Microsoft Earnings Q4 2022

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

peter42O

Guest
For me it’s annoying cause the argument always boils down to, ‘sony should put their in-house games that they built from the ground up on the competitors platform’, and that the competitor has every right to buy 3rd party studios because they won’t.

Spider-Man 2018 is as much of a Sony game as Uncharted is. That game wouldn’t be as good and wouldn’t exist the way it does if it was developed by anyone else. Playstation owners bought their console for those type of games that sony makes, they also buy them for the 3rd party games that have been coming out on their platform for generations.

Its like saying Sony should buy Bungie and make their games exclusive because Microsoft won’t allow Halo on Playstation.

I shouldn’t buy a console and then be told a large portion of games that it always got I now have to get another console for just because. With xbox players its, they bought a system tehy knew didn’t get certain games, and now are complaining about not getting them.

There was never an expectation of xbox getting more insomniac games this generation, bluepoint games, Housemarque games…etc

The only situation where i feel like they have a case with is Final Fantasy, and again they have literally taken 90% of WRPG’s off playstation. Its really an unequal balance. Almost every studio they have bought in the past 6 years were multiplatform
I personally have never said that Sony should put their exclusives on Xbox nor should they. I agree with you to an extent but at the same time, Sony could have acquired Bethesda. They simply didn't want to spend the money. They could have acquired Obsidian or InXile or whoever and again, they didn't. It's no different than Microsoft not going after Insomniac. If Sony acquires Square Enix, then it will be no different than Microsoft acquiring Bethesda. And yes, if that happens, Sony should make their games fully exclusive which I believe every platform manufacturer should do when they acquire a company because if not, what's the point in buying the company? The entire purpose is to make your brand, platform and eco-system better and acquiring companies does just that.

The publishers being acquired were multi-platform but 95% of third party publishers are multi-platform so if any one of the big three acquire a publisher, they would basically be acquiring a third party multi-platform publisher. Also, the Bethesda acquisition was announced two months before the current generation consoles released so if you're a Bethesda fan but went with PlayStation, in all honesty, that's on the person making that decision.

In my eyes, I think it's more about PlayStation being dominant, everything going Sony's way, they get everything while other platforms didn't and now, because that has changed, PlayStation fans want to cry about it but they weren't crying when Microsoft was sucking during the Xbox One generation and were happy as hell about it. Now, because Microsoft finally woke up, PlayStation fans can't seem to accept it.

I also look at it if someone is an adult and is working, I don't see an issue at all because first, you don't have to buy a single Microsoft game, can play them via Game Pass and save $50 on each game which would pay for the console itself. Second, why limit yourself out of loyalty or favoritism to a company when they don't even know you exist? I'm not loyal to any company. Fuck that. I wanted to play Kena, FF7R and upcoming games day one. I don't cry that they won't go on Xbox for a year or perhaps ever. I simply buy them on PlayStation, play and complete them and then move on.

Side note - The Elder Scrolls was exclusive to the original Xbox console wise for two games so if anything, Bethesda and especially The Elder Scrolls is more Xbox than PlayStation. I see them the same as Square Enix. Far closer to one platform holder than the other. Also, Bethesda was and is a perfect fit for Microsoft where as with Sony, they don't really fit in with them. Same for Square Enix but in the opposite direction.

I simply look at it all as business and as someone who owns both consoles, I want more acquisitions on both sides. Only thing is that I like Bethesda so im happy with that acquisition by Microsoft but Activision Blizzard isn't for me so I would have easily preferred Ubisoft, WB with all of DC or Electronic Arts instead. Main reason why I favor Microsoft for acquisition is simple - it's because I no longer have to buy their games and I know they will never ever leave Game Pass unless it's a licensing issue. Of course, im not a collector. I just want to play and complete the game and then move on to my next game.
 

thicc_girls_are_teh_best

Veteran
Icon Extra
24 Jun 2022
3,911
6,767
Sony has the biggest IP and game that was always on other platforms before making a deal to make the game exclusive - Spider Man which is bigger than any supposedly multi-platform game that Microsoft has taken away.

Microsoft buying Bethesda, Activision, Obsidian, etc. and making their games exclusive, oh well. Too fucking bad. I love people that complain about "losing" games they never had in the first place since they haven't released yet while at the same time, don't want to play them on Xbox, PC or Cloud so it's like, in my mind, these people don't even care about the games. They only care about the games not being on PlayStation which makes no sense to me. Why bitch about certain games if you're not interested in playing them or willing to do what it takes in order to do so?

In my mind, PlayStation fans who bitch about Bethesda and soon Activision among others are no different than Xbox fans who bitch about Final Fantasy or Japanese games not releasing on Xbox regardless of the reason. It's like, if you want to play the fucking game, buy the other fucking console. It's not that serious nor is it that difficult. In fact, it's pretty damn easy.

I see you woke up and chose violence today 🤣

I can agree with your main point: if people on PS really care about some of these ABK games, and they by some chance end up becoming exclusive, then they should go where the games are. Always believed in that mantra. But some of these Xbox fans out here constantly crying about being "betrayed" by Square-Enix, or crying about Final Fantasy not coming to Xbox, need to live by that same mantra and stay consistent. Those games are increasingly becoming exclusive to PlayStation, part of the reason (very likely) due to SE having data showing they don't sell very well on Xbox at all, so the minority of FF fans on Xbox who want to play stuff like FFVII Remake or FFXVI should just suck it up and buy a PS5.

It goes both ways, essentially, and that's not the only game or franchise I've seen some hardcore Xbox fans (or content creators) effectively port-beg for, especially games that have traditionally never been on Xbox or haven't performed well there. So I agree with you on that part. However, Final Fantasy skipping Xbox isn't the same as COD skipping PlayStation, not absolutely; the former is an IP/brand that has historically never had much of an install base on Xbox consoles, the latter is an IP/brand where the majority of the players are currently on PlayStation.

Microsoft removing COD off PlayStation would be more akin to Final Fantasy leaving Nintendo, which absolutely had a massive effect on Nintendo's console brand in Japan (a metric ton of SFC owners switched to PlayStation simply for Final Fantasy VII). However, that type of switch isn't one that can be solely pinned on Sony buying exclusivity to Final Fantasy, let alone buying Squaresoft; Square were genuinely already tired of dealing with Nintendo, and Sega wasn't looking too hot between their multiple systems (and Saturn's complicated design); 3DO was struggling and Jaguar was practically already dead so the only real option for them was PlayStation. It had the right media format, hardware, corporate backing, brand appeal and market strategy for Squaresoft, all simultaneously. So it was more Squaresoft's choice to focus on PlayStation than Sony needing to buy them away from Nintendo or Sega consoles.

Something like that with COD would be significantly different. For one Microsoft themselves have outright purchased the developer and publisher. Secondly, in a market where ABK were still left to be their own publisher there is practically 0% chance they would have suddenly switched up their deals with Sony, if anything they'd of doubled-down on COD/PlayStation brand association, co-marketing, early access deals etc., considering where the brands were at a couple years ago and even where they are at currently. There is nothing about PS5 from a technological, brand, or marketing POV that would have naturally driven ABK away from Sony to prioritize Microsoft and Xbox this gen for IP like COD if they weren't being acquired.

So I can definitely understand your point about PS gamers complaining if stuff like COD goes exclusive is useless, just like Xbox gamers complaining about FF and SE skipping their platform for many of the big games, and that if gamers really care about these games they'd just get the platform the games are on like how it's always been done. But I don't agree that COD getting locked down to Xbox and FF locked down to PlayStation are the same, unless only talking extremely surface level.
 
P

peter42O

Guest
I see you woke up and chose violence today 🤣
Hahahaha.
I can agree with your main point: if people on PS really care about some of these ABK games, and they by some chance end up becoming exclusive, then they should go where the games are. Always believed in that mantra. But some of these Xbox fans out here constantly crying about being "betrayed" by Square-Enix, or crying about Final Fantasy not coming to Xbox, need to live by that same mantra and stay consistent. Those games are increasingly becoming exclusive to PlayStation, part of the reason (very likely) due to SE having data showing they don't sell very well on Xbox at all, so the minority of FF fans on Xbox who want to play stuff like FFVII Remake or FFXVI should just suck it up and buy a PS5.
I agree 100%. Problem is that with fanboys/extremists, I truly believe that they care more about having stuff to bitch and cry about as opposed to having more games that they want to play. I don't see either side changing. For the record, I have no issues or problem with games being exclusive to either platform. In fact, I prefer it because it's better for me personally. I don't see either side being "betrayed". It's all business and a lot of fanboys/extremists on both sides can't seem to understand and accept it.

It goes both ways, essentially, and that's not the only game or franchise I've seen some hardcore Xbox fans (or content creators) effectively port-beg for, especially games that have traditionally never been on Xbox or haven't performed well there. So I agree with you on that part. However, Final Fantasy skipping Xbox isn't the same as COD skipping PlayStation, not absolutely; the former is an IP/brand that has historically never had much of an install base on Xbox consoles, the latter is an IP/brand where the majority of the players are currently on PlayStation.
I agree that Final Fantasy skipping Xbox isn't the same thing as COD skipping PlayStation, however, what people don't get is that Microsoft is about to own the IP along with everything else that comes with Activision Blizzard King just like they do with Bethesda. It's going to be theirs which means if they want to make it exclusive, multi-platform, end the series or sell it to someone else, they can do so. This is what I believe PlayStation fanboys/extremists can't seem to comprehend. Also, let's say for the argument sake, Sony acquired ABK. Do you truly believe that any PlayStation fanboy/extremist wouldn't be laughing at Microsoft and Xbox completely? They would be doing the exact same shit that Xbox fanboys/extremists have done since January.

The bigger issue is that I have realized that because of the domination by Sony over the last 25+ years that their fanboys/extremists simply believe that everything should be catered or favored to them which I disagree with completely. In short, these fanboys/extremists have been so fucking spoiled that they just can't accept the new reality which is Microsoft isn't fucking around anymore. People can bitch about them buying this or that but if it was Sony, these same people would be ecstatic and quite honestly, maybe if Sony was a trillion dollar company, they could afford a major big time purchase like ABK but they're not and quite honestly, that's not Microsoft's fault or their problem.

Microsoft should have been investing since 2001 and they barely did outside of Rare. It took them 17 years to finally start investing into Xbox on a major level and instead of praising them for finally spending money and yes, they should be spending their money into Xbox because otherwise, what's the point in having Xbox exist and second, what's the point of being a $2 trillion dollar company if you can't spend the money to acquire companies? If anything, that IS the entire point.

As for COD not having much of an install base on Xbox consoles, that's not true. COD was massive for Microsoft on Xbox 360 just like it was for Sony during PS4. The entire only successful argument on PlayStation is complete bullshit. Via Wikipedia, COD dominated Xbox 360 in sales. 4 of the top 8 games all time were COD. PS3 only had a single game which was at #10 tied with Uncharted. There was only one other COD game for PS3 in the top 22 so basically 2 out of the top 22 spots were COD. Compared to Xbox 360 which required players to pay for online multi-player and yet, COD was still way bigger on Xbox 360 than PS3.

COD was bigger on PS4 than XBO because of two reasons - Microsoft didn't renew their marketing deal which was a mistake and XBO was a disaster from the start. Whoever gets the marketing wins when it comes to COD because people tend to believe that it's exclusive to that platform. People thought Destiny was exclusive to PS4 because of the marketing. The only difference is that once contracts are done, COD will be exclusive to Xbox as it should be due to the simple fact that Microsoft owns the fucking thing.

The best part is that during last generation, all I ever heard from the PlayStation fanboys/extremists was "exclusives", "exclusives", "exclusives", "exclusives" and "exclusives" but when it's not for their platform, they constantly bitch, moan and groan like a fucking 8 year old. I see it as, you're an adult, buy the other fucking console, buy the fucking game and play it if it's so God damn important. If not, then those people should shut the fuck up. And this applies to every PlayStation and Xbox fanboy/extremist.

Microsoft removing COD off PlayStation would be more akin to Final Fantasy leaving Nintendo, which absolutely had a massive effect on Nintendo's console brand in Japan (a metric ton of SFC owners switched to PlayStation simply for Final Fantasy VII). However, that type of switch isn't one that can be solely pinned on Sony buying exclusivity to Final Fantasy, let alone buying Squaresoft; Square were genuinely already tired of dealing with Nintendo, and Sega wasn't looking too hot between their multiple systems (and Saturn's complicated design); 3DO was struggling and Jaguar was practically already dead so the only real option for them was PlayStation. It had the right media format, hardware, corporate backing, brand appeal and market strategy for Squaresoft, all simultaneously. So it was more Squaresoft's choice to focus on PlayStation than Sony needing to buy them away from Nintendo or Sega consoles.
I agree with this but there is one slight difference. Nintendo/Sony didn't own Square Enix or Final Fantasy. Microsoft is going to own ABK and in turn COD and quite honestly, they should make it exclusive because it's theirs, not Sony's or the fanboys/extremists. If anything, PlayStation fanboys/extremists should be thrilled that Microsoft is fulfilling contracts because if that was me, Sony and PlayStation wouldn't get shit.

Never before have I ever seen this pansy ass bullshit where you buy a company but give your competition what you now own. Get the fuck out of here with this bullshit. And this applies to Sony as well. If they acquire Square Enix, they should be completely exclusive to PlayStation. No fucking Xbox. No fucking Switch. Like seriously, buying companies and going to your competition saying - "here you go, enjoy". Get the fuck out of here.

Square Enix went with Sony more for PlayStation being CD based as they didn't want to deal with cartridges and more importantly, didn't want to buy them from Nintendo.

Something like that with COD would be significantly different. For one Microsoft themselves have outright purchased the developer and publisher. Secondly, in a market where ABK were still left to be their own publisher there is practically 0% chance they would have suddenly switched up their deals with Sony, if anything they'd of doubled-down on COD/PlayStation brand association, co-marketing, early access deals etc., considering where the brands were at a couple years ago and even where they are at currently. There is nothing about PS5 from a technological, brand, or marketing POV that would have naturally driven ABK away from Sony to prioritize Microsoft and Xbox this gen for IP like COD if they weren't being acquired.
I agree with this, however, your second sentence says it all. Microsoft acquired ABK. Like, that's it. Game over. Done. Finished. There's no debate. They own them, period.

Microsoft didn't buy stocks and do some hostile takeover shit. Kotick went to Facebook first and they simply refused. Microsoft took advantage of ABK's situation and simply outbid everyone else which is exactly what you're supposed to do if you're running a company. What if somehow Apple or Amazon had acquired ABK. Then what? Apple is rumored to be developing a console and I wouldn't be shocked if this was true because their brand is massive. What if Amazon acquired ABK? They have Luna. Why wouldn't they make it exclusive to their platform? That would make Luna get a massive boost and there's no way they would give it to PlayStation or Xbox for that matter, nor should they if that happened.

The difference though is that Microsoft does give you plenty of options to play their published games. Two consoles. Two options on PC via Windows Store and Steam. Cloud streaming. Game Pass. Don't even have to buy the game. TV App if it's not available already. Microsoft gives consumers at least five different options. Microsoft has made playing the games the easiest and cheapest it's ever been.

Imagine if Google acquired Bethesda. Oh my God. That would have been far fucking worse than Bethesda could ever be with Microsoft. Streaming only. Must buy the games. Jeez. This shit would have been fucking horrible.
So I can definitely understand your point about PS gamers complaining if stuff like COD goes exclusive is useless, just like Xbox gamers complaining about FF and SE skipping their platform for many of the big games, and that if gamers really care about these games they'd just get the platform the games are on like how it's always been done. But I don't agree that COD getting locked down to Xbox and FF locked down to PlayStation are the same, unless only talking extremely surface level.
FF and COD are not the same in regards to being on the same level but the end result is the same if you're a gamer/consumer. If you truly want to play the fucking game, you know what you need to do. If those people don't do what they need to do in order to play a game that they supposedly love and want to play, then in my mind, they're completely full of shit and second, they need to shut the fuck up because their opinion means nothing simply based on the fact they don't want to do what is necessary in order to play the game that they again, supposedly love and want to play.

My primary is Series X for this generation and would I prefer to play Kena, Sword and Fairy, etc. on Series X day one? Absolutely because that's my preferred platform of choice for this generation. However, I don't cry or bitch constantly or even once for that matter. I do what a normal gamer and fan who wants to play a certain game or games that are not on their referred platform would do - I buy it for the other fucking console. I'm not waiting to see if/when they ever get released on Xbox. Fuck that. I want to play the game.

Excluding the NES generation, it's why I have always owned two or more consoles. It's because at the end of the day, I know there's always to be games on one console that aren't on the other(s) and as a gamer since 1989 with NES, I simply want to play the damn game. If a game is timed/full exclusive to my secondary or lower console, so be it. I'm still buying and playing the game.

In my mind, when I see people crying about this bullshit, I laugh because it's like, why are you putting a limitation or restriction on yourself? I can't imagine anyone doing this for their career choice, buying a house/car or for who they want to marry and be with. Like, I don't get it. Such an easy problem that can easily be solved and yet, those fanboys/extremists on both sides would prefer to cry and bitch when instead, they could be playing that exact game that they're constantly bitching about. lmao. smh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarkMage619

Shmunter

Veteran
22 Jul 2022
2,968
3,402
Hahahaha.

I agree 100%. Problem is that with fanboys/extremists, I truly believe that they care more about having stuff to bitch and cry about as opposed to having more games that they want to play. I don't see either side changing. For the record, I have no issues or problem with games being exclusive to either platform. In fact, I prefer it because it's better for me personally. I don't see either side being "betrayed". It's all business and a lot of fanboys/extremists on both sides can't seem to understand and accept it.


I agree that Final Fantasy skipping Xbox isn't the same thing as COD skipping PlayStation, however, what people don't get is that Microsoft is about to own the IP along with everything else that comes with Activision Blizzard King just like they do with Bethesda. It's going to be theirs which means if they want to make it exclusive, multi-platform, end the series or sell it to someone else, they can do so. This is what I believe PlayStation fanboys/extremists can't seem to comprehend. Also, let's say for the argument sake, Sony acquired ABK. Do you truly believe that any PlayStation fanboy/extremist wouldn't be laughing at Microsoft and Xbox completely? They would be doing the exact same shit that Xbox fanboys/extremists have done since January.

The bigger issue is that I have realized that because of the domination by Sony over the last 25+ years that their fanboys/extremists simply believe that everything should be catered or favored to them which I disagree with completely. In short, these fanboys/extremists have been so fucking spoiled that they just can't accept the new reality which is Microsoft isn't fucking around anymore. People can bitch about them buying this or that but if it was Sony, these same people would be ecstatic and quite honestly, maybe if Sony was a trillion dollar company, they could afford a major big time purchase like ABK but they're not and quite honestly, that's not Microsoft's fault or their problem.

Microsoft should have been investing since 2001 and they barely did outside of Rare. It took them 17 years to finally start investing into Xbox on a major level and instead of praising them for finally spending money and yes, they should be spending their money into Xbox because otherwise, what's the point in having Xbox exist and second, what's the point of being a $2 trillion dollar company if you can't spend the money to acquire companies? If anything, that IS the entire point.

As for COD not having much of an install base on Xbox consoles, that's not true. COD was massive for Microsoft on Xbox 360 just like it was for Sony during PS4. The entire only successful argument on PlayStation is complete bullshit. Via Wikipedia, COD dominated Xbox 360 in sales. 4 of the top 8 games all time were COD. PS3 only had a single game which was at #10 tied with Uncharted. There was only one other COD game for PS3 in the top 22 so basically 2 out of the top 22 spots were COD. Compared to Xbox 360 which required players to pay for online multi-player and yet, COD was still way bigger on Xbox 360 than PS3.

COD was bigger on PS4 than XBO because of two reasons - Microsoft didn't renew their marketing deal which was a mistake and XBO was a disaster from the start. Whoever gets the marketing wins when it comes to COD because people tend to believe that it's exclusive to that platform. People thought Destiny was exclusive to PS4 because of the marketing. The only difference is that once contracts are done, COD will be exclusive to Xbox as it should be due to the simple fact that Microsoft owns the fucking thing.

The best part is that during last generation, all I ever heard from the PlayStation fanboys/extremists was "exclusives", "exclusives", "exclusives", "exclusives" and "exclusives" but when it's not for their platform, they constantly bitch, moan and groan like a fucking 8 year old. I see it as, you're an adult, buy the other fucking console, buy the fucking game and play it if it's so God damn important. If not, then those people should shut the fuck up. And this applies to every PlayStation and Xbox fanboy/extremist.


I agree with this but there is one slight difference. Nintendo/Sony didn't own Square Enix or Final Fantasy. Microsoft is going to own ABK and in turn COD and quite honestly, they should make it exclusive because it's theirs, not Sony's or the fanboys/extremists. If anything, PlayStation fanboys/extremists should be thrilled that Microsoft is fulfilling contracts because if that was me, Sony and PlayStation wouldn't get shit.

Never before have I ever seen this pansy ass bullshit where you buy a company but give your competition what you now own. Get the fuck out of here with this bullshit. And this applies to Sony as well. If they acquire Square Enix, they should be completely exclusive to PlayStation. No fucking Xbox. No fucking Switch. Like seriously, buying companies and going to your competition saying - "here you go, enjoy". Get the fuck out of here.

Square Enix went with Sony more for PlayStation being CD based as they didn't want to deal with cartridges and more importantly, didn't want to buy them from Nintendo.


I agree with this, however, your second sentence says it all. Microsoft acquired ABK. Like, that's it. Game over. Done. Finished. There's no debate. They own them, period.

Microsoft didn't buy stocks and do some hostile takeover shit. Kotick went to Facebook first and they simply refused. Microsoft took advantage of ABK's situation and simply outbid everyone else which is exactly what you're supposed to do if you're running a company. What if somehow Apple or Amazon had acquired ABK. Then what? Apple is rumored to be developing a console and I wouldn't be shocked if this was true because their brand is massive. What if Amazon acquired ABK? They have Luna. Why wouldn't they make it exclusive to their platform? That would make Luna get a massive boost and there's no way they would give it to PlayStation or Xbox for that matter, nor should they if that happened.

The difference though is that Microsoft does give you plenty of options to play their published games. Two consoles. Two options on PC via Windows Store and Steam. Cloud streaming. Game Pass. Don't even have to buy the game. TV App if it's not available already. Microsoft gives consumers at least five different options. Microsoft has made playing the games the easiest and cheapest it's ever been.

Imagine if Google acquired Bethesda. Oh my God. That would have been far fucking worse than Bethesda could ever be with Microsoft. Streaming only. Must buy the games. Jeez. This shit would have been fucking horrible.

FF and COD are not the same in regards to being on the same level but the end result is the same if you're a gamer/consumer. If you truly want to play the fucking game, you know what you need to do. If those people don't do what they need to do in order to play a game that they supposedly love and want to play, then in my mind, they're completely full of shit and second, they need to shut the fuck up because their opinion means nothing simply based on the fact they don't want to do what is necessary in order to play the game that they again, supposedly love and want to play.

My primary is Series X for this generation and would I prefer to play Kena, Sword and Fairy, etc. on Series X day one? Absolutely because that's my preferred platform of choice for this generation. However, I don't cry or bitch constantly or even once for that matter. I do what a normal gamer and fan who wants to play a certain game or games that are not on their referred platform would do - I buy it for the other fucking console. I'm not waiting to see if/when they ever get released on Xbox. Fuck that. I want to play the game.

Excluding the NES generation, it's why I have always owned two or more consoles. It's because at the end of the day, I know there's always to be games on one console that aren't on the other(s) and as a gamer since 1989 with NES, I simply want to play the damn game. If a game is timed/full exclusive to my secondary or lower console, so be it. I'm still buying and playing the game.

In my mind, when I see people crying about this bullshit, I laugh because it's like, why are you putting a limitation or restriction on yourself? I can't imagine anyone doing this for their career choice, buying a house/car or for who they want to marry and be with. Like, I don't get it. Such an easy problem that can easily be solved and yet, those fanboys/extremists on both sides would prefer to cry and bitch when instead, they could be playing that exact game that they're constantly bitching about. lmao. smh.

Ideally the deal should fall through. Xbox will still get the games as 3rd party, while freeing up billions of dollars for MS to build new studios and ip’s. Results in more games, actual excitement for new things, and proper brand building through growing the sector.
 
P

peter42O

Guest
Ideally the deal should fall through. Xbox will still get the games as 3rd party, while freeing up billions of dollars for MS to build new studios and ip’s. Results in more games, actual excitement for new things, and proper brand building through growing the sector.
The acquisition isn't going to fall through because there's no legitimate reason for that to happen. While majority are bitching about COD, that's not even what FTC and regulators are looking at. They're looking at their mobile/cloud gaming division and what the deal does in this regard especially in other regions where Microsoft bundles their services together. COD is like an afterthought for all these regulators.

Personally, im not an ABK fan as they have no games im interested in except for Diablo IV which has been day one since it's gameplay reveal over two years ago. I would have preferred Ubisoft, WB (with all of DC) and Electronic Arts over ABK as they have 5, 3 and 5 games respectively that have been officially announced. Doesn't include rumored games.

I'm happy about Microsoft acquiring ABK because any games I do get, I can play on Game Pass and no worries about the games ever leaving the service. I do want COD exclusive simply because I believe that's what should happen when you acquire a company. Will never understand why anyone would ever see it any other way. After that, I want COD to be a platform once exclusive because outside of Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer Games, I don't want to see any of the other studios working on COD. This way, one base game and they just add to it for the rest of the generation.

The way ABK is now, there's literally 0% chance all those other studios ever do anything besides COD. Screw that. Even if all the other studios release games that aren't for me, until then, they're a 50/50 shot where as now, they're literally a 0% shot. I want to see what all the other studios will do once they get away from Kotick and COD. Outside of Diablo IV, this is the only major reason why I want the ABK deal to go through - because I want to see what all the other studios will do.

Would I "trade" ABK for Ubisoft, WB (with all of DC) or EA? Absolutely. They simply have more games im interested in. Business wise though, I would stay with ABK and I have no valid argument or reason not to if I was at Microsoft and had to decide to get this deal done. It would be a no-brainer business wise.
 
  • haha
Reactions: Swift_Star

nominedomine

Banned
8 Jul 2022
834
950
Ideally the deal should fall through. Xbox will still get the games as 3rd party, while freeing up billions of dollars for MS to build new studios and ip’s. Results in more games, actual excitement for new things, and proper brand building through growing the sector.
Ideally MS buys Activision Blizzard and destroys them.
 

thicc_girls_are_teh_best

Veteran
Icon Extra
24 Jun 2022
3,911
6,767
I agree that Final Fantasy skipping Xbox isn't the same thing as COD skipping PlayStation, however, what people don't get is that Microsoft is about to own the IP along with everything else that comes with Activision Blizzard King just like they do with Bethesda. It's going to be theirs which means if they want to make it exclusive, multi-platform, end the series or sell it to someone else, they can do so. This is what I believe PlayStation fanboys/extremists can't seem to comprehend. Also, let's say for the argument sake, Sony acquired ABK. Do you truly believe that any PlayStation fanboy/extremist wouldn't be laughing at Microsoft and Xbox completely? They would be doing the exact same shit that Xbox fanboys/extremists have done since January.

Well yeah, fanboys are gonna fanboy but I don't care about what they do, personally. What we're talking about is more what MS will realistically do with IP like COD even after owning them, and to what degree stuff like GamePass will play into that. Whatever console warriors want to think doesn't really come into the picture for me except when they use it to spread FUD or concern troll.

The bigger issue is that I have realized that because of the domination by Sony over the last 25+ years that their fanboys/extremists simply believe that everything should be catered or favored to them which I disagree with completely. In short, these fanboys/extremists have been so fucking spoiled that they just can't accept the new reality which is Microsoft isn't fucking around anymore. People can bitch about them buying this or that but if it was Sony, these same people would be ecstatic and quite honestly, maybe if Sony was a trillion dollar company, they could afford a major big time purchase like ABK but they're not and quite honestly, that's not Microsoft's fault or their problem.

Well technically speaking, Sony doesn't need to be a trillion-dollar company to buy ABK. They have the cash-on-hand combined with shares and loans they can take out, to buy a company like ABK; market cap isn't the only factor into deciding what a company can buy. We've already seen this with Disney when they bought 20th Century Fox. But Sony's priorities would have also required necessitating ABK to some degree and that simply was not the case, hence they didn't bother with the buy. Also IIRC, it was ABK board members who had Phil and Satya on the hotline when they decided to sell the company, so ABK already had a company in mind who were also the most likely to easily make the purchase (which from what I've seen someone on Twitter point out, who IIRC has an account here, they may've still taken out a loan from Goldman Sach's to put towards the ABK purchase).

I don't know how many PS diehard fanboys/fangirls feel the way you describe, but in terms of the wider install base, well there are certain expectations that come with a brand that's usually outsold its competitors by a decent margin almost every generation for the past 20+ years. There are certain expectations that come with IP from a brand that's been multiplatform since the 1970s. There's a shock associated with the looming reality that said company will be owned by a platform holder in less than a year, and it takes time to accept that. This is a WAY bigger shock than Zenimax being bought (by the same platform holder, no less), a WAYYY bigger shock than Squaresoft leaving Nintendo for Sony with the PS1.

So you have to understand on some level that acceptance of the new reality will take a while even for the non-extremists console warriors. That's normal.

Microsoft should have been investing since 2001 and they barely did outside of Rare. It took them 17 years to finally start investing into Xbox on a major level and instead of praising them for finally spending money and yes, they should be spending their money into Xbox because otherwise, what's the point in having Xbox exist and second, what's the point of being a $2 trillion dollar company if you can't spend the money to acquire companies? If anything, that IS the entire point.

I think part of the issue is that for some people, MS's idea of "investing" has come at the expense of spearheading a big shift in industry consolidation of the 3P market, and that the investing is mainly only in the form of throwing money at studios and publishers, but very little in terms of creative leadership and guidance/curation from the upper management of the Xbox division.

Because, and I believe this as well, you can't have real, profound growth of studio talent and results if you don't have a strong balance of both, this is where comparisons with Sony look unfavorable for Microsoft. Look at the growth we've seen from Insomniac Games from the start of PS4 gen to where they are now. Sony didn't need to spend $70 billion to get those results, they didn't even need $7 billion to get them. The $250 million they paid in acquiring them was to lock down a studio they've already been investing in with both smart money and sound creative/leadership guidance for over two decades.

Microsoft doesn't honestly have a single studio under their belt with that type of growth from investments into them. Rare was a great chance to do that and, yes, I guess Sea of Thieves is financially their best-performing game ever. But you'd be hard-pressed to get a majority of Rare fans or gamers in general, to claim that SoT is their best work yet from a creative POV. We hadn't even really seen what type of payoff came from the Obsidian, Ninja Theory, IneXile etc. acquisitions in 2018 before MS purchased Zenimax in 2020/2021, or ABK this year going into 2023 (the latest the deal will be approved).

So the idea they have purchased yet more studios, and may purchase yet another publisher or two in the future, when we're still waiting to see results that show clear scope & creative growth for the teams MS already own and have owned for years, of course that's going to make some folks (myself included) side-eye those types of moves because otherwise it feels like a lot of money being thrown at a problem, but no direction in how that money's actually going to be applied for technical & creative growth/polish, much less growth in leadership from division management showing strong guidance for their teams.

As for COD not having much of an install base on Xbox consoles, that's not true. COD was massive for Microsoft on Xbox 360 just like it was for Sony during PS4. The entire only successful argument on PlayStation is complete bullshit. Via Wikipedia, COD dominated Xbox 360 in sales. 4 of the top 8 games all time were COD. PS3 only had a single game which was at #10 tied with Uncharted. There was only one other COD game for PS3 in the top 22 so basically 2 out of the top 22 spots were COD. Compared to Xbox 360 which required players to pay for online multi-player and yet, COD was still way bigger on Xbox 360 than PS3.

I didn't say COD had a small install base on Xbox, I said FF does. I know full well how big COD was on 360 compared to 360 back in the day.

COD was bigger on PS4 than XBO because of two reasons - Microsoft didn't renew their marketing deal which was a mistake and XBO was a disaster from the start. Whoever gets the marketing wins when it comes to COD because people tend to believe that it's exclusive to that platform. People thought Destiny was exclusive to PS4 because of the marketing. The only difference is that once contracts are done, COD will be exclusive to Xbox as it should be due to the simple fact that Microsoft owns the fucking thing.

Well yeah, no doubt those reasons played into COD being bigger on PS this gen than Xbox. I'm actually curious how marketing for COD will be handled going forward because I know ABK will act somewhat independent still (just under Microsoft Gaming), but I want to know if the traditional advertising model will get pared back for individual COD releases going forward.

Because it certainly did with Halo Infinite, and that's MS's biggest, marquee FPS IP until they own ABK and get COD.

The best part is that during last generation, all I ever heard from the PlayStation fanboys/extremists was "exclusives", "exclusives", "exclusives", "exclusives" and "exclusives" but when it's not for their platform, they constantly bitch, moan and groan like a fucking 8 year old. I see it as, you're an adult, buy the other fucking console, buy the fucking game and play it if it's so God damn important. If not, then those people should shut the fuck up. And this applies to every PlayStation and Xbox fanboy/extremist.

I mean, maybe just don't pay attention to them as much? It's really easy to just block that stuff out.

I agree with this but there is one slight difference. Nintendo/Sony didn't own Square Enix or Final Fantasy. Microsoft is going to own ABK and in turn COD and quite honestly, they should make it exclusive because it's theirs, not Sony's or the fanboys/extremists. If anything, PlayStation fanboys/extremists should be thrilled that Microsoft is fulfilling contracts because if that was me, Sony and PlayStation wouldn't get shit.

From a gamer's perspective, especially if you're predominantly an Xbox gamer, then yes it makes sense to think COD should 100% be exclusive. But these companies aren't thinking about it that way. To them, it's business, and they want to recoup the money spent and then some.

Look at it this way: MS's kind of spent $70 billion for COD (this isn't actually true but COD is the biggest thing they get out of this alongside Candy Crush). Does making COD exclusive to Xbox, realistically get them on the path to recouping that $70 billion and making a lot of profit on top of that, in a realistic time frame? Let's say making COD exclusive to Xbox increases Xbox revenue by 10%, and increases Xbox net profit by 10% of whatever that is.

Say Xbox normally makes $1.5 billion a year in net profit, and say COD weighs 35% into the price of the ABK acquisition (that's $23.45 billion). Candy Crush weighs as 45%, all the other IP weigh as the remaining 20%. And now say Xbox division has a FY net profit of $1.65 billion. It'd take Xbox a little under 15 years to make back in net profit the share of COD's weight into the acquisition cost. That's the remainder of the 9th gen, and all of 10th gen (which might be the last console gen).

Do you think MS is willing to wait that long? Say GamePass starts pulling in enough new subs annually to where it's maybe bringing in an extra $1 billion of annual profit on top of what it does today (IMO, I think it brings in ~ $750 million a year); that would help cut the time to recoup down but it's a gamble because it's predicated on if GamePass growth can bring in a pure $1 billion more net per FY than it already does, and what if that takes another 5 years? What if it takes longer? What if it never happens?

There are other factors MS have to consider, too. What if the trend with Vanguard selling less, repeats itself with the next COD release, and the one after that? What if another massive FPS comes onto the scene and replaces COD in popularity? Yes a lot of these "what ifs" have a low chance of happening and MS could actually use these in a court defense to argue for making COD exclusive to Xbox & GamePass if they really wanted, but the point is these are possibilities they as a business have to keep in mind when deciding on things like making COD exclusive or keeping it multiplat.

That's even without pointing to another massive IP they own which they eventually decided to keep multiplat: Minecraft :/

Never before have I ever seen this pansy ass bullshit where you buy a company but give your competition what you now own. Get the fuck out of here with this bullshit. And this applies to Sony as well. If they acquire Square Enix, they should be completely exclusive to PlayStation. No fucking Xbox. No fucking Switch. Like seriously, buying companies and going to your competition saying - "here you go, enjoy". Get the fuck out of here.

Again, that's the gamer's way of looking at it, but you have to think like a businessperson on this as well. Now, in the case of Sony buying SE, they could easily justify dropping Xbox for everything outside of games like a Power Wash Simulator, because they wouldn't lose much money by doing so and have a strong chance of retaining the absolute vast majority if they made things PS-exclusive (Xbox JRPG fans who really want FF/Valkyrie/Star Ocean/Dragon Quest will just end up buying a PS to play them).

But Sony would be rather dumb to stop supporting Switch with things like the 2D JRPG remasters/remixes, or smaller new JRPG releases like Octopath. Not unless they decided to make their own portable system as well ;)

Microsoft didn't buy stocks and do some hostile takeover shit. Kotick went to Facebook first and they simply refused. Microsoft took advantage of ABK's situation and simply outbid everyone else which is exactly what you're supposed to do if you're running a company. What if somehow Apple or Amazon had acquired ABK. Then what? Apple is rumored to be developing a console and I wouldn't be shocked if this was true because their brand is massive. What if Amazon acquired ABK? They have Luna. Why wouldn't they make it exclusive to their platform? That would make Luna get a massive boost and there's no way they would give it to PlayStation or Xbox for that matter, nor should they if that happened.

This is all true, although I think even in Apple or Amazon's case, they'd keep some of the games multiplat. No reason to lock Candy Crush behind simply our devices or service, for example, and they may want some cash from gamers on PS, Xbox & Nintendo who can access their products or apps on those consoles already.

The difference though is that Microsoft does give you plenty of options to play their published games. Two consoles. Two options on PC via Windows Store and Steam. Cloud streaming. Game Pass. Don't even have to buy the game. TV App if it's not available already. Microsoft gives consumers at least five different options. Microsoft has made playing the games the easiest and cheapest it's ever been.

They do have a lot of options for sure, but some of these aren't going to be realistic options most of the time for certain games or certain types of gamers. How many COD players do you think want to mess with (non-mobile) COD competitively on a little smartphone or latency-ridden (compared to a native console) cloud streaming?

That aside, it doesn't take away from the fact that yeah, MS do give people a good number of options to play and that's commendable.

Imagine if Google acquired Bethesda. Oh my God. That would have been far fucking worse than Bethesda could ever be with Microsoft. Streaming only. Must buy the games. Jeez. This shit would have been fucking horrible.

I don't know if buying the games would've been "horrible", that's just the status quote and still the dominant model in the market for many reasons.

Google have shown they can't really manage game studios whatsoever though, so I agree Bethesda's probably be worst under them. Tho that doesn't excuse whatever happens with them under Microsoft; IMO we need some games showing clear improvements in quality and ambition going forward and Starfield was looking kinda rough at the showcase is all I'm gonna say.

FF and COD are not the same in regards to being on the same level but the end result is the same if you're a gamer/consumer. If you truly want to play the fucking game, you know what you need to do. If those people don't do what they need to do in order to play a game that they supposedly love and want to play, then in my mind, they're completely full of shit and second, they need to shut the fuck up because their opinion means nothing simply based on the fact they don't want to do what is necessary in order to play the game that they again, supposedly love and want to play.

This is true, can't really disagree there. Go where the games are, even if that means having multiple platforms. If you're forced to choose, then that's just what it is. People gotta make choices everyday.

My primary is Series X for this generation and would I prefer to play Kena, Sword and Fairy, etc. on Series X day one? Absolutely because that's my preferred platform of choice for this generation. However, I don't cry or bitch constantly or even once for that matter. I do what a normal gamer and fan who wants to play a certain game or games that are not on their referred platform would do - I buy it for the other fucking console. I'm not waiting to see if/when they ever get released on Xbox. Fuck that. I want to play the game.

Excluding the NES generation, it's why I have always owned two or more consoles. It's because at the end of the day, I know there's always to be games on one console that aren't on the other(s) and as a gamer since 1989 with NES, I simply want to play the damn game. If a game is timed/full exclusive to my secondary or lower console, so be it. I'm still buying and playing the game.

👍Same for me, man. I've always had at least two consoles each gen (three for 7th-gen) since the 5th-gen systems. If I knew about consoles like the Saturn or SNES when I was at the point of maybe being able to game on them (I got into 4th-gen pretty late, and Saturn was basically a unicorn to me at most stores as very few carried them), I'd of probably convinced my parents to get them for me too xD.

Gaming's just better when you have as many platforms at your disposal as possible, just in case there's that big exclusive on only one of those platforms. That way you don't miss out.
 

DarkMage619

Verified Gamepass Reseller
15 Jul 2022
106
115
Thats a lie

Forza_Horizon_5_pre_order_editions.jpg


Only the premium edition had early access and it was 100 dollars.
I bought the premium add on bundle for $44 dude. It gave me early access and it wasn't $100. Did you try it on an Xbox? I did.

@DarkMage619 was shook to the core and never came back to argue his points. It's easier to leave empathy and lol emojis on GAF than argue with logic.
Sure bro. I have other things to do. I have yet to see anyone using logic with relation to PlayStation here yet. Dude trying to tell me how much I paid for a Forza bundle on a system he doesn't own. SMH.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MScarpa

DarkMage619

Verified Gamepass Reseller
15 Jul 2022
106
115
Ok so according to your logic none of the games I mentioned were ever planned to come on PS?


jennifer lawrence ok GIF
PROVE IT. Show the official release info of PlayStation titles that were later canceled by MS. There are numerous titles and IP MS owns that hit PlayStation regardless. The reverse is not true. Nothing is guaranteed ask Xbox gamers who were expecting Street Fighter 5 after getting 4.

That said you can play Xbox games without owning an Xbox at all. Every game they make hits PC day 1 that cannot be said of PlayStation titles. MS also has tons of games that are streamable to tables and phones too. Sony paying 3rd party devs to not make Xbox titles is not like MS buying IP and studios to secure content for their platform and you know it.
 

PropellerEar

Veteran
Founder
21 Jun 2022
1,353
2,249
PROVE IT. Show the official release info of PlayStation titles that were later canceled by MS. There are numerous titles and IP MS owns that hit PlayStation regardless. The reverse is not true. Nothing is guaranteed ask Xbox gamers who were expecting Street Fighter 5 after getting 4.

That said you can play Xbox games without owning an Xbox at all. Every game they make hits PC day 1 that cannot be said of PlayStation titles. MS also has tons of games that are streamable to tables and phones too. Sony paying 3rd party devs to not make Xbox titles is not like MS buying IP and studios to secure content for their platform and you know it.
DirkMagusDCXIX @ fanfiction.net and the BS narrative.
 

Gediminas

Boy...
Founder
21 Jun 2022
7,231
8,914
PROVE IT. Show the official release info of PlayStation titles that were later canceled by MS. There are numerous titles and IP MS owns that hit PlayStation regardless. The reverse is not true. Nothing is guaranteed ask Xbox gamers who were expecting Street Fighter 5 after getting 4.

That said you can play Xbox games without owning an Xbox at all. Every game they make hits PC day 1 that cannot be said of PlayStation titles. MS also has tons of games that are streamable to tables and phones too. Sony paying 3rd party devs to not make Xbox titles is not like MS buying IP and studios to secure content for their platform and you know it.
Bethesda officially stated that they had to scrap Starfield for Playstation after m$ bought them.

Street Fight 5 would never happened if not Playstation, they funded development. go and ask why m$ didn't funded it? go and ask m$ why they declined KOTOR remake? boohoo, Sony agreed and it's console exclusive. no shit sherlock, they are funding it.

m$ buying ips and studios to secure content, no, they bought MULTIPLATFORM, that content would been hitting m$ regardless.
 
Last edited:
  • fire
Reactions: Gods&Monsters
OP
OP
ethomaz

ethomaz

Rebolation!
21 Jun 2022
11,594
9,450
Brasil 🇧🇷
PSN ID
ethomaz
Bethesda officially stated that they had to scrap Starfield for Playstation after m$ bought them.

Street Fight 5 would never happened if not Playstation, they funded development. go and ask why m$ didn't funded it? go and ask m$ why they declined KOTOR remake? boohoo, Sony agreed and it's console exclusive. no shit sherlock, they are funding it.

m$ buying ips and studios to secure content, no, they bought MULTIPLATFORM, that content would beed hitting m$ regardless.
Remember games that 3rd asked MS to fund it but got denied by Uncle Phil so they reached Sony and boom…
 

DarkMage619

Verified Gamepass Reseller
15 Jul 2022
106
115
Bethesda officially stated that they had to scrap Starfield for Playstation after m$ bought them.

Street Fight 5 would never happened if not Playstation, they funded development. go and ask why m$ didn't funded it? go and ask m$ why they declined KOTOR remake? boohoo, Sony agreed and it's console exclusive. no shit sherlock, they are funding it.

m$ buying ips and studios to secure content, no, they bought MULTIPLATFORM, that content would beed hitting m$ regardless.
Multiplatform games like Final Fantasy and Street Fighter? Show me the official announcement of Starfield for PlayStation and its subsequent cancelation. It was all speculation just like Xbox gamers speculated the next Street Fighter was coming to Xbox. Oh well. Doesn't change the fact that MS is far more likely to put their titles on other platforms than Sony is with their titles. It's all business but to act like MS is a bad actor while Sony is virtuous is laughable.
 
  • haha
Reactions: Swift_Star

Gods&Monsters

Veteran
21 Jun 2022
5,512
11,212
PROVE IT. Show the official release info of PlayStation titles that were later canceled by MS
Prove that Bethesda games were multiplatforms? Bethesda was not that kind of publisher like Square Enix. They didn't make permanent exclusives anymore since like Oblivion. They even supported the Switch which was obviously underpowered for their games.
Even timed Deathloop and Ghostwire was out-of-character for them.

If you're still pissed about Street Fighter then it doesn't make any sense to cheer about MS acquisitions like you've been doing for years. Major hypocrisy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.