Gizmo_Duck
blathering blatherskite!
Meanwhile at the CMA headquarters:
Not sure why you continue to call a paid service free but okSony Stan's
Yeah we really upset we going to get to play free games
This can be said about every single studio acquisition, this seems a little…compromised.
Sony Stan's
Yeah we really upset we going to get to play free games
I'm sure this wont blow up in Sony's face down the line in any way.
I'm sure, but if they thought they were legit in first place without any fukkery then all of this wouldn't matter.they've never bought a publisher. no one tripped when companies bought studios. Publishers is a whole nother level, esp by someone already in the industry.
Apple or Amazon buying Activision Blizzard is not the same as Sony, Nintendo, or MS buying
they've never bought a publisher. no one tripped when companies bought studios. Publishers is a whole nother level, esp by someone already in the industry.
Apple or Amazon buying Activision Blizzard is not the same as Sony, Nintendo, or MS buying
the CMA got Sony stans on board
I don't see a problem. Sony needs to be significantly weakened. My ideal gaming world on consoles is Nintendo 33% Sony 33% Microsoft 33%. When that happens we as consumers win as they compete. When Sony is outselling Microsoft 3-1 they don't really have to compete with them.
They aren't buying every major 3rd party publisher though. There is literally no other way for Microsoft to compete than to acquire ready made meaningful assets to add value to their brand. People are not going to abandon their preferred brand to buy a different brand just because they make a bunch of high quality exclusive games new IPs. Most people don't want to own 2-3 consoles nor can they afford to.buying up every major 3rd party publisher is like the least competitive way to do that
hence the current predicament
They aren't buying every major 3rd party publisher though. There is literally no other way for Microsoft to compete than to acquire ready made meaningful assets to add value to their brand. People are not going to abandon their preferred brand to buy a different brand just because they make a bunch of high quality exclusive games new IPs. Most people don't want to own 2-3 consoles nor can they afford to.
If I was a single console gamer I'd own a PlayStation and there would be pretty much noting Microsoft could do to get me to buy an Xbox over that outside of acquiring companies that make games I'm into.
Anybody that actually follows gaming knows that Microsoft's gaming business is a joke to Sony. Even after this acquisition they still won't compare but it will at least make them stronger. I don't see how this acquisition doesn't benefit consumers as a whole. When companies have valid competition regardless of how it comes into being they do more for their consumers.
If Xbox was a legitimate competitor to PlayStation we'd have PS5 games cost $60 instead of $70. We'd have physical game backwards compatibility on PS5. We'd have an answer to smart delivery. The PS5 wouldn't be going up in price. Sony for at least since the PS4 has had the luxury of ignoring whatever Microsoft did. Back in the Xbox 360 era they at least often tried to match or outdo them on features.
they've spent damn near 100 billion on acquisitions in the past 5 years, that might not account for every major publishers but its far more than even embracer or tencent considering the size of these acquisitions.
Activision/blizzard/king are three major publishers in one, the size of it completely dwarfs both sony and Microsoft combined studios together. If what they say is true and this isn't the last major acquisition for them, then yeah, thats not really competitive thats straight up monopolizing. Its not as if they didn't have countless opportunities to put out quality games and build quality studios over the last 20 years, they could have always bought studios like double fine, mojang, inxile, play dead, obsidian, etc. they chose not to build out their library of studios or games and completely dropped the ball on building healthy 3rd party relationships. They really have no one to blame but themselves for why they've fallen so far behind.
course correcting that doesn't mean you have to outspend the competition it means you just need to finally manage your studios and resource sbetter and make quality products.
its like owning a bakery and instead of learning how to bake to just start buying all the other bakeries on the block. This is what people feared when Microsoft first entered gaming that they would treat it how they treat windows.
just uncreative and tacky.
That argument is laughable to me. You're talking about some fantasy where Microsoft churns out all these "quality products" and suddenly people flock to their brand over the market leader PlayStation. The reality is Sony didn't even do that. Sony rose to their position by taking advantage of Nintendo's greed and desire to dominate and control 3rd parties. Many of the major players yanked their products off Nintendo's platforms after the Super Nintendo with that whole N64 dream team we ain't doing CDs on our console fiasco.they've spent damn near 100 billion on acquisitions in the past 5 years, that might not account for every major publishers but its far more than even embracer or tencent considering the size of these acquisitions.
Activision/blizzard/king are three major publishers in one, the size of it completely dwarfs both sony and Microsoft combined studios together. If what they say is true and this isn't the last major acquisition for them, then yeah, thats not really competitive thats straight up monopolizing. Its not as if they didn't have countless opportunities to put out quality games and build quality studios over the last 20 years, they could have always bought studios like double fine, mojang, inxile, play dead, obsidian, etc. they chose not to build out their library of studios or games and completely dropped the ball on building healthy 3rd party relationships. They really have no one to blame but themselves for why they've fallen so far behind.
course correcting that doesn't mean you have to outspend the competition it means you just need to finally manage your studios and resource sbetter and make quality products.
its like owning a bakery and instead of learning how to bake you just start buying all the other bakeries on the block. This is what people feared when Microsoft first entered gaming that they would treat it how they treat windows.
just uncreative and tacky. they've just bought so many publishers and devs at this point they literally have no real identity anymore besides a subscription service for a smattering of random AA games. They really are just the western Tencent
Xbox doesn't have a Miyamoto, Sakurai, Barlog, Druckmann, or just any real type of visionary that guides their software pipeline. It's very Microsoft
That argument is laughable to me. You're talking about some fantasy where Microsoft churns out all these "quality products" and suddenly people flock to their brand over the market leader PlayStation. The reality is Sony didn't even do that. Sony rose to their position by taking advantage of Nintendo's greed and desire to dominate and control 3rd parties. Many of the major players yanked their products off Nintendo's platforms after the Super Nintendo with that whole N64 dream team we ain't doing CDs on our console fiasco.
Sony got to incubate in an environment where all major 3rd parties all shifted to them hard. Go back and look at a lot of the iconic brands from the PS1 days and Sony doesn't own a lot of them. Hell they don't own Spyro or Crash and they were considered PS mascot characters.
The Nintendo 64 sold like 33 million the PlayStation sold over 100 million. Sony had the whole industry working on their platform and they got the pick of the litter of upstart studios to acquire and build out a brand. When has Microsoft ever had conditions that favorable?
It doesn't sound anything like the Xbox 360 era. Microsoft has never had an entire console generation where they were really the only valid choice for game developers and publishers looking to make software. Sony had the PS1 and PS2 generation back to back. Don't get me wrong the PS3 was an unforced fumble by Sony but they still managed to recover the ball and score a touchdown. From 1994-2005 so about 11 years Sony got to enjoy being the defacto console for all major publishers. the Xbox 360 got like a year head start and that's still with Sony back to back selling 100 million plus consoles and being the only real game in town before then.also sounds like 360 era xbox
they even had multiple capcom exclusives