To all the comments thinking this will give AB better work culture or make them more creative: Oh boy, you’re naive.

Who says they won't go after Sega next though. Microsoft can surely cough up another 10 billion if they want.

Did Google make legally binding commitments to get an acquisition through and then spit in the face of the regulator afterwards? I'm unsure what Google action we're talking about since they regularly run into issues, Lol. Microsoft currently has an antitrust investigation against them by EU for their Teams and Office bundling as well which Microsoft has been desperately trying (and failing) to get out of. EU vs American Companies is a past time

Imo, there is absolutely 0% chance that Microsoft, a company which was thoroughly fucked in the past by regulators and is now shit scared of upsetting them and thus has been trying to play the nice guy for the past 10-20 years throws all that away and shows to every single regulator around the world that Microsoft can't be trusted on their legally binding commitments for xCloud's benefit of all things...

The only way they're getting out of it is if EC lets them out of it...They'd be insane to do anything else...They could kiss goodbye making another large acquisition anytime soon, Lol. The FTC and CMA will have their back-up for future actions against Microsoft as well and there is absolutely zero chance Microsoft can take on CMA/FTC/EC at the same time.

The risks simply massively outweighs the rewards.

I'm confused what you mean with "will get revenue from other streaming services for Call of Duty"?

The license on offer is a free license, I don't believe Microsoft is getting revenue from Geforce Now, Boosteroid's subscription service, the only money they'll get is from people buying the game on a digital store (I.E. Steam) to stream the title through GeForce Now/Boosteroid. Unless you mean the revenue they get from Game Pass? Idk.

Nvidia also has deep pockets, they're a trillion dollar company. In your scenario, Microsoft could undercut Boosteroid/Ubitus/Nware, etc with an independent Activision as well, as I've said, there is absolutely nothing stopping an independent Activision from selling their license exclusivity to the highest bidder, aside from the fact that Activision said they aren't interested in Cloud Gaming so nobody was getting their content anyway.

Guarantee Access > Maybe Access.

As for the infrastructure, I'll repeat what I said in another post, xCloud does not run on Azure, it runs on Xbox Hardware inside of Azure Datacentres, every single Azure Datacentre has to have Xbox hardware placed into it and this comes with numerous issues. For starters the stock situation for Xbox hardware is awful, they're unable to produce a lot for some reason, as I said earlier, xCloud in the UK has a maximum capacity of 5,000 concurrent users which is a pathetic number but shows how few Xbox hardware they have in the data centres.

Another issue it provides is that it's limited by Xbox hardware technology, while something like GeForce Now uses custom tech, as a result, GeForce Now is better in every single way (technologically) than xCloud (framerate, resolution, input lag, latency). So was Stadia because that used custom hardware too, so Microsoft doesn't have an advantage in technology and a small head-start in infrastructure.

Nvidia is more than capable of opening more data centres, and they already do have quite a few, Google/Nvidia/Microsoft/Amazon all have data centres in the key markets so there's not really a large advantage for anyone there. You can say smaller companies will struggle to compete without the infrastructure but you could say that for an independent Activision too. Anyway, Ubitus is partnering with Google Cloud for their datacentres. Boosteroid has 18 data centres and have partnered with ASUS.

Google isn't that far behind Azure, Stadia failed because the business model was shit, because it was awkward for developers to support technologically and because it's Google, they never stay committed to anything new for long, in fairness, Microsoft have confirmed that xCloud is losing money and it is currently underperforming in practically every metric but they're sticking with it, Google dipped out at the first sign of difficulty.

As for Call of Duty, while not exactly the same type of videogame, I'd say Fortnite is a significant competitor to it. Especially since COD decided to create Warzone and compete more directly with Fortnite. They both appeal to largely the same audience as well. Then Apex Legends is also a significant competitor to Warzone. A lot of CODs fanbase has moved into Warzone now. Halo and Battlefield shit the bed but I see no reason why Battlefield can't become a decent competitor again, especially if COD goes on a 2-year release schedule.

Simply disagree with the sub service advantage as well, they don't have an unstoppable advantage that the competition won't be able to compete with, if Sony wanted to (and if Nintendo wanted to) they could clone Game Pass tomorrow and they'd have dozens of millions of subscribers, I would still argue that a Sony Game Pass clone would grow much faster than Game Pass, the reason why they don't do these things is because their business models are different, not because they can't compete in this area and for Sony, this is a business model that extends even outside of PlayStation, you'll notice how Sony is one of the only film/tv production studios without their own subscription service (aside from Anime) but they provide a ton of content to other subscription services.

Microsoft doesn't give Xbox infinite amounts of money, they testified to that in court, people really need to stop thinking that Microsoft isn't a business and just tosses their money willy-nilly, Xbox has to turn a profit, it has to make smart business moves, if Xbox had this amount of resources that people claim they do then Sony wouldn't be getting any money-hats, Lol. Microsoft have outright said these large scale money-hats don't make any financial sense for them, Xbox has Microsoft but it hasn't stopped them from being 3rd in the market for 3 gens in a row, it hasn't stopped Sony dominating them in exclusives, Lol.

Microsoft is doing a lot of its recent moves precisely because they've realised they've lost in the console market and are changing their business model, Sony doesn't want to change theirs, that's fine but it doesn't mean they couldn't compete if they wanted to. They have the brand power, the IPs and the sales, reminder that Game Pass growth relies on Console growth as well which Sony utterly dominates Xbox in, Game Pass PC is proving hard to grow because most would rather use Steam (Xbox testified that Microsoft Store is currently #7th in PC Gaming Stores).

• There is zero reason why Google, Amazon, Nvidia can't compete with Microsoft in Cloud Gaming.
• There is zero reason why Sony, Nintendo can't compete with Microsoft in Subscription Gaming.

A difference in business models does not = can't compete if they wanted to.

They can't, unless the EC says they can or for other certain extreme circumstances per the contract. Again, Nvidia, Ubitus, Nware, EE, Boosteroid, etc. All knew what they were signing, they aren't all stupid, they wouldn't sign a strong contract if it wasn't a strong contract, Lol. The comparisons are flawed because in this scenario we're talking Microsoft just ripping up a contract and taking away content from multiple companies, in the Indiana Jones scenario we're talking Microsoft changing a contract they didn't make, Disney had to agree to it and they did agree to it, they didn't get pushed around by Microsoft, Indiana Jones is still being made, Disney is still being paid, it's just being made for one less platform, everyone is happy.

Phil wasn't "trying" to make Minecraft Dungeons exclusive, they discussed it and maybe it was at one point in time but then they decided it would be better as a multiplatform release, if Phil wanted Minecraft Dungeons exclusive, it would be exclusive. I don't really think it indicates anything on Call of Duty, Minecraft Dungeons is the Minecraft IP so yeah it's still a modest sized release but Minecraft Dungeons specifically vs Call of Duty...It's not even a close comparison, Call of Duty dwarfs it in every single way.

Each Call of Duty is developed by thousands of employees, dozens of studios, on a yearly schedule, which relies heavily on multiplayer. They've done the modelling already, Call of Duty as an exclusive would make them a loss, they wouldn't profit off it, they would be acquiring a company for $69bn and then shooting it in the knees. Investors would be fuming. Regulators have done the modelling as well, the amount of people which would abandon PlayStation for Xbox is too low to be considered an SLC and too low to make it profitable for Microsoft.

Again, it's exactly like Minecraft, that isn't exclusive because it makes no financial sense to do so, it would be more damaging than beneficial, the same applies to Call of Duty. Minecraft is Call of Duty's best business comparison.

Also, Minecraft Dungeons doesn't have a contract to release on PlayStation, videogames do not need contracts to release on certain platforms except in certain financial circumstances (I.E. Activision saying to Xbox they won't release on Xbox unless they give them 80% of the digital transaction cuts which they said to Xbox after they got the same deal with Sony).

There is no contract at all to release Minecraft or any of its spinoffs on PlayStation. It was considered, a business considers a lot of things, it doesn't mean they'll do them all, they're just exploring possibilities and finding which makes the most sense, in this scenario, keeping it multiplatform made the most sense.

Correct about the EC...It's all about Cloud. CMA dismissed the Console SLC, as did the EC. FTC still has them but the Judge tore apart their data for it. Regardless, the contract offer to Sony still stands, Microsoft is still offering them it, but again, Microsoft does not need a contract to release COD on PlayStation. They offered them one to counter Sony's claims and show a legally binding commitment for COD on PlayStation but they never discussed it internally, about removing COD from PlayStation. PlayStation themselves don't believe Microsoft will remove COD from PlayStation based on internal emails between Jim Ryan and another dude (forgot his name).

Again, all the modelling done, only shows a modest gain for Xbox hardware if COD were to be made exclusive, at best, they take a minor lead over PlayStation. No modelling was done for Game Pass but Game Pass is held back by Xbox hardware too and Steam users refusing to use Windows Store, Lol. Xbox have already said they expect Game Pass to only account for 15% of their Content and Services revenue. It would be a massive gamble that could end up completely tanking the COD IP.

I disagree with Microsoft here Tbh...I don't think xCloud will ever take off in a major way, I'm pretty negative on Cloud Gaming in general, I don't think it will ever beat native hardware in experience, it heavily relies on ISPs taking their fingers out their asses (data caps, shitty internet speeds). Google, a trillion dollar company, dipped out instantly, Amazon, a trillion dollar company, is barely trying, Microsoft, a trillion dollar company, is making a loss on xCloud and it's failing in every metric.

We have Phil in internal emails basically being really down on xCloud too...He essentially says that nobody on Mobile wants to play xCloud. It's an inferior experience to native ports, hence why they're desperate to get into Mobile, because xCloud isn't cutting it. I honestly think xCloud is a push from Satya because he's all about Cloud Cloud Cloud but I always see the future for it as a small one, far smaller than consoles and massively smaller than native mobile experiences.

Microsoft is even offering UK a remedy to completely remove xCloud from the UK based on rumours, they want Activision-Blizzard-King for their Mobile efforts more than anything else, followed by their PC efforts and Game Pass growth, Microsoft has been desperate for a Mobile developer since 2010 and is looking to expand in PC as well.

You can see, I'm really not a believer in this "Cloud Gaming" future

But I think these contracts still offer a better shot than not at injecting some sort of life into it...I think if this deal was blocked on the basis of xCloud there would be a not so unlikely chance that Microsoft would just put a bullet in xCloud...Losing a $69bn acquisition, a $8bn per year revenue company, who makes almost half their revenue from Mobile, over xCloud...A business which is dragging its corpse right now, would be quite the backfire of a bet, Lol..

It's not as simple as that, because some companies can refuse and there won't be hostile takeovers. SEGA recently shot down that idea anyway.

That's incredibly naive.

The world doesn't work like that. It's stupidly easy for businesses to exploit employees and going to work elsewhere isn't a solution. For starters, maybe leaving is part of the problem? I personally had an issue like that last year with a company trying to reduce me to 0 hours but not actually firing me so they could immediately get rid of me without paying a penny. A call to the ministry of labour got that sorted out and forced them to pay me for the notice period however. Governments intervening in businesses works!

Not to mention the fact that most people can't just go and get a better job at a good company. There are an awful lot of bad companies, and if you actually want any company to be willing to offer you really good terms then you really need to have some specific high level skills that are hard to find. That will never be the case for the vast majority of people. When every other job is just as shitty and exploitative because there's no government mandating a minimum wage, overtime pay, holidays etc. then going elsewhere simply isn't an option.

CoD of duty exclusivity never was at play at any time, see this post, even if it was a possibility to discuss it early on it never was undeniable, especially with Minecraft as the closest thing MS owns compare to CoD, now that we know a vast amount of details this concern is simply dead, not credible, and not logical.

Minecraft Dungeon was never under a multiplatform contract, so this is misrepresenting things quite a lot, it has been conceptualized, developed, and published under MS full ownership. They do what they want whit it and they willfully decided to go multiplatform. Maybe they discussed other possibilities at some point but that's only expected.

Indiana Jones, Disney agreed to add exclusivity close to their deal with Bethesda that was made under a different context without MS, this is still not an example that would show MS walking back on their word/contract.

for Diablo and Overwatch, we have not much info except that still exclusivity was not mentioned internally or with Blizzard regarding this acquisition. The next Diablo installment is likely 2034 at the earliest and the Overwatch sequel act as a replacement for the prior title making it very unlikely to go the exclusive route. 

For the rest, smaller Ips and long-forgotten ones, yes I expect full exclusivity (except Guitar Hero, this would still make sense in a multiplatform format), but that's not unlike any other kind of exclusivity play so common in the industry, Jim Ryan himself stated there's nothing anti-competitive in that.

"The many gamers who oppose this deal are concerned about the industry being completely consolidated in a decades time. [...] Whether or not you think mass consolidation is an irrational outcome to Microsoft's biggest acquisition ever is where we may differ. Personally, I doubt industry consolidation will ease up if Acti/Blizz is cleared, only accelerate. "

But that's the thing, that's just a feeling, a belief that it would be so based on nothing more than gross generalization without looking at this deal in particular ins and outs. Since we know so many details about this deal it makes no sense to overlook those and rely on generalization. Furthermore, even if that's supposed to be true nothing points to this transaction as some kind of inception point to this, and that denying the transaction would somehow magically restore 'stability' in the market. This position to me is only one that roots for the status quo and/or fear changes. It focuses on might-be-bad aspects of a might-be future of a might-be tied to this transaction as an inception point and still overlooks any potential benefits in this scenario. 

Also, I truly don't mind any actor attempting any acquisition unless it truly creates an undeniable SLC like MS buying Nintendo, at the end of the day acquisition is only about actors stepping up their game or trying new ventures. Yes I may lose some ease of access to some content and some companies might bring a vision that goes against what I wish and be bummed about it but that's it. Even if Google were to buy Take-Two, I would be pissed but not be against it, my wish is not supposed to be the be-all end-all VS one company's right to sell and another company's right to acquire.

Diablo fans waiting on the next Diablo.

XD fixed, though like with every Diablo entry, it will feel like a thousand years lol

Then I'm naive as much as workers' unions in the US, EU, and UK and as much as the ones placing MS as the best workplace worldwide.

Also, Spencer already state how he would like to bring back some games including a new Guitar Hero and there's a good possibility that Xbox is finally gonna bring CoD on a 2-year cycle like ABK was supposed to do for many years now which would free devs', especially in studios that were forced to give up creative works to be tasked with CoD support Like Toys for Bobs, Raven Software, High Moon Studios, Beenox.

Looks like your definition of naive wrongly pertains to people using facts or logic either that or it is only a willful attempt to discredit one opinion without making an argument yourself. You may want to familiarise yourself about Ad hominem fallacy.

If MS is smart and the deal goes through they'd be well advised to try and reinvigorate the Starcraft and Warcraft brands with high quality new games.

They should also try making some kind of mega-platformer with Crash + Banjo-Kazooie + Conker + Spyro.