Also another thing with the CMA's new findings in what
@Puff posted. Funny thing is, I have always considered MS doing GP-related exclusive perks with ABK content would have been in the realm of possibility and acceptance. It'd be their choice and might as well provide something to benefit customers in your ecosystem, right? I felt they would try that seeing as how they lined up perks for RIOT games on PC Game Pass, for example.
MY problem is that suddenly the CMA have this rather big turnaround from their initial provisional findings to these new statement where it seems they are suddenly cool with things they appeared vehemently against initially. So they think only a "small fraction" of PlayStation COD players would switch to Xbox if Microsoft made COD perks exclusive to Game Pass & Xbox, when I know they have seen many people (including quite a lot of disillusioned ones) in online discussion around this acquisition, imply that Sony doing similar with exclusive COD content on PS4 is a reason why MANY Xbox people eventually switched to PS4 last gen?
I mean let's not kid ourselves; Microsoft isn't going to limit those perks to just a couple crappy skins. They're going to
at least try copying Sony's strategy and, fair enough. But if Sony's strategy supposedly helped cultivate a large swath of people tied to the COD franchise to switch from Xbox to PlayStation, how would Microsoft doing the same suddenly
NOT cause that to happen in their favor, particularly if they pair that with making new COD available on Game Pass Day 1 (either in full, or just as some partial offering) which therein naturally provides a 20% discount on a purchased copy through the Xbox storefront?
Or maybe the CMA in fact do not consider Sony's exclusivity strategy with COD last gen as having a significant impact on COD player migration from Xbox to PlayStation. I guess that is always possible. But we know there are certain fanboys and fangirls who swear it did, and have argued as such, but now they will hide behind these new CMA findings to pretend that Microsoft doing similar suddenly will be "no big deal".
Always
convenient for those types, isn't it?
Not completely, some of us discussed this yesterday but the CMAs conclusion is still the same either divestment or prohibition is the preferred outcome, with them not seeing any reason for behavoruial remedies. Although as before they still are allowing ms to convince them on the latter.
No doubt the console concerns is gone, now the question is do the CMA hold onto the same conclusion regarding cloud.
Do you know where I can access the full report of their new findings? And how many pages is it, specifically?
I'm not necessarily trying to get caught up in reading legal documents for my weekend
