Microsoft Signs Another 10-Year Deal In Its Bid To Buy Activision Blizzard

So, Xbox games can soon be played on literally any device/platform......except the Playstation. Lol.

@BrilliantBill Better than going to PlayStation 😂

@Kaloudz If they say 'when', it's implying that they think the deal will close imminently. Notice the recent announcement Diablo 4 won't be Day 1 on Game Pass.

ABK can't guarantee anything YET. Microsoft can't guarantee anything YET. The FTC and EU regulators could be in a protracted legal battle with Sony and the CMA, or it could close around late April to early May.

I personally hope Sony just holds their hands up and accepts it, rather than using what regulators it's bought to keep it going until the Playstation 6 and XBOX Cloud.

Sorry if I am repeating something that was already on the article but my understanding is this service is similar to NVidia's, where you still need to own the game and get to install and run it remotely on a "rented server."

I am not shocked that they would allow any such service on board going forward, but I will be shocked if they line up a deal with Amazon to allow games bought from the Microsoft store to run inside of Luna, as that is a much more unique streaming service.

@ActionPanther deal or no deal, xbox will continue to ship CoD to PlayStation consoles, Sony is at no risk of losing access to CoD.

@themightyant there is one thing that might go off the table post-acquisition: PlayStation Extra addition terms might end up being way less favorable post-acquisition.

I am aware right now Sony does not consider the terms favorable, but we know its less than the cost of membership and they could opt to only add it to the premium tier, or why not, an even higher price tier that actually costs $180 a year.

@themightyant honestly, other than the proposals already on the table (including an independent monitor paid for by Microsoft) I can’t see regulatory agencies adding any additional concessions.

@themightyant I have some predictions 1) deal goes through 2) Sony tries to buy up more companies 3) Microsoft buys more companies 4) gamers get better service but games are more exclusive than ever

I knew CoD was big but I never realized how big it was till this acquisition started. All this fighting over this one series. There’s so many games between Activision, Blizzard, and King, but the focus is on CoD. Makes me wonder after the deal closes (which I think is going to happen) if porting the game to all these different devices is going to effect the game at all? I don’t play CoD but will it affect its performance and yearly time schedule? I’m not knocking the deal or anything. I’m just curious because of all the crunch they do over there already. Now it’s adding more on their plates.

@themightyant Oh dear, Sony had a massive drop in their share price... It's what's known as 'speculative trading'.

One of the things Sony has done by throwing shade on the deal is drop the value of ABK. They would adore it if ABK, all in, was barely worth 69 million, due to it's own legal issues and it's value tanking due to the failed acquisition.
Microsoft would have wasted billions on a worthless asset, and would waste even more recouping said losses, and that's if they don't step away because the value dropped below the value of the penalty clause.

And yes, Sony would swoop in and buy the flagging company, with the regulators not noticing since it's not a billion dollar acquisition, it's a fire sale.

@themightyant Microsoft could actually just put cod on ps and all the rest of the platforms have parity ..... We would have given u parity if u signed the deal , everyone else got something extra

@themightyant well said. Someone did research.

While MS are going on a deal signing spree Blaze/Evercade should try to get access to their back catalogue.

@Sebatrox @robe both good points, now is the time for those companies to get a good deal from Microsoft as it keeps everyone happy.

@Romans12 Minecraft, and COD will be on PS. Many others also, but maybe not everything new coming from the studios. Have to wait and see, they said case by case bases.

I can see cloud based game pass coming to probably Switch 2.
Or depending on the consoles power downloadable game pass titles.

@ActionPanther one of the things already on the table is a regulatory entity that will make sure Microsoft does not try to make CoD exclusive and keeps parity.

This deal going through relies heavily on Microsoft keeping their word. Although not much can be done after the fact, it would be corporate suicide to break their word, as it would likely result even on the smallest of acquisitions being blocked outright.

@Texel modern Microsoft is primarily a service company. Incentivizing those services is their #1 priority, therefore the line by Phil Spencer “ This is about delivering great exclusive games on platforms where Game Pass exists”.

CoD will continue to be everywhere, because not only is it too big, but also because of regulatory scrutiny, but don’t expect that goodwill to spread further than necessary.

It's pretty much a lock now that a 10 year guarantee is the only concession Sony is going to get.

@Moonglow I concur.

I'm curious as to what exactly is being offered in these 10 year deals. Are they committing to continuing with yearly releases for the next 10 years? Or in the highly unlikely event that CoD's popularity takes a nosedive within that time and is losing them money are they still required to ensure that CoD games release for the duration of the contract?

@themightyant Thank you for being maybe the only voice of reason on this whole site.
The idea that these regulatory bodies are somehow bought by Sony shows the level of disconnect between reality and the kind of statements regularly offered as 'astute observations' on this site. Buying up such a large slice of the market in one deal was always going to attract the attention of regulators, regardless of anything Sony said or didnt say.

@Kevw2006 they are just guarantees that any call of duty game that comes to xbox will also be available to these platforms during the 10 year span.

The deals are just optics because xbox has no interest in making it exclusive. They love the idea of making 70% of every sale of playstations best selling game and the prospect of nintendo's massive audience buying it. The deals are just a fake concession so regulators can say they did something. I would bet money that year 11 after the deal goes thru call of duty is still on these platforms.

@ActionPanther because regardless if Sony accepts or not, Microsoft is promising regulators they will keep making the game for PlayStation.

As others have said, Call of Duty will release on PS whether Sony agrees to the deal or not. I still expect total Parity of content too.

The ONLY thing that may change is the 'terms' of the agreement over time with Sony whereas the rest have a legal binding document with terms set out for the next ten years 'fixed' whereas MS won't have to offer the same terms over the duration for example. Sony would have to negotiate to put ANY game in PS+ and/or negotiate to get any other A/B game released which may have been 'guaranteed' if they signed.

Unless Sony really block MS from releasing games on their platform, I can't see MS NOT releasing what they 'want' to on their Platform as a Publisher - although could be awkward sending PS5 Pro/PS6 dev-kits to MS to ensure CoD is 'optimised' for those platforms in time... Sony want the 'Sales' revenue from 3rd Party Publishers on 'their' platform and certainly want 'CoD' on there - even if 20% leave, its still a LOT of Revenue for Sony regardless...

Great! Cloud based gaming have come very far the last year or so. Geforce Now Ultimate is amazing, I can play my own game in 4K with a latency that is lower than any console at the highest settings. Only shortcoming is the lack of games on this service and this is a nice step forward.

@Titntin What is meant by Sony 'buying' the regulators is that the CMA are practically copying Sony's rhetoric, declaring that the only way the deal will go through is with CoD taken off the table.

The FTC are dotting the I's and crossing the T's, by asking Sony to give 'confidental' information that is decisive towards their decision, while the EU are accepting the deal Microsoft have offered, for what's known as a behavioural remedy.

But the CMA want to drag it on past the FTC deadline, with them umm'ing and ahh'ing about it, while showing no regard for letting Microsoft have the behavioural remedies they offered.

And it's only the CMA who are making Microsoft bend over backwards. I could see the CMA's decision being that sale of Call Of Duty minimum is the only deal they'd accept, and potentially accept a very dubious under the table deal where Sony get first bid.

@ValentineMeikin I seriously doubt that if Call of Duty was taken off the cards and made to be sold off that Sony would be allowed to bid for it. If one isn't allowed to own it then neither should the other.

Yet again God Emperor of the Mankind Phil, opens Warp portal just for Jimbo can see smile on his face =]

@Microbius
Sony has zero incentive for the market to change. If you take the market definition of high powered consoles as the FTC is defining it, Sony holds a dominant position and that isn't going to change no matter what MS does.

If you were in Sony's shoes you would probably fight to keep things just as they are too.

Sony's case continues to get weaker and weaker. They proudly brag about how they're the dominant leader in sales, yet they continue to act like they wouldn't be able to compete, and are about to stand alone in opposition to this deal.

@NeoRatt ...and that is exactly why Sony's case should be dismissed.

Regulators are not supposed to be protecting the market leader, in fact their existence is supposed to accomplish the complete opposite of that.

@JayJ Not just dismissed, it shouldn't have got this far.

The regulators should have looked at it, looked at the market projections, and gone 'Yes, nothing wrong here' and not demanded Microsoft make 'concessions' and 'remedies' to suit Sony's demands, which Big Jim has outright admitted are 'Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to buy ABK...'

I almost feel like Sony aren't just saying they shouldn't be allowed to buy ABK, they're saying they shouldn't be allowed to buy anything else. That they shouldn't be having a steadily increasing stock price while Sony's stocks have been dropping like a rock.

But the solution is simple. Jim should get into a time machine, and had him tell his past self to keep his head down, let the acquisition go through, even make a big announcement confirming that Sony will continue to have Call Of Duty for years to come after a 'landmark deal' with Microsoft. Sony would recoup that $20 billion loss in days, and we'd not have weeks and weeks of discussions like this.

But no, Jim's put his foot in it, and is only just managing to get Sony's shareholders to have any trust in the company again.

If M$ has xbox, steam, Nintendo, cloud, Nvidia, epic store, mobile, etc. Do they still need Sony? if one year of CoD missed PS5 but was on everything else people who own a PS5 would just buy it someplace else. Not a lot of money would be lost as there are a million new doors that just opened.

Don’t forget Microsoft has pretty much ruined every studio that it has purchased or franchise. Rare, halo etc🙄

@Baler yeah, Rare and their ruined Sea of thieves game with 30 million players. Can you imagine if they were successful?!

@themightyant Sony lose $20 billion should mean nothing to regulators and shouldn't being even being taken in consideration. Regulators role is to protect consumers and the market in general not multi billion dollar profits of specific companies.

@eduscxbox I don’t think that’s true

@eduscxbox we’ll see won’t we.

@Baler You don't have to think it is true. It is a fact. Officially shared by Rare. Sea of Thieves has 30 million players. It's a fact. Do your search.

@themightyant Sony is not losing face only. They're creating trouble for PlayStation Players.

If this deal goes through and sony don't sign the deal, Microsoft will have no legal bind to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation.

Even if we think about the "bring games to more people" MS will still achieve this with Nintendo, GeForce and other services they're signing with, even without sony there will be more players playing COD. That means regulator will not have a reson to call MS out.

This would result in PlayStation players losing one of the most played games of the plataform. The deal guarantees this won't happen.

Microsoft offered 10 years with game at parity level (even sony doing the opposite today), they offered game on PS Plus subscription, they offered a undisclosed percentage profit over sales on PS. The only thing missing to offer is to make COD exclusive to PlayStation. There is nothing else Microsoft can offers them to make they accept the deal, as Jim Ryan himself stated he "only want to block the merger".

@eduscxbox 30 million will have played it but not bought it

@Baler sea of thieves is not a free game.

@themightyant if they block the merger and piss activision (which they did), it is certain Activision will not partner with Sony for exclusive content for a long time, as they also want the merger to go through.

Microsoft said they had no intention to remove call of duty of PlayStation, but that don't legally bind them. There is no contract. That would depend on the good faith of MS, and I think there is no good faith left considerind how hard sony is going against the merger.

What I would do differently is not place the future of my whole company in the hands of a third-party title. I would sing the deal and use those 10 years to turn my dormant FPS franchise into a game capable of compete with Call of Duty to the point my business could run well regardless of players that are out of my control.

Sony has lots of talented studios, and a huge amount of money they spend to take games out of xbox instead of investing in their first party to be less dependent of activision.

@eduscxbox it’s on gamepass ………

@themightyant If the deal is not signed, Microsoft might not remove COD from PlayStation right now, but they could do that at some point in the future. They will lay low, wait for all those stuff to calm down and slowly remove COD from PS.

Also, even if they don't, by not signing the deal Microsoft will most likely not add Call of Duty to PS Plus subscription, which will make Sony fear of COD Day 1 on game pass a reality, and they wouldn't be able to fight back.

Honestly, I think that have COD on PS Plus is a pretty good deal, and Sony might lose that as well.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it is easy to make a COD competitor, but I think sony can make a game capable of compete for what they need.

But I'm pretty sure a Killzone with campaign and good online multiplayer in the standards of COD with cross-play between PS5 and PC would at least offset some of the profit Sony will lose with Call of Duty, and if they keep the franchise running long enough it can even cover all the loss. You see, Sony money from Call of Duty is coming only from PS platform, if they had a first-party in the same way on PS and PC they could make this work, and that's a 100% share on PS as it is a first-party, only on PC they would have from 12%-30% cuts from stores.

@themightyant Most likely Microsoft offered a better deal for Sony to add Call of Duty on PS Plus than they would have received from other companies.

Sony can't afford to add COD to PS Plus becase it is a huge AAA, but Sony somehow can afford to acquire exclusivity of entire games from Square-Enix, such as FF7R, FFXVI and Forspoken. And square-enix is not the only company Sony acquire exclusive games from.

They don't need to make Killzone a annual game, They can make it live service (that is already on their plans, as sony want to make 10 live service games). And they don't have to worry about lottery, they own the masters of live service, creators of Destiny (and Halo, with makes them experts in both FPS and Live Service Games), they wouldn't get the whole team to work on Killzone, but some experienced people helping guerrilla would be enough to set the game on the right direction. Sony can also work with other external studios, just like they did with God of War, there was at least 8 studios working on the game, Sony already do that, it would be nothing new to them.

About development cost, they already have those costs with guerrilla to produce Horizon series, they would simply shift the studio focus to develop Killzone. Yes, probably would be more expensive, but part of the budget is already there anyways.

343 issue with Halo has nothing to-do with lottery, it was the studio mismanagement that created all the mess Infinite multiplayer was in, something looks like Sony doesn't have an issue with.

@themightyant Yes, the company still receives game sales for exclusives, but isn't that the same for subscription services?

People will subscribe to play, and if you do a good job with the service, they will keep generating profit month after month.

I agree that to make a successful live service is a lottery for new IP, but Sony has a huge advantage as Killzone is not new, and they already own a studio who know how to make successful live services, as both Destiny 1 and 2 have earned great success, that can't be a lottery, it is expertise.

Killzone was never as big as COD, that is true, but that is the idea here, to make Killzone bigger than it was before with the help of Bungie. This is not something that will happen overnight, but it can be done with time, they can grow the player base slowly, as even if COD leaves PS eventually it will take a couple of years until that happen.

@themightyant "that can't be a lottery, it is expertise." I said specifically about Bungie / Destiny.

I'm at work right now, but will be back at Hogwarts legacy later today.
Happy gaming you too.