There’s no way people are this fragile.
1 Like
Both the examples you gave are worried for the ‘exclusive’ games… So think I made my point
If people are uninformed about marketing rights meaning exclusivity, then it’s not my fault.
It shows that exclusivity matters a lot to bring gamers to platform.
They really are.
3 Likes
Obviously exclusivity will bring people over, but my point was that even marketing deals will because they make people think games are exclusive. It doesn’t matter if Call of Duty stays on Playstation because every ad for the game will have an Xbox logo on it, and Xbox will get every advantage (early DLC, better support, etc) so it would get people to switch from PS to Xbox, just like losing all that stuff to Sony made a lot of people switch from Xbox to PS in 2013.
Had a friend that had a meltdown because xbox was buying studios cause they couldn’t compete with Nintendo or Sony as a result of the Activision buyout and Sony-Bungie.
3 Likes
He nailed it
15 Likes
Exactly. That’s why the whole acquisition story is practically the right place at the right time. Also, while Microsoft did say “what’s next,” Activision wasn’t selling at the time, so they gave up on it. Then it was them that came to MS, so it’s a case of “look who came crawling back.”
1 Like
yep
didn’t Phil tell booby if you want to sell call me ?
lol idk
1 Like
It normally goes the US, EU then UK.
1 Like
I don’t think exlusive on the game is the only option.
In the 360 day’s, just be the partner (exclusive content , early beta, advertisement with Xbox logo, competition on Xbox) is powerfull enough. And in my opinion, is more attractive than exclusive.
When a player is on a game where he choose to be, but could not acces to stuff, it can create frustration against the plateform is actually on. If Ms, make COD exclusive, it can bring anger again Xbox and this is not the best way to do thing because the second a COD like will have any hype, those player could left the plateform and COD and go on the new game. If he choose to came on Xbox to get advantage on COD, he will probably stay because it was his decision on the first time and will not wan’t to be in contraction with his own decision.
For developpement, it could be different than annual or two year dev.
Like COD - COD - COD - NO COD THIS YEAR - COD - COD - COD - NO COD THIS YEAR
it make all the studio got 3 full year instead of 2 for the development. And don’t create a big gap between the games.
Depend if Xbox wan’t to put some COD dev studio on other stuff (and if they want it too).
Oh that dude said that? No wonder why Im seeing a lot this narrative now.
Like the dude I quote above never brought that point until recently so that explains a lot.
Where’s their complaints against Netflix then? 
1 Like
Her intentions are good but maybe she’s just picking fights way bigger than the FTC can handle. So those “Facebook will stomp them in court” arguments (is that possible?) I’ve seen these days have some truth to them.
On the good side (I guess?) less and less reasons for the FTC to being “concerned” about something as insignificant like games 
…RIGHT?
Edit: apprently,the FTC has used half of its annual expert witness budget in just the Meta case. DAM one would think an organization like this would have more support from the government…guess I was wrong.
this “microsoft can kill their competitor because they have unlimited money” is so nonsense because:
1 - microsoft bought nokia to try to get into the mobile market with windows phone - failed
2 - microsoft bought beam(mixer) to get into the streaming market - failed.
people need to remember that sony is ahead of microsoft, and when sony release “spartacus” they will have the advantage that people already know a subscription service is a good deal, so sony won’t need to market it all the time like microsoft is doing right now with gamepass.
Right now sony have what, around 130M consoles sold, around 110M monthly users, they only need around 20% of its user base to subscribe to spartacus and already be almost bigger as gamepass and what worries me with sony spartacus is, remember that RE8 contract blocking the game to get into a subscription service? I can see sony using its bigger user base to buy “subscription exclusive games”, example: go to rockstar and get GTA 6 for their spartacus service and at the same time block the game to be in any other subscription service.
Since sony probably wont put their 1st party games in the service, its make sense to buy “subscription exclusive AAA games” to promote spartacus and at the same time make gamepass less valuable.
In the end sony can kill gamepass, not the other way around, and if that happens, i bet we wont see anyone saying bad things about sony.
1 Like
Yeah, I think Spartacus launch will help Microsoft case if they need to make an argument.
“The market leader just launched their competition to our service and it will be bigger than game pass right out of the gate” (tier 1 and that’s not counting the other subscription services in the industry). As I said, MS as a lot of ways to play this.
Edit: also not only Spartacus but the amount of acquisitions the market leader is going to do this year will help MS case I reckon.
1 Like
yes, thats why I find funny all these analysts saying microsoft will kill sony. My guess is that all these M&A microsoft is doing are a defense mechanism against sony.
No they can’t.
5 Likes
It is not a defense against Sony. It is MS making their subscription model as valuable as possible and avoiding the errors of early Netflix. Netflix streaming early on was far too dependent on catalog content from studios. When studios realized that they could just offer their products on their own streaming services they started pricing Netflix out on content. Netflix pivoted to producing as much of their own content as possible and while the quality of a lot of that content is debatable, it allowed Netflix to hold its own.
Microsoft is heading into the game subscription model with that knowledge and know that they need a formidable first party apparatus. They need the ability to sustain a subscription model with first party content and they know it and are making moves to reach that goal. Third party deals will continue to go both ways but neither service will survive on third party deals alone as competition increases. Without first party Day 1 titles, spartacus has an uphill battle. All indications are they are going the NSO route and are banking on nostalgia instead.
3 Likes