Phil spencer answers and shuts down sony stans burning questions and concerns

[Legal]

I didn’t get defensive. I answered your question.

But they didn’t say COD would be “case by case” Maybe if they were being coy about it or jewlezing like they did with bethesda then your concerns would be warranted. But they aren’t. They said it loud and clear that COD would stay multiplat and have signed binding contracts to follow through on that promise.

They have set a precedent with minecraft in the past. They said they would never take it from other platforms and they never did. From day one they described their plans with COD to mirror how they have handled Minecraft.

So at this point, with all that information out there if people are still “concerned” about COD going “exclusive” then they are either misinformed or they have some other reason to be spreading their “concern”

Bolded ain't matching up. You're not defensive, but every answer ends with some variation of "People like you have an ulterior motive with these questions."

Like I said, I'm just asking why that specific talking point can't be taken serious about Microsoft's current strategy as a whole.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Bolded ain't matching up. You're not defensive, but every answer ends with some variation of "People like you have an ulterior motive with these questions."

Like I said, I'm just asking why that specific talking point can't be taken serious about Microsoft's current strategy as a whole.

That’s not getting defensive.

You asking something that has been throughly answered over and over again.

The only reasonable explanation is that you have some other motive to be continually asking that question.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

"The CMA considered Microsoft’s broader strategies, as evidenced by its internal documents and historical course of dealing following similar transactions in the past. The CMA found that the potential strategic benefits to Microsoft of using ABK’s content to foreclose rivals— such as expanding the Game Pass user base and strengthening network effects in its gaming ecosystem—could outweigh any immediate losses in terms of licensing revenues. The CMA notes that Microsoft has followed this approach in several past acquisitions of gaming studios, where it made future game releases from those studios exclusive in consoles to Xbox (such as the upcoming Starfield and, based on Microsoft’s public statements, Elder Scrolls VI from Bethesda, a studio Microsoft acquired as part of its USD 7.5 billion acquisition of ZeniMax in 2021)."


Straight from the document, I'm not doing this with you today

Finish reading. It’s still all about COD. They literally say. “If you sale COD, then it’s all good”

The CMA is not closing the book on the proposed merger just yet, though. The government group provided a list of "remedies" that Microsoft could take to help get the deal approved. One such remedy is a very big one, and that would be a "partial divestiture" of Activision Blizzard. This could include Microsoft divesting of the Call of Duty business entirely, or divesting of the Activision business unit inside Activision Blizzard. A third remedy could be for Microsoft to divest of both the Activision and Blizzard divisions. In essence, this seems to read like the CMA is proposing that Microsoft would have an easier time getting the deal done if it drops Activision and the Call of Duty series from the proposed merger of Activision Blizzard.

What’s wrong with you breh

 

[MeachTheMonster]

They didn't buy any of that?

Oh, they got those games/studios “organically”

Sony stan’s

 

[5n0man]

Xbox stans completely forget the difference between ownership and licensing because they spend every waking moment listening to phil spencer lie to them

Square begged Nintendo to use a disk drive because their games couldn't fit on cartridges, that's why they went with sony. Spiderman and most EA games were multiplat. Naughty dog was making ninja warrior, who the fukk felt like they lost anything from them working with playstation?

And these are the best examples of sony coming out the gate using their "vast resources" to buy up the industry.

 

[5n0man]

Finish reading. It’s still all about COD. They literally say. “If you sale COD, then it’s all good”



What’s wrong with you breh

Why don't you go read the actual document rather than quoting articles about it

 

[gurf]

Finish reading. It’s still all about COD. They literally say. “If you sale COD, then it’s all good”



What’s wrong with you breh

If it’s all about COD why did they include info about Zenimax/Bethesda? For fun?

 

[Legal]

That’s not getting defensive.

You asking something that has been throughly answered over and over again.

The only reasonable explanation is that you have some other motive to be continually asking that question.

Not giving an answer and redirecting to an accusation is pretty defensive, breh.

There really hasn't been much of an answer given, though. You yourself said they were juelzing about their Bethesda plans, and now when someone asks what's up with that, the answer is to point out what they're doing with Activision, which is its own, separate issue. That's not really an answer.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Not giving an answer and redirecting to an accusation is pretty defensive, breh.

There really hasn't been much of an answer given, though. You yourself said they were juelzing about their Bethesda plans, and now when someone asks what's up with that, the answer is to point out what they're doing with Activision, which is its own, separate issue. That's not really an answer.

This why i said y’all just playing dumb for console reasons.

THEY SIGNED A 10 YEAR CONTRACT.

Is somehow not an answer. You on your own breh. Keep up the concern

 

[MeachTheMonster]

If it’s all about COD why did they include info about Zenimax/Bethesda? For fun?

I swear some of y’all are either slow or you can’t read

They OK’d the Zenimax deal because they didn’t deem any of the gsmes big enough to matter. They bring up that deal here to say that microsoft had used acquisitions in the past to secure exclusive content. In this case they deem COD as so big it’s a platform within itself and if microsoft was to make it exclusive it would unfairly hinder competitiveness in the market.

Their remedy is for microsoft to sell off COD. It’s not about whether they should be allowed to buy a publisher or not, or if any other games will be exclusive or not. It’s all about COD.

 

[The Mad Titan]

What deals did they lock up?

Square begged Nintendo to use a disk drive because their games couldn't fit on cartridges, that's why they went with sony. Spiderman and most EA games were multiplat. Naughty dog was making ninja warrior, who the fukk felt like they lost anything from them working with playstation?

And these are the best examples of sony coming out the gate using their "vast resources" to buy up the industry.

12:35 on breh

But the thing is a good watch.

 

[Legal]

This why i said y’all just playing dumb for console reasons.

THEY SIGNED A 10 YEAR CONTRACT.

Is somehow not an answer. You on your own breh. Keep up the concern

I'm not talking about Activision, though. Still just asking why someone taking solely about they did with Bethesda can't be an actual topic of discussion. People had the same question before Microsoft even announced the Activision deal.

Not defensive, but you out here calling people dumb and typing in all caps over a single question.

 

[Fatboi1]

12:35 on breh

But the thing is a good watch.

So Sony got as much developers on board to support the PS1 in it's infancy=Sony made lock up deals?

 

[Fanservice]

Well by the end of the year Sony fanboys who talking BS in this thread will have an Xbox. That's the entire point get people in the ecosystem. Starfield will easily be the game of the year

Starfield will be best on pc with nexus mods tho. Why get an Xbox and be gimped @ 30fps and stuck with creation club crap

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Why don't you go read the actual document rather than quoting articles about it