Microsoft acquired Activision Blizzard King for $69 Billion on 2023-10-13

[Silent_Buddha]

When you make such a deal you are immediately signaling that you are planning to make these franchises full exclusive

Yeesh.

Phil says it makes no economic sense for MS to not have COD on PS. That must mean they want to make it exclusive.

Phil, "Arrrgh, here let's make it more clear. We'll put in writing that we'll guarantee that it's on PS for at least 10 years because we're not sure we'll even be making COD more than 10 years from now." That must mean MS want to make it exclusive.

Hypothetical Phil in the future. "We'll bow down to our Sony overlords and ensure everything that MS makes will always be on PS." That must mean MS want to make it exclusive...

Regards,
SB

 

[eastmen]

Who said there was any payment involved???

I don't even understand what they are trying to say. Does that person think Activision puts COD on playstation for free and sony gets to sell it and keep all the money ?

What is even going on in this thread anymore.

 

[Nesh]

Neither MS nor Sony are looking into the short term as you guys are looking at it. 10 years seems like a lot to you, but its not. Both companies are looking much further into the future than that.
The deal itself is telling Sony into agreeing to not having COD on their platform after the specified period ends and thats why Sony is wary and not commenting on it.
If Sony agrees with it, they are losing any potential future case and greenlits the acquisition in the present.
The devil is in the detail as well as other details that we are not even aware of which may include other catches.

 

[eastmen]

Neither MS nor Sony are looking into the short term as you guys are looking at it. 10 years seems like a lot to you, but its not. Both companies are looking much further into the future than that.
The deal itself is telling Sony into agreeing to not having COD on their platform after that period ends and thats why Sony is wary and not commenting on it.
The devil is in the detail as well as other details that we are not even aware of which may include other catches.

10 years is a very long time. COD itself first released in 2003. So MS is willing to commit to releasing it for what will be a third of its life span when the contract ends. That is a very long time. Who knows if COD will even be relevant in 10 years.

I mean if you really want to get into the weeds the first call of duty wasn't released untill 2006 on the ps3. So a 10 year contract is a very long time for a game that wasn't even on sony platforms 17 years ago.

edit * also we don't know if its 10 + the current 3 year contract that is apparently still in effect. So that can be 13 years of COD on playstation platforms. That could be enough to enter what would be a ps7 generation with cod . Honestly can't see anyone seriously saying that isn't a long time. Ps4 released Nov 2013 so its only 9 years old. Ps5 is already 2 years old. So you'd easily get deep into ps6's generation

 

[Nesh]

10 years is a very long time. COD itself first released in 2003. So MS is willing to commit to releasing it for what will be a third of its life span when the contract ends. That is a very long time. Who knows if COD will even be relevant in 10 years.

I mean if you really want to get into the weeds the first call of duty wasn't released untill 2006 on the ps3. So a 10 year contract is a very long time for a game that wasn't even on sony platforms 17 years ago.

How you perceive and interpret time is solely your opinion.

 

[Cynicalking]

Of course it's all in the details. Phill said "PlayStation" so he clearly means the original PSOne. Take that, Jimbo!

 

[Nesh]

Deals specify starting and ending dates.

 

[eastmen]

How you perceive and interpret time is solely your opinion.

So what is a long time to you ? 20 years ? 28 years ? Hell 28 years is the total amount of time the playstation has existed in the market. what 40 years ? Now we are the total amount of time Nintendo has been in the market ? 47 years ? Now we are the total age of home video games.

Which one of those do you think is a long enough time ? Think 40 years is enough for the CMA to be happy the game will be on their playstation ?

 

[Nesh]

So what is a long time to you ? 20 years ? 28 years ? Hell 28 years is the total amount of time the playstation has existed in the market. what 40 years ? Now we are the total amount of time Nintendo has been in the market ? 47 years ? Now we are the total age of home video games.

Which one of those do you think is a long enough time ? Think 40 years is enough for the CMA to be happy the game will be on their playstation ?

What is long for me is irrelevant.

 

[Deleted member 2197]

So what is a long time to you ? 20 years ? 28 years ? Hell 28 years is the total amount of time the playstation has existed in the market. what 40 years ? Now we are the total amount of time Nintendo has been in the market ? 47 years ? Now we are the total age of home video games.

Which one of those do you think is a long enough time ? Think 40 years is enough for the CMA to be happy the game will be on their playstation ?

Instead of stating time in years why not just say availability on PS for the life of the game? EOL on will happen at the same time on all consoles.

 

[BRiT]

Instead of stating time in years why not just say availability on PS for the life of the game? EOL on will happen at the same time on all consoles.

Because it's unheard of to even have contracts beyond 3 years. Why is it needed?

 

[iroboto]

 

[eastmen]

Instead of stating time in years why not just say availability on PS for the life of the game? EOL on will happen at the same time on all consoles.

What game ? COD is a new yearly game each year. What if MS doesn't doesn't ship a cod for a year on ps5 or xbox but does on switch 2 ? Legal trouble there ?

What if they just stop calling it COD and call it Modern warfare. Then can MS only release on xbox ?


I will state this again. Contracts are for a finite amount of time because dynamics change. In this example if activision stays independent and cod suddenly drops off in 5 years would sony want to give the same % per sale that COD commanded in its heyday ? If COD starts pulling in double the numbers wouldn't activision want to go and get sony to lower the % of sony's take on all micro transactions and game sales ? Wouldn't activision want to go back and say hey we doubled our sales the marketing campain , we want you to kick in more money for that.

That is how contracts work. MS offering a 10 year contract that would fix COD to whatever the current terms is a really generous offer and I have never really heard game contracts going that far out. It's going to be really tough for Sony in terms of these regulators after this (aside from CMA who want games on their playstation) When the USA brings up COD MS will say we offered an unheard of 10 year contract with Sony to keep call of duty on the playstation platform. When EU goes for second round they will hear the same. When they go to sony and ask why they denying the contract ... well i'd love to be a fly on that wall. What will they say oh we can't use out dominate market position to get lucrative beta, early access and content packs for the game if MS owns it ?

 

[Johnny Awesome]

Sony were fools for making it all about COD.

 

[Deleted member 2197]

Because it's unheard of to even have contracts beyond 3 years. Why is it needed?

So what happens if I bought the game and want to play beyond 3 years? Why bother even purchasing any game for PS if only MS consoles allow playing the game well beyond that time period?

BTW ... I enjoy finding time to play an occasional Daggerfall or Skyrim session on my PC sans contract worries.

 

[Malo]

So what happens if I bought the game and want to play beyond 3 years? Why bother even purchasing any game for PS if only MS consoles allow playing the game well beyond that time period?

Neither Activision nor Sony want you to be playing any CoD beyond 1 year anyway... and that's not going to change after MS buy ABK. You're meant to keep buying the next iteration and spend your savings on battle packs.

 

[BRiT]

So what happens if I bought the game and want to play beyond 3 years?

This isn't about keeping existing COD games on the platform. This is about releasing NEW COD games on the platform.

Phil already indicated publicly that they have no intentions of removing any released games off existing platforms.

 

[eastmen]

So what happens if I bought the game and want to play beyond 3 years? Why bother even purchasing any game for PS if only MS consoles allow playing the game well beyond that time period?

BTW ... I enjoy finding time to play an occasional Daggerfall or Skyrim session on my PC sans contract worries.

This isn't about keeping existing COD games on the platform. This is about releasing NEW COD games on the platform.

Phil already indicated publicly that they have no intentions of removing any released games off existing platforms.

Yes this is about new games as Brit says. Sony is trying to position it so that every cod is on playstation and likely they want to continue to enjoy exclusive betas , early starts and content over competitors for one of the most popular shooters out there

Sony cares less if COD 2020 stays on the PS5 and cares more that COD 2025 comes to the ps5 and has a beta for it and has early play weekend and early map packs and whatever. Basicly Sony is afraid that MS will start to do what Sony is doing. You know like buying marketing rights for the new harry potter game and keeping exclusive missions and content away from everyone but playstation buyers

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I'm glad he pointed out 2 key things that in the US may be different from other countries.

First, the FTC does not hold any jurisdiction over whether a deal like this can go through. That is a power that the judiciary in the US holds. They can attempt to sue a company in order to gain an injunction against a deal, but they have to prove that it is harmful to consumers under the Clayton/Sherman act.

That second is the other important thing. The only thing that truly matters in the US about whether a court would find a deal is illegal and thus can be blocked is if it can be proved that said deal would actually be harmful to consumers. NOTE - it does not matter if it is harmful to a rival corporation if it is not harmful to consumers. That also doesn't mean that the impact to rival corporations isn't taken into account in any court case brought by the FTC attempting to block a deal. But it has to be shown that harm to that rival corporation would result in harm to consumers. If that cannot be shown beyond a shadow of a doubt then it is not something that would impede a deal going through.

Unlike some countries consumer benefit/harm is the most important thing to look at with regards to any deal going through.

Now, companies will attempt to comply with FTC rulings in an attempt to avoid it going to court as going to court is costly. But it isn't uncommon for the FTC to rule against a merger/deal but then fail in a court of law to prove that it is harmful to consumers. Then end result is that those deals would then go through as negotiated prior to the FTC looking into it.

Regards,
SB

 

[stu11]

10 years is a very long time. COD itself first released in 2003. So MS is willing to commit to releasing it for what will be a third of its life span when the contract ends. That is a very long time. Who knows if COD will even be relevant in 10 years.

I mean if you really want to get into the weeds the first call of duty wasn't released untill 2006 on the ps3. So a 10 year contract is a very long time for a game that wasn't even on sony platforms 17 years ago.

edit * also we don't know if its 10 + the current 3 year contract that is apparently still in effect. So that can be 13 years of COD on playstation platforms. That could be enough to enter what would be a ps7 generation with cod . Honestly can't see anyone seriously saying that isn't a long time. Ps4 released Nov 2013 so its only 9 years old. Ps5 is already 2 years old. So you'd easily get deep into ps6's generation

I guess Call of Duty : Finest Hour (released in 2004) and Call of Duty 2: Big Red One (released in 1005) don't count then? Both were released on PS2/Gamecube/Xbox

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_of_Duty:_Finest_Hour