-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Everyone in Canada is entitled to 52 weeks parental leave at 55% of their wages (with a cap). Some companies will top up the maternal/parental leave for varying periods (my spouse was 100% for 16 weeks). My company didn't begin offering parental leave top up (for the non-birthing parent) until after our second child so I missed out on being to able to double up, but at least I was able to take some vacation at the time.
I would take that with a grain of salt. We only heard mention of COD repeatedly
Why are we pretending that there's a reasonable threat of consolation leading to PS being foreclosed from content. First of all, the market is for fragmented than ever with countless studios finding success via self publishing. Secondly, there's virtually no chance that any platform holder would get approval to achieve a monopolistic share of publishing power via acquisition. Thirdly, potential mergers between 3rd parties would have no incentive to ignore Sony's platform.
I don't disagree that they both have hybrid approaches. My point is that Sony is unwilling to decouple their streaming service from purchases of their hardware. If a player wants to stream new Sony PS5 games, they must own a PlayStation device and hope that it appears on the short list of supported titles. Why? Because streaming threatens to be a disruptive force in a market where they are king of generating revenue via the plastic box.
Or their conservatism could mean they miss an opportunity to be first to capitalize on a new market and would have no one to blame but themselves
The number of studios MS thinks they need has no bearing on how many Studios Sony would need to have success with a similar model. For the past 2 decades, Sony has produced more hit games and with greater frequency than Xbox AND has been more successful at attracting 3rd parties. This is without having MS war chest. The idea that Sony would need to match Microsoft's spend on content in order to compete isn't grounded in reality.
I don't disagree. Sony is well diversified and as such is well positioned to compete, despite acquisitions being made within the industry. They still have massive market power, an industry leading IP portfolio, industry leading talent, and the resources to build a foothold in streaming and mobile… If they want to. But they prioritize their plastic box, because that's where they are comfortable.
It's an NYP piece, I wouldn't take that to be 100% accurate. Also, it makes 0 sense for MS to make that investment and not get some exclusive content from new potential ABK IPS.
Yea, I was also wondering exactly this question. Now I'm wondering if they meant that they're going to meet with the Republican commissioner, as well? Cuz honestly, at least PRETEND like you're not locking out some members of the commission haha, even if they're actually somewhat irrelevant. "Only democrats get to take the meetings" would be a... wild... position to take.
Also, whatever article you posted is not written super well and has several errors.. (Assuming it's from the NY Post again?)
the article itself is from the NY Post which that tweet is referencing. The article said the 3 Dem commissioners, so I think they got the number wrong as that includes Khan herself.
I mean they didn't say anything crazy, unless I missed it
All that was said is Brad Smith will meet with FTC tomorrow because Khan is about to go on leave and Microsoft wants the FTC's side finished before that happens
I don't think is that serious. Considering that the Republican member is on board with the merger, it makes sense that he will meet with the other members who are not completely on board yet.
LOL incredible!
Yea, that's how it reads. Is that normal? Like I get that when we're talking about Congress and other purely political bodies, but.. iono. And yes, I recognize that FTC and other agencies are politically appointed. But these are positions that last not only past the President who appointed them, but even over multiple Presidents. Iono just weird (and perhaps why that other Republican just chose to resign - and probably take a more lucrative job elsewhere). But also not that big of a deal practically.
All the more reason for Brad Smith to want all of them there. This reads more like the Democrats boxing out the Republican than that this was a MS choice per se. Unless that Republican is incredibly toxic or counterproductive in some way.
Unless this is a carefully orchestrated and premeditated anime betrayal 4D chess move, where Smith wants Khan to feel at ease amongst her peers before he reveals the traitor who will vote for the deal in defiance of Khan's leadership in a dramatic flourish - sinking in the metaphorical knife into the unprotected back of the pending FTC lawsuit......
(/s btw).
Like others have said. Might want to temper expectations. Jason Schreier didn't write that article.
I don't see anything strange about it. the 3 commissioners up in the air are all the Democrat ones.
Is it really "last-ditch"? This seems like one of potentially several remedies to get the deal underway, especially now that Microsoft is offering major concessions (10 year deal, union recognition will be popular with Democrats, etc.).
I feel like every time some non gaming site writes "ten year licensing agreement for ABK content" people take it as non COD stuff lol. These journalists just don't know much about gaming and probably think all Activision makes is Call of Duty which is a fair assumption tbh
It's the Post, so a little bit of sensationalism would be expected.
Eh. If this was MS's preference, then sure. Just seems weird to me. If this is business as usual at the FTC, then I've made my feelings known.
But like I said, I recognize that it doesn't actually make a difference to the outcome.
I took that as just a case of good old journalistic liberty. At the end of the day, it is kind of the last ditch effort regardless of how close the FTC is to approving or suing. There won't be another time that Microsoft will be able to get in front of them before real decisions are made. So, while it makes it sound like they are desperate, it's probably more just that it's an incredibly important meeting and Smith is going to have to turn up the heat, if he can.
Im confused where you're confused haha
The commission has 5 members max. One party can only have 3 commissioners. He's meeting with the Dems because the one R is already supportive so he's hashing it out with the doubters to appeal to them. Seems like a normal meeting to have as part of the merging party.
It's definitely last ditch in the sense that the FTC is rumoured to be making a decision on December 8th. But otherwise yeah it's hard to parse how much of the article is based on the Post's reporting and how much is them just sprinkling in some spice
Probably doesn't help Sony making it about Call of Duty lol, everyone who isn't in the know about games know about Call of Duty but without a doubt have no clue what Diablo or Overwatch is haha and with that I think this is probably why Sony did make it all about Call of Duty.
I'm more reffering to the report that said that one member was flipping
I feel like even getting an audience right before the vote is a positive for Microsoft. It might not come down in their favor but being the last one in the room to voice your side can never be a bad thing imo.
lol fair enough. To me, you'd talk to all of them at once. If one of the members was already convinced.. great. That's another supportive voice in the room. They can ask helpful questions (unless we know they can't). Right now, you're essentially talking to the one maybe unconvinced person on the panel (Khan is pretty clearly sticking to her guns on this one). Why would you fill that room with only the likely 2 voices that are actively trying to contradict everything you say? But anyway. I'm over it lol.
I find it interesting that Phil Spencer isn't showing up to this meeting. (Or at least isn't named). Guessing that means they're planning on doing some deep dives on what MS will do in terms of concessions, and the context role that Phil can provide is finished. Maybe. lol
There's still time before the vote. A few weeks at least. What's happening soon is that the FTC STAFF are making their recommendation (likely lawsuit) to the commission. It's interesting that Smith is talking directly to the commissioners and not the staff at this point, of course. Sounds (guessing here) like they're all treating the staff recommendation as a done deal and just getting to the work beyond it.
Yup. Nobody else is in this business is anywhere close to trying to block this as they are that we know about.
They chew their nails in worry as God of War out sells CoD.
the CWA has been for the deal for like, half a year. The republican still approves of it.
Would be a major twist if the Republicans and Democrafts flip on the deal.
The Republicans are more worried about the direction of the agency than they are about unions in general, anyway. Or less charitably, blocking Lina Khan (or the perception of her activism) is more important than why.
Bloomberg is reporting the same thing as NY Post about the meeting with Khan so it's legit
www.bloomberg.com
Microsoft to Meet with FTC Chair Lina Khan on Activision Deal
www.bloomberg.com
any new/further details in there?Bloomberg is reporting the same thing as NY Post about the meeting with Khan so it's legit
Microsoft to Meet with FTC Chair Lina Khan on Activision Deal
