Sony in Ultra Petty mode: Sony has responded to the CMA's decision to further investigate the acquisition, and says it "welcomes the announcement."

The Mad Titan

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 27, 2012
Messages
48,898
Reputation
12,785
Daps
127,286
Why does microsoft have to overthrow sony in one generation? They had 20 years to build up a competent first party line up and good 3rd party relationships.

Everything they’re doing now is simply born out of desperation and because they have the money to do it. They simply are just trying to lower the value proposition of single big games so they can roll out service oriented multiplayer that fit their service. The more people start to turn their noses up at game prices the better they look, and eventually you’ll be no better off than the mobile gaming market.

Microsoft doesn’t care about gaming anymore than Sony, but Sonys method of delivering games is overall better for the market long term and pushing out high quality products.

A game like God of War Ragnarok will not exist if subscription gaming takes over. Big Budget single player games have no place launching on subscription services and the only reason why they are launching starfield on it is because its all already been set in motion so they figure it’ll be a test to see if it increases subs. Most likely they’ll do early access to cover the lost funds from it and claim its still launching day 1 on gamepass.

I bet anything that BGS next game after Starfield is Starfield Online and not elder scrolls or fallout
Opinions over statics of course
 

Legal

Superstar
Supporter
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
15,976
Reputation
3,172
Daps
60,888
Reppin
NULL
What semantics? There’s no way in hell you can argue a franchise selling 50 million in 10 years isn’t VERY successful in this industry.

I’ll ask again, Which other game franchises have sold that much over the last 10 years and had multiple movie, tv series and other media presence.

Which racing game studios have been more successful than Turn 10 since their inception?

So bungee sold 46 million with 5 games and 343i sold 35 million with 2 gsmes, and somehow it’s “slowing down”


Yes, slowing down :ehh:


No, like i said y’all create these narratives around console wars that just aren’t reality. Then you repeat them over and over again till you start believing them.

Very few games or studios have been as successful as 343i and Halo over the last 10 years, and that’s a verifiable fact.

First off, the sales figures quoted before are for the entire series, not just new games.

Secondly, we're not counting Mast Chief Collection? That's their work. And they probably could've released more than three games if they hadn't had to spend so much time fixing MCC, and had actually got the development of Infinite right from the start. That year delay was crazy.

Third, why's it relatively easy to pull articles like this?

‘Halo Infinite’ Is Not Finding Much Of An Audience On Twitch

Halo Infinite Poor Matchmaking Shows How Misleading Player Counts Are

Why's there a constant defense of keeping the Halo property with 343?

Are they a good studio? Sure, I suppose.

One of the most successful ever? Nah, breh. This is just another case of you going off just because everyone refuses to act as if everything is fine at Microsoft, and they're excelling in every way.

But even if all that were true, how can a company with so many successful studios be in the woeful position they're claiming to be in?

Are they incubators of some of the most successful studios of all time, or do they need to amass as many assets as possible to keep up, like they're trying to position things? It really can't be both.
 

MeachTheMonster

YourFriendlyHoodMonster
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
68,375
Reputation
3,643
Daps
106,958
Reppin
Tha Land
First off, the sales figures quoted before are for the entire series, not just new games.
When 343i took over the total sales were 46 million. They were at 81 million before Infinite released. It’s FTP so hard to make a direct comparison but it had over 20 million players within a couple weeks.
Secondly, we're not counting Mast Chief Collection? That's their work. And they probably could've released more than three games if they hadn't had to spend so much time fixing MCC, and had actually got the development of Infinite right from the start. That year delay was crazy.
So we moving goalposts….”that don’t count” :mjlol:

343i did all the work on the anniversary remasters and online stuff to make MCC what is, but yeah. That don’t count. :mjlol:
Third, why's it relatively easy to pull articles like this?

‘Halo Infinite’ Is Not Finding Much Of An Audience On Twitch

Halo Infinite Poor Matchmaking Shows How Misleading Player Counts Are

Why's there a constant defense of keeping the Halo property with 343?
You can find negative articles about any game.

fukk are you even trying to prove here. :dahell:

Halo infinite right now, with all its criticism and lack of content is being played by more people on xbox than Madden 23 which just came out.

So are we calling madden a “failure” :ohhh:
Are they a good studio? Sure, I suppose.

One of the most successful ever? Nah, breh. This is just another case of you going off just because everyone refuses to act as if everything is fine at Microsoft, and they're excelling in every way.
Who said they are “excelling in every way”

I said a franchise/studio selling ~50 million games in 10 years sits up there with some of the most successful games/studios EVER.

That’s a fact, hence why you can’t find a bunch of other examples to match it.

Fun fact: I’m sure you’d call Naughty Dogg one of the most successful gaming studios over the last decade.

343i has sold MORE games than ND since their inception. :ufdup:

But even if all that were true, how can a company with so many successful studios be in the woeful position they're claiming to be in?

Are they incubators of some of the most successful studios of all time, or do they need to amass as many assets as possible to keep up, like they're trying to position things? It really can't be both.
Who said anything about a woeful position?

You made that up.

They’ve created some of the most successful gaming studios ever and they are looking to expand. It’s not even that complicated.
 

MeachTheMonster

YourFriendlyHoodMonster
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
68,375
Reputation
3,643
Daps
106,958
Reppin
Tha Land

Legal

Superstar
Supporter
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
15,976
Reputation
3,172
Daps
60,888
Reppin
NULL
@Legal talking about twitch stats



One of these games is the “failure” the other is the industry standard. Can you guess which is which??

:mjlol:

One's a live service multiplayer game, and one's a single player story game, but go ahead and cook, breh. :ehh:
 

Gizmo_Duck

blathering blatherskite!
Joined
Aug 15, 2018
Messages
72,149
Reputation
5,369
Daps
152,831
Reppin
Duckburg, NY
@Legal talking about twitch stats



One of these games is the “failure” the other is the industry standard. Can you guess which is which??

:mjlol:

Now lets compare infinite to another popular multiplayer title :ehh:





And if you wanna go first party to first party

 

winb83

52 Years Young
Supporter
Joined
May 28, 2012
Messages
45,115
Reputation
3,748
Daps
68,352
Reppin
Michigan
Why does microsoft have to overthrow sony in one generation? They had 20 years to build up a competent first party line up and good 3rd party relationships.

Everything they’re doing now is simply born out of desperation and because they have the money to do it. They simply are just trying to lower the value proposition of single big games so they can roll out service oriented multiplayer that fit their service. The more people start to turn their noses up at game prices the better they look, and eventually you’ll be no better off than the mobile gaming market.

Microsoft doesn’t care about gaming anymore than Sony, but Sonys method of delivering games is overall better for the market long term and pushing out high quality products.

A game like God of War Ragnarok will not exist if subscription gaming takes over. Big Budget single player games have no place launching on subscription services and the only reason why they are launching starfield on it is because its all already been set in motion so they figure it’ll be a test to see if it increases subs. Most likely they’ll do early access to cover the lost funds from it and claim its still launching day 1 on gamepass.

I bet anything that BGS next game after Starfield is Starfield Online and not elder scrolls or fallout
When has anyone ever successfully overtaken the market leader even through generations of work in the video game industry without the market leader fukking up or without them completely changing business strategy? Portable or home console. It's never been done not in one generation or several.
 

Gizmo_Duck

blathering blatherskite!
Joined
Aug 15, 2018
Messages
72,149
Reputation
5,369
Daps
152,831
Reppin
Duckburg, NY
When has anyone ever successfully overtaken the market leader even through generations of work in the video game industry without the market leader fukking up or without them completely changing business strategy? Portable or home console. It's never been done not in one generation or several.

Microsoft did it during the 360 generation they had a big lead over playstation and they could have continued the lead well into the xbox one era if they didn’t trip over themselves with releasing a bad faulty product (RROD), stop putting put compelling software, and start pushing Kinect and cable tv companion box one.

You can’t blame microsofts placement in the industry on anyone but microsofts continued failures
 

The Mad Titan

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 27, 2012
Messages
48,898
Reputation
12,785
Daps
127,286
imagine claiming xbox is doing game pass out of desperation as if xbox didn't come into the game with Online subscription base content with xbox live FROM THE GATE In 2002 when no one was paying for sub base stuff.
MS essentially is going back to there roots, when xbox live dropped and had a ethernet port instead of modem most people didn't have the internet let alone, high speed internet, in fact it wasn't even offered in most areas.
Playing online with friends was basically unheard of unless you played on PC and even then around that time I worked at a tech company and they STILL brought there pc in for lan parties
Sony had nothing like it, the ps2 had a adaptor you could buy and supported like 3 games, so they had to pivot they tried to do the same thing for free thinking people would jump ship to just play online but not only was it a mess it was half baked. It took them almost 10 years just to really get PSN fully functional
That is a HUGE shake up in innovation alone, that changed how we play games till this day. But yeah MS doesn't innovate...
MS was never about releasing gow's and uncharteds. They have always been very multiplayer and online based and ironically enough the generations that people loved are the generations that had very strong 3rd party support.
Fast forward now MS is doing something very much similar, but sony stans have made up there mind that the only good games are triple a exclusive solo movie games. While at the same time crying about how MS might take COD in 3 years...
 

Gizmo_Duck

blathering blatherskite!
Joined
Aug 15, 2018
Messages
72,149
Reputation
5,369
Daps
152,831
Reppin
Duckburg, NY
but sony stans have made up there mind that the only good games are triple a exclusive solo movie games.


1955-F7-DC-7-AB6-4558-858-E-F4506-B21800-B.jpg
 

The Mad Titan

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 27, 2012
Messages
48,898
Reputation
12,785
Daps
127,286
Microsoft did it during the 360 generation they had a big lead over playstation and they could have continued the lead well into the xbox one era if they didn’t trip over themselves with releasing a bad faulty product (RROD), stop putting put compelling software, and start pushing Kinect and cable tv companion box one.

You can’t blame microsofts placement in the industry on anyone but microsofts continued failures
Stans always conveniently forget about

ps2-startup.gif


Which was as big if not bigger than the RROD but since it was so inconsistent dudes dealt with it. People had all kinda tricks to get disc to try and read people even replaced lenses and such

Sony did everything wrong and still ended up winning in the end when it comes to the 360 era. That should tell you all need to know. When you can do EVERYTHING wrong, and still outpace the competition.

Xbox pushing for something innovated and different which you claim they should and it backfiring with the kinect and media center box (which ironically both the series x and ps5 are now) isn't something to hold against them.

So now the gloves are off and they are all in on gaming doing exactly what they have been from the start, but now also acquiring studios to release the exclusives yall love so much and its a problem based on straight hypotheticals
 

MeachTheMonster

YourFriendlyHoodMonster
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
68,375
Reputation
3,643
Daps
106,958
Reppin
Tha Land
Now lets compare infinite to another popular multiplayer title :ehh:





And if you wanna go first party to first party

One's a live service multiplayer game, and one's a single player story game, but go ahead and cook, breh. :ehh:
Sounds like excuses to me.:ehh:
 

winb83

52 Years Young
Supporter
Joined
May 28, 2012
Messages
45,115
Reputation
3,748
Daps
68,352
Reppin
Michigan
Microsoft did it during the 360 generation they had a big lead over playstation and they could have continued the lead well into the xbox one era if they didn’t trip over themselves with releasing a bad faulty product (RROD), stop putting put compelling software, and start pushing Kinect and cable tv companion box one.

You can’t blame microsofts placement in the industry on anyone but microsofts continued failures
Microsoft did not overtake Sony in the 360 generation. When that generation ended they were last. Through the entire generation they never really even expanded their lead past the amount of consoles they sold that first year on the market when they rushed the 360 out to beat Sony to market. They did manage to outsell Sony in certain territories but the amount they had to outsell them by to keep or expand their lead was unsustainable.

You call it tripping over themselves. I call it Microsoft realizing we can't win a head up battle with Sony so we have to go a different route with Kinect.

Nobody will ever beat Sony in a straight up battle for the same customer base unless Sony royally fukks up. The amount of money Microsoft has expended even attempting combating Sony is staggering. If it was any other company they would have exited this space long ago. Other companies have tried and failed to make successful home consoles and exited.

Even Nintendo masters of making good software couldn't even get numbers that sniffed Sony until they abandoned the hardcore gaming market and started making weak consoles constructed around gimmicks that chased after casuals. From there they made the Wii U a quality system that flopped and they decided to take their portable market and merge it into their home console.

What you're suggesting Microsoft can do is simply not possible. I'm not going to speak for you but given then choice between Xbox and PlayStation I will always choose PlayStation and there isn't a game Microsoft can make that will change that. About the only thing they could do is acquire companies that make games I care about to grab my attention. Outside of that most of the games that matter I can get on PlayStation. PlayStation has a more diverse audience and always will so more developers will target them.
 

5n0man

Superstar
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
16,227
Reputation
3,295
Daps
53,194
Reppin
CALI
Sony did everything wrong and still ended up winning in the end when it comes to the 360 era. That should tell you all need to know. When you can do EVERYTHING wrong, and still outpace the competition.

Microsoft did not overtake Sony in the 360 generation. When that generation ended they were last. Through the entire generation they never really even expanded their lead past the amount of consoles they sold that first year on the market when they rushed the 360 out to beat Sony to market. They did manage to outsell Sony in certain territories but the amount they had to outsell them by to keep or expand their lead was unsustainable.
I don't know why yall keep running with this false narrative that Microsoft couldn't keep up with Sony with the 360.

The final numbers for both systems is 87 million for the ps3 and 85 million for the 360. 3rd party games sold better on the 360, Xbox exclusives sold better than ps3 exclusives. Sony had to combine the sells of the ps2 with the ps3 just so it didn't look like they were being outsold as much as they were for majority of that generation, xbots were always bringing up that fact whenever numbers were released. The 360 outsold the ps3 in the U.S. and the EU for the entirety of that generation. Microsoft literally stopped supporting non kinect projects for the last few years of that generation, while Sony dug their heels in with exclusive titles, which is when Sony managed to finally close the gap.


This narrative that Microsoft couldn't compete with Sony is a flat out lie.
 
Top