 hours ago, Chris- said:

Business discussion aside, this more or less cements that I will get a Series S at some point. Bethesda and Blizzard properties make up a substantial portion of my gaming interests, and there is enough else to like with GamePass that it is more or less a no brainer.

But why not an X?

[best3444]

9 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

But why not an X?

 

Exactly. I would NEVER get a Series S when there is an X out that is much more powerful. What's the point? Might as well buy and Xbox One X....

[Brian]

You can get a X today through Best Buy All Access plan

 

[best3444]

I prefer the interior S. It just looks cooler and stuff. 

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, best3444 said:

Might as well buy and Xbox One X....

The S will have new titles that the One X eventually won’t.

[Paperclyp]

1 hour ago, BloodyHell said:

Minecraft was already on the platform. I agree warzone isn't going anywhere. We're talking about future CoD games, (or blizzard, or anything else).

 

MS is giving sony one option. Gamepass or no new games. MS qill absolutely honor current contracts, thats the law. But it ends there.

Yeah COD is already in the platform too 

 

I think we’re at an impasse because you don’t seem to want to acknowledge my points and keep coming back with like, “no man, they’ll lose millions because the games are popular.” 
 

So I guess since you know how it’s gonna go, let’s get you down with some specifics: when does MS stop putting COD on there, when does Sony cave and allow game pass, etc?

[Biggie]

44 minutes ago, best3444 said:

 

Exactly. I would NEVER get a Series S when there is an X out that is much more powerful. What's the point? Might as well buy and Xbox One X....

X 

[BloodyHell]

23 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

Yeah COD is already in the platform too 

 

I think we’re at an impasse because you don’t seem to want to acknowledge my points and keep coming back with like, “no man, they’ll lose millions because the games are popular.” 
 

So I guess since you know how it’s gonna go, let’s get you down with some specifics: when does MS stop putting COD on there, when does Sony cave and allow game pass, etc?

And you keep refusing to acknowledge that once this deal goes through, new CoD will not be on ps5. Warzone is not going to keep people around for years to come. 

 

When do they stop putting them on there? Definitely by end of 2023 will be the last. If Sony already has a contract for CoD 2023, they might get it, but if they dont, 2022 will be the last.

 

When does this sale start hurting Sony? Its already  affected share price, wiping away 20bn in capital over night. So let's not pretend it hasn't hurt them already. Their market cap was less than 140 billion before the stock drop. 

 

When do they decide to allow gp on ps5? No idea, Japanese companies are notoriously proud. But the sooner they do, the sooner the bleeding stops. 

[BloodyHell]

1 hour ago, best3444 said:

 

Exactly. I would NEVER get a Series S when there is an X out that is much more powerful. What's the point? Might as well buy and Xbox One X....

Because its not going to matter. Streaming will reach Series X quality soon. The idea of powerful hardware is a dying concept that you specifically seem very tied up in. 

[best3444]

4 minutes ago, BloodyHell said:

Because its not going to matter. Streaming will reach Series X quality soon. The idea of powerful hardware is a dying concept that you specifically seem very tied up in. 

 

[Paperclyp]

4 minutes ago, BloodyHell said:

And you keep refusing to acknowledge that once this deal goes through, new CoD will not be on ps5. Warzone is not going to keep people around for years to come. 

 

When do they stop putting them on there? Definitely by end of 2023 will be the last. If Sony already has a contract for CoD 2023, they might get it, but if they dont, 2022 will be the last.

 

When does this sale start hurting Sony? Its already  affected share price, wiping away 20bn in capital over night. So let's not pretend it hasn't hurt them already. Their market cap was less than 140 billion before the stock drop. 

 

When do they decide to allow gp on ps5? No idea, Japanese companies are notoriously proud. But the sooner they do, the sooner the bleeding stops. 

 

 I'm not refusing to acknowledge it might not be on PS5, but I'm saying it's not a certainty. We should clarify exactly what we mean by COD - Like I said I think it's perfectly feasible the multiplayer stays on PS5 and would be a better business deal for MS if it did so, ala Minecraft. If you're just talking campaigns, sure I doubt in the future they'll put those on Sony platforms, but there's been rumors recently that they're just gonna turn COD into a forever game without yearly releases, so maybe it won't exist anywhere. 

 

You're welcome to comb through my posts and find any evidence of me saying this is not a huge blow to Sony. 

 

This just circles back around to I think the opposite of what you're saying is true: GP on their platform would effectively kill Sony as a major competitor to MS. It's possible they maintain a major player without it, albeit at a larger disadvantage than they've ever had. It's also possible their goose is cooked. I'm not claiming to know how it's going to go either way like you are. 

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

I think the opposite of what you're saying is true: GP on their platform would effectively kill Sony as a major competitor to MS.

Why do you believe GP on PlayStation is worse for a Sony than none of those now MS Studios franchises not coming to the platform?

[Paperclyp]

36 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

Why do you believe GP on PlayStation is worse for a Sony than none of those now MS Studios franchises not coming to the platform?

Game pass includes a lot more than just MS’s own studios. Once those games are available and accessed through game pass, Sony will not get their significant cut of everything from the purchase of the game itself to any content purchased for that game. It seems that more and more that is what these companies care about. 
 

And again if Sony can entice MS with a deal for certain live games, like say with COD they relent on some of their typical cut that they’d normally take in exchange for the multiplayer to exist on the PlayStation. That’s just an example of a wrinkle that is a little more nuanced than what bloody is talking about. 

[Chris-]

2 hours ago, Spork3245 said:

But why not an X?

No need or desire for a disc drive, and I’m still rocking a Panny plasma so the native 4K output is irrelevant (and even if I did have a 4K TV, I’m not enough of a videophile that upscaled 4K would bother me). So there is basically no reason for me to get an X. 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

Game pass includes a lot more than just MS’s own studios. Once those games are available and accessed through game pass, Sony will not get their significant cut of everything from the purchase of the game itself to any content purchased for that game. It seems that more and more that is what these companies care about. 

 

Windows GP and Xbox GP have different content, so I see no reason to presume that PS GP must have the same content. And why would the inclusion on a theoretical PS GP affect the revenue share they get from micro transactions that occur on their platform? If users are buying content through the PS store interface, Sony is going to get their piece.

[BloodyHell]

1 hour ago, best3444 said:

 

I mean, its true. Current GP streaming is already using Series X hardware. The Series S streams perfectly well.

 

We might get a mid generation update, but this is probably the very last MS console. We're very close to moving beyond the need for console hardware. By next Christmas, maybe xmas 2023, most "X Box's" sold will probably be a akin to chromecast. A dongle and a controller.

 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, BloodyHell said:

I mean, its true. Current GP streaming is already using Series X hardware. The Series S streams perfectly well.

 

We might get a mid generation update, but this is probably the very last MS console. We're very close to moving beyond the need for console hardware. By next Christmas, maybe xmas 2023, most "X Box's" sold will probably be a akin to chromecast. A dongle and a controller.

 

There is good reason to assume MS will continue making consoles. I do think we are quickly approaching the end of the discreet generations in consoles for MS and new hardware will replace older hardware of the shelves, and the way older hardware will continue accessing new content will be via xCloud.

 

xCloud in its current state is not a replacement for dedicated hardware though.

[Spork3245]

47 minutes ago, Chris- said:

No need or desire for a disc drive, and I’m still rocking a Panny plasma so the native 4K output is irrelevant (and even if I did have a 4K TV, I’m not enough of a videophile that upscaled 4K would bother me). So there is basically no reason for me to get an X. 

The X adds more than resolution.

[stepee]

S is already running some stuff at 900p, it’s not even suited for the plasma. :P

[stepee]

Also everyone shut up for a second I want to hear what mother fucking @TomCat has to say about all this.

[Paperclyp]

1 hour ago, sblfilms said:

 

Windows GP and Xbox GP have different content, so I see no reason to presume that PS GP must have the same content. And why would the inclusion on a theoretical PS GP affect the revenue share they get from micro transactions that occur on their platform? If users are buying content through the PS store interface, Sony is going to get their piece.

I never presumed they will have the same content, just stated fact that many of the games - both on PC and the Xbox - contain a multitude of titles from non-MS owned third parties. If Sony would want to chip down the number of available titles on their version it would just be another barrier to the deal getting done. 

 

As for your second piece, that's where it gets legally and probably mechanically extremely complicated. Can you set it up to buy a DLC for a game on GP? Maybe. But strictly thinking of like Call of Duty DLC or skins or whatever, I don't even know how that would look. Maybe MS only allows you to buy skins / DLC for its GP games through its own stores. That's where this battle is going to be held. 

 

Sure maybe it all plays nice and it's a nice simple thing. Seems like you guys are thinking so. I have my doubts. 

[Chris-]

1 hour ago, Spork3245 said:

The X adds more than resolution.

I have not read about any difference between them that really makes me feel compelled to buy the X instead. If there is a compelling reason then ok, I’m willing to consider it, but if there is then you’ve done absolutely nothing to actually explain what it is. 

[Spork3245]

13 minutes ago, Chris- said:

I have not read about any difference between them that really makes me feel compelled to buy the X instead. If there is a compelling reason then ok, I’m willing to consider it, but if there is then you’ve done absolutely nothing to actually explain what it is. 

I have no idea what research you’ve done nor am I compelled to sell you an X over an S as your decision does not affect me. What an odd reply lol. If you’d like to know the difference, then ask, and I’d be happy to offer examples. The X offers better graphics over the S as well as better framerates, the graphical differences are in the actual detail levels and not just the resolution (think ultra settings vs medium settings on a PC); for example, in Forza Horizon on the S you can choose fidelity or performance, things like volumetric smoke/dirt, reflections, detail level of the environment, etc are reduced in performance mode to achieve 60fps, or you can run it in full detail in fidelity mode at 30fps - on the X it is in the fidelity mode and at 60fps, AND is rendered at a higher resolution on top of this. This is roughly the same on Halo Infinite. Also, your TV resolution doesn’t matter as the games are still rendered at whatever they’re rendered at and are then downsampled for your TV if it’s not 4k.

[Guest]

 

24 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

I never presumed they will have the same content, just stated fact that many of the games - both on PC and the Xbox - contain a multitude of titles from non-MS owned third parties. If Sony would want to chip down the number of available titles on their version it would just be another barrier to the deal getting done. 

I would guess the long range vision for GamePass is almost exclusively MS Studios titles on all platforms. In the same way that the video streamers have all realized the only viable path forward is growing your own content library, I think MS fully realizes that the way forward for GP is to continue growing their own portfolio of content so there is great new titles showing up on the service regularly. That is much more difficult to sustain if they are also paying other publishers for their content.

 

But I admit that is more speculative on my part.

 

24 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

As for your second piece, that's where it gets legally and probably mechanically extremely complicated. Can you set it up to buy a DLC for a game on GP? Maybe. But strictly thinking of like Call of Duty DLC or skins or whatever, I don't even know how that would look. Maybe MS only allows you to buy skins / DLC for its GP games through its own stores. That's where this battle is going to be held. 

 

Sure maybe it all plays nice and it's a nice simple thing. Seems like you guys are thinking so. I have my doubts. 

There is nothing different when you buy content in a game via a GP sub vs buying content in a game as a full purchase. In fact, if you buy content for a game while it is on GP and then later buy the game outright when it leaves GP, you still have all the content you purchased when you had the title as part of GP.

 

There is no reason to think games downloaded to a PlayStation as licensed through GP would operate differently for purposes of revenue sharing of micro transactions. 
 

As an example, micro transactions on EA games don’t work differently if you get the title from the PlayStation store or if you get it through EA play.

[Brian]

23 minutes ago, Chris- said:

I have not read about any difference between them that really makes me feel compelled to buy the X instead. If there is a compelling reason then ok, I’m willing to consider it, but if there is then you’ve done absolutely nothing to actually explain what it is. 

I would get the X for 1TB storage since the propriety storage from Microsoft is stupid expensive 

[Paperclyp]

11 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

 

I would guess the long range vision for GamePass is almost exclusively MS Studios titles on all platforms. In the same way that the video streamers have all realized the only viable path forward is growing your own content library, I think MS fully realizes that the way forward for GP is to continue growing their own portfolio of content so there is great new titles showing up on the service regularly. That is much more difficult to sustain if they are also paying other publishers for their content.

 

But I admit that is more speculative on my part.

 

There is nothing different when you buy content in a game via a GP sub vs buying content in a game as a full purchase. In fact, if you buy content for a game while it is on GP and then later buy the game outright when it leaves GP, you still have all the content you purchased when you had the title as part of GP.

 

There is no reason to think games downloaded to a PlayStation as licensed through GP would operate differently for purposes of revenue sharing of micro transactions. 
 

As an example, micro transactions on EA games don’t work differently if you get the title from the PlayStation store or if you get it through EA play.

This is all well and good until you remember we are dealing with Sony, which has blocked cross play and compatibility cross platform specially because they wanted a higher cut than companies were willing to pay. 

[Paperclyp]

I’m sure most remember this leak

 

Leaked Court Documents Reveal How Much Sony Disliked Crossplay on PS4

GAMERANT.COM

---

According to a leaked court document from Epic Games, PlayStation firmly resisted crossplay back in 2018 despite softening its stance recently.

 

[Chris-]

8 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

I have no idea what research you’ve done nor am I compelled to sell you an X over an S as your decision does not affect me. What an odd reply lol. If you’d like to know the difference, then ask, and I’d be happy to offer examples.

 

Then why even ask me to begin with? I would not like to know, this conservation only started because you asked.