Microsoft's acquisition of Activison Blizzard
- Thread starter Darth Vader
- Start date
There'd be a lot of John WIck shit going down if we could shoot proper in VR. With total freedom to blind fire etc.
The thing is 3rd party deals is not exclusive to Sony. Microsoft has the same ability to find partners who would want to make the same deals like they did aggressively during the 360 days but the thing is that offer is not attractive to most because why do that deal with a perpetually 3rd place console. Why do that deal with Microsoft when the data shows that you would have to agree to the game being day 1 in gamepass or the competitor has a larger market share and larger percentage of your games sold on the other consoles
Xbox is becoming so irrelevant marketshare wise microsoft may be surprised to learn that some of those third party exclusives happened because the company just didnt want to port it to xbox.
D
Deleted member 417
Guest
100%. Sony need an online FPS ASAP in VR as a killer-app. Counter Strike source VR is funny as hell with people poking guns around corners and lobbying grenades from all over the place.
Microsft trying to pry third party deal information from sony might end up making said third parties mad, especially if it becomes public? How would microsoft airing square enix laundry make square enix want to work with them? Or any third party for that matter? What are they hoping to find, Sony helped fund certain games and that why they are exclusive? Ok And??
Their argument might be, "why are you going after us for the possibility of making COD exclusive when Sony has so many? Don't listen to anything they tell you." if I had to guess.
That's "knowinstuff" who up until then has reached fairly sobering and realistic conclusions based on the facts.
That someone can't see how permanently withholding 20+ previously multiplatform IPs including one of gaming's biggest from other platforms is the definition of anticompetitive is insane to me. Microsoft clearly has much much more incentive to build up Xbox as the place to play those IPs through degradation of the experience on other platforms, by siphoning away the user base, and then removing the experience entirely from alternate platforms. Although at that stage they wouldn't have to. And even if we took them at their word, if they have to wait out 5-10 years of parity to have 30 years all to themselves, why wouldn't they?
I know. You are right. We should change that.
Make this place more green, more gamepassy.
The problem, where is green there are ponies..
And you are doing SO well to be better! Mommy’s little soldier!
I noticed Law came into this thread to complain about the "Sony" Fanboys shitting up the place, while shitting up the thread without contributing to anything on the topic.I know. You are right. We should change that.
Make this place more green, more gamepassy.
The problem, where is green there are ponies..
I guess Law cant imagine there is a forum that actually knows how to think for themselves outside of the normal safe Xbox echo chamber
Last edited:
Well, we will give him a grand welcome of shit and abuse to meet the spirit with which he entered here!I noticed Law came into this thread to complain about the "Sony" Fanboys shitting up the place, while shitting up the thread without contributing to anything on the topic.
I guess Law cant imagine there is a forum that actually know how how think for themselves outside of the normal safe Xbox echo chamber
This thread has mostly been speculation and news from when I've started here at least. You may not agree with everyone's opinions on whether or not the deal should be allowed to happen or whether it's harmful to the industry, but this thread stays on topic for the most part.
There's an article alleging that Sony went to Seattle and could potentially be meeting with Microsoft on a COD contract, but that wouldn't make sense if they feel like the deal is in hot water like it appears to be. The author also seems to think that Sony would be more worried about COD being divested than MS owning them, which doesn't make sense to me, as a separately owned COD that goes back and forth with who they make maketing deals with isn't much different from the status quo. Idas seems to think that this would be a weird development as well. Could also be that the guy's sources are bad.
superjoost.substack.com
Sony and Microsoft's agreement on Call of Duty
New information suggests that the console rivals are closing in on a Call of Duty deal that would satisfy anti-trust regulators.
superjoost.substack.com
The FTC often has hearings and meetings in Seattle, so if Sony execs are there, that’s the reason, not some super-secret talks with MS.There's an article alleging that Sony went to Seattle and could potentially be meeting with Microsoft on a COD contract, but that wouldn't make sense if they feel like the deal is in hot water like it appears to be. The author also seems to think that Sony would be more worried about COD being divested than MS owning them, which doesn't make sense to me, as a separately owned COD that goes back and forth with who they make maketing deals with isn't much different from the status quo. Idas seems to think that this would be a weird development as well. Could also be that the guy's sources are bad.
Sony and Microsoft's agreement on Call of Duty
New information suggests that the console rivals are closing in on a Call of Duty deal that would satisfy anti-trust regulators.
View attachment 566
I also just read that Bungie is about a 15 minute drive from Seattle as well, if Sony had business with their new studio for example.
Good point, I had forgotten about that possibility.
More to the point, Sony is NOT going to be meeting with MS unless it is in the presence of the FTC with what’s going on.