This is a lot less than microsoft was demanding iinm
*edit* I'm not mistaken, sony got largely what it wanted. Excluded employee performance reviews and limited the scope of what it had to turn over (microsoft wanted everything going back to 2012, sie now has to disclose contracts past 2019).
You need to read the whole opinion and not just the clip that was posted by console warriors. Go ahead, the link is in the Twitter post.
Most of Sony's requests were denied, the biggest 'win' they got out of this is that instead of showing all agreements from 2012, they have to show them from 2019.
Still, that's gonna be some valuable juicy information as to how much Sony pays for third party exclusives and their clauses preventing third parties from putting games on game pass or other sub services.
MS and any other company has that same clause for competing services. This is nothing.Still, that's gonna be some valuable juicy information as to how much Sony pays for third party exclusives and their clauses preventing third parties from putting games on game pass or other sub services.
You need to read the whole opinion and not just the clip that was posted by console warriors. Go ahead, the link is in the Twitter post.
MS and any other company has that same clause for competing services. This is nothing.
I literally just posted the result sheet showing that the majority of their quashing requests were denied, who the fuck cares what some plebs on twitter are saying
It doesn’t.How does this actually affect the case? Proving that Sony doesn’t need COD?
Exclusity is literally means keep games from other platforms, like Tunic, Medium, Falconeer, Stalker 2 etc..will this prove that Sony paid to keep games from releasing on other platforms or just get marketing deals like Hogwarts Legacy ?
There are more numbered requests granted than denied. That’s not what majority means.
Most of Sony's requests were denied, the biggest 'win' they got out of this is that instead of showing all agreements from 2012, they have to show them from 2019.
Still, that's gonna be some valuable juicy information as to how much Sony pays for third party exclusives and their clauses preventing third parties from putting games on game pass or other sub services.
Sorry, don’t understand. What is the aim of this discovery?It doesn’t.
will this prove that Sony paid to keep games from releasing on other platforms or just get marketing deals like Hogwarts Legacy ?
Most of Sony's requests were denied, the biggest 'win' they got out of this is that instead of showing all agreements from 2012, they have to show them from 2019.
Still, that's gonna be some valuable juicy information as to how much Sony pays for third party exclusives and their clauses preventing third parties from putting games on game pass or other sub services.
There are more numbered requests granted than denied. That’s not what majority means.
This will be information about how much they pay for keeping games off of other platforms and services like game pass, things that can be used in any number of court cases.
How does this actually affect the case? Proving that Sony doesn’t need COD?
MS and any other company has that same clause for competing services. This is nothing.