Support NeoGAF

[Eddie-Griffin]

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/mi...g-the-company-doesnt-make-any-must-have-games

“Specifically, with respect to Activision Blizzard video games, there is nothing unique about the video games developed and published by Activision Blizzard that is a ‘must have’ for rival PC and console video game distributors that could give rise to a foreclosure concern,” read Microsoft’s response to the New Zealand Commerce Commission, published in a report from June. That means that Microsoft don’t consider their future ownership of Activision Blizzard’s franchises such as Call Of Duty to cause issues that would prevent their rivals – among whom they identify Valve in the PC space – from competing against them.

Bear in mind that Call Of Duty alone has raked in $27 billion (£22 billion) for Activision Blizzard since the series debuted in 2003, as an earnings call revealed last year. At the time of that call, the company’s Chief Operating Officer Daniel Alegre said Call Of Duty was “one of the most successful entertainment franchises of all time”.

This contradicts the theory that Microsoft will be open with Activisions games on other platforms outside of contracts. If Microsoft believes that, or is saying they believe Activision doesn't make "must have" games, that excuse would only really make sense if they wanted to try and address the concern that several of those games may become console exclusive. I can't see any other case where they would use wording that specific.

I assume that is regulators biggest concern, and Microsoft is trying to downplay them with this statement.

To be fair to Microsoft, on the Activision end at least, COD would be the only point of concern regarding this issue these days. So if they can get around regulators concern for this one series, they can probably get this deal done by August or September without having to convince regulators about Blizzards stuff. That could be advantageous given the rather dry holiday lineup this year.

 

[BlakeofT]

Are they wrong?

 

[Kagey K]

I'll just quote myself from the other thread.

Nintendo can be used as a clear example of that point.

They don't have CoD on thier system and are doing well, therefore CoD is not a must have for your business to survive.

It's the difference between "wants" and "needs."

 

[ManaByte]

In 30 years when all that's left is Fornite on Meta VR and all franchises are part of that game, people will look back and laugh at people shitting their diapers about an ancient franchise once known as "Call of Duty" not being on a specific game console.

 

[saturnalian]

Edit, wrong quote

 

[a multicultural team of v]

Sony: the world is ending if Microsoft buys Activision because nobody else is as good as them
Microsoft: Activision is complete trash with nothing worth owning, who would even want to buy them? (please let us buy them)

NeoGAF lawyers.gif

 

[Abriael_GN]

1: it's accurate
2: It contradicts nothing. It's simply meaningless legalese in real-world terms. It's funny that people read something actually relevant into this in term of plans for the actual games. Quasi-legal proceedings aren't gaming announcements. All the first-parties are doing here is trying to make the case look as good as possible in their favor. No more. No less.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

It seems MS is "scared" as well. .

 

[Elios83]

Sony: No one can make something like COD, the deal is concerning!

Microsoft: This publisher has never made anything unique or must have and we want to spend 70 billions on it for...reasons

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Sony: No one can make something like COD, the deal is concerning!

Microsoft: This publisher has never made anything unique or must have and we want to spend 70 billions on it for...reasons

Yep. They are acting like "us".

 

[BennyBlanco]

If MS really considers Valve their rival in the PC space, why do they put all their games on Steam?

 

[Little Chicken]

This is response to Sony, who have been very vocal about this acquisition from the moment it was announced. I'd imagine they're still freaking out that one platform will have all future Activision/Blizzard games for "free" via Game Pass and the other will have Destruction AllStars.

 

[elliot5]

Critical thinking MIA eh

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

This is response to Sony, who have been very vocal about this acquisition from the moment it was announced. I'd imagine they're still freaking out that one platform will have all future Activision/Blizzard games for "free" via Game Pass and the other will have Destruction AllStars.

Well. Nothing of value will be lost. Accordingly to MS

 

[a multicultural team of v]

Sony: No one can make something like COD, the deal is concerning!

Microsoft: This publisher has never made anything unique or must have and we want to spend 70 billions on it for...reasons

 

[mansoor1980]

when phil preaches , you listen

 

[Aenima]

I do agree with Microsoft on this one. Cant remember the last time i played a game from activision.

 

[Ezekiel_]

"There is nothing unique about the video games developed and published by Activision Blizzard"

Put that on the box

 

[saturnalian]

Edit, wrong quote

 

[Yoboman]

Lmao the people in this thread trying to justify such a silly statement in this thread like they are a lawyer presenting a closing argument to the FTC

 

[Topher]

"There is nothing unique about the video games developed and published by Activision Blizzard"

Put that on the box

 

[RoboFu]

It’s kind of true.

Activision has a lot of worth in merchandising and IP licensing for such.
Space invaders, pitfall, asteroids.

 

[Abriael_GN]

Lmao the people in this thread trying to justify such a silly statement

Since you say it's a silly statement, would you care to name something "unique" about Actiblizzard's games?

 

[Slicker than your average]

Buying cod and sticking it on gamepass and keeping it exclusive doesn't make that much sense financially.
Cod rakes it over one billion maybe two annually from game sales alone that's before dlc and mtx.
Buy the time Xbox can keep it exclusive gamepass will probably have achieved its critical mass.

 

[ManaByte]

"There is nothing unique about the video games developed and published by Activision Blizzard"

Put that on the box

List of first-person shooters - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Yoboman]

Since you say it's a silly statement, would you care to name something "unique" about Actiblizzard's games?

Selling 10-20 million COD copies a year for the past 15 years is pretty unique

 

[Abriael_GN]

Selling 10-20 million COD copies a year for the past 15 years is pretty unique

Popularity isn't unique. Try again.

 

[Little Mac]

Activision doesn't do anything other AAA developers can't do themselves. It's like Sony is saying that only Activision can make a modern FPS and no other developer can. Meanwhile Sony buys Bungie who made Halo and Destiny?

 

[MrTroubleMaker]

Their not wrong, I haven't bought a game from that pub in years.

 

[rodrigolfp]

They are not wrong. No game ever is "must have".

 

[ANDS]

I'll just quote myself from the other thread.

Nintendo can be used as a clear example of that point.

They don't have CoD on thier system and are doing well, therefore CoD is not a must have for your business to survive.

It's the difference between "wants" and "needs."

COD was never on a NINTENDO console.

 

[ReBurn]

I mean, Activision doesn't factor into my buying decisions at all. Maybe MS has a point.

MS, why you spending so much money anyway?

 

[rodrigolfp]

COD was never on a NINTENDO console.

Wrong.

 

[remember_spinal]

simply two major corporate entities playing poker with the regulators

one is trying to convince you their hand is bad and the other trying to convince you its good

 

[Unknown?]

Hopefully the military industrial complex gives COD license to someone else like Marvel did with Spider-Man.

 

[Sosokrates]

It's funny that Microsoft and Sony are kinda saying the opposite things.

 

[Ghost of Caelid]

No one really has a must have game...seems like an excuse any company can use. Unless the game is literally feeding you its not must have.

 

[Jaybe]

MS just wants this deal to get done with as little restrictions as possible for any future decisions. It is all legal manoeuvring. MS may still keep it on PS, but want that to be wholly at MS’ discretion. I think it goes through with no restrictions aside from honouring existing contracts. Shame to see such a badly managed company as ABK get such an easy out but it is what it is.

 

[ANDS]

Wrong.

Cool. Let me be very specific then for the pedantic among you: COD as an annualized, largely multiplayer focused game largely advertised and pushed through advertising deals with their console partners has never been on a Nintendo console; but sure you can play a COD on a Wii U if you really, really want to.

 

[saturnalian]

Edit, wrong quote

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Can you put one that says:

Video game forum expert analyst

 

[rodrigolfp]

Cool. Let me be very specific then for the pedantic among you: COD as an annualized, largely multiplayer focused game largely advertised and pushed through advertising deals with their console partners has never been on a Nintendo console; but sure you can play a COD on a Wii U if you really, really want to.

And CoD 4 on Wii. Interesting gunplay on wiimote. Not that shitty aim assisted/semi aimbot CoD on other consoles.

 

[Kagey K]

No one really has a must have game...seems like an excuse any company can use. Unless the game is literally feeding you its not must have.

I would say that the must have wouldn't be for any games, but would apply more to proprietary tech.

Like for example if someone tried to buy Epic and competitors feared that the company would stop licensing Unreal Engine to them., or make it costly prohibitive.

Activision owns nothing like that.

 

[remember_spinal]

center right is definitely adamsapple looking soy af

 

[PendekarRajawali]

COD was never on a NINTENDO console.

Teenager.

 

[Fbh]

I guess in legal terms this could be true. There's plenty of other multiplayer first person shooters on the market, the only remarkable thing about COD is how popular it is.

But it's funny seeing MS trying to lower the profile of Activision while Sony is doing the exact opposite

 

[Stuart360]

If MS really considers Valve their rival in the PC space, why do they put all their games on Steam?

Where have they ever said Valve is a rival?, they have been bussom buddies for years. And they put their games on Steam because 'thats where PC gamers want their games' as quoted by Phil.

As for the topic, it doesnt sound good for COD on other systems is this deal goes through.

 

[ManaByte]

COD was never on a NINTENDO console.

 

[K2D]

Microsoft: We're gonna buy the rights to bread! Nobody "needs" bread..!

(But you're going to buy it, you dirty, filthy you..!)

 

[Ozzie666]

According to this thread and public opinion anything from Blizzard is trash. Call of Duty sells well, but it's not for everyone and eventually it will fall off a cliff. Tons of shooters out there and options and games and store fronts. None of that success is guaranteed, just looked at Battlefront. One bad release/step and boom. Just let the sale go through.