
Last week, you may remember that a story was doing the rounds about a U.S. senator claiming Sony has a "monopoly of 98% of the high-end game market" in Japan, and that story has evolved substantially over the past few hours.
Axios is reporting that 11 members of Congress are concerned Sony is unfairly hurting Xbox in Japan, which again centres around this "imbalanced" Japanese game market. Here's what one of the letters, signed by four members of Congress, had to say about PlayStation's conduct in the country:
"Our understanding is that the Japanese government tolerates a range of exclusionary conduct by their domestic companies that may violate Japan’s antitrust laws, and that this inaction by the Japanese government harms the ability of U.S. companies to compete in the country."
"We understand that Sony – which holds 98 percent of the [high-end] market – pays third-party game publishers not to make their content available on Xbox and systematically negotiates exclusivity arrangements that keep the most popular games in Japan off Xbox."
It's also mentioned in one of the letters that this "imbalance" could be "violating the spirit" of the U.S.-Japan Digital Trade Agreement, which calls for “non-discriminatory treatment of digital products”.
Axios says that although Microsoft "isn’t saying just how involved it was in orchestrating this push", the outlet understands that Microsoft's government affairs team has "discussed these issues with members of Congress".
Here's what Microsoft spokesperson David Cuddy had to say in a statement:
“Sony’s anti-competitive tactics deserve discussion, and we welcome further investigation to ensure a level playing field in the video game industry."
It'll be interesting to see what happens next, then - we probably haven't heard the last of this!
In related news, there's a good resolution coming out of Japan for Microsoft today, as the Japan Fair Trade Commission has stated the takeover of Activision Blizzard "would not substantially restrain competition in certain fields of trade".
What are your thoughts on all of this? Let us know down in the comments section below.
[source axios.com]
Comments 105
Can't wait for Stalker 2 and Ark 2 to come to playstation day one, oh wait....
Let's be real Nintendo have more Japanese exclusives than playstation does, and even if xbox had the same Japanese games as playstation and nintendo the market share would still be the same, as Japanese consumers are loyal to those home brands.
How about Xbox, Nintendo and Playstation just stop having any kind of exclusives at all from anyone other than their own studios, that will make it fair right?
Also Xbox are a bit hypocritical here as I'm pretty certain during the 360 gen they had quite a few Japanese exclusives that didn't come to the PlayStation 3 to try and gain popularity in Japan and failed, yet sony is doing the same and are successful, its like Microsoft are acting like a jealous brat over that fact.
Oh how the tables have turned.
@UltimateOtaku91 Microsoft have every right to question business practices that Sony have, considering the opposition Sony are showing to the Activision merger. Nothing 'bratty' about it.
There isn't a right side to this argument. Paid for exclusivity and industry consolidation ultimately hurt the consumer at the end of the day. Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo are all guilty of both.
@UltimateOtaku91
Yeah, Japanese consumers are very loyal to local brands like SEGA, thats why they are so successful with their console, oh wait
Xbox has never had a big market in Japan. It’s always been between Nintendo and Sony and right now the Switch being a portable is doing gangbusters and the PS5 is starting to show huge sales now it’s more easily available because it’s a brand that historically always did well. Xbox just never got any traction and I don’t think that’s going to change in any meaningful way.
Sony brought this on themselves with the whinging they did about ABK
And look, one of the local ponies that was all about Sony pushing back on ABK is whinging in the first comment when Microsoft retaliates.
It's a fair complaint about trade - the US and Japan signed an agreement for a level playing field.
Sony are allowed to compete freely in the US and buy companies such as Bungie, and has a decent market share.
Microsoft's purchases of publishers is rightly reviewed by competition watchdogs.
But if Sony went to buy Square in Japan, even before Bethesda, would the competition watchdog even take a second glance at it? What about if it was Microsoft trying to buy them?
And this is before we talk about games not coming to Xbox (yes, they're tiny in Japan but most Japanese publishers sell more games outside Japan than inside it) while often giving exclusivity deals to Sony that I suspect wouldn't be available to Microsoft for any price.
And given the resistance to foreign takeovers in Japanese tech companies (golden shares etc.) and the way they collaborate with each other, while the US is the opposite, there is a question whether it's truly a level playing field...
@FragRed
SEGA never existed in your world?
@UltimateOtaku91 I bet Stalker 2 and Ark 2 come to PlayStation before Final Fantasy 7 Remake comes to Xbox.
Timed exclusivity is annoying, but at least you eventually get it - permanent exclusivity is fine so long as we're told about it.
But this "will they, won't they" where MS allege Sony have paid Square to never put FF7R on Xbox but won't just come out and say so, is much more annoying for gamers as a big fan doesn't know whether to give in and buy a PS5 or whether it'll actually come to Xbox a few months later
@Murray Sega were never successful in Japan with their home consoles
Excellent update putting this into context, so it’s not ‘one’ US senate funded by Microsoft complaining, but 8 members of the senate complaining, and it’s not in relation to any future Japan US trade deal, but is in fact in breach of an existing Japan US trade deal, that definitely warrants full investigation with punishment against Japan.
You cannot just sign trade deals and then ignore your own laws and regulations when your home companies ignore them in their monopolistic anti competitive behaviour. Sony must have shown some very juicy details in those millions of documents they were forced to submit.
@UltimateOtaku91 Nintendo may well have more Exclusives and/or more users - but Sony doesn't count Nintendo as they don't 'compete' in the High-End Console market where Sony has a 98% 'monopoly' in Japan - helped by Sony blocking Japanese Studio's/developers from releasing games on Xbox to 'compete' fairly in Japan yet expect the US market to 'protect' them and their access to US made games from US made Studios/Publishers.
You have a Japanese company going out of their way to Block MS acquiring A/B - two US companies that benefit the US economy and US jobs, tax dollars etc (especially as A/B could be bought by Chinese owned TenCent) on the grounds of it being 'unfair' and 'difficult' for Sony to Compete 'fairly' in the US if CoD was 'pulled', yet go out of their way to block MS from competing Fairly in Japan.
With the Japanese-US trade discussions set to take place, US companies want to feel they can compete 'fairly' in Japan. MS can't compete without Final Fantasy, Street Fighter 5 etc or even 'negotiate' with Studio's to bring Japanese games to Xbox. If you can't provide Japanese games to Japanese gamers, how can they compete with Sony in the 'High-end' console market.
Sony 'expect' access to CoD, yet block Final Fantasy on Xbox...
Exclusives are 'essential' to a Platform to be successful. People wouldn't buy an Xbox if all MS games are on Playstation and Playstation also offers 'extra' games like Spider-Man, Wolverine, Horizon, God of War, R&C, Returnal, Gran Turismo, Uncharted, Ghost of Tsushima etc etc. MS want to 'compete' and draw people to their Platform so need Exclusive IP's to compete with Sony.
That's why they are spending nearly $80bn on Bethesda and A/B to 'compete' with Sony and their 'Exclusives'. Regardless of whether they had a 'history' or not, regardless of 'size' of company (multi-studio Publisher or a single independent Studio), as soon as the deal goes through, those IP's, Studios, Publishing Rights etc are 'owned' by MS and they 'stop' being 3rd Party multi-platform Studios and become 1st Party Xbox Studios. Unless MS has a 'good' reason (an ACTIVE ONLINE COMMUNITY of Gamers that will 'buy' your game on Playstation to play ONLINE together with Friends/Family on whatever Platform(s) they have), then it will be 'Exclusive'.
It doesn't make sense for MS to continue funding development, porting, optimising, manufacturing, distribution, continued updates/support etc for their biggest, closest Rival when those games are better utilised to bring players into Xbox and grow the Xbox Community. CoD has a 'big' ONLINE Community on Playstation, a ready made 'fanbase' to sell CoD to - Redfall has NO online Community yet on ANY platform so its better to keep 'exclusive'
@Widey85 I fully agree with your point, let these companies make deals with xbox nintendo and playstation, but atleast clarify what those deals exactly mean. Like with monster hunter rise, I thought it was a nintendo exclusive but then all of a sudden its coming to xbox and playstation, if I knew that from the start I wouldn't of bothered getting the switch version as I'd rather have better performance etc.
So yeah it's fine for example playstation say to sqaure enix here's £30 million go make us final fantasy 7 remake, but be clear and tell people it's not coming to other consoles instead of leaving people guessing, I fully agree with that.
I doubt anything will come of this congress issue. Exclusivity has always been a valid tactic in this industry. But it is good to see some retribution for Sony's terrible actions during the abk deal.
Interesting but I don’t think anything will change. US senators may give their Japanese counterparts a little nudge over this but that’ll be all.
At this point I don’t even consider Sony a Japanese company. They have a headquarters in California like almost all other tech giants and nearly all of their first party games are made by western developers for a western audience.
@UltimateOtaku91 That's the point of 'timed' exclusivity deals - to make you buy it on 'their' platform so they get 'money' from your purchase to hopefully make 'more' money for Nintendo than it would if the game released EVERYWHERE day and date or waiting for it to come elsewhere.
As soon as I knew MS was buying Bethesda, I knew I could 'wait' for Deathloop and Ghostwire to come to Xbox and more importantly, Game Pass - pay a LOT to play a year earlier or wait and get it free. However, if you can't wait, you have to buy on Sony so Sony get a Sale on their Platform - its not as if that gamer could choose to buy on Xbox to play.
First Party Games - unless they have Active ONLINE Communities of gamers that play together on 'other' platforms, a ready made 'market' to sell to, then expect them to be EXCLUSIVE to compete. Elder Scrolls (and Fallout) are Stand alone games and every entry starts from Scratch with a 'new' Character you create. They all have a distinct 'end' - not a cliff-hanger that you now can't find out what happens 'next' because the Game is now exclusive. Therefore I EXPECT every Single Player and 'New' IP made and wholly funded by Xbox to be Exclusive to Xbox - games with an Active ONLINE community of gamers ready to 'purchase' new Games from Xbox on their Playstation hardware to keep playing with Friends/Family ONLINE together (like Minecraft, CoD etc) to remain 'multi-platform'. You wouldn't expect Sony to release Final Fantasy on Xbox if they bought SE, so why expect MS to be a 3rd Party Multi-platform developer when they have their OWN platform to support and 'compete' with Sony. Redfall has NO online Community of gamers on Playstation as its NEVER been on Playstation so no 'market' to keep supporting - unlike CoD which has a huge ONLINE community of CoD gamers on Playstation that will buy the next CoD so a big reason to keep 'multi-platform'.
@Fenbops Yep but if Sony want to be an American company, they shouldn't be getting the preferential behaviour from Japanese companies.
We all know Square wouldn't have offered Xbox the exclusivity on FF16 for almost any price, and if MS had gone after Square instead of Activision that Sony would have used their influence in Japan to block it (whether via golden shares or their sway with the regulator as a Japanese company)
MS turning the tables on Sony after they fought so hard against the Activision purchase. Are Nintendo classed as high end gaming? I wouldn't put them in that bracket myself. To me their consoles main competition seems to be a mobile phone. 😂
Sony dominated multiple markets because of their actions. Aside from the Wii/360 generation where those consoles with DS had large market shares and Gen 9, where Nintendo is crushing it with the Switch, of course. I'm glad people are finally starting to take notice because most of the gaming press seems indifferent and always have. As if it was just the natural order.
I knew this would happen if Sony kept pushing and complaining. They really overplayed their hand.
MS funds these representatives and the senator that are involved. There is no surprise here that they are willing to go to bat for them regardless of not understanding video games at all.
While there may be some cause for investigation here, it's interesting to note some important facts that are not mentioned in this article that was on Push Square and elsewhere.
Apparently, 6 of the 11 of those members of congress are from Microsoft's home state and for at least 4 of them MS are one of their top 'contributors'. Make of that what you will.
Also not sure why Nintendo is being overlooked like others have said (well I could probably guess). None of them are saints, and I love gaming on all systems but MS and Sony are acting like kids in a playground.
@Widey85 absolutely I agree.
@Nexozi Nintendo aren’t classed as high end gaming. Regulators made that clear from the beginning. They’re in their own bracket of 600p gaming.
@UltimateOtaku91 Typical post from you, Sony are using monopolistic anti competitive tactics in its home market, and that’s against an existing trade deal. Hence the call for it to be investigated. Nintendo seem more then happy to work with Microsoft, it also has many first party exclusives, they haven’t been accused of making deals to deliberately keep ‘third party’ games off a competitors platform or streaming service.
Nothing shocking from Sony really, but now with the US government accusing the Japanese government of turning a blind eye, that is an important development and will require Japan to answer.
If Sony wants full access to the US market as it currently enjoys, it must allow US competitors the same level of free access to its market, as does the Japanese government need to, or they face the consequences which can include sanctions I’d imagine.
If you are a foreign entity, and enter a country to compete in its market, and then you actively lie and try to block business of your competitors that are home grown in that said market, don’t complain if the government starts pushing back on your monopolistic anti competitive actions in your own home country against the trade deal agreed.
@FatalBubbles oh my, ofc that would be your comment on this article
@endlessleep I’m not sure what that means. Microsoft is Cantwell’s single biggest donor. Over half a million dollars in her time as a politician.
I wasn’t staying an opinion, those are just the numbers. Secondly, MS is based in their state, so obviously they are going to try and help them out.
What was controversial about what I said?
It’s pretty funny how the tables have turned so much in the space of a week. It may not accomplish anything in Japan - Japans always favoured Japanese products. And Japanese publishers are still likely to choose PlayStation and Nintendo over Xbox in Japan.
What will be really interesting though is if this ends up effecting Sony acquiring Square in the near future - it’s been long rumoured. And I was always left with the feeling the only reason it hasn’t happened when square sold off their western division is because Sony were waiting on the ABK deal to pass.
The soap opera continues
@UltimateOtaku91 nah, Microsoft are just biting back. This won’t really go anywhere other than cause the same headache for sony that Sonys been causing for Microsoft. It’s not jealousy, it’s pettiness. I bet Microsoft couldn’t wait to use the whole ‘high end market’ narration, that sony and the ftc gladly pushed, against them. Talk about shooting themselves in the foot discounting Nintendo!
Also, Stalker 2 and Arc 2 and timed exclusive…Sony does ample of those too…we’re literally just about to finally get Ghostwire Tokyo on Xbox. Sony definitely have a greater monopoly on Japanese developed games - which is what this is about.
Get rid of exclusives then they’d argue services. These companies are in competition with one another.
Sony deserve everything they get now I have both a PlayStation and xbox but I see Sony now for how anti consumer they are and I hope they lose everything 😊
@Moonglow But out of those 280 games how many are actually paid to be playstation exclusive, I can't see Sony paying for games like atelier, disgaea, Senran kagura and all the other niche anime games that come to playstation (there's a lot!) especially in Japan where there tonnes more than don't even get localised in the west. Sony don't pay for those, the studios behind those games just don't put their games on xbox due to lack of demand, they have only just started putting games like YS and Atelier on nintendo because of the crazy switch sales. So it's unfair to say sony has a monopoly in Japan if its not their decision what console these games go to to begin with.
Yeah I'd argue they have paid square enix a lot of money for final fantasy games and to Konami for silent hill, but the other Japanese games are not being on xbox are down to the developers.
@Bleachedsmiles I agree that sony do a lot of times exclusives as well, probably more so with bigger games (by name) but that's got to be down to lack of funds to actually compete with acquisitions. Sony know they can't compete with Microsoft when it comes to buying publishers, so instead they go for third party timed exclusives. Clearly its not illegal as its been done by Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo for years now with some huge titles involved such as final fantasy for playstation, monster hunter for nintendo and tomb raider for xbox. So I don't see why all of a sudden its illegal and needs to be investigated.
Microsoft being the biggest supporter of many of these representatives is greatly concerning showing the unjust power big tech has in creating favorable outcomes for itself. Also nintendo is the powerhouse in Hap so to ignore them is absurb
@UltimateOtaku91 Sony actually do better by using their money securing the marketing to every big AAA game and offering exclusive content to those games - which is why it was always pretty outrageous their, and their fanboys, sudden concern over parity when it comes to this ABK deal - if anything needs looking over by these governing bodies it isn’t exclusives it’s the fact that customers are being charged £70 per game on both platforms…yet one set of customers are being offered less content for the same money. That’s what needs protecting against.
Timed exclusives and exclusivity isn’t illegal. I think the issue more is with the amount of Japanese focused ones Sony has over Microsoft…preventing those games from coming to Xbox consoles or coming to gamepass. Even marketing deals Sony has ensures they’re blocked from coming to gamepass.
It won’t go anywhere…but there’s No way MS isn’t going to miss the opportunity of having Sony also investigated for their own exclusive and timed exclusivity deals…not when Sony pushed so hard for MS to be looked in to.
They’re just protecting their business right? The same people that were ok with Jim Ryan acting like a kid are suddenly all up in arms about this i see. Fitting. That’s what happens when you start a gas fire Sony, you F around and find out.
I see the JFTC is gonna pass the ABK deal now as they see no concerns. Ah, can’t wait to have all those games in game pass. Love it!
Xbox is absolutely nothing in Japan. They have almost no presence and will continue to be so unless they change their marketing categorically. The most success the Xbox brand had here was the timed exclusivity of Tales of Vesperia and filling some niche aspects during the 360 era (Western game machine, SHMUP machine, uncensored violent game machine).
These attempts were almost always ultimately a failure and sometimes even damaging, for example when the PS3 got a better version of Vesperia a bit later leaving people who bought the 360 just for that cheated.
If FFXVI would release on the same date on the Xbox and PS5 here, it wouldn't move the needle even a tiny bit. They'd have to get FFXVI only on the Xbox and that is obviously not going to happen.
Microsoft spokesperson can say many things but I feel these are just empty words really.
@Kaloudz I try my best
@Kaloudz it's starting to get good now isn't it my friend. We'll be playing ABK in game pass before you know it! That consolidation, gotta love it!
@Gooseman42 yes, that is how representative government works. They are representing their constituents, in this case Microsoft. You wouldn't expect a senator from Nebraska to lead this. I'm not sure if you or whoever posted this at push square thought this was some sort of "gotcha," it just looks like they have no idea what senators do or who they represent.
Just straight up ha motherfu$@*&g ha! All those visits to Brussels and London fell on def ears but now you have congress asking questions of the Japanese government and an FTC subpoena for your dirty laundry. Reap what you sow Jimbo....reap what you sow.
As a happy owner and regular user of all three consoles I just don’t understand how Sony paying for timed or full third party exclusives is “Anti Consumer” but MS doing the same thing is not. Jan 2022 to date we have seen Tunic, immortality, high on life, vampire survivors, Gunk, Shredders, Scorn, the ascent, citizen sleeper, valheim, power wash simulator and rogue legacy 2 (likely more I have forgotten and almost certainly more coming out this year). All third party, about 50% of those have never hit PS and most of the ones which haven’t there is no word as to whether they will or not. Please can someone explain to me the difference without calling me a Pony, fanboy or leaping straight to the Final Fantasy Remake which we have all heard about constently for the last 3 years.
I’m genuinely looking for clarity on this (not a mud slinging match) because in my mind Phil Spencer is sat somewhere wetting himself laughing because MS is doing the exact same thing year on year but coming out smelling of roses while Sony is seen as some corrupt narcissistic entity which just wants to ruin everyone’s good time.
I can't take US Congress seriously after their actions during the questioning of the TikTok CEO last week. Bashing a foreign company for practices that US companies are far worse at just underlined how corrupt they really are.
Although to all those commenting on the 'high end console' market and excluding Nintendo. Japan is a very unique market where the high end console market isn't even really a market. The dominance of the Switch just cannot be ignored and Sony will certainly see Nintendo as a competition over there. I'm sure that if Nintendo were to announce they were buying Square Enix you would see just as much push back from Sony on that as there has been for the ABK deal.
My government does a lot of interesting things, most of them questionable, at best. However, this seems pretty fun. Timed exclusivity is one thing, but permanent 3rd party exclusives geared to basically destroy the viability of entire Japanese genres on Xbox, nah, I'm not okay with that. If the Japanese government has no issue with Sony doing this, then let the American mergers roll.
If anything, this whole s***show has convinced me NOT to replace my knackered Series S with another S or X. The stupid pettiness of the gaming industry is unbelievable these days. I had a S for Xbox games and i have a PS5 for PlayStation games, with a a smattering of 3rd party games on each, but this scenario is such BS, all the fun is being drained from gaming st the moment
Now this is interesting. I think some people are missing the point. The goal here is not to use the levers of government to change the status quo in Japan so Xbox can become a more competitive in seller in Japan, though that would be a desirable side effect for them. The goal is to drag into the light of day the exclusivity arrangements and sweetheart deals, most visibly famous by their dealings with Square Enix, that Sony uses to secure dominance, with Japansese content being a key market segment this affects. Via Bethesda, MS has been one of the providers of these exclusivity deals, so they know what practices are involved. They're not trying to push against such deals to have greater control in Japan, that's just the legal lever to pull to compel a change in that behavior worldwide.
The video game industry is a cesspool of wild west dealmaking and bribery, and some of us hoped that all the hearings from all this would drag that into the light of day overall, as it is all legally....questionable..... and the games industry has long avoided scrutiny.
Now where it gets hypocritical is they can afford to buy content producers to gain exclusive content where Sony is financially limited in doing that, however, their exclusivity deals only work because they dominate markets so completely, they couldn't afford that if they didn't. MS was uninterested in exclusives last gen, and it hurt them, as Sony weaponized theirs. MS has responded by pushing exclusives now, but their strategy isn't dependent upon that.
This all comes back to Jim's squalid leadership. Had he not played hypocritical drama queen about ABK, MS would not have been digging into this war. They were content with doing their own thing. Jim poked the bear, then armed it. Then taunted it. Then kept taunting it. Now we have MS figuring out it has the ear of US government, and we get to replay the 90's of Nintendo wielding government against Sega with Arakawa and Lincoln on the news every night playing sequences of Night Trap to tell us all how evil Sega was.
Nintendo's anti-Sega campaign isn't what killed Sega's console business, despite a year or so of demonizing them on the news, Sega's poor management, and Sony's undercutting them is what did that. But it did change how and where video games are sold to minors, produced the ESRB ratings organization, and helped make the entirety of video games become more stigmatized than it already was.
Under a dozen US legislators isn't going to create a major trade treaty, but backing by MS, and partner companies could shine a giant spotlight and compel legal exposure to practices Sony would much rather keep in the cover of dark, and Sony, having interest in protecting their film and music monopolies in Japan, would probably be willing to cave on their video game deal-making if it was necessary to keep practices hushed that they employ more critically in music and film, especially in Japan. They own their idols. Or at least the retail part of them Avex doesn't already own and the "family businesses" haven't wedged into.
@GeeEssEff All of the big three has snapped up timed exclusivity for a variety of titles over the years. If you're asking why it's a bigger deal for Sony to systematically attempt to lock down as many of the biggest releases of the generation as possible in order to damage the viability of the competition than for Microsoft to boost a few indies with Game Pass deals (which tend to not remain exclusive indefinitely), I think the answer is self-evident. When Sony can't get exclusivity, they start making deals for exclusive content or preferential treatment for their platform, as seen with multiple Call of Duty games, Hogwarts Legacy, etc.
@Swirly Referencing my mention of Nintendo v Sega from above, when has the video game industry not featured this petty antics?
We had MS vs Nintendo, we had Nintendo and their (eventually deemed illegal) contractual clause that content can't be on any other platform (meaning Sega) if it was on the NES), we had Nintendo's publishing limits that meant publishers created multiple phantom companies to exceed the publishing limit, and Nintendo selling overpriced cartridges with the mandate the cartridges must be purchased from them with the famous Tengen (subsidiary of Atari) games using non-official cartridges and bypassing the lockout chip, EA blackmailing/bluffing Sega over their lockout. The fact that Activision is named Activision because it sorts higher in lists alphabetically than Atari (it was started by former Atari execs), and then Acclaim being named Acclaim because it sorts higher alphabetically than Activision (it was started by former Activision nee Atari execs.)
Going back to the 80's, I don't see a time when the game industry was NOT petty?
The Xbox 360 was earlier to the party and had a great lineup of Japanese exclusives, from Blue Dragon to Tales of Vesperia and it still didn't help. Would FFXVI coming to the Series X really make much difference?
The software and hardware charts for the last 5 years have been entirely dominated by Nintendo because in the densely populated commuter jungle of Japan, a small home console you can take with you on public transport is a miracle.
Nintendo is high end. Zelda is going to cost 70 and for the next 10 years, you will be able to play the same COD on it as any other platform. 😀
@Jenkinss It wasn't a post it was an article, and posted elsewhere online/twitter etc.
Even ignoring the timing and how much MS have contributed to these members of congress (out of the goodness of their heart I presume?), I think it's a little naïve to say they are just representing their constituents. It's not like they are a poor defenceless little homeowner with a grievance and no money.
As I said I think both these companies are as bad as each other & just need to stop the toxicity which is just fuelling the fanboys on both sides and they need work with, not against each other.
One day maybe.
@RadioHedgeFund I think the issue isn't necessarily just Japanese market share, but the role those Japanese games play in a platform's success in the global market. Japanese games sell by and large better in western markets than they do Japan. Sony using its position to lock up the biggest Japanese franchises lessens Xbox's ability to compete in the global market, because fans of Japanese games basically only have one choice for a console. To your point, would FFXVI coming to Xbox make much difference? It apparently makes enough of a difference that Sony went out of their way to make sure it didn't. I think these issues in this industry have been going on for so long, that we're maybe past a point of trying to correct it. Now we just have Microsoft shelling out gobs of cash to buy themselves some major security in the software department.
The issue here is exclusivity agreements specifically — those are regulated by anti-competition laws and could land any business that relies on them too much or applies certain conditions in any one agreement in a lot of hot water.
@SplooshDmg This is a story 20+ years in the making. Some of the interviews with some of the people that were involved in launching the OG Xbox, no longer at MS, had stories of trips to Japan that were largely successful with publishers (presumed to be Square, in context, but never confirmed) where negotiations would be positive, then they'd all be at some event that was being held with people from various companies, not TGS but that sort of event, and suddenly the person they'd being having positive negotiations with would pretend to not know them and have never met them before, and they'd be flanked, by handlers/intimidators presumed to have been from Sony, and that's the backdrop that started the "Xbox isn't viable in Japan" meme 24 years ago. Sony's been running mob tactics to firmly secure that #2 position for so long it all seems normal now. I'm certain it's not quite so mob-like today, but this has been a long time coming, and Jim's bellowing finally caught them up.
@UltimateOtaku91
I see where you are coming from, but there is a huge difference between an underdog negotiating a deal, and a company "with 98% of the regional market" negotiating deals in that region that prevent games going into the platform.
Mind you, that's based on the dumb "XBox and Playstation dont compete with Nintendo" logic, that I entirely disagree with, but Sony made that bed.
Anyways, it would be just as bad if Microsoft approached, lest say Adobe, to make future Photoshop versions exclusive to Windows, yet it would not be the same if Apple did the same due to their much smaller market share.
Also keep in mind this is about Japan now, not about other regions. In an extreme hypothetical scenario, Sony could be blocked from doing exclusivity deals in Japan, but keep them overseas. FF16 could be exclusive in the US and Europe, but be multi-platform in Japan.
@Murray
Dont forget about that tiny Japanese phone maker startup that is huge in Japan: Apple.
@Ralizah Thanks for the response. Personally I doubt MS are signing exclusivity for indie titles simply to boost their profile. It is cheaper to purchase them for gamepass than your big AAAs. If it was simply to boost them they wouldn’t purchase exclusivity they would just purchase gamepass rights. And yes most of them go to PS eventually but exactly the same could be said of the exclusivity deals Sony make.
I’m not sure I agree with Sony systematically locking down as many exclusives as possible. Outside of forspoken, godfall, ghostwire and deathloop I can’t think of any other big exclusives Sony has tied up this generation where they haven’t had some hand in development. And with regards to Bethesda games from a personal perspective if I didn’t have both consoles I would rather wait a year to play a game over never atall as PS players now face with future releases.
With regards to exclusive content again this is not something only Sony are guilty of. MS literally started the cod content wars in the 360 era. Exclusive content switched to PS for the PS4 and then everyone miraculously forgot who actually started the practice. Can’t speak for things like hogwarts because I don’t know enough about it but really I don’t think people can call Sony anti consumer for doing something that MS does but doing it to better effect.
Wording is the most important piece to this whole thing.
If it found that Sony is paying Japanese developers to either not release specifically on Xbox (and only Xbox) or to make the Xbox versions the worst performing version of a game compared to PlayStation, I can see where questions should be raised and looked into as anti-competitive practices - especially if still opens a window for a Nintendo release (barring technical feasibility, of course). It could be seen as specifically singling out the American company in favor of the Japanese country.
If this is just a case where Sony is simply partnering with Japanese developers to make system exclusive titles, then that's just business and Microsoft just needs to evaluate how it conducts business in Japan to build better developer relations.
Japan is a very loyal country and would prefer to do business with Japanese businesses.
@Gooseman42
Thats not entirely accurate, their contributors are from small donors, over 30 years. MS happens to be a huge employer in Washington state, so it is extremely expected that over 30 years a politician would pile up a sizeable number of contributions from MS employees.
@Tharsman There's also the matter that corporations can't directly give money to anyone campaigning in the US. MS can openly donate money to a PAC, and that PAC can then donate funds to the campaign and that's 100% legal/transparent and all corporations do it. MS being headquartered in Washington state, I'd kind of think they'd like the elected representatives to well... You know... Represent them. I think that's like... Sort of the point.
@GeeEssEff
Here is a hypothetical: if in the US, Xbox had 90% of the console market, it would be very anti-competitive monopolistic behavior to use that market position to lock games in the US region.
Keep in mind that despite consoles being region free, every region is independent and exclusives don't have to be global.
I obviously don't know Japanese law, but would imagine these trade agreements try to set some common ground between trade partners for such things, and its what is being now discussed.
As I mentioned earlier, though, I don't agree with the logic that Sony has 98% of the market, that is based on Sony's own stupid attempt at removing Nintendo from their "market" just so they could explain why CoD was essential on their corner of the market. As a publisher, Nintendo has 33% of the Japanese market, 43.8% if you include the Pokemon Company. Sony has 2% of the publishing market in Japan. Microsoft actually has 3%, 50% larger than Sony, why? Because of Minecraft.
Sony is not a monopoly in Japan, but it was Sony themselves that made this argument in front of global regulatory agencies and now they will have to figure a way to backpedal out of it.
@Tharsman
Fair enough, but some of the reports do show that MS were in the top contributors in 2021-2022 for at least four of these members and that's not including Maria Cantwell who apparently received half a million dollars from MS in the past 10 years. I'm not saying that Sony doesn't do the same thing either, but it would be to say this doesn't have any bearing on the current proceedings.
@Gooseman42 the records only specify the last 30 years, not 10. And it is from individuals, not from microsoft.
Those donation stats simply show the name of the employer of donors. Split that over the years and that's less than 17k a year, that's actually an extremely small amount for that long time, and again, this is about individuals that happen to work for Microsoft, this is not from Microsoft itself.
Over that same window they got 3.76 million from retired individuals, for contrast.
Edit:
For clarity, if you happened to donate to a senator, your donation would not show up under your name in this graph, but under your employer, regardless what your opinion of your employer was.
Reading the toxic comment section on Push Square and MS is horrible and a disgrace for this, lol. I really hate fanboyism.
Sure, they don’t want CoD taken away. But when the biggest JRPG franchise Final Fantasy games come along, it’s just fine that they never get published on Xbox.
@GeeEssEff I wasn't implying that Microsoft was behaving altruistically with regard to indie developers. All of these companies are machines designed to generate a profit. ESPECIALLY Microsoft. I'm just pointing out that there's a big difference between how Microsoft and Sony are tackling timed exclusives this gen. Comparing some of the biggest releases in the industry to a smattering of indies seems... disingenuous.
They (ironically) attempted to lock down Starfield. They've locked down multiple Final Fantasy games. They're likely going to lock down Dragon Quest XII. And probably made attempts at many other games as well. Sony's strategy since the PS1 has been pretty consistent, in this regard: maintain dominance by starving the competition.
I opened by acknowledging they've all done this sort of thing in the past. Microsoft in the 360 era. Nintendo was pretty ruthless in the early 90s. No company has clean hands, in this regard. I just think it's silly to invoke the past sins of competitors to justify Sony's hyper-aggressive behavior now.
For the record, I wouldn't describe Sony as "anti-consumer." That's a silly buzzword that doesn't mean much of anything.
@Fenbops Yea, just always seems strange when someone mentions high end gaming and then Nintendo gets thrown into conversation.
@Nexozi I think many PC gamers would say the same about including any console into the conversation of "high end gaming". 🙃
@NEStalgia I'm glad I'm not the ONLY one old enough to remember all the dodgy and underhanded deals made in the past with gaming.
What happened to neogeo, intellivision or any of the other Consoles of the 80's/90's. Atari may of 'hurt' themselves initially, but Nintendo/Sega basically killed off any chance of a Comeback. I remember when Codemasters were an independent Studio/Publisher who made 'cheap' (£1.99-£2.99 games - at least until A Rockstar ate my Hamster) But are now owned by EA making games only for EA to Publish where EA chooses to Publish and probably own 'Dizzy' now too.
As EA don't have their own platform and rely on Sales of games, it makes sense to maximise the number of platforms its on so tend to release on 'every' platform. However, MS, Sony and Nintendo have their own Platform so ANY Studio/IP they acquire/develop are used to help sell their 'ecosystem', their Platform. These Platform holders don't rely solely on the revenue from sales of their OWN Games only, like EA or other 3rd Party Platformless Publisher, but also get 30% of ALL content sold through their Digital store, get revenue from 3rd Party Publishers for sales of their games on their own platforms, revenue from Sub services - inc 'online' access Subs, revenue from Accessories, hardware etc so don't 'need' to maximise Sales.
The argument about buying a Publisher with 'numerous IP's - even if most haven't seen the light of day for years, numerous Studio's in 'one' swoop vs lots of independent Single studios with little/no history is ridiculous. Its still a Studio that could have gone on to make 'multi-platform' games but now a First Party only studio.
It just makes more 'business' sense to buy Publishers with 'multiple' Studios, the IP's they owned (Some Studio's don't own their IPs) and the Publishing Rights to their 'old' games because they start bringing revenue in immediately. You buy Fallout 4 on Playstation today, even though its Published' by Bethesda, MS gets money. You have to wait for a Studio to put a product out (maybe need to invest a lot of time and money into that Studio to make a game) to start selling to recuperate costs and those IP's maybe 'strong' enough to pull people into your ecosystem in anticipation too.
We could be here all day if we talk about the history - how CoD was created to kill MoH and Battlefield, How 'CoD' essentially became the 'Halo' Killer that every Publisher was trying to 'beat' (inc Sony with Killzone and Resistance) and Halo was really a Goldeneye/Quake killer. Maybe if CoD hadn't reacted to PUBG/Fortnite and not made Warzone, it would be 'dead' now. Titanfall was a CoD killer for the XB1 era (although limiting it to Xbox and then releasing the sequel between the 2 'biggest' FPS games basically screwed that - but Apex is 'big'. Roblox and Fortnite will no doubt have 'CoD' clones in them too so plenty of CHOICE in the FPS market - but until MS announced buying A/B, most Sony gamers didn't care about CoD, never cited CoD as a reason to buy PS and very critical of Activision as a 'money grabbing, cut & paste slave driving Publisher who destroyed 'numerous' creative Studios to ensure CoD released 'every year to bleed the CoD community dry of every spare penny they had - but now MS is buying them, somehow they are 'worse' than Bobby Kotick...
@awp69 There's been enough toxic comments from both sides of the argument to be fair, but in any such case the side that feels like it's going to be losing out is always going to be the most vocal. It's not fanboysim, it's just human nature.
@Tharsman Ah yes, when u run a 20 year old game at 1080p with a 4080. 😂
@BAMozzy I'm sure that Xbox players probably had the exact same opinion of Activision before Microsoft announced the merger too and their opinions of them certainly seem to have changed now too.
@Tharsman Thank you for explaining the vast difference between an individual who just so happens to work at Microsoft (Considering where MS are based, its extremely likely their Constituents are employed by MS) and 'contributes' to their chosen political party.
That is 'very' different to being 'employed' by Microsoft herself or receiving 'donations' directly from Microsoft. Gaming Companies in 'Washington' for example may well press the senator on what they are doing to 'help' them bring in more Revenue into their own Constituency, just like they can ask what they are proposing to do about 'Crime' or any other concerns they want to be discussed by the Lawmakers.
It's like I can speak to my 'Local' MP about how I'm being blocked from selling my 'goods' to China for example yet every shop I walk into has something Made in China. They can take that to London and maybe bring it up in Parliament to discuss the 'imbalance' of trade between UK and China because that is the process. They 'lobby' for votes and want to be the 'voice' for their constituents, discuss the things that are Concerning their Voters and try and 'work' for the People that 'voted' for them to represent them in the Senate, in Parliament or whatever process your country is governed.
This is NO different so thank you for explaining it to others. The way some go on, you'd think she is employed by Microsoft specifically to attack Sony's attempt to Block MS, to discredit or make them look bad to 'force' the FTC to withdraw its pending court case as Sony appears to be their 'only' defence where as MS has the entire Industry and more and more Governing bodies supporting them - but really, she is the 'Senator' for Washington so the most 'likely' person to bring up any concerns that could be 'negatively' impacting her supporters and state.
@BAMozzy Well, Neogeo was "killed" by its price point and product concept in general, it was always a fringe product (literally an arcade board in a consumer plastic chassis at the full price of commercial equipment and public license software) was never going to go anywhere, and PC Engine moved on in the arcade eventually anyway....but yeah... Nintendo was amazingly underhanded, I mean even Jim's Sony doesn't really hold a candle to the corruption of Yamauchi's Nintendo. Not many companies ever actually will, they were blatantly operating outside the law for years before the law finally caught up with them, and in that time they shaped parts of the industry that still function that way because of them today.
We're talking about the same Hiroshi Yamauchi who's first action after Allied forces occupied Japan was to go to the new provisional government and work out an exclusivity deal for selling playing cards to the occupying invaders.... That man literally started underhanded, morally questionable games exclusivity contracts in the 1940s!
In defense of the last part, though, internet fan group PS fans may not care bout CoD, but the mass market PS consumers very much do, which is why PS has spent so much money locking it down as "best" on their system. Plenty of competition, but CoD is the one that's become a "common noun" representing the genre, even the video game medium to the masses (both for good and for bad) where it used to be Doom. So it is important, but not nearly as life-and-death as Jim tried to pretend while sitting in a market domination position.
@NEStalgia I'm basically always on team chaos. If there is a status quo, I want to see something challenge it. I don't care how or why Sony is at the top of the food chain, I'm not convinced that Sony's dominance in gaming going unchallenged is good or healthy. I think gaming needs a more pronounced pendulum effect than we have now. The system is designed that once you are locked in, you stay locked in because trying to leave is expensive and or completely inconvenient, to a point that the winner at the right place in time just stays in power till the end of days. I just really don't see how customers are excited about that. People can say I'm just shilling for big bad MS, and I say, not really. MS is the company talking about busting up the walled gardens. That is what has my attention.
@SplooshDmg Totally agreed. I'm not on "team chaos" but I want to see pendulum's swinging and don't want to see any cemented power, and we just don't have that in gaming right now, and it's deifnitely not good for anyone. Heck it was Sony doing exactly what MS is doing now that made them popular to begin with! Their legacy was built on being the underdog, challenging the status quo, and knocking Nintendo and Sega down from their pedestals. Then they became the dominant one and started copying Nintendo's bad behavior. Someone needs to knock them down (so long as it doesn't install MS as an even harder to remove new emperor which is a legit criticism.)
@NEStalgia Right, I mean, the only way to find out if we're giving rise to the galactic empire is to give it a shot and see what happens. Hence the team chaos. Revolutions are often messy, and usually end poorly, but eh, whatever. They can be fun. M&A is a proper and legal growth strategy in the realm of corporations. I don't care about the weirdos and their "but.. but... muh Playstation! What about organic growth!" All I care about is corporate landscapes shifting some power into different hands, hopefully to our benefit. Which considering the EU and UK no longer seem to have concerns about console competition, I stand to say that I feel my positive feelings on this merger have been well placed since the start.
@Gooseman42 "I think it's a little naïve to say they are just representing their constituents."
Embarrassing take. This is the government's job. You're implying that senators should allow foreign governments to shelter foreign companies from competition from companies in their state, which employ tens of thousands of their voters. Go back to reading push square or wherever you're getting these nonsense ideas from.
"It's not like they are a poor defenceless little homeowner with a grievance and no money."
Right, Microsoft isn't a poor defenseless homeowner. They're an American corporation petitioning their representatives in the federal government to represent their interests abroad. And it's about time someone did something.
"As I said I think both these companies are as bad as each other"
And you're wrong, one of these companies is far worse than the other. Sony is using its monopolistic position to remain dominant by buying exclusivity with 3rd parties left and right for pennies on the dollar. The only reason they even have a competitor is because Microsoft has insane amounts of cash to burn to compete with their monopoly, which Sony is abusing with 3rd party publishers. This is the company which drove Sega out of the hardware business. These companies are not "equally bad."
@SplooshDmg There's really not much room for debate when Sony itself is weirdly boasting about their 90-something percent market dominance in Europe. Nothing says "please hit me" like that. Though maybe counterbalanced by them boasting "98% of Japan's high-end gaming market" which is to say "we have 7% of gaming in Japan!"
Imagine Walmart saying "We have 70% of all US retail! Yay!" and then people being upset when people say maybe Target and Amazon should grow more....
That's the part that's hysterical. It's not like it's outside speculation that one company holds too much power in the market in an industry. The company itself is boasting about it with statistics claiming near total domination of markets! And they're advertising this!! While going to court claiming to be aggrieved!!!
But...yeah...I'm still hoping it doesn't give rise to the galactic empire....because it just trades one bad problem for a worse problem. It's like WWII's eastern front when everyone was terrified of Stalin killing everyone, so they welcomed and supported Hitler, who then proceed to build a genocide machine against them, so then they all went back to Stalin for help....who then continued to kill them all, too, but not in the name of genocide....
@Ralizah Apologies for misunderstanding your point about the altruism in that case. I still don’t think that the comparison is completely disingenuous though. It’s still timed exclusivity regardless of the size of the game. Call me a moral absolutist but I don’t think it’s fair to say “MS are fine negotiating 10-15 smaller games a year but Sony are wrong to negotiate 1-2 AAA games a year. The practice in itself is either wrong or right. Plus alot of the games come down to personal preference anyway. For example I put more hours into Rogue Legacy 2 last year than the four games I mentioned previously combined (not that I bothered with forspoken or godfall).
On that note please could you elaborate on some of the other big third party releases PS have tied down. I mentioned the four I could think of (although I accept I have probably forgotten some) and we are now 3 years into the cycle. The only one of those I would class as a massive release would be deathloop. The rest released to a tepid reception at best. I purposely didn’t include FF because strictly speaking the remake was a PS4 that got a fresh coat of paint for PS5 and FF16 hasn’t released yet. I’m just not seeing the massive amount of third party AAA games that Sony are purported to have secured and if we were to simply look at the sheer number of games and critical/user reception as metrics I’d be willing to bet Xbox comes on top for negotiated exclusives this gen.
@Jenkinss I seriously suggest you read up on Microsoft's history and how they got to be as big as they were in the first place as Sony hasn't got anything on their track record.
@NEStalgia I know all that but the point was that numerous Consoles have disappeared from the market - not all because of Nintendo or Sega, but you could say NeoGeo was the first 'High end' Console maker at a time when 'High end' gaming wasn't mainstream or affordable enough to 'compete'.
I know CoD is bought by masses - but the majority of Playstation gamers don't care about it. 10-15m is not the ENTIRE Playstation community. Sony had a deal on the table to 'keep' selling CoD for the next decade - no threat of pulling CoD, no threat of those 'masses' suddenly leaving because they can still 'buy' CoD just like they ALWAYS have. The ONLY difference is that NOW all CoD gamers have the freedom to choose where and 'how' they want to access - Buy it on PS/Xbox/PC (as per usual) and get the SAME Content Day and Date, not being 'forced' to play on Playstation because you get 'more' for your money, Maybe you'd prefer to play on Nintendo on the Go or maybe Subscribe to Game Pass and access the Content on any Game Pass 'device' instead of buying it - point is, MS owning CoD is no different from A/B owning CoD to a PS CoD gamer. The ONLY difference is that now Sony cannot pay MS to keep content away or exclude Xbox from Early Access Beta events but they'll still get the SAME Maps, Modes, Skins or any other Content as EVERY other CoD gamer so they are NOT the ones who were very negatively vocal about CoD and A/B before MS announced purchasing them, and are now negatively vocal about how 'detrimental' it will be for gaming once MS own A/B, how important CoD is/was etc, how 'big' it is - how 'many' play it. It may have 'more' sales than Minecraft - but that's spread over 20+ games and most CoD gamers buy it every year so its pretty much the same 10-15m playing on Playstation every year.
I can't wait for MS to take over, re-organise A/B studios so either 1 becomes the 'CoD' studio (like Gears is the Coalition or 343 is Halo), integrates the MP suite into Warzone and makes it 'F2P' with seasonal updates (maybe even switch between eras - WW2, Modern, Advanced movement eras with each season or Annually instead of 'releasing' a separate 'paid for' game every year that Sony can Sell - instead they can 'buy' season passes and MTX through Sony's store (or maybe on ANY platform) so Sony get 'little' in return.
Maybe IW will become the CoD developer - although Raven who tends to be the MP developer may take over - allow those that want to make CoD to move to Raven or form a new Studio specifically from those Studios. Then let Sledgehammer, Treyarch, Toys for Bob, IW etc make the games they WANT to create - exercise their creative side to make Xbox Exclusives.
Treyarch could make a Zombies game for Game Pass - not CoD: Zombies with a Nazi-WW2/CoD backstory, but any Origin story they want for example for Xbox exclusively - even if it was in development to be tied to a CoD before the Take-over.
If I was a CoD gamer on PS only, I'd be aggressively demanding Sony make a deal with MS to keep CoD on my preferred Platform, make sure I still have access to it guaranteed for the next decade - especially as more and more Governments are likely to see that there are still LOTS of other Publishers to make Games, 1000's of Studio's making games and that Sony as a Platform is the Dominant player so a 'smaller' company buying another 'smaller' company with many other companies still in the market and wouldn't suddenly make the Smaller Companies into the Biggest with a massive user base (if MS bought Nintendo, that would seriously affect the Console market as only 2 'consoles' would exist with MS having the Market share of Gamers) and only makes MS more 'competitive', brings them 'closer' to Sony in terms of IP's and 'more' competition is 'better' for the industry in general...
@NEStalgia "Eh, it'll be fine." - Some guy that got murdered, probably
See sony you shouldnt throw stones when you live in glass houses. You should let it all go. It would be great if sony refuse 10 year exclusivity and all gets passed so nintendo and the pc based services get COD but greedy sony miss out.
@BAMozzy You seem to be so in favour of MS buying up IPs rather than actually creating any new ones of their own with the developers that they already own. MS already has the tools to compete with Sony and one the ABK deal goes through the gap will gradually close until MS does become the market leader. And once they become that juggernaut no one is going to be able to come close.
@BAMozzy Yeah that's the thing. People talk about abk like it's this beloved games company that churns out classics. It's a dysfunctional mess desperately in need of fixing. Maybe ms is or isn't the right company to do that but it's not like abk was in a good condition otherwise, it's a scratch and dent purchase.
@Sebatrox Ah so competition is good until Microsoft are the dominant ones, got it.
@NEStalgia Exactly - their stock was Crashing, their reputation in tatters and 'everyone' at Activision actively busting a gut to make CoD EVERY Year without fail despite games getting 'bigger, better, more complex (at least in visual and if possible MP too) and with games taking 'longer' more and more Studio being 'pulled' in to feed that SALES based Profit. Blizzard too have basically become just 1 Studio now as everyone else is a 'Support' Studio to Blizzard.
They were crashing and burning - until MS stepped i and offered well above market value for every share, they all accepted and all the 'employees' - at least it seems they do - want to be acquired by Microsoft.
The ONLY ones 'upset' by this are Sony FANBOYS and 'Sony' as a business (which is understandable - but MS BUYS the Company, the IPs, the TALENT behind those games to 'Compete' against a VERY dominant Sony not pay 'others' to keep Content away from Xbox). Even if they LOST all sales from that point on, maybe A/B collapse into a legal battles and staff issues, leaving as they desert a sinking ship or Xbox decides to make CoD exclusive as they OWN the game, it doesn't stop Sony having MORE Exclusives and MORE gamers on their Platform spending their Money on 'Other' games - if they can't play CoD, maybe they all play Factions instead or Battlefield grows - especially with ex CoD/Titanfall/Apex creator at the helm now. So I can understand their 'reluctance' but then being offered CoD for the next Decade at the SAME time with the SAME content - Parity (although DS5 features may 'give' it a hardware edge for example but its still the SAME Content, SAME Game-play etc all funded by MS to not only develop, but also to port, optimise, manufacture, distribute (Physical), continuously update and support for the long term a very popular seller would offset those concerns. Petty Fanboys I expect that from who can't see things for what they are. Every big Publisher has bought out other Publishers, other studio's etc to improve their OWN content line-up and make money through Selling those games.
If Sony don't sign, that's more 'detrimental' to their customers than anything. Playstation CoD gamers are probably Confident that MS will keep CoD on PS regardless so its really Sony Fanboys not wanting MS to be competitive with IP's like Spider-Man, Wolverine in their repertoire and now MS owns 'Call of Duty' to compete...
@Kevw2006 Are we talking about Playstation and Xbox, or are we talking about spreadsheets and televisions? Because if it's the former the amount of anti competitive behavior isn't even close and only one railroaded a major competitor right out of the hardware business. If you want to talk about Bill Gates killing Netscape Navigator or Sony killing HD DVD the scope of that conversation will be a bit too long for a video game website comments section.
@Jenkinss thank you - my thoughts exactly.
@Sebatrox I get no joy out of PS4 dominating the market but people also need to remember that Microsoft scored a massive own goal with some questionable choices on the launch of the Xbox One when they largely tried to kill off the used game market and kinekt being mandatory. Those had just as much of an effect as anything Sony did, if not more and they were left massively behind and playing catch up. I have no desire to see Xbox fail, quite the opposite in fact, but I get the feeling reading through the comments that a lot of people would be delighted to see Sony go bust and that's not a healthy outlook to have.
I remember last year when xbox thought the console wars were over. But after trying to buy Activision they realise Sony was coming to take them out. Lol
@Kevw2006 I don't like xbox, but I'm in favour of xbox acquiring activision. I don't like activision either. But I just want them to have it and see how it goes.
Remember when people wanted Japanese rpgs to all be turn based? Japanese games aren't about that tradition anymore because of western influences. So in my opinion the whole thing is now only Sonys influence. They westernized ff14 an ppl whined and now it's still western af but since it's exclusive you aren't hearing it. It's like Sony is secretly fighting to hold onto what makes the 98%. What Sony is doing with ff looks like they are purposely making them get low sales so they can buy em. I pretty much won't even bother lookin at trailer for ff or square games. Like why get excited when it takes this long and they could have just spoke of the exclusivity immediately but instead made us wait for Spencer to tell us he's trying until he just comes out and says it. Then squares excuse is. Ooooh Sony paid for us to build it on their software from the ground up. I'm literally too old for this nonsense.
@MoneySlot I've played more than 5 games on xbox lol I completed more than 5 xbox games last year and my gamerscore is 20,164.
I prefer playstation and nintendo yes but I still game on xbox due to gamepass which I won't argue is great value, but I admit I absolutely do not like Phil Spencer or what Microsoft are doing by buying the biggest publishers knowing the competition can't compete with their spending.
@MoneySlot wow yeah. I’d never bothered to check out his gamertag, played 5 games, 0 achievements in 4 of them 🤣 I blocked him ages ago because I knew his game around these parts, he always used to defend himself and say ‘well I have a series S’, maybe so but he never plays it or anything recent from Xbox since that consoles been out. What an embarrassment.
@Fenbops I have to say I see some members like him on here and add the odd reply or just think whatever. Then I go to Push Square and see their comments over there and it quickly becomes very obvious what their game is as you say.
@S1ayeR74 he’s the only person I’ve ever blocked, he’ll say one thing over here trying to appear neutral (and failing) then go over to PS and call us all xbots. I wish I’d have seen his gamertag before I blocked him because I definitely would have made fun of it 🤣 and he had the audacity to call me an xbot, I’ve probably played more PlayStation games than him and he was always free to look at my psn.
I doubt this will go much further than being a bit of showboating. However if there is a Trade Deal and Japanese companies are colluding to stop an American business from competing fairly, in direct contradiction of that Trade deal, it would be remiss of American representatives not to ask the question. Even if it’s just a case of making sure the issue is registered.
The ABK deal and especially Sonys response to it have opened up a can of worms for the industry. I hope that the Competition authorities can understand the difference between platform holders paying for a third party game to be made that otherwise wouldn’t exist (SF V, Bayonetta) and paying for timed exclusivity on games planned as multi platform.
Once the ABK deal goes through the likes of EA and Ubi soft will be gobbled up, possibly along with Rockstar (though that’s more difficult), by Apple/Google/Meta/Ten Cent. The industry is about to go through a huge change. It seems to me Sony are trying to freeze the industry in time where it is now, which is never going to happen. Even worse, they’ve drawn attention to the industry as it is now.
@electrolite77 If you read the story it states they are claiming the acts of Sony and the Japanese government are in breach of an existing digital trade deal. So they already have one that covers this in place.
@MoneySlot @S1ayeR74 @Fenbops I don't know where you're getting I have only played 5 games and have zero achievements, are people that desperate to now make lies up about people on this site? How pathetic
My Psn and gamer tag are their for you to add me to see how many games I've played on playstation and xbox, and to @Fenbops I can guarantee that I've played more playstation games than you.
Xbox Gamer tag is GamerOtaku91#693, I won't have people make lies about me.
@Sebatrox there is a distinct lack of cute anime girls on xbox 🥲
@UltimateOtaku91 you're the one with #693 behind it? You should probably add that to your message
@Cherip-the-Ripper Yeah that's right I didn't know that was necessary lol
@UltimateOtaku91 nor did I! I apologise for the incorrect gamertag view. I'm only going by your comments on purexbox.com and pushsquare.com.
@Fenbops I don't think some people realize you can see their comment history on their profile. There are certain posters I question why they even come here, and clearly act fake and outlandish for clout. Just comes off as fake, too wrapped up in this stuff.
@MoneySlot no worries, il openly admit I have a playstation bias since I've been gaming with them since the Ps1 came out and it's been my main console since but I do enjoy the xbox as well.
@S1ayeR74
Oh yeah, don’t know how I missed that bit. They have to raise issues then, otherwise what is the use of such Deals?
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...