Current Events > Lmfao this was Sony's demands to Microsoft to not complain to FTC

(+) Yeah! (+)

CrimsonGear80 posted...

man they can change that amount to whatever they want whenever they want.

Are you implying they would sell off assets AND completely deplete all of their cash reserves/go in debt just to buy one of those publishers and "counter" MS?

Yeah... that's not how it works lol

solosnake posted...

Seems like a lot of people would rather xbox just die and only have playstation.

No we would rather MS compete by either making the better console, like it did in the 360 generation, or making better franchises, like Nintendo does, instead of by just throwing its money around to turn multiplats exclusive.

What part do people not get about making a multiplat franchise exclusive being massively anti-consumer scumbaggery? This isn't about the company doing it.

CrimsonGear80 posted...

I mean it's not always the cheapest, most of the time the price is the same. and lots of research has shown that Switch owners also own another console. maybe they want to take some games portable, but if they play at home I see no reason why they would buy a switch version of a game when it is also on another more powerful console.

I was counting the cost of the console. The lowest end Switch is $199 new. So it has a strong case for a financially pressed gamer.

CrimsonGear80 posted...

do you not think people buy a switch for nintendo games?

I bought a Switch for nintendo games. I didn't buy it to play a crappier version of The Witcher 3...

Ok so whats your point? Quite happy to accept that one of the reasons for getting one game over the other is if the hardware is better on one device but PS and Xbox are pretty much identical.

Masked-One posted...

No we would rather MS compete by either making the better console, like it did in the 360 generation, or making better franchises, like Nintendo does, instead of by just throwing its money around to turn multiplats exclusive.

What part do people not get about making a multiplat franchise exclusive being massively anti-consumer scumbaggery? This isn't about the company doing it.

Why are you willfully ignoring that they aren't going to make CoD exclusive?

Tyranthraxus posted...

Why are you willfully ignoring that they aren't going to make CoD exclusive?

He was talking about Elder Scrolls or something else most likely.

Exclusivity sucks. People accept the typical practice where a company works closely with a studio for a while til its pretty much a second party anyway, then buy it to make it first party, then that studio makes exclusives for them.

They are less accepting of just throwing bags of money at established third party studios to buy exclusivity like Epic Games started doing to try and prop up their shitty unwanted store, and thats the kind of thing Microsoft is doing now.

Granted, it actually benefits me if Microsoft buys an exclusive away from Sony since Im a PC gamer, but I have enough empathy to care about others who may not be as fortunate.

I just watched a Final Fantasy XIV commercial where they highlight it is a Sony exclusive. Can't fucking believe they are ruining gaming like this!!!!

PraetorXyn posted...

They are less accepting of just throwing bags of money at established third party studios to buy exclusivity like Epic Games started doing to try and prop up their shitty unwanted store, and thats the kind of thing Microsoft is doing now.

That situation wasn't comparable. In the epic games case, the game had already been listed and sold on steam and then taken away to be put on epic exclusively. Valve immediately learned their lesson and updated their terms to say that you can't pull out like that anymore. No one cares about Epic moneyhatting timed exclusives.

Tyranthraxus posted...

That situation wasn't comparable. In the epic games case, the game had already been listed and sold on steam and then taken away to be put on epic exclusively. Valve immediately learned their lesson and updated their terms to say that you can't pull out like that anymore. No one cares about Epic moneyhatting timed exclusives.

Its only different in that Epics arrangement is temporary and Microsofts is permanent.

People have bought studios before. Thats how Zenimax came to own ID and Bethesda etc in the first place, but Microsoft is the first company to start buying up multibillion dollar umbrella companies in the gaming industry.

Still insane that people on this board cheer on this merger.

PraetorXyn posted...

Its only different in that Epics arrangement is temporary and Microsofts is permanent.

People have bought studios before. Thats how Zenimax came to own ID and Bethesda etc in the first place, but Microsoft is the first company to start buying up multibillion dollar umbrella companies in the gaming industry.

Epic's arrangement isn't temporary in every case. They own the studio that made rocket league now, for example. They own Harmonix (Rock Band), they bought EAC and then immediately killed of the Linux port of EAC which permanently ruined any potential for Linux ports of games that require it. They bought Bandcamp to incorporate it into UE as well which doesn't directly affect the gamer but shrinks the market distribution overall regardless.

Funkydog posted...

'Either we get preferential treatment and you get nothing or we have a tantrum'

Fuck Sony. Fuck all these big corporations, but especially fuck Sony for being hypocritical, anti-consumer pieces of garbage.

PraetorXyn posted...

Its only different in that Epics arrangement is temporary and Microsofts is permanent.

People have bought studios before. Thats how Zenimax came to own ID and Bethesda etc in the first place, but Microsoft is the first company to start buying up multibillion dollar umbrella companies in the gaming industry.

What did people expect to happen when Sony kept making exclusives, timed or otherwise, or locking content to Playstation?

I'm just mostly surprised it took Microsoft this long.

Funkydog posted...

What did people expect to happen when Sony kept making exclusives, timed or otherwise, or locking content to Playstation?

I'm just mostly surprised it took Microsoft this long.

For Microsoft to use its endless amount of money to cultivate studios similarly to how Nintendo and Sony did. Them being behind is no excuse. Theyve been in the gaming industry for 20 years or so at this point and have only shown interest in a handful of exclusives for most of that history.

Funkydog posted...

What did people expect to happen when Sony kept making exclusives, timed or otherwise, or locking content to Playstation?

I'm just mostly surprised it took Microsoft this long.

To do the same thing back instead of escalating by billions of dollars?

PraetorXyn posted...

For Microsoft to use its endless amount of money to cultivate studios similarly to how Nintendo and Sony did.

ND, SP, Insomniac, Guerilla, Media Molecule, Santa Monica, etc are all acquisitions.

They did develop some studios internally but all their major hits are from acquisitions. Many of them made some pretty bad ass games on other platforms before their acquisitions, too.

Tyranthraxus posted...

ND, SP, Insomniac, Guerilla, Media Molecule, Santa Monica, etc are all acquisitions.

They did develop some studios internally but all their major hits are from acquisitions. Many of them made some pretty bad ass games on other platforms before their acquisitions, too.

Many of those were [practically] second party before being acquired and those acquisitions happened over a considerable length of time.

PraetorXyn posted...

For Microsoft to use its endless amount of money to cultivate studios similarly to how Nintendo and Sony did. Them being behind is no excuse. Theyve been in the gaming industry for 20 years or so at this point and have only shown interest in a handful of exclusives for most of that history.

Sony purchased numerous studios or paid for exclusivity of many of their top hits though.

itachi15243 posted...

To do the same thing back instead of escalating by billions of dollars?

That's not how any company works. Sony included.

Yeah, MS sucks but this was an inevitable consequence of the demand for exclusivity from customers and the competition. Sony only has themselves to blame.

PraetorXyn posted...

Many of those were [practically] second party before being acquired and those acquisitions happened over a considerable length of time.

Why does length of relationship matter? The end result is still the same.

voldothegr8 posted...

Why does length of relationship matter? The end result is still the same.

Because that was Sony and this is Microsoft

voldothegr8 posted...

Why does length of relationship matter?

Because it's actually fine when Sony does it, that's why it's always these worthless excuses.

voldothegr8 posted...

Why does length of relationship matter? The end result is still the same.

Why are you asking why history matters when historical patterns are being discussed?

PraetorXyn posted...

Why are you asking why history matters when historical patterns are being discussed?

The historical pattern under discussion "to cultivate studios internally" doesn't exist for either party. That's the problem with your argument.

Collat posted...

Still insane that people on this board cheer on this merger.

ABK wanted to sell. Them selling or merging with someone was inevitable. Better to go with the 3rd place console maker to even the playing field AND have all their games on game pass and PC too, along with many still going to the competitors' platforms (including the biggest one)

I don't know why this is so hard for you to understand

Wow, there are people in here acting like Sony doesn't do everything in its power to deny other platforms the opportunity to play things, buying years long timed exclusivity, exclusive DLC, and whatever else they can manage. Xbox still gets denied plenty of stuff outright.

Still can't enjoy Final Fantasy games on release on PC because Sony pays to stall them for years, and probably gonna happen with GTA VI too. Horizon Forbidden West nowhere in sight, though I hardly care at this point.

I'd be glad to see them go out of business just for having the audacity to be this hypocritical if that were on the table, but a lack of competition would probably make Xbox even worse than Sony was so eh.

Epic is honestly worse than MS, they even take previously released games off of Steam after buying them. And buying a fucking anti-cheat software just to prevent it from becoming compatible with a rival platform is unreal. Greedy POS company.

Tyranthraxus posted...

Why are you willfully ignoring that they aren't going to make CoD exclusive?

I'm not. I'm saying that people are fearful of it due to Microsoft's past. They killed Minecraft's Steam port, locked down Elder Scrolls, locked down Fallout, etc.

Now they have a reputation.

itachi15243 posted...

To do the same thing back instead of escalating by billions of dollars?

Exactly. Nobody was suing when MS was just paying for timed exclusives. When they made Tomb Raider a timed exclusive I just dealt with it and waited the extra year. A timed exclusive's nowhere near as bad as a permanent one.

Kyle1022 posted...

Since 1999, around the time the Xbox started development, Sony has acquired 22 video game studios. MS has acquired 20 (assuming the ABK purchase goes through)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Sony

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Microsoft

But sure, keep complaining about big bad MS trying to play catchup

So they're pretty much equal, so I was off, but again, proof that both are bad and have been at this dick measuring contest for decades.

Microsoft was on top of the world in the 360 days and is one of the biggest companies in the world. You're not going to convince me they are still "playing catch up".

Masked-One posted...

Epic is honestly worse than MS, they even take previously released games off of Steam after buying them. And buying a fucking anti-cheat software just to prevent it from becoming compatible with a rival platform is unreal. Greedy POS company.

Epic is probably the worst company in gaming right now. Cannot wait until big daddy Tentent pulls the plug on their bullshit storefront that keeps bleeding money year after year

Kyle1022 posted...

Epic is probably the worst company in gaming right now. Cannot wait until big daddy Tentent pulls the plug on their bullshit storefront that keeps bleeding money year after year

Not going to happen until Fortnite dies. That's how they keep it afloat.

"Really the exclusive Call of Duty bonus content and the year of Deathloop/FF16 meant Microsoft had no choice but to buy Bethesda, Activision, Obsidian, etc to stay in the game. What else could they do? Buy timed exclusivity for some games themselves? Like they have many times in the past?"

Masked-One posted...

I'm not. I'm saying that people are fearful of it due to Microsoft's past. They killed Minecraft's Steam port, locked down Elder Scrolls, locked down Fallout, etc.

Now they have a reputation.

I've never heard of a Minecraft steam port before, but it's been around for fucking years before Microsoft acquired it. Why didn't they release it themselves? Anyway.

I maintain complete lack of empathy regarding console versions of Fallout, Elder Scrolls, and soon to be Starfield. Console versions of these games were always completely inferior without even an attempt made at parity to the PC version because of security compliance to the nature of the locked down ecosystem of consoles.

It would be better for the consumer if these games were never released on consoles at all.

Kyle1022 posted...

Epic is probably the worst company in gaming right now. Cannot wait until big daddy Tentent pulls the plug on their bullshit storefront that keeps bleeding money year after year

Agreed. For as much complaining as I'm doing about MS here, I respect Phil Spencer. My opinion of Tim Sweeney is moddable.

Doesn't help that Valve doesn't even feel like a deserving target of Epic's sheer pettiness. Apple sure, that's just asshole vs. asshole, but Valve is relatively pro-gamer.

Tyranthraxus posted...

It would be better for the consumer if these games were never released on consoles at all.

It would be better for the consumer if consoles didn't exist with the way these people act about exclusivity. But we don't wanna have that discussion.

hockeybub89 posted...

So they're pretty much equal, so I was off, but again, proof that both are bad and have been at this dick measuring contest for decades.

Microsoft was on top of the world in the 360 days and is one of the biggest companies in the world. You're not going to convince me they are still "playing catch up".

MS bought studios to get a foothold in the industry (at the time), and now buys them to catch up to Sony. Sony does so to try and maintain their position as market leader. These are not the same thing no matter how you try to argue it

Microsoft was not "on top of the world" during the 360 days, at least not in the gaming world. Once the Wii released, they were literally never in first place. They finished that generation in last. This is not even addressing the red ring of death and e74 errors that plagued the console during its lifespan and cost Microsoft billions of dollars

Please get a clue

Kyle1022 posted...

Epic is probably the worst company in gaming right now. Cannot wait until big daddy Tentent pulls the plug on their bullshit storefront that keeps bleeding money year after year

Sweeney owns sole majority. Tencent can't do shit. They could maybe threaten to sell which would temporarily devalue Sweeney's holdings but I don't think he cares because Sweeney doesn't want to sell any of his stake at all.

Unknown5uspect posted...

It would be better for the consumer if consoles didn't exist with the way these people act about exclusivity. But we don't wanna have that discussion.

Yeah the very existence of consoles is anti consumer but I'm tired of fighting that fight. I've filed it next to my "Don't use Facebook or anything similar" rants.

Unknown5uspect posted...

It would be better for the consumer if consoles didn't exist with the way these people act about exclusivity. But we don't wanna have that discussion.

I agree. What's the point of multiple brands of smart TV if they don't all purchase a streaming service and make it exclusive to their machines?

I own every Sony console and have only ever bought one xbox ever (360, before PS3 existed), but at this point I'm hoping this acquisition goes through just because the way Sony fanboys are twisting themselves into pretzels trying to explain how it's only bad when Microsoft does it is giving me secondhand embarassment.

Whoever said console wars ended in the PS4/Xbone era has obviously never visited this dying websight, where we party like it's 1999.

Tyranthraxus posted...

Sweeney owns sole majority. Tencent can't do shit. They could maybe threaten to sell which would temporarily devalue Sweeney's holdings but I don't think he cares because Sweeney doesn't want to sell any of his stake at all.

Without that Tencent money, the exclusives would grind to a halt. They've already slowed down severely over the past couple years. And the freebies have been almost all repeats and/or shovelware lately

Funkydog posted...

What did people expect to happen when Sony kept making exclusives, timed or otherwise, or locking content to Playstation?

MS does the exact same thing. so does nintendo. i don't know why that is being ignored ( i mean, I KNOW why)...

Kyle1022 posted...

MS bought studios to get a foothold in the industry (at the time), and now buys them to catch up to Sony. Sony does so to try and maintain their position as market leader. These are not the same thing no matter how you try to argue it

and if you were in charge of Sony, would you NOT want to do that? "oh hey were are going to ease up on the exclusives and let MS catch up. it's only fair". Yeah, enjoy the unemployment line after bringing that to your bosses...

Microsoft was not "on top of the world" during the 360 days, at least not in the gaming world. Once the Wii released, they were literally never in first place. They finished that generation in last. This is not even addressing the red ring of death and e74 errors that plagued the console during its lifespan and cost Microsoft billions of dollars

MS still spent money to buy exclusives and timed exclusives. Dead Rising, Blue Dragon, lost Odyssey, GTAIV DLC...remember those? nevermind the COD deal they had before AB went to Sony.

Their badly-designed console is not Sony's fault. Neither are consumers choosing to buy other consoles since they found they offered something better than an Xbox did.

TheDurinator posted...

I own every Sony console and have only ever bought one xbox ever (360, before PS3 existed), but at this point I'm hoping this acquisition goes through just because the way Sony fanboys are twisting themselves into pretzels trying to explain how it's only bad when Microsoft does it is giving me secondhand embarassment.

again, people wanting it to go through because of "dur fanboisZZZ" are sad as fuck.

You shouldn't want the industry monopolized because it's BAD for us, no matter what MS or whoever else wants to spin it otherwise.

Kyle1022 posted...

MS bought studios to get a foothold in the industry (at the time), and now buys them to catch up to Sony. Sony does so to try and maintain their position as market leader. These are not the same thing no matter how you try to argue it

Microsoft was not "on top of the world" during the 360 days, at least not in the gaming world. Once the Wii released, they were literally never in first place. They finished that generation in last. This is not even addressing the red ring of death and e74 errors that plagued the console during its lifespan and cost Microsoft billions of dollars

Please get a clue

Microsoft was kicking Sony's ass for years and then Sony came back and then Microsoft hurt themselves with their XBone leadup and launch, as Sony did the previous gen.

I'm not saying studio purchases are good, but almost all of Sony's purchases in the last 20 years were studios that most people didn't even know weren't already first-party, given how closely tied they were for years. If Sony had bought Square or Konami, it would have made bigger waves than when they bought Naughty Dog or Sucker Punch.

To spin it as "Microsoft has to buy exclusivity to survive!" but then "Sony is buying exclusivity to destroy the competition!" is silly.

Tyranthraxus posted...

I've never heard of a Minecraft steam port before, but it's been around for fucking years before Microsoft acquired it. Why didn't they release it themselves? Anyway.

It's Minecraft, it's on basically every modern console and amidst all that porting a Steam version was low priority because Minecraft already had a standalone PC client. But Notch had been in talks with Valve over a port... said talks heading to the shadow realm after the MS purchase, because MS had its own PC storefront instead.

Masked-One posted...

It's Minecraft, it's on basically every modern console and amidst all that porting a Steam version was low priority because Minecraft already had a standalone PC client. But Notch had been in talks with Valve over a port... said talks heading to the shadow realm after the MS purchase, because MS had its own PC storefront instead.

And yet Valve has no issue with the acquisition.

Punished_Blinx posted...

And yet Valve has no issue with the acquisition.

why would they?

Punished_Blinx posted...

And yet Valve has no issue with the acquisition.

It's not like Valve was entitled to an unreleased game from a franchise that had never been on Steam. That's different from how PS heavily depends on games like CoD to stay competitive.

Masked-One posted...

It's not like Valve was entitled to an unreleased game from a franchise that had never been on Steam. That's different from how PS heavily depends on games like CoD to stay competitive.

Are platform holders entitled to games in franchises that were previously released on their platform?

Punished_Blinx posted...

Are platform holders entitled to games in franchises that were previously released on their platform?

Depends on if the courts think so. Legally they are allowed to intervene if they think a monopoly is forming.

Punished_Blinx posted...

Are platform holders entitled to games in franchises that were previously released on their platform?

Consumers should be. Exclusivity deals literally exist to deny other platforms business and to force consumers to buy their platform if not already owned. Games that clearly they believe the competitor would have access to. No one is saying Starfield has to be released on mobile or playable on PCs built in 2006.

hockeybub89 posted...

Consumers should be. Exclusivity deals literally exist to deny other platforms business and to force consumers to buy their platform if not already owned.

"Exclusivity is bad for consumers" is a completely different subject and it's not one you're going to find any industry moguls advocating.