There's more talk about Activision Blizzard going on today, and that's because the UK's Competition and Markets Authority has made more recent documents available to the public, including responses from Microsoft and Sony.
Perhaps the most interesting new documents are related to six companies who have thrown their support behind the acquisition. One of these is 4J Studios, which has worked on various ports for Xbox including Banjo-Kazooie and Perfect Dark in the past, while the other five have all been submitted anonymously from developers and publishers.
Here are a few samples from the documents in question:
4J Studios: "We do not see the proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard as anything other than a natural evolution of the industry and it does not give us any cause for concern for our own future opportunities."
Participant B: "We do not believe that any title can be considered a 'must have' in the interactive entertainment market.... We do not believe the proposed transaction will negatively impact consumers."
Participant C: "In my experience dealing with them over the last 25 years, Microsoft always honor their contracts and obligations. When they say that they intend to make Call of Duty content available on Sony and Nintendo platforms, I believe them and I believe it is in their interest as well as the interest of the industry."
Participant E: "The acquisition will not all of a sudden make Xbox the dominant platform. It's far more likely that it may help to create a more level playing field between Xbox and PlayStation which, at this point in time, is sorely needed. PlayStation needs better competition, to force the platform to up its game, and this will surely help to do that."
Some interesting comments, then, and hopefully they'll assist Microsoft in getting this deal over the line with the CMA in the coming weeks. The deadline for the regulator's decision is currently April 26th, 2023.
If you're interested in reading through all the latest publicly available responses to the CMA, you can find them all on the UK government website... just be warned that some of them are extremely long!
What are your thoughts on this? Let us know down in the comments section below.
[source gov.uk]
Comments 57
Participant C sounds like Gabe Newell. He also said something among those lines:
"Microsoft offered and even sent us a draft agreement for a long-term Call of Duty commitment but it wasn’t necessary for us because a) we’re not believers in requiring any partner to have an agreement that locks them to shipping games on Steam into the distant future b) Phil and the games team at Microsoft have always followed through on what they told us they would do so we trust their intentions and c) we think Microsoft has all the motivation they need to be on the platforms and devices where Call of Duty customers want to be."
@Thrussted That's what I thought! Sounds like Valve/Gaben's quote.
Interesting that they name 4J Studios though, I had to google who they are. They've worked on Minecraft ports for the last 10+ years and Perfect Dark, Banjo Kazooie & Tooie before that. While everyone has their own bias, they are not exactly what you would call impartial.
Crazy how Gov.uk is a source for PureXbox these days!
@themightyant They probably have the most relevant information. 4j ported Minecraft to sony and Nintendo consoles, including Mario items for Nintendo etc. They have a unique position in understanding how Microsoft behaves with other platforms and ports after buying a 3rd party game (minecraft) and releasing it on more platforms
@Thrussted Agreed, I totally think participant C is Valve aka Gabe Newell.
Participant E is 100% spot on with all of this!
I'm sensing a paradigm shift in the gaming landscape like how Microsoft changed it with the original Xbox. I do hope it's for the best. I've come to love and respect Xbox in the past few years as some of the best moments in gaming I've had came from their studios or brilliant partnership with some amazing developers. Gamepass introduced me to the likes of Sea of Thieves, Ori series ( Masterpiece), Cuphead ( Masterpiece) State of Decay, Pentiment, Hifi Rush and so on. I do hope Xbox continues to deliver to their consumers and remain the go to choice for quality indies which to me is the lifeblood of this industry.
Been telling people it's inevitable. Once this is all done and the deal goes through the industry will move forward. Some will complain about it but it is what it is, just game and move on.
I think the biggest news from the documents is a indie developer saying that thier games sales are stagnant on ps as they don't show indie games in Thier marketplace as good as Xbox do
Not a big shock but them saying outloud that if the deal goes ahead it will give them more sales which is good for them ( as a small indie UK developer )
And lets not forget that Valve (Steam) didn't feel the need to 'sign' a deal to guarantee CoD (or other games MS 'choose' to release on their Platform) as they believe MS would honour their word and that CoD in particular would remain on Steam - a Rival Platform to Xbox/Game Pass, Playstation/PS+, Nintendo etc.
Couple that with 'deals' to bring CoD to Platforms it currently isn't on - all the Physical 'consoles' and devices people play games on as well as various companies that 'provide' streaming services to hardware, the CMA/FTC would actively be harming consumers if they 'block' the deal and have NO support for their/Sony's Claims of 'damage/harm' to consumers/competition - especially as MS is actively looking to reach 'more' customers and increase the competition. Currently, gamers can only choose to buy the game for PC/Xbox/PS hardware - now Nintendo and other Streaming services will be 'competing' for consumers to 'choose' their platform to play CoD - no 'gamer' or 'Platform' will 'miss out' on having CoD on their platform - despite it being just 1 IP, not the 'biggest' IP, not the most played IP, not even the highest user base and certainly not the ONLY FPS game on the Market.
The more time that has passed, the weaker FTC/CMA etc arguments look. Even the FTC claim about Bethesda and Starfield/Redfall 'exclusivity' is a joke as they 'NEVER' promised to make these multi-platform or misled anyone and they have 'honoured' EVERY agreement in place - inc waiting over a year to release Deathloop and Ghostwire on their OWN platform...
If they really do take this 'further' to try and force MS to take them to court, then what does that say about these 'independent' governing bodies? They would obviously NOT be interested in protecting Consumers, only 'Foreign' companies and their Profits (which maybe funded these 'bias' governing bodies).
Even without concessions, there are still plenty of other Publishers, Studio's, Platforms etc, plenty of competitors to CoD - inc Destiny (owned by Sony who also own Killzone, Resistance, MAG, SoCoM etc), Battlefield etc so its not as if the 'only' MP game is being removed from other Platforms even if they intended to pull it from PS - the Only Platform its on outside of Xbox. However, they have demonstrated that Pulling it from PS is not their intention and actually expanding the choice for Consumers to play on 'other' platforms as well as PS/XB/PC hardware...
Looks like Microsoft has built up some trust with the game studios especially the indies… I still think we are entering a Cold War of exclusives becoming more used as a way to sway market share…
I'm curious as to who participant B is as while they may be technically correct, there are definitely titles out there that can be classed as system sellers that are 'must have' titles in some people's eyes (GTA & FIFA along with CoD are a few examples I could think of).
Would be good to get it through before this year's COD. Though it's likely to drag on.
@Moonglow Sony are probably in the unique position where they are the ones that stand to lose the most from the deal going ahead. Even with CoD still being offered on PlayStation there is likely to be a shift of users switching from PlayStation to Xbox after it is all done. Participant E mentions levelling the playing field, that gap will inevitably close by the PlayStation share reducing while the Xbox share increases. I've said it many times before but if Microsoft were in a similar position where their market share in an area was under threat they would be putting up just as much of a fight to prevent it from happening, and we all know they can not play nice when they have to.
SIE [Sony Interactive Entertainment] cannot protect against the loss of Call of Duty," Sony wrote in a document published today by the UK's Competition and Markets Authority regulator, which is currently scrutinising the deal
SIE's recent development experience of shooter/battle royale games is limited and its main active shooter franchise is significantly less impactful than Call of Duty," Sony wrote. "Destiny, SIE's main active first-person shooter franchise, had only [redacted percentage] of the gameplay hours and [redacted percentage] of the game spend of Call of Duty in 2021
The above ( via Eurogamer) is what Sony outlined to the CMA and the reasons why they are against the takeover. It is utterly predictable from Sony but here we are😁.
Folks.... we're just over a month away from this ABK plague being behind us! Hopefully the regulators scramble as some have predicted to be the first to approve it and it's done before April 26th but even it we have to wait for the 26th....the end is near!!! This deal is and always has been great for everyone but the market leader. It's going through, I'm playing Diablo in gamepass, and the price of salt will crash with all the tears being shed in the Sony Pony stables.
@Sakai Exactly! To dismiss 4J Studios because they have ported Rare and Minecraft games is ridiculous. If anything, they have privileged information about cross-platform deals.
@Krzzystuff hopefully hopefully
@Sol4ris I saw that too.
I guess Sony reads, and I am paraphrasing, "we will support PlayStation as long as there is a PlayStation to support" and yells "OBJECTION!" for no reason.
Because that's basically what it looks like.
@Sakai That's true to an extent. But from what we understand of Microsoft's deal to buy Mojang, it seems they are independent and choose which platforms they can launch on too. (Similar to the Sony Bungie deal if reports are to be believed) but MS are still their ultimate paymasters.
@Trmn8r I thought participant F was the most interesting.
@Sebatrox Yes several smaller developers have mentioned this problem with PS Store in the past. Basically if you aren't one of the larger, or more celebrated, indies - who don't need as big a push anyway - or AA/AAA, then it's hard to get noticed on PS Store.
Discoverability of smaller titles IS a problem, as it is on most online stores, some are better than others, and PS is particularly bad.
But I don't think Game Pass solves that either. Generally only the better indie games get on game pass, their curation is excellent, I don't think Game Pass solves that discoverability either despite what this one developer says. Unless you are one of the lucky few to get on the service... but same could be said for PS+
Have noticed over the last few years there has been lots of car group buyouts and serval very well known manufacturers all in big groups and owned by one big company.
Did they have to go through all this, as I can’t recall all these problems with them.
I can't see any third party developers/studios being against the deal at all, and why would they? With Sony saving the millions they usually spend on call of duty, these developers are hoping sony now turn their attention and money towards them, something similar to what EA said about the deal about Battlefield getting more attention.
@themightyant as someone who celebrates indie games in general above most others these days, it's a problem everywhere. I think Nintendo and Xbox both do more than Sony with little directs/streams, and big promotions and sales. Xbox in particular is what invigorated my love for the creativity and diversity of indies with their Summer of Arcade back in the day, but yeah, the vast majority of genuine indie developers, not putting out shovelware, but a genuine vision from a small and dedicated studio working with and around limitations to make a damn game that works, don't get to catch a lucky break, and it doesn't matter if it's the PS store, the Xbox store, the eShop, or Steam, it won't reach everyone that it could and won't get any promos over the beloved indies, the next licensed game for the grind, or the next AAA open world 'epic' for the grind.
@Sakisa Discoverability is DEFINTELY a problem everywhere, and definitely worse on PS store. Though eShop has it's own pretty major problems, Nintendo had to step it to stop people manipulating the charts to get noticed.
Also loved Summer of Arcade back in the day. But again the calibre of games in that aren't really the problem area. Games like Braid, Bastion, Trials HD, Limbo, etc. were going to get covered in magazines regardless, yes SoA boosted sales, not knocking it, but this isn't the real problem area.
It's games that DON'T get featured on the likes Summer of Arcade, Game Pass, PS+, etc, or aren't big indie hits like Cult of the Lamb that have the problem of discoverability.
EDIT: Sony's biggest two problems here are not allowing devs/publishers, within reason, to set their own store prices (though see Switch eShop problem for reason why it can't be fully open) and they don't have good discoverability options or social proof (reviews/ratings) on their Store for games you've never heard about.
@themightyant
from what we understand of Microsoft's deal to buy Mojang, it seems they are independent and choose which platforms they can launch on too. (Similar to the Sony Bungie deal if reports are to be believed) but MS are still their ultimate paymasters
I personally see Mojang and Bungie’s position with regards to choosing which platforms they can launch on too to be more of a quasi-independent situation. Like you observed, Ultimately, its up to Microsoft and Sony if future IP'S from Mojang an Bungie will be multiplatform endeavours or not.
It's good to see other companies are explaining to CMA that a trailing competitor making moves to close the gap to the market leader is not harmful to competition but actually helpful. It's common sense that the only thing that would lessen competition is protecting Sony's current market share.
@Sol4ris Bungie said, in their aquisiton press release
While it doesn't specifically say it, the wording seems pretty clear that Bungie, not Sony, are in control of what they make, and where they publish. This was reiterated in several reports at the time.
As for Mojang, Microsoft said:
While that is much woollier language ('plans' change and what counts as 'Minecraft'?) several reports at the time suggested Mojang had clauses that assured more autonomy than most buyouts (i'm trying to find the links, but it's almost 10 years ago and google is defeating me!) But subsequent evidence with multi-platform releases for both Dungeons and now Legends suggest that was correct.
@Dezzy70 That's because a certain company wasn't involved in the automotive industry at the time. Afeela the situation would be different in that sector today....
@UltimateOtaku91 yeh ok ... So what your saying is these companies don't really see it as a gd deal but will say that it is just in case Thier lottery numbers come up and sony gives them money cause it's not like Sony can put the money they saved in Thier own studios hey ?
@Banjo- Who said anything about dismissing 4J's view? They should be taken into account. I only suggested they would be less impartial as MS have been their main source of income for over a decade. That is correct, no?
@Martsmall I'm not saying they don't think the deal would be good in general, but just adding a reason why they wouldn't be against it, they have something to possibly gain from the deal but absolutely nothing to lose, if that makes sense.
@themightyant I have no problem if it makes indies up their game and deliver a quality game with the curation process. As everyone says the beauty of GamePass is that we can try and delete if it not good/interesting.
@UltimateOtaku91 oh ok it reads like that's the reason sort of thing. That make sense ?
The deal makes no difference to other companies they are in competition with acti games now and still will be and even with cod competition they still do good sales , ok not as good as cod ( let's face it no one does that I know fortnight maybe ? ) but still gd , the only one losing anything is Sony and imho it's cause they don't accept change well ...eg how long to finally face Thier games are going to pc ? If I had a £ for every time some Sony fan told me Thier exclusive games will never b on pc I'd b buying activisin lol
@AlwaysPlaying Neither do I. It's my favourite thing about Game Pass, basically every game deserves to be there. While they may not all be for me, they all have something that has earned their spot. The quality is FANTASTIC.
With so many thousand games on the store this sort of guided curation is appreciated for finding hidden gems, even for those of us that live an breathe gaming on sites like this.
But again I don't think Game Pass solves the issue of discoverability for the rest of the titles that don't make it. That is the problem area and there are plenty of great games that don't make the cut, and then might even get drowned out by Game Pass.
@Dezzy70 All merger and acquisitions get scrutinized regardless of the business. Variety of issues like foreign ownership and if the resulting company created creates an uneven playing field. Look at 5G and Huawei for instance.
@themightyant No. Your interpretation is what is biased.
@Kaloudz I think that they just chose to show their name because they don't care (imagine Sony complaining about Minecraft PS ports) and perhaps the others are afraid of Sony's victimhood and pestering. Remember when Sony was phoning Microsoft after the announcement because Sony only cares about Call of Duty's current lack of parity in Sony's favour and then they rejected their calls and ABK's because they were busy lying to every regulator. They are playing the victim around the world because they can no longer milk Call of Duty fans' with early access and exclusive DLC instead of focusing on their first-party lineup.
My guess is that Participant C is Todd Howard!
Said it from the beginning and haven’t backed down, this deal will go through and when Call of Duty commercials say play on Xbox Game pass that will be a big driver for the service and make more competition. I am all for it. I would like to see Xbox over take Sony in america, currently PS5 is ahead in the states by 2.6 million units. So it’s close, around the world MS can hope to just earn little amounts at a time as PS will still be the major player in those markets. This is good for the industry and i can’t wait until the deal is done and we start to see what GP will look like. Should be great.
Slightly off subject but just watched a little documentary on USA Company FORD.
I drive a Ford car.
Basically how they are slowly going down in the European/UK market over the years and what they are trying to do now moving forward.
The biggest thing and related to Xbox, USA Company, is that Ford believe now, what works well for the USA market they seem to believe will work for Europe/UK etc.
Which it won’t for good reasons and sales are now definitely showing this.
My connection, I believe that it is what Microsoft believe with Xbox and the whole Gamepass approach and not selling many consoles at all in Europe/UK or not bothered. Is they believe what works well in the USA, which is where xbox is doing slightly ok or it’s best area, will work in Europe/UK.
I know a different industry but both USA companies and what I think, they believe what works or will work in the USA works in other countries.
It’s something to do with how some USA businesses normally big ones end up internally believing this. Which normal ends in trouble.
They gave other examples like General Motors etc that believed the same thing and they had to get government bale out etc.
@Kaloudz it was a joke. After all the memes and vids about Todd over the years, it was the first person I thought of when I read that statement!
@Dezzy70 not selling many consoles at all in the UK?
"The UK games industry is the most competitive console market in the world. Over the last 10 years, Xbox, PS and Nintendo have all led the market at one point.
Last year, Xbox Series, PS5 and Switch all had over 30% market share each (GfK data)
In terms of PS4 vs Xbox One, 57% of sales were for PS4 and 43% for Xbox One. On PS5 vs Xbox Series it's pretty much the same (56% vs 44%). It's close"
Source: https://mobile.twitter.com/Chris_Dring/status/1636394786235064321
@Sakai
I think you missing my point, I have all three consoles. Yes the UK is one of Xbox better markets. But worldwide it’s getting further behind now. Month after month. And will stay third place and my prediction will sell less consoles worldwide this year 2023 than it did 2022 and gain less Game pass subscribers than year 2022.
See I have series x but I know Xbox will always be behind and I’m cool with that.
They only hope is buy buy buy studios and that is what they are doing, so who knows maybe one day.
@Sakai
See for the love of gaming we have to go through these phases with these companies.
Sony arrogance PS3
Nintendos complacency WII U
Xbox it works in the USA experiments, Xbox one and series x to a point.
One only difference Xbox has Microsoft with the world’s deepest pockets to help and take risks and buy up big studios.
‘Participant E’ absolutely nails the important point-“ It's far more likely that it may help to create a more level playing field between Xbox and PlayStation which, at this point in time, is sorely needed”
" It's far more likely that it may help to create a more level playing field between Xbox and PlayStation which, at this point in time, is sorely needed”
I don't know about any of you folks, but it troubles me reading that statement.
@Banjo- So you genuinely think a company who's sole job has been porting Microsoft games for the last 10+ years is impartial?
OK then!
Lets ask HAL Labs for an unbiased view of Nintendo while we're at it. I want some of what you are all smoking.
Although I agree that indie games should be easy to find, I disagree that all should be seen front and center and should have the same amount advertising space. They should all be easy enough to find, but the amount of crap that gets put on all the game stores today would just make it a quagmire of shovelware. I think Microsoft do a pretty good job of advertising good indie games I just hope they aren't making them pay through the nose to do it. I think that gamepass is also a good way of pushing these games through, as only 3-4 games at a time drip through max each time, so it ensures that people will at least give them a go
@themightyant That's rude but I don't care because I don't smoke anything. Don't say that it's a joke because I've never found any of your comments amusing, not even when you try.
Your neutral façade doesn't fool anyone but the worst thing about your comments is that they don't make sense and that the cherry-picking is so obvious. You should be straightforward and just say what you think.
Here's an interesting update among all of this i have not seen widely reported yet:
"MLex reports that the lawsuit from gamers has been dismissed and they’ll need to redraft their complaint.
Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley raised concerns about a lack of evidence/numbers, precise argument about the harm arising from the deal and the definition of the relevant markets."
This is in relation to the lawsuit "gamers against ms/abk acquisition" that was filed
@Banjo- You are right that was rude, and uncalled for, I apologise.
But I am saying what I think. 4J are not a neutral party, I don't see how anyone could think they are. How does that not make sense?
I believe I am relatively neutral when it comes to Xbox, Game Pass and gaming in general. I play on all and don't have a favourite. Pros and cons to each. I consistently sing the praises of Game Pass and some other Xbox things for example, but am frustrated by MS first party output, UI etc.
But I am NOT neutral when it come's to the mass industry consolidation that is happening here, never suggested I was, because I STRONGLY believe it is going to be awful for this hobby we all love in the long run. It frustrates me that so many support it and are handing away gamers rights by wishing for more platform exclusivity with smiles and grins on their faces. All whilst decrying exclusivity on other platforms. It's two faced.
It's entirely possible to be relatively neutral on one issue and heavily against the other.
@themightyant Sony needs better competition and the way they are handling this is so disgusting that the deal should go through. There are more objective reasons to agree with Microsoft in this case. I only see you complaining about Microsoft's acquisitions and protecting Sony's interests so I'm going to ask you some questions and give you those objective reasons at the same time:
1) What is worse, Microsoft acquiring ABK and accepting all the risks and massive work it entails or Sony sending bank transfers to third parties to prevent games from coming to Xbox, using their money as a gatekeeper? Is there something worse in the industry than what Sony does? It's unbelievable that a person with the three brands on the profile picture can't see that.
2) What is worse, Microsoft acquiring ABK and people being able to play games on Xbox, PC and Cloud and some of them on PS or Sony acquiring Square Enix, if it ever happens, and releasing Final Fantasy games only for PS5? What company is the most consumer-friendly?
3) What do you think about Call of Duty's lack of parity as Sony has been managing that IP that doesn't even belong to them? What if Microsoft starts paying Ubisoft for having a better version of Assassin's Creed games on Xbox?
4) What is worse, considering that ABK is going through difficult times internally as an organisation (I wrote another verb last time and you made an awful deal of it so I'll avoid it), ABK being acquired by Microsoft or being acquired by Sony, that is number one and hates sharing their games and other companies' games?
5) Is it fair to not let Xbox grow anymore and let Sony increase their market share even more through anticompetitive practices such as moneyhatting, considering that Sony is currently number one and that they pay third parties to decrease the importance of Xbox in the gaming landscape? Why can't a company that shares games with other platforms unlike Sony be as important as Sony in the video games market?
Yes, the deal should go through, because Sony has the biggest market share, and moneyhatting to specifically exclude Xbox from third-party games as Sony does should be illegal.
@Banjo- All fair questions
1) What is worse? Buying 20+ studios and publishers and making much of their content exclusive is FAR worse than the occasional paid exclusive on PS. No I don't like those either, I have always been clear on that (FF and others should be on all platforms). But the relatively few paid exclusives does not even come close to competing against every Zenimax / ABK game that becomes an exclusive going forward, for now and seemingly evermore. Those are all games that would have by-and-large been on other platforms.
2) I don't like either. But while COD may be cross platform, that is just one franchise, what about every other ABK game? I'm certain there will be more Xbox Zenimax & ABK exclusives from these deals than PS Final Fantasy / Square etc. ones. We will end up with more and more exclusives and more walled gardens.
3) I don't like exclusive content, just as I don't like paid exclusives. I don't like what Sony is doing paying for it AT ALL. But lets be clear of 2 facts here.
But neither are reasons to make whole franchises exclusive in exchange. it's a disproportional response akin to bringing nuclear weapons to a gun fight.
4) I agree ABK will likely eventually get to a better place under Microsoft's rule than they are under Bobby Kotick and his cronies. This is potentially one of the positives for the deal. But people working in good conditions, shouldn't be conditionally linked to platform exclusivity.
5) This one is complicated. Yes it is fair to let Microsoft grow their market share. And they have been doing a great job of this in recent years with Game Pass, backwards compatibility and a string of pro-consumer decisions. I salute them for that. FWIW I don't like many of Sony's tactics and MS are currently more pro-consumer. But this wasn't always the case, and probably won't always be either.
But gaining market share shouldn't come at the cost of snapping up whole publishers and taking their IP, games and future output off the table forever more. ESPECIALLY when that contains some of the most beloved IP in gaming Elder Scrolls, Doom, Quake, Fallout, etc. etc.
Microsoft are throwing around their financial might and bullying their way back to the top through spending power. It's like Man City and Chelsea in the English Premier League. The fact that no one else can compete with them on this - Sony and Nintendo don't have anywhere near $69bn to spend - is the reason this deal should be blocked.
[edited for clarity]
UPDATE to your edit: I completely agree paying for single exclusives like Final Fantasy should not be allowed, but neither should buying up some of the greatest IP in history and making them exclusive.
How can you be so against one but for the other? It's the same end result for gamers on other platforms.
The main difference for gamers is that one is a game at a time, the other is seemingly every game in those franchises going forward. Which is worse again?
@Banjo- I answered your questions, would you answer 5 of mine?
1) You said it should be illegal to allow "moneyhatting to specifically exclude Xbox from third-party games as Sony does. Broadly I agree.
Why then do you think it is OK for Xbox to anti-competitively outspend everyone and buy up IP to make it exclusive? It's the exact same end result for gamers on other platforms.
2) Do you think it is OK for Microsoft to make games/IP that were previously multi-platform like Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Doom, etc. exclusive? Is that consumer friendly?
3) Do you think there will be more Xbox console exclusives because of this ABK deal than before? If so are you OK with that? Broadly are you happy with more industry consolidation, larger walled gardens and more exclusives.
4) Do you think Microsoft's current position in the market is more down to Sony/Nintendo and their practises. Or it is more due to decisions they made themselves in the past e.g. XBO launch, closing most of their studios, turning down titles like Spider-man, and the inability to put out as highly regarded games as Sony & Nintendo?
5) Do you think Microsoft's first party games in the last 10 years have been a good enough standard and frequency to compete with Sony & Nintendo with the masses?
BTW I agree that Sony needs better competition, on that we can agree. But I think we are already heading that way. Microsoft is already gaining market share off Sony & Nintendo, and we haven't even really started to see the long terms effects from the Zenimax deal, this takes years to really take effect. Xbox doesn't need ABK to do it, they could have invested a fraction of $69bn into their own studios but they are being greedy.
@themightyant Microsoft is already gaining market share off Sony & Nintendo, and we haven't even really started to see the long terms effects from the Zenimax deal, this takes years to really take effect. Xbox doesn't need ABK to do it, they could have invested a fraction of $69bn into their own studios but they are being greedy.
This This This!
I've said it before in another thread, can you imagine where MS would be if they were to put that kind of investment into their own IP's and studios. PGR, Kotor and Jade empire to name a few. That's how you build a solid fanbase and create a more level playing field. Dodgy business practices from both ends aside, Sony essentially earned their market share due to the release of two powerhouse consoles before MS successfully entered the console market.
When/If this deal goes through, a huge amount of previously multi-platform games will become exclusive and I, personally, as an almost 50 year gamer who loves games and not Companies, think that is really problematic for the gaming future.
i wish and hope MS take the advise ive been saying here, if sony wont sign anything before this gets approved i would NEVER brring any game to their platform.....as a big middle finger to sony....
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...