• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Microsoft CEO Nadella: "Our entire goal is to bring more options for gamers to be able to play, and for publishers to have more competition."

Eddie-Griffin

Eddie-Griffin

Banned
Video link: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mar...y-microsoft-ceo-says/vi-AA14f8lz?category=for

New interview with Microsoft CEO Saiyan Nabella with CNBC's Tanvir Gill a few hours ago
www.cnbc.com

Microsoft wants to create more competition among game publishers, CEO Satya Nadella says

Microsoft's Satya Nadella says the tech giant wants to create more competition among game publishers, with its proposed offer to buy Activision Blizzard.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com
“Our entire goal is to bring more options for gamers to be able to play [on every platform] and for publishers to have more competition,” Nadella, chairman and CEO of Microsoft, told CNBC’s Tanvir Gill in an interview Thursday.

“Like all large deals, I think regulators should scrutinize them,” Nadella added, when asked how he feels about the EU probe.

When asked about what Microsoft’s ultimate ambition is in the gaming business, Nadella said: “Microsoft isn’t a conglomerate, I want to be very clear. It’s not about sort of gaming here and productivity here.”

“The fundamental thesis for us is: what is the core technology that we build, that allows us to be in these different businesses while doing things that are valuable for customers? What can Microsoft uniquely do for gamers and game publishers? I believe there is plenty we can do,” he added.
Click to expand...
“With gaming, for example, for us, it’s a streaming workload. It helps us build the right cloud infrastructure. Think about artificial intelligence, these AI-generated models, differently and how they can be used in both creation and testing of games,” said Nadella.

When asked about the next step if the Activision Blizzard deal doesn’t happen, Nadella said: “We have been in gaming for decades. We will be in gaming going forward.”
Click to expand...

Nadella has not only addressed concerns that Xbox isn't all in on gaming, but they will continue even if the deal fails.

He also says that the deal with Activision is part of his vision of wanting to help facilitate the rise in competition between game publishers.

When I read him ask "What can Microsoft uniquely do for gamers" the first thing I though of was' release games' but I guess that would be anti-competitive, and this acquisition is actually pro-competitive and I have this backwards.

I also noticed that he doesn't go into detail on the "plenty we can do" part but I guess he doesn't want to give more ammunition to EU regulators.
 
Last edited:
feynoob

feynoob

Gold Member
typical PR words.

Bored Episode 15 GIF by The Simpsons
 
Jennings

Jennings

Member
remember_spinal said:
How does buying activision create more competition amongst publishers? They are just saying words
Click to expand...
Call of Duty needs a genuine competitor. If it's unavailable on Playstation then Sony will be inclined to develop this much needed competition in order to serve their players, and all players the world overwill be rewarded with the power of even more choice.
 
Last edited:
remember_spinal

remember_spinal

Banned
Jennings said:
Call of Duty needs a genuine competitor. If it's unavailable on Playstation then Sony will be inclined to develop this much needed competition in order to serve their players, and all players the world overwill be rewarded with the power of even more choice.
Click to expand...

Sony is already developing their own multiplayer games and thats been in the works before the acquisition happened, hence them signing the deviation, Firewalk, and negotiating with Bungie since early last year.

Also, if Microsoft don’t plan to make CoD exclusive that makes even less sense. Sony are the ones creating competition by funding new studios making games. Buying pre-existing studios doesnt contribute anything to the industry
 
Last edited:
The_Mike

The_Mike

I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Eddie-Griffin said:
When I read him ask "What can Microsoft uniquely do for gamers" the first thing I though of was' release games' but I guess that would be anti-competitive, and this acquisition is actually pro-competitive and I have this backwards.
Click to expand...
Happy You Good GIF
 
E

Elios83

Member
ikbalCO said:
Is this thw first time they acknowledge there may be a possibilty that the deal wont go through?

Before this it was, we are confident etc.
Click to expand...
Yes and it's the only thing that stands out in the whole bunch of empty PR words.
The scenario that the deal will pass without any restriction has become quite unlikely and that's clearly not what they expected.
Now the most likely scenario is that the deal will pass with some formal compromises they will have to commit to.
Something concrete and legally binding, not Spencer's words.
The other option that I see less likely is that they don't see the value in spending 70 billions if they can't do whatever they want and in this case they'll risk the everything or nothing with regulators.
 
ikbalCO

ikbalCO

Member
Elios83 said:
Yes and it's the only thing that stands out in the whole bunch of empty PR words.
The scenario that the deal will pass without any restriction has become quite unlikely and that's clearly not what they expected.
Now the most likely scenario is that the deal will pass with some formal compromises they will have to commit to.
Something concrete and legally binding, not Spencer's words.
The other option that I see less likely is that they don't see the value in spending 70 billions if they can't do whatever they want and in this case they'll risk the everything or nothing with regulators.
Click to expand...
Right?

Amongst all the PR shenanegans answering the question if not? with, we'll still be in business, is very telling of the situation.

Again, i still believe that it will go through. I mean i thought disney fox merger wouldnt go through and now simpsons is a disney property but seeing how su companies fumble with actual regulatory bodies overseas is actually quite fun. Lobbying is a disase that needs to be delt with in the us.

I dont know if there is any relations with it but after the whole uefa/fifa -qatar scandal and how much shit came up with that, i guess regulatory bodies in eu and uk are much aware of the public percrption on the process of these kind of deals.
 
feynoob

feynoob

Gold Member
ikbalCO said:
No, it is the only part that isnt PR. It is the part where he says, ok we are ready to bend over for this to go through
Click to expand...
Not really. This just them highlighting their support for the brand. Its why I said very PR. Its targeted towards shareholders.
 
ikbalCO

ikbalCO

Member
feynoob said:
Not really. This just them highlighting their support for the brand. Its why I said very PR. Its targeted towards shareholders.
Click to expand...
Bro, MS is a trillion dolar company. What brand? When a company is that big, boards dont care about brands. They dont care about names or goodwill. They only look at the numbers and move on.

Xbox is not a sinking ship. I am pretty sure it is quite profitable. But when compare to revenue stream from azure and windows, i am pretty sure the board is lmaoing the xbox revenue.

I may be the only person in this forum that pays full price monthly to gamepass. I love that service. It is great. But for gamepass to work it needs constant content. Like netflix disney plus etc. If not, it is unsustainable. Because you can not keep dropping money on 3rd partys pockets. You just cant.

After all that investment and acquisitions, gamepass only has 25 mill subs. Which is 10 mill below probably one of the worst subscription models, nintendo online and nearly half of ps plus. And can you say sony and nintendo invest the same amount on their subscriptipn systems? I am certain nintendo probably spend %1 of what MS is spending on gamepass. PS may be half of it. After sometime shareholders would like to see some return from their investments and unfortunately, gamepass growth has slowed down signficantly. Because there arent many xboxes out there and noone cares about cloud gaming.

CoD is a mutli billion dolar revenue franchise every year and I guess nobody understand how desparetly MS need Activision as a infinite source of content every year. Because their bet on bethesda didnt pay out since bathesda is lazy af.

So no. Its not about the brand. Its not about the support. Its them, needing quality content on Gamepass right now.
 
Last edited:
feynoob

feynoob

Gold Member
ikbalCO said:
Bro, MS is a trillion dolar company. What brand? When a company is that big, boards dont care about brands. They dont care about names or goodwill. They only look at the numbers and move on.

Xbox is not a sinking ship. I am pretty sure it is quite profitable. But when compare to revenue stream from azure and windows, i am pretty sure the board is lmaoing the xbox revenue.

I may be the only person in this forum that pays full price monthly to gamepass. I love that service. It is great. But for gamepass to work it needs constant content. Like netflix disney plus etc. If not, it is unsustainable. Because you can not keep dropping money on 3rd partys pockets. You just cant.

After all that investment and acquisitions, gamepass only has 25 mill subs. Which is 10 mill below probably one of the worst subscription models, nintendo online and nearly half of ps plus. And can you say sony and nintendo invest the same amount on their subscriptipn systems? I am certain nintendo probably spend %1 of what MS is spending on gamepass. PS may be half of it. After sometime shareholders would like to see some return from their investments and unfortunately, gamepass growth has slowed down signficantly. Because there arent many xboxes out there and noone cares about cloud gaming.

CoD is a mutli billion dolar revenue franchise every year and I guess nobody understand how desparetly MS need Activision as a infinite source of content every year. Because their bet on bethesda didnt pay out since bathesda is lazy af.

So no. Its not about the brand. Its not about the support. Its them, needing quality content on Gamepass right now.
Click to expand...
MS is investing on Xbox, by expanding it. Shareholders wants to see a progress. MS is talking to them, that they are going to stay, and increase their investment in this space.
Recent moves, such as gamepass, xcloud for cloud gaming, and now the mobile investment.

MS is thinking about the future, and how to capitalize on those gamers. Current situation doesn't matter, as that can be fixed by money. What matter is the future for their business.

Look at the current gaming trend. Your typical normal games are dying slowly, in favor of those money making games, like live service or f2p games.
 
D

Drewpee

Banned
Elios83 said:
Yes and it's the only thing that stands out in the whole bunch of empty PR words.
Click to expand...
Of course that is the only part that stands out lol everything else being said by Phil and this guy mean nothing.

The part where they comment on what happens when/if Sony fanboys get what they want, now that is notable and worth considering. I literally laughed out loud to myself when I read your comment lmao
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Poll
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT|
|OT| 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102
55K
2M
DeepEnigma replied
EA CEO Andrew Wilson is ‘indifferent’ on Microsoft’s Activision deal, claims EA ‘will still be the number one Xbox publisher’
Opinion Business Game Dev
12
741
GHG replied
Microsoft / Activision deal prevented to protect innovation and choice in cloud gaming
News 54 55 56 57 58
3K
131K
Astray replied
In defense of Phil Spencer - he is not the problem with Xbox
Opinion Business Cringe 2 3 4
181
8K
Radical Dreamer replied
  • Locked
Sony calls UK regulator’s reversed stance on the Microsoft Activision deal ‘surprising and irrational’
10
2K
KuraiShidosha replied
Top Bottom