Current Events > Sony and the FTC are getting annihilated in court during the closing arguments

(+) Yeah! (+)

A guy named Destin has been documenting what is being said in the calling arguments. FTC has been getting destroyed but this one really stood out. You can go through his entire thread if you want to see everything

https://twitter.com/destinlegarie/status/1674552550878769152?s=46&t=RIgg7MxCuMBQaInBBisyMQ

This guy is a major Xbox fanboy btw.

SocialistGamer posted...

This guy is a major Xbox fanboy btw.

So I picked the wrong person? I could find someone else but I dont get how this changes what he is quoting from the hearing

Sony has no legit argument. They pay top dollar for exclusives. They didnt want to play ball with crossplay. What horse are they on?

I've read a lot of tweets from this case but the one TC picked out actually sums it up more than anything.

The FTC is acting like their job is to defend Sony in court instead of American consumers.

Here is a more recent quote from the case from Charlie Intel. Hopefully that is less bias.

https://twitter.com/charlieintel/status/1674552714590560258?s=46&t=RIgg7MxCuMBQaInBBisyMQ

Having one company buying another large one such as Activision is harming consumers through having a crazy big market share and thus essentially a monopoly. If you can only get CoD on Xbox from now on is that really good for consumers?

Not sure why this is so hard to grasp. Just because they can buy them doesnt mean its a good thing.

For the record I dont care about COD and havent bought it in years. But I dont like seeing companies become these monolithic giants that can dictate terms not through good quality but because they are the only game in town.

Hopefully the sale remains blocked this is a terrible deal for consumers. Sony would then likely yank Destiny off Xbox. Then each company buys up the next developer, next its UBIsoft, then Sega, then Take Two.

ToadallyAwesome posted...

Having one company buying another large one such as Activision is harming consumers through having a crazy big market share and thus essentially a monopoly. If you can only get CoD on Xbox from now on is that really good for consumers?

Not sure why this is so hard to grasp. Just because they can buy them doesnt mean its a good thing.

For the record I dont care about COD and havent bought it in years. But I dont like seeing companies become these monolithic giants that can dictate terms not through good quality but because they are the only game in town.

Youd be able to still buy COD on PC and they have ideas with Nintendo. This isnt anything different than all of the games Sony is keeping exclusive

ToadallyAwesome posted...

Having one company buying another large one such as Activision is harming consumers through having a crazy big market share and thus essentially a monopoly. If you can only get CoD on Xbox from now on is that really good for consumers?

Not sure why this is so hard to grasp. Just because they can buy them doesnt mean its a good thing.

For the record I dont care about COD and havent bought it in years. But I dont like seeing companies become these monolithic giants that can dictate terms not through good quality but because they are the only game in town.

You do know that Phil Spencer already said, under oath, that he would bring Call of Duty to PS5 and all future PlayStations right? Even Sony said in a private email that came to light that they believe Microsoft wouldnt make Call of Duty exclusive

Noname12 posted...

Youd be able to still buy COD on PC and they have ideas with Nintendo. This isnt anything different than all of the games Sony is keeping exclusive

This is a bullshit excuse.

Noname12 posted...

Sony has no legit argument. They pay top dollar for exclusives. They didnt want to play ball with crossplay. What horse are they on?

You do know that MS was perfectly fine with buying exclusives and against crossplay until very recently right?

Tanthalas posted...

You do know that MS was perfectly fine with buying exclusives and against crossplay until very recently right?

How can they be against crossplay with Windows computers and Xbox?

Noname12 posted...

Sony has no legit argument. They pay top dollar for exclusives. They didnt want to play ball with crossplay. What horse are they on?

Like I said, Sony's rope is running out. Their lifeline is two third party companies that are giving them free charity and do not need them, one is Activision the other is Take Two who is publicly supporting MS buying Activision. They're clearly holding out GTA 6 launch until this goes through, lmao.

Sony and their fanboys think the world owes Sony a lifeline. Sony should have built an actual software brand they own and can monetize OR a viable live service platform. Instead they think they can bribe two companies for exclusive content to drive PS sales forever.

GTA 6 isn't out because Take Two is waiting for their contracts with Sony to expire most likely. Bet it comes to Xbox day 1 with DLC parity. They're actually sacrificing some money buy limiting content and game releases to PlayStation at this point and what else? That actually harms consumers who want to play GTA day 1 or buy CoD DLC that never comes to PC/Xbox.

Bobby Kotick admitted this was a mistake, and he also wishes they released content for Nintendo as well. Even if this deal is blocked, Kotick and one of the other execs have been actually shitting on Sony on social media for the last year...their exclusivity deals are not getting renewed. Sony even admitted, they just want to trip Microsoft...that's all.

"We don't want a new deal, we just want to block this merger". From the horse's mouth. Lol.

Goodbye Sony.

Hopefully the FTC do a better job at stopping Albertsons and Kroger.

Oh_Boy_ posted...

Sony and their fanboys think the world owes Sony a lifeline.

that's a fucking rich thing to say when MS is crying about not being able to compete and THEIR army of fanboys begging on their behalf for this merger to go through...

They had 20+ years to nurture their IPs and make their product actually worth buying and, to their admittance, they failed. Why should they be allowed to monopolize the industry because they sucked at their jobs?

That judge knows what's up.

The death of Sony, what a time to be alive!

Avirosb posted...

How can they be against crossplay with Windows computers and Xbox?

FFXIV isnt on xbox because they wanted exclusive servers.

Avirosb posted...

How can they be against crossplay with Windows computers and Xbox?

they were against crossplay and buying up third-party exclusives all the time in the 360 era.

"rules for thee....", I guess.

Tanthalas posted...

You do know that MS was perfectly fine with buying exclusives and against crossplay until very recently right?

Umm..LOL!? It is literally just Sony who opposes it and has blocked it in many key titles.

https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/3/22417560/sony-ps4-cross-play-confidential-documents-epic-games-agreements

https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/sony-is-the-only-platform-holder-that-charges-for-cross-play-epic-ceo-claims/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Borderlands/comments/nm5eck/sony_has_blocked_crossplay_in_borderlands_3_for/

Ahem

https://www.cnet.com/tech/gaming/were-ready-microsoft-says-about-xbox-one-ps4-cross-play/

https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/21/17488530/nintendo-switch-microsoft-xbox-minecraft-cross-play-marketing-sony

https://www.windowscentral.com/xbox-cross-play-games

And Microsoft has been trying to get cross platform play right since the Xbox 360....

EDIT: the biggest issue raised about cross play in the 360 era was literally the PC's superior control scheme for competitive shooters.

The most common limitation for supporting cross-platform play from a developer's stance is the difference in control schemes between consoles and computers. Computers with keyboard and mouse controls on personal computers are generally considered to have a significant advantage in games that require aiming, such as first-person shooters, over analog controllers for consoles. Console games are then subsequently developed with features such as aim assist to make up for the lack of precision controls.

In 2010, Rahul Sood, the president of Voodoo PC, stated that Microsoft had terminated cross-platform play between Xbox 360 and computer players for an upcoming game claiming that even skilled console players "got destroyed every time" in matches against computer players of mediocre skill due to the difference between controller and keyboard-and-mouse controls, and thus would be seen as an embarrassment to the Xbox 360. Microsoft's Senior Director of Computer and Mobile Gaming Kevin Unangst countered this point, stating that Microsoft's internal testing found that much of the issues related to control scheme difference can be mitigated through a game's design and balance.

Blizzard Entertainment implemented cross-platform play in its game Overwatch for all supported consoles and on personal computers, but due to the advantage keyboard-mouse players have over controllers, which greatly affects performance in the fast-paced game, they kept the game's competitive play mode segregated into console and computer player pools.

Cliff Bleszinski believed that cross-platform play for his game LawBreakers was a "pipe dream", as he anticipated that by placing tools such as aim assist to help console players match computer players, computer players would be upset at the handicap this introduced, and the player base would react negatively towards this. Following wider adoption of cross-platform play in many mainstream titles starting around 2020, the issues of balancing the game with the use of aim assist in first-person shooters, where the game automatically locks onto targets for those using controllers, became of concern as a game with aggressive aim assist could lead to poor balance between cross-platform players

^didn't know one of MS's lawyers posted here...

ToadallyAwesome posted...

Having one company buying another large one such as Activision is harming consumers through having a crazy big market share and thus essentially a monopoly. If you can only get CoD on Xbox from now on is that really good for consumers?

Not sure why this is so hard to grasp. Just because they can buy them doesnt mean its a good thing.

For the record I dont care about COD and havent bought it in years. But I dont like seeing companies become these monolithic giants that can dictate terms not through good quality but because they are the only game in town.

Microsoft + ABK is in no way, shape, or form anywhere close to a monopoly.

TendoDRM posted...

Microsoft + ABK is in no way, shape, or form anywhere close to a monopoly.

If they were able to make CoD Xbox exclusive it would take a significant chunk out of Playstation's revenue. They seem pretty committed to not doing that however, at least for the next 10 years.

Board_hunter567 posted...

If they were able to make CoD Xbox exclusive it would take a significant chunk out of Playstation's revenue. They seem pretty committed to not doing that however, at least for the next 10 years.

What does that matter to the consumer?
This is part both you and the FTC are failing at. Sony losing out is irrelevant.

Oh_Boy_ posted...

Umm..LOL!? It is literally just Sony who opposes it and has blocked it in many key titles.

https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/3/22417560/sony-ps4-cross-play-confidential-documents-epic-games-agreements

https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/sony-is-the-only-platform-holder-that-charges-for-cross-play-epic-ceo-claims/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Borderlands/comments/nm5eck/sony_has_blocked_crossplay_in_borderlands_3_for/

Ahem

https://www.cnet.com/tech/gaming/were-ready-microsoft-says-about-xbox-one-ps4-cross-play/

https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/21/17488530/nintendo-switch-microsoft-xbox-minecraft-cross-play-marketing-sony

https://www.windowscentral.com/xbox-cross-play-games

And Microsoft has been trying to get cross platform play right since the Xbox 360....

Sony fans don't even know Sony's lore

Board_hunter567 posted...

If they were able to make CoD Xbox exclusive it would take a significant chunk out of Playstation's revenue. They seem pretty committed to not doing that however, at least for the next 10 years.

You guys are like children truly. This merger would make all of that PS exclusive CoD content available on Xbox and PC in the future, and they already want to get back to releasing games on Nintendo systems.

Null_Gain posted...

Sony fans don't even know Sony's lore

Super sad. It's because Sony isn't an actual brand...literally Weekend at Bernie's and Activision is tired of propping up a corpse.

Oh_Boy_ posted...

Umm..LOL!? It is literally just Sony who opposes it and has blocked it in many key titles.

https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/3/22417560/sony-ps4-cross-play-confidential-documents-epic-games-agreements

https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/sony-is-the-only-platform-holder-that-charges-for-cross-play-epic-ceo-claims/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Borderlands/comments/nm5eck/sony_has_blocked_crossplay_in_borderlands_3_for/

Ahem

https://www.cnet.com/tech/gaming/were-ready-microsoft-says-about-xbox-one-ps4-cross-play/

https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/21/17488530/nintendo-switch-microsoft-xbox-minecraft-cross-play-marketing-sony

https://www.windowscentral.com/xbox-cross-play-games

And Microsoft has been trying to get cross platform play right since the Xbox 360....

thats not true about that last part, sony tried to get crossplay to be a thing during the ps3/xbox360 era and microsoft was the one who said no.

then microsoft got spanked so hard and they tried to pretend that cross play was a new idea and they should be praised.

Microsoft doesnt get praise for crossplay when the only reason they became for it was because they lost that generation. When they were winning they were against it too.

https://kotaku.com/i-saw-the-playstation-3-wired-to-play-against-an-xbox-3-5813740?__twitter_impression=true

Barber102 posted...

thats not true about that last part, sony tried to get crossplay to be a thing during the ps3/xbox360 era and microsoft was the one who said no.

[citation needed]

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Oh yeah, the biggest Sony shill you will ever see.

Unknown5uspect posted...

What does that matter to the consumer?
This is part both you and the FTC are failing at. Sony losing out is irrelevant.

Maybe because Sony then uses that money to fund their first party exclusives? So quality of those will decrease or the number they make will decrease.

I really dont understand Microsoft fanboys wanting this to go through. Microsoft is just going to turn you around and screw you the first chance they can. And the entire gaming scene will be so much worse of

Barber102 posted...

thats not true about that last part, sony tried to get crossplay to be a thing during the ps3/xbox360 era and microsoft was the one who said no.

then microsoft got spanked so hard and they tried to pretend that cross play was a new idea and they should be praised.

Microsoft doesnt get praise for crossplay when the only reason they became for it was because they lost that generation. When they were winning they were against it too.

Never mind I posted real facts about MS always trying for it, you're claiming (with no proof FYI) that Sony supported cross play...when all their little 3rd party friends abandoned them during the PS3 and PSP dog years that they were floating on residual PS2 money and selling their headquarters in several key cities for cash? Lol. So when they couldn't dominate and bully the market, they wanted an olive branch? That is rich.

EDIT:

https://kotaku.com/i-saw-the-playstation-3-wired-to-play-against-an-xbox-3-5813740?__twitter_impression=true

Sounds like a quality issue and I agree. PS online was fucking dreadful back then and MS was charging real money for XBL which was good. This is just like Nintendo rejecting partnerships that can't guarantee quality.

Unknown5uspect posted...

What does that matter to the consumer?
This is part both you and the FTC are failing at. Sony losing out is irrelevant.

The most basics, choice and weaker competitive forces.
For the record, I don't think this merger should be blocked and I believe the FTC and CMA are flailing in their reasonings. But the question of CoD exclusivity is absolutely the major thing hindering it and something that should be scrutinized and heavily considered. It'd be like making it so you can only buy Coca Cola at Walmart.

voldothegr8 posted...

[citation needed]

https://kotaku.com/i-saw-the-playstation-3-wired-to-play-against-an-xbox-3-5813740

"Microsoft won't let Sony players play against them," Rodberg said, before suggesting we change the topic to something less sensitive. Presumably the barrier is a corporate and/or technical incompatibility between the Xbox 360's Xbox Live and Sony's PS3/PSP PlayStation Network. Those services are separate enough that people who play, say, Call of Duty on one, can't play that game against owners of the other, rival console.
I checked with Microsoft to be sure Rodberg wasn't maybe just mis-hearing them. Maybe Microsoft wanted to break the barrier too?Here's a Microsoft spokesperson saying "no," while promoting how awesome the Xbox 360's online service is: "Xbox Live delivers the best entertainment experience unmatched by anyone else, with 35 million actively engaged members. We have a high level of expectation for our game developers to ensure that all Live experiences remain top notch. Because we can't guarantee this level of quality, or control the player experience on other consoles or gaming networks, we currently do not open our network to games that allow this cross-over capability."

Xerun posted...

I really dont understand Microsoft fanboys wanting this to go through. Microsoft is just going to turn you around and screw you the first chance they can. And the entire gaming scene will be so much worse of

Then another competitor will rise up. Also I'm not a MS fanboy, as stated over and over I just want to watch Sony burn. Watching them squirm and squeal as their own scummy game is turned against them has been the best of soul food.

Barber102 posted...

Microsoft doesnt get praise for crossplay when the only reason they became for it was because they lost that generation. When they were winning they were against it too.

It wasn't really "Microsoft" it was Don Mattrick and Steve Ballmer. The change in quality & position happened when Xbox changed hands to Phil Spencer and Satya Nadella.

Xerun posted...

Maybe because Sony then uses that money to fund their first party exclusives? So quality of those will decrease or the number they make will decrease.

AAA is already unsustainable. It takes a full console cycle to make just one game in a series.

Oh_Boy_ posted...

Never mind I posted real facts about MS always trying for it, you're claiming (with no proof FYI) that Sony supported cross play...when all their little 3rd party friends abandoned them during the PS3 and PSP dog years that they were floating on residual PS2 money and selling their headquarters in several key cities for cash? Lol. So when they couldn't dominate and bully the market, they wanted an olive branch? That is rich.

you posted no proof about the last part though. I did post something to back up what I said with the first link in a 2 second google search.

Noname12 posted...

Sony has no legit argument. They pay top dollar for exclusives. They didnt want to play ball with crossplay. What horse are they on?

I don't understand how people don't see the difference between that, and a $69 billion acquisition. The latter being such an incomprehensible amount of money and a huge leap towards a monopolization within the industry.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

I don't understand how people don't see the difference between that, and a $69 billion acquisition. The latter being such an incomprehensible amount of money and a huge leap towards a monopolization within the industry.

By huge leap you mean they will still have 30-some % marketshare, right?

Board_hunter567 posted...

The most basics, choice and weaker competitive forces.
For the record, I don't think this merger should be blocked and the FTC and CMA are flailing in their reasonings. But the question of CoD exclusivity is absolutely the major thing hindering it.

Literally the onyl current, and future CoD "exclusivity" exists on the PlayStation as exclusive live service content. Sony literally doesn't want it to be available elsewhere.

https://www.dexerto.com/gta/new-rumor-claims-sony-wants-gta-6-to-be-a-timed-ps5-exclusive-1406445/

https://kotaku.com/rockstar-locking-some-gta-online-car-upgrades-to-ps5-x-1847323125

Barber102 posted...

you posted no proof about the last part though. I did post something to back up what I said with the first link in a 2 second google search.

Psychoses, truly. MS was never "winning" nor were they against cross play. the ONLY thing you posted was a TRUE issue, quality control. PS# online was hated by the fans....a BIG problem of the time.

voldothegr8 posted...

Then another competitor will rise up. Also I'm not a MS fanboy, as stated over and over I just want to watch Sony burn. Watching them squirm and squeal as their own scummy game is turned against them has been the best of soul food.

this is an incredibly dumb take.

Avirosb posted...

AAA is already unsustainable. It takes a full console cycle to make just one game in a series.

They are still some of the best games that are highly regarded and recommended for anyone jumping to a console for the first time. Having less of those is a net loss for consumers

Cheetaluv posted...

Oh yeah, the biggest Sony shill you will ever see.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


let me guess: you guys are level-headed neutral parties, right?

nah, you guys, whos heads I apparently live in rent-free, arent fanboys, no way

Xerun posted...

Maybe because Sony then uses that money to fund their first party exclusives? So quality of those will decrease or the number they make will decrease.

That's Sony's problem to solve, and their fault if they can't maintain quality. That isn't an issue of the consumer's.

Xerun posted...

I really dont understand Microsoft fanboys wanting this to go through. Microsoft is just going to turn you around and screw you the first chance they can. And the entire gaming scene will be so much worse of

Idgaf what happens with this merger, the arguments for stopping it are terrible.

Avirosb posted...

AAA is already unsustainable. It takes a full console cycle to make just one game in a series.

Doesn't matter. They still are console sellers and sell shit loads. They also provide some of the best experiences in the entertainment industry.

Yeah it would be nice to have them come out faster, maybe with leaps in technology with stuff akin Unreal 5, and probably Ai?

Unknown5uspect posted...

That's Sony's problem to solve, and their fault if they can't maintain quality. That isn't an issue of the consumer's.

Idgaf what happens with this merger, the arguments for stopping it are terrible.

well its something you should care about. Because if Microsoft does get what they want and remove Sony from the market then your choice becomes go Microsoft or Nintendo. And if Microsoft does get its way expect Gamepass to skyrocket in cost

SpiritSephiroth posted...

I don't understand how people don't see the difference between that, and a $69 billion acquisition.

Nice

Anyways, why would monopolization matter from a consumer's perspective?
Games are already expensive as sin.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

They also provide some of the best experiences in the entertainment industry.

Ehhhhhh

Xerun posted...

this is an incredibly dumb take.

I think the word you're looking for is petty. and yes, it is a very petty take. Still feels so good, karma in action.