Microsoft did get their way. They signed the contracts.
What the fukk are you even talking about
Sony plunged $10 billion after its PS5 sales cut. But a bigger issue is its near decade low games margin
- Thread starter MeachTheMonster
- Start date
What the fukk are you even talking about
David_TheMan
Banned
Xbox being. Loss for Ms is miniscule.
Entertainment division, PlayStation, has literally been responsible for keeping Sony afloat as a company.
If you can't see the difference that's on you.
I'm talking about the fact that they don't own the rights to stream some of their own games. I'm just curious why they didn't suggest that until the CMA rejected their merger if it was part of their plan.Microsoft did get their way. They signed the contracts.
What the fukk are you even talking about
Seems like they went through a long process for nothing when clearly they didn't want the streaming rights to the Activation Blizzard catalog all along. Maybe if they voiced their desire at the beginning of talks the deal could have closed much sooner.
It's almost as if that wasn't something they really wanted but ended up agreeing to to close the deal. Nah companies don't do things like that. A company would never sign a contract with clauses they don't prefer to have in it just to get a deal done.
It was literally their idea. The CMA didn’t suggest it.
They came up with a solution they were comfortable with. If they didn’t want ubisoft to have the streaming rights, they wouldn’t have sold them.
Apparently it all fits within their strategy
It was obviously something they didn’t feel was integral to their business strategy, or they wouldn’t have signed up for it.
You keep assigning feelings to these things.
Business is money. No business singing a deal they don’t think will make them money.
Sony has decided that making a few xbox games will make them more money than not making them
So can you explain why they didn't put that into their deal upfront?It was literally their idea. The CMA didn’t suggest it.
They came up with a solution they were comfortable with. If they didn’t want ubisoft to have the streaming rights, they wouldn’t have sold them.
Apparently it all fits within their strategy
It was obviously something they didn’t feel was integral to their business strategy, or they wouldn’t have signed up for it.
You keep assigning feelings to these things.
Business is money. No business singing a deal they don’t think will make them money.
Sony has decided that making a few xbox games will make them more money than not making them
The alternative is you could admit that your own logic is fukking stupid and doesn't even hold up to basic scrutiny if re-applied elsewhere. Microsoft gave those rights up and COD on Game Pass as a concession but they really didn't want to do it just like Sony gave MLB and Bungie the ability to publish games made by studios they own on Xbox but really had no desire for that to happen. That's not feelings that's if we completely got our way these things wouldn't have happened.
Nah you'll act like Donald Trump and argue a ridiculous point that's been proven so because like him you never admit you were wrong on anything.
Cause the deal didn’t need it.
You are comparing apples the oranges.
The Microsoft+ Activision deal was already signed. A 3rd party, regulator had a problem with the deal, but it was still microsoft choice on how to deal with that problem.
Sony+Bungie was agreed upon up front.
Again. you are the one adding feelings and emotions to the shyt.
On both accounts they signed a deal they thought would make them money.
If sony thought sony games on xbox would be bad business, they wouldn’t have signed the contracts.
Sony Stan's mad quiet in this thread 
I'm figuring out your favorite move is to strip all context from stuff and attempt to summarize it in a unnuanced fashion.
It's like one guy marries the love of his life and the other guy marries a one night stand just because he knocked her up and you'll strip it to they both looked at their options and chose to marry a woman they wanted to marry. While that's technically not untrue it also strips all the reasoning away from the choices. The context matters just as much as the end result.
In the real world companies sign contracts and make concessions. That's not feelings and emotions. Just like in the house example it's not feelings and emotions with the seller paying the closing cost. The seller wants the deal closed but if were up to them they wouldn't be paying those cost they'd keep that money. The buyer demands that as part of the sell and the seller agrees and takes that loss. Someone saying they'll give up something they want to get something they want even more because that's was the terms they faced isn't feelings and emotions.
Facts are facts. Your feelings are your feelings.
I’m not bout to try to jump into these execs heads and make up my own story.
That’s sony stan shyt
You don’t know which guy is which.
you chose the guys based on your own prejudices and feelings.
Sony want money.
They signed deals that would make them more money by their own assement.
Sony developing xbox games will make them more money based on their own metrics.
Everything else is you in your feelings
Sony is destroying the movie industry and the videogame industry
legend in two games like Peewee Kirkland.Console wars aside, I honestly believe the market needs to correct itself. My genuine belief, gut feeling, is that developers have allowed themselves to be ransom to gamers who expect something completely fresh with installment.
Growing up, we got Crash 1, 2 and 3 in a 3 year period. These days, they would make Crash 1 and then go back to the drawing board. If they made Crash 2 and Crash 3, you'd have a vocal minority crying about it not being much different.
Spider-Man 2 cost 300 million to make. I would expect the to squeeze 3 games out of the engine. Not look to pump another 300 million into the next installment when they can get away with perfecting what's there.
As an investor or director I'd question whether people are selling me lies on the work that's required so that they can keep their job.
Growing up, we got Crash 1, 2 and 3 in a 3 year period. These days, they would make Crash 1 and then go back to the drawing board. If they made Crash 2 and Crash 3, you'd have a vocal minority crying about it not being much different.
Spider-Man 2 cost 300 million to make. I would expect the to squeeze 3 games out of the engine. Not look to pump another 300 million into the next installment when they can get away with perfecting what's there.
As an investor or director I'd question whether people are selling me lies on the work that's required so that they can keep their job.
We are over half way through the PS5’s life and Naughty Dog’s next game hasn’t been announced, Bend’s next game, Sucker Punch’s next game. From the major players we’ve seen Guerrilla, SSM, and Insomniac. These games just take too long.
This is an interesting point. I grew up in the same era, or rather Sonic 2 Sega Genesis as a kid to Gears 3 Xbox 360 when I was in college. Inbetween I had a ps1 & ps2, crash 1-3, tomb raider 1-4, NBA Lives 97-2001, etc.,
Each of those Sonic, Crash, NBA, and TR iterations felt mostly identical to their predecessors and I had no problem with it. But then fast forward to last year and I recalled thinking that for a 4 year wait, GOW:R didn’t feel much different than GoW 2018.
I still enjoyed GOW:R (my #2 behind Elden Ring) and found it a perfected enhancement from 2018 but even I was momentarily caught up in the “what made it take so long? This the same stuff.”
Then I see what insomniac is doing with SM1 (2018), SM:MM (2020), SM2 (2022), and altho there were complaints about no radical changes to the gameplay, a 2-year turnaround time isn’t bad..
…granted unlike those early ps1/sega games,
So I think certain expectations are warped, part of it possibly justified (or a chicken or the egg paradox) but there may be a better middle ground/compromise to be had.
CoolinInTheCut
Superstar
More 2am console warring from the xbots