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).
As if companies can’t spread propaganda lol, all big companies does it, its not a “conspiracy theory”, its how businesses operate. A conspiracy theory would be like Sony saying they will" die without COD (they actually said this lol)". Companies use the media to make themselves look good, petty, whatever that suites their needs. Its not a coincidence Jim Ryan would really only talk to Chris Dring or gamesindustry.biz, and that its mostly UK based outlets that made a big fuss about this ABK deal(mostly on sony’s side). Doesn’t have to be payed to do it either, playstation has alot of brand loyalty. And there are bound to be folks who are blinded by nostalgia and would defend their favorite brand because it has sentimental value to them. Same can be said to Xbox, but playstation has a ton more mind share worldwide.
Ever since this whole thing started and seeing MS making all these consessions, so that it’s a great deal for all other parties, I’ve been wondering…but what about what MS wants? They keep offering things, making the deal sweeter and sure, it’s to their benefit as well. But for example, the Asian market, they said it themselves that they can still do better at it, a lot better and I agree.
Them now missing out on at least mainline FF games can’t be what they want. Wonder if MS tried to get Sony to slow down with them locking up FF and “allow” it for Xbox too. But that also sounds like a gesture of good faith, not exactly something Sony is good at. It’s clearly not happening, but it would have been ideal.
Alright, yet again I’m not asking but telling people, the moment they disparage the whole community because they disagree is when good-faith discussion ends. This is worse than list/console warring as attacking individuals with thought-killing cliches rather than having a discussion, especially when there’s no data to support the counter-claim, constitutes making things personal. Be good to each other, disagree, but the moment you start labeling people the same as some circles of the internet, is the moment lenience leaves.
Finally, to imply that the benchmark for deciding if disinformation from an organization exists or matters, solely based on whether said organization believes what they disseminate is one of the most naive takes I’ve seen in the post-Dominion v. Fox News world. The fascists at Fox don’t believe a word of what they sell, directly from the horses’ mouths, but disinformation and damage has absolutely still occurred. The point being, it doesn’t matter whether propagandists believe what they propagate… because the effect is the same regardless.
The context of the entire discussion is that Microsoft won’t take future releases of COD away from Playstation, and they say they have no intention of yanking COD or any Activision content from rival platforms, which would suggest to me they’re saying all Activision content will be on all major platforms.
This makes sense, they could sidestep the issue by simply dropping the Activision label for exclusive games.
Are we doing the whole debating what content from Activision would come to other platforms thing? We did this with Bethesda already.
When Microsoft says they aren’t taking away content they mean games already released will be supported and games already announced will be released. Starfield, Redfall, the next Elder Scrolls aren’t coming to PlayStation. That Blizzard survival game won’t be coming to PlayStation. The next Crash or Spyro game probably won’t either.
They’re using different language to discuss COD for a reason. The agreement with Nvidia specifies a wide range of content for a reason. Nintendo and Sony got offered a contract for COD and not everything else for a reason.
I love this tweet. Also, I fucking hate the phrase “banger.” It was nowhere in gaming conversation and then it just blew up into the most overused, vapid, meaningless word outside of “cringe.”
Call of Duty franchise will remain multi-platform as will Crash Team Rumble, Diablo IV and Overwatch 2. I believe all future games will be exclusive to Xbox/PC. The only exception that I could see would be Overwatch 3 if it’s free to play. Other than that and of course COD, nah, I just don’t see it happening.
They really trying it, OMG.
