Well, I guess he and Miles Dompier went to the same
school .
That's an interesting point. It should be illegal for MS to know the terms of contracts Sony signed in private with 3P publishers for exclusivity deals, so they're either making an educated guess (which might was well be fiction, considering the narrative they want to set in order to appear weak and get the deal approved in their favor), or have just admitted to committing a crime.
Either that, or Sony have some of the dumbest lawyers on the planet and wrote bad NDAs in those exclusivity agreements. Which I strongly doubt to be the case, considering how long they've been in the business.
No see, Sony isn't allowed to acquire any publishers either because of the market share advantage they have by customers rewarding them for selling them a better product over multiple generations. They have to be punished for the market share they more or less earned by people deciding to buy their product.
If it's a problem Microsoft has? They can buy their way to a solution. If it's a problem Sony has? They have to somehow only make the solution themselves. Only one company is allowed to "compete", with some of these folks, apparently.
Yeah, that's what really pisses me off with articles like these. Insinuating that the actual power consumers have in order to reward an open, competitive market by speaking with their wallets and buying the product that's most appealing to them, borderline disgusting, isn't too far removed from insinuating ideas like they're too "stupid" to have the power to decide what product should have the most market share, or that they're "voting" (with their wallet) against their own best interests (those "best interests" being the company whose product the person making the insinuation happens to prefer or shill for).
If you want some real anti-consumer stuff in action, just look at the way articles from people like this frame the choice of the consumer choosing their preferred product in the market because it happens to be a product of a competitor with a product whom your employer's website is named after
.
TBH I think you're being
too generous in thinking dudes like Jez or Miles are sincere in writing these articles. They just always happen to time these articles to narratives that we see Microsoft themselves relying on at any given point in time, in this case WRT ongoing investigation into the ABK acquisition.
"Where are the Japanese games?" "The monopoly of Sony's timed exclusives", ...those are all talking points that ironically line right up with what Microsoft are focusing on bringing up in their responses to regulators. Even the fact Jez somehow stupidly calls Bloodborne a 'moneyhat' (or something to that effect) when they KNOW that was a game co-developed between Sony Japan Studio and From Software (which Dodkrake mentioned ITT), shows IMO the intention with these articles is very much insincere.
