14 Likes
Idas responds. Article is about something else.
2 Likes
Already asked Idas my friend.
"Initially it seems to say that ESO 6 and some future titles will be multiplatform because they wonât lose X% of revenue and users from Playstation in those cases.
But reading the full context (from page 55), I think that they are saying that ESO 6 and some future titles from Zenimax arenât as big as COD or Minecraft (âMass market audienceâ, as they call them). Therefore, if those titles are also exclusive (like what has happened with some past acquisitions) those wonât involve giving up the same amount of revenue or users from Playstation that they would lose if COD went exclusive.
Anyway, itâs a very complicated way of saying it xD"
3 Likes
Sony and those fans that are currently suing Microsoft sabotaged his mic. Those monsters!
1 Like
Welcome to law firm. Got to use âbigâ words to make it sound law.
1 Like
3 Likes
That graph is kinda glaring lol
13 Likes
6 Likes
There motto moving forward to avoid this when it comes to exclusivity for there purchased publishers should be.
-Single player games are exclusive
-Multiplayer games that rely on large player engagement numbers will be everywhere
1 Like
All Bethesda games are exclusive. The three they speak of are Redfall, Starfield and Elder Scolls 6. They arenât going to give regulators any ammunition by adding more games to that list.
11 Likes
Damn
They better stop Xbox look at that slice!
Lastly, the gaming subscription service and cloud gaming service Xbox offers are not different products. The services allow consumers to access games in different ways, whether by paying a low monthly price for a broad catalog of games or playing a game on a variety of devices without first downloading it. But the games themselves are identical. Xbox believes these alternative payment and distribution models may have promise in the future. But consumers will ultimately decide whether Xbox is correct. If they agree with Xboxâs vision, that will simply prompt more competition, including from companies like Sony, which already has a successful subscription service without even including its most popular (and exclusive) games on the day they are released.
Sony may prefer to protect the revenues it gets from more expensive individual game sales, but the antitrust laws do not serve to insulate the dominant market player and its favored business model from competition.
This so much
17 Likes
Xbox has made this same offer to other competitors, and at least one (Nintendo) has accepted to date. Sony refuses to deal. But a vertical merger causes anticompetitive harm only when the acquired input is âessential.â If Call of Duty were truly essential, Sony would have no reason to refuse
16 Likes
It is really annoying reading the resetera thread, people still act like Microsoft is not allowed to have exclusives but Playstation is. Really frustrating that people really exist with this mindset.
8 Likes
Lmao MS is trying to get FTC to pay their court fees, thatâs a funny slap to the face if it does get blocked.
2 Likes
Sony right now
5 Likes
I was curious as to what the âallegatationsâ they denied in paragraph 50 were - thought I was onto something interesting (as this was the paragraph where the FTC mentioned Microsoft had a game with a lengthy development cycle in the works) but Microsoft seems to end every response with âmicrosoft denies the remaining allegationsâ.