I find it hilarious that with the old math of the console’s SLC Sony was like “fantastic, incredible, implacable, genius move, 100% agree with that” and now they are completely against it and telling the CMA the model they should use. (spoilers THEYR NEW MODEL WOW!)
I will always wonder if the CMA’s work were made in ignorance or malice, because I kind of would understand they lack information about the industry and saying the insane things they have been saying all this time in the console space and use SONY to try to build a case but if its the later and the just wanted to block for the sake of block by latching on faulty arguments that anyone with a brain cell could tell were nuts from a competitor (one who anyone could told was self serving) who is also the market leader well…I don’t know what to think.
I’m completely mystified by Sony’s response. With so little time till a final decision there’s almost no chance that the CMA reverse their decision and reintroduce the SLA on console harm. Plus you add that the EU dropped the console concerns previously and even if they wanted to appeal there seems to be very little to back up their claims. It’s almost like they just went through the motions.
It’s pretty poor. Let’s just put out an article with Sonys arguments and edit out the ones that sound ridiculous. I don’t know what eurogamers agenda are but they’ve not been very good for a while sadly.
Anyone notice that no matter how far down the rabbit hole Sony goes, their fans and gaming media goes down with them? Shits crazy… Yet, there’s no media bias. Asmd literally, no matter how many times you bring it up, people keep trying to sweep it under the rug.
I’m glad this case has exposed a lot of these frauds.
You all need to stop believing that Reedpop has a narrative. They don’t. They don’t care ps v xbox, at that level, all they care about is clicks and you and the rest of the Internet are giving it to them.
To pretend there is a media bias editorially is to play the victim.
??? So you’re saying that they have a vested interest in appealing to the more popular console to say in business (Getting more clicks) but that’s not a bias???
Wow… saying that observing things as they are is a victim-complex reads like something straight out of OtherEra. I said what I said to someone else about accusing others of being conspiracy theorists, and this falls in the same vein - just because you don’t think that to be the case, in spite of the last years’ worth of evidence alone, doesn’t mean that others’ view on the matter (especially with citations) isn’t valid.
I am as well. People keep saying fiduciary duty but IMO that’s a big misinterpretation. For whatever reason the broader discourse seems to justify everything Sony does as part of their fiduciary duty regardless of how dumb it is. But their fiduciary duty goes well beyond just grasping at whatever straws they can to oppose a competitors merger. The leadership of Sony is obligated to consider the reputation of the business, to government, to the industry and the public. They’re obligated to act in good faith, to tell the truth and to make sound business decisions that ensure the longterm viability of the business.
They absolutely have a duty to be involved in the merger as a third party. To ensure that regulators and the other parties involved follow due process, object where it makes sense and represent the interests of Sony.
But writing legal briefs with first Google results forum posts as proof of some regulatory error. Misrepresenting their own business or becoming so dependant on a single input they couldn’t survive without it… complaining about quality concerns while release TLOU port on PC in the shape they did. Submitting shoddy surveys and documents to regulators. Damaging relationships with third party partners unnecessarily… that’s not part of any reasonable interpretation of managing your fiduciary responsibility.
When Jim Ryan wants to get a point out to the public he goes to Reed Pop every single time. They also defend Sony at every opportunity. There is obvious bias and reason for bias.
I respect you all, but you’re entirely misreading my point. I’ll try to clarify.
That’s not what I said. They only care about getting clicks - that’s not editorial bias. They’re going to write about the deal to get eyes on it. Pretending their is some widespread conspiracy around the deal becuase Sony has bought Reedpop’s articles is childish infantile victimhood, and entirely ridiculous.
Literally reporting what has been said is not propaganda. There is literally nothing in the report that editorialises to the point of believing the statements that are made. Did Sony bring up Redfall? Yes. It’s unfathomably and laughably immature, and almost wilfully ignorant, to read that much into the articles, and then to add blame to Reed Pop, who are what, to Eurogamer? Editorial overlords?
Let me check.
Eurogamer is owned by Gamer Network. Gamer Network is owened by ReedPop, a division of Redd Exhibitions, or RX, which is part of RELX. So where in that chain is the suggestion that ReddPop would be bought by Sony?
Anyone who suggests that ReedPop has any sway over any site that is either owned by them or is an avertising partner is ridiculous without proof of it, and I dare say there isn’t any.
I telling you that the view that there is some large conspiracy against Xbox ran by ReedPop across all their sites, is ridiculous, and looking for things to back that up is looking to play the victim and confirmation bias.
This is nothing but a conspiracy theory; seeing reporting about Sony’s claims is not spreading proaganda, and suggesting it is is patently absurd. It’s also not my view, it’s undeniable fact that you have a theory and it is a proposed conspiracy. If you have direct evidence of people in the games industry actually being unbiased for money or gain, beyond just writing articles in the passive voice, then please, serve them up.
I know of one instance of this in the past twelve months; he’s a secretive person compared to Phil. And in that article, he went to GamesIndustry.biz. Let’s just check their affiliation to ReedPop - same as Eurogamer.
Honestly, I don’t get it. Who fucking cares - this place is a great Xbox community, and a pinnacle of what a good community can do. Go over and read IconEra, and see their blinkered views on this and you’ll find the other side of the coin - they believe in the idea that MS has the media bought (and the trade committees to, for that matter) and it reads like the scrabblings of people who are reading the words and taking away a different meaning.
I’m trying to suggest that not every article that parrots back Sony’s actions agrees with them, and frankly that’s not the job of the articles but, rather, the report the news objectively.
Anyway, I’m out. If you are going to “Sure Jan” me when I make a serious point, then I don’t think I’ll engage again.
Reporting what has been said versus picking through everything that has been said to paint a picture where Sony is the victim and being wronged are two completely different things.
Reporting what was said objectively would involve reporting the good, the bad and the absurd.
The article is littered with repeating Sony’s claims with no actual pushback to the reality of the situation and the data that contradicts Sony’s claims - but obviously that doesn’t apply to MS here in the article.
We’ve seen dozens of journalists over the course of the last year show prejudice on their socials and in articles, that is NOT a conspiracy theory and dismissing anyone who can read as one is tasteless. Bias doesn’t just present because someone is paid off… personal bias presenting professionally is a thing that’s occurred since the dawn of time (look at Fox News, as an easy to see example outside of gaming).
