Microsoft / Activision Deal Leaves Sony Stans in Shambles | M$ Wins Fight Against FTC

[5n0man]

But how is that Sonys fault? They didn’t mandate the 35% or whatever. That’s on Activision.

Are they expecting rates to be lower for the same service because they aren’t the market leader?

Per the tweet activision wanted the same percentage, not more.

What I'd really like to know is if Microsoft was even looking for deals like Sony was, because I don't believe marketshare alone prevented Microsoft from signing deals.

I personally feel like Microsoft just stopped caring about the gaming industry at some point before Phil took over. They admitted that they considered exiting the console space last generation. Like why didn't Microsoft renew the COD deal with activision before Sony signed one? At the time the market share was basically even, and cod was selling more on xbox.

 

[Obreh Winfrey]

Jim on VHS

 

[daze23]

 

[MeachTheMonster]

What I'd really like to know is if Microsoft was even looking for deals like Sony was, because I don't believe marketshare alone prevented Microsoft from signing deals.

I personally feel like Microsoft just stopped caring about the gaming industry at some point before Phil took over. They admitted that they considered exiting the console space last generation. Like why didn't Microsoft renew the COD deal with activision before Sony signed one? At the time the market share was basically even, and cod was selling more on xbox.

Not signing those deals was a Phil spencer decision,

They felt the money was better spent investing in their own games and things like gamepass.

Market share was never even, and i don’t think COD was selling more on xbox outside of the first couple games.

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

Today definitely wasn't a good day for MS. Matt Booty is a treasure, though.

 

[daze23]

 

[5n0man]

Not signing those deals was a Phil spencer decision,

They felt the money was better spent investing in their own games and things like gamepass.

Market share was never even, and i don’t think COD was selling more on xbox outside of the first couple games.

Phil took over midway through the generation didn't he? That cod deal was signed at the beginning of last generation, and microsoft had sold nearly as many consoles as sony in the generation before that. And cod did sell better on the 360, or atleast the difference wasn't enough for activision to choose Sony over Microsoft.

If it was an internal decision to not seek 3rd party deals to invest internally, then you can't really blame Sony's marketshare on deals microsoft wasn't willing to sign at the time.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Phil took over midway through the generation didn't he? That cod deal was signed at the beginning of last generation, and microsoft had sold nearly as many consoles as sony in the generation before that. And cod did sell better on the 360, or atleast the difference wasn't enough for activision to choose Sony over Microsoft.

If it was an internal decision to not seek 3rd party deals to invest internally, then you can't really blame Sony's marketshare on deals microsoft wasn't willing to sign at the time.

He was already making those decisions before he was promoted. Microsoft has always been behind in worldwide market share, and by the time COD became the huge series it is now it was already selling more on playstation. Those marketing and exclusive content deals were getting more and more expensive, and microsoft went in a different direction instead of an arms race with the clear market leader.

No one is “blaming” sonys market share on those deals. That’s their strategy. Instead of competing on sonys terms, microsoft is trying their own strategy.

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

There was nothing funny about that exchange. Tom Warren is a corporate shill and he purposely omitted the point of it.

That is about the confidential deal MS had NVIDIA sign where their games can only be streamed through their service on hardware running on windows.

 

[5n0man]

He was already making those decisions before he was promoted. Microsoft has always been behind in worldwide market share, and by the time COD became the huge series it is now it was already selling more on xbox. Those marketing and exclusive content deals were getting more and more expensive, and microsoft went in a different direction instead of an arms race with the clear market leader.

No one is “blaming” sonys market share on those deals. That’s their strategy. Instead of competing on sonys terms, microsoft is trying their own strategy.

He's obviously changed his stance now because Microsoft has started signing deals with 3rd parties again. I don't think anyone could say for certain that sony was the market leader coming into last generation. Microsoft made up the lack of interest in Asia by being the more popular console in most western markets, doesn't make sense that they would admit defeat and go in a different direction coming off a generation where they were nearly even with playstation 3.


I've seen microsoft argue that sony signs deals that make it hard for xbox to exist, that kinda sounds like they blame Sony for their position when they weren't even at the negotiation table.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

He's obviously changed his stance now because Microsoft has started signing deals with 3rd parties again.

Only indies for timed exclusives and games coming to gamepass.

I don't think anyone could say for certain that sony was the market leader coming into last generation. Microsoft made up the lack of interest in Asia by being the more popular console in most western markets, doesn't make sense that they would admit defeat and go in a different direction coming off a generation where they were nearly even with playstation 3.

The numbers say they were.

No one said anything about admitting defeat. They began to position themselves for the direction they felt the industry was going.

I've seen microsoft argue that sony signs deals that make it hard for xbox to exist, that kinda sounds like they blame Sony for their position when they weren't even at the negotiation table.

If you followed the proceedings today they talked about this. The deals started to become more and more expensive, while they became cheaper for sony, at a point it just began to make more sense to purchase the content outright instead of paying more money for worse deals than what sony could get.

 

[daze23]

There was nothing funny about that exchange. Tom Warren is a corporate shill and he purposely omitted the point of it.

That is about the confidential deal MS had NVIDIA sign where their games can only be streamed through their service on hardware running on windows.

sounds like we don't know the details. but currently GeForce Now works with every OS out there

and you don't even need a Windows License to use Windows

edit: to add to this, a big part of the appeal of streaming is being able to do it with any device, including mobile. XBox's own streaming service supports non-Windows devices

but like any BYOG stream service, you have to buy the game first. currently GeForce Now only supports games purchased from Steam, EGS, and Ubisoft Connect. I'm sure after these deals, it will also support games purchased on the Windows store. so maybe that's where they're going talking about it "involves a license for Windows". they may go as far as to not support MS games bought on Steam

 

[5n0man]

The numbers say they were.

No one said anything about admitting defeat. They began to position themselves for the direction they felt the industry was going.

The numbers were close enough to be irrelevant. Sony was not the defacto market leader because they sold 2 million more than xbox. Sony and Microsoft started last generation on equal footing, Microsoft deciding to go in a different direction was a major fumble because it ended up with microsoft going an entire generation with very little content while dominated.

If you followed the proceedings today they talked about this. The deals started to become more and more expensive, while they became cheaper for sony, at a point it just began to make more sense to purchase the content outright instead of paying more money for worse deals than what sony could get.

I did listen before the stream went private. I didn't understand that argument because it didn't sound like Microsoft was looking for those deals, I didn't even hear anything suggesting Microsoft has to pay more, other than activision asking them to match what sony pays.

I've heard nothing to convince me that microsoft should be allowed to buy publishers because they didn't like sony signing deals with them.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

The numbers were close enough to be irrelevant. Sony was not the defacto market leader because they sold 2 million more than xbox. Sony and Microsoft started last generation on equal footing, Microsoft deciding to go in a different direction was a major fumble because it ended up with microsoft going an entire generation with very little content while dominated.

The console market has not grown in like 20 years. Microsoft decided it made no sense to keep fighting sony over that stagnant market when all other gaming markets have been growing. You can say it was a “fumble” but now people are scared that microsft is just gonna take over and dictate the future industry.

I did listen before the stream went private. I didn't understand that argument because it didn't sound like Microsoft was looking for those deals, I didn't even hear anything suggesting Microsoft has to pay more, other than activision asking them to match what sony pays.

No at some point they talked about how for those exclusive deals you have to pay an estimate of the sales lost on the other console. With sony having such a large and growing lead in console market share it made those deals less and less favorable to Microsoft

I've heard nothing to convince me that microsoft should be allowed to buy publishers because they didn't like sony signing deals with them.

It’s not against the law. Acquisitions are a normal part of business. The FTCs job isn’t to protect one company over another.