Support NeoGAF

[DenchDeckard]

What actually sucks is we have people saying Microsoft can just go out and secure third party deals for gamepass and they should...then we literally find out Sony has actual contract terms stopping Microsoft from being able to do that...

It's actually disgusting how sony acts. I hope this shit goes to court and we actually get to find out how far the rabbit hole goes.

 

[kyliethicc]

They're probably just pulling it out of their ass

and here I am wishing Jimbo would like can you imagine

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

What actually sucks is we have people saying Microsoft can just go out and secure third party deals for gamepass and they should...then we literally find out Sony has actual contract terms stopping Microsoft from being able to do that...

It's actually disgusting how sony acts. I hope this shit goes to court and we actually get to find out how far the rabbit hole goes.

Stop crying.

 

[laynelane]

More than likely to find out that MS isn't as innocent as Xbox fans want to believe.

When that day comes, I look forward to reading how any uncovered wrongdoing by MS is somehow Sony's fault.

 

[GHG]

What actually sucks is we have people saying Microsoft can just go out and secure third party deals for gamepass

They do. It goes hand in hand with the games they have marketing deals for.

It's going to be hilarious if this goes to court and we get some industry wide exposé. The saying foot meets mouth comes to mind.

 

[LordCBH]

They're probably just pulling it out of their ass

Microsoft when asked how they know:

 

[Gudji]

MS doesn't even know when everwild, awoved and starfield will come out how the fuck would they know about wolverine. lmao

 

[Menzies]

Please provide a source for this bold claim that Microsoft cannot enter into exclusivity agreements in the same manner that Sony can. How do you know that Microsoft can't make exclusivity agreements with, for example, Square Enix? And is the reason that Microsoft can't make exclusivity agreements due to developers/publishers not wanting to go into business with Microsoft, or do you have some evidence that Sony is breaking the law by forcing developers/publishers to decline exclusivity agreements from Microsoft? If it's the former then that's got nothing to do with Sony or being competitive as it is a developer's/publisher's prerogative regarding who they want to go into business with. If it's the latter than show me evidence, and send it to the authorities while you're at it since that's anti-competitive behavior and should be fined.

Well hopefully the CMA is breaking down this dam. To reasonable minds it stands to conclude that Sony's dominant market position nets them favourable deals in these types of negotiations.

Microsoft paid $100 million for a single year of Tomb Raider.

What is Sony paying for multiple years of Final Fantasy?

Let's see how even the existing landscape is, and that it isn't already a foreclosure concern. Is this not enough evidence for Microsoft to justify their pivot so that they can compete?

 

[freefornow]

MS responses to the the CMA Reference decision clearly reminding CMA of its role.

3.4 .....The Referral Decision goes no further than to assert that a foreclosure strategy could have some unspecified impact on "Sony's revenues and user base".28 There is no assessment of the impact on competition or consumers. Indeed, while Sony is mentioned 57 times in the Referral Decision, consumers are only referred to 10 times. In considering this theory at Phase 1 the Referral Decision fails to "consider the effect of a merger on competition in the market rather than on individual competitors" (emphasis added).29

3.5 At Phase 2, the CMA must assess whether it is more likely than not that competition will be substantially lessened - and consumers harmed - as a result of the Transaction. Microsoft is confident that the CMA will find that this is not the case.

Meanwhile CMA official reading response:

 

[ANIMAL1975]

'Sony is releasing all this games in 2023 your honor. You see? They don't need Call of Duty.'

 

[Barakov]

I didn't know that a CMA document could sound like pure desperation but here we are.

 

[01011001]

Spider-Man 2 and Wolverine?

WHAT IF THEY ARE THE SAME GAME?

 

[GHG]

I didn't know that a CMA document could sound like pure desperation but here we are.

Wait until you hear about how many times the CMA said the dirty word in their response to Microsoft.

 

[Kilau]

I love when we get more Sony information from MS than we do from Sony.

 

[FalsettoVibe]

No it's not.....lol
Stop it Microsoft.

 

[SlimySnake]

MS literally knew the Sony specs in 2018. I wouldnt dismiss this. The Miles team is making this and they started dev in november 2020. By November 2023, it wouldve given them 3 full years to make the game. insomniac doesnt blame covid or inflation or hurricane sandy for delays. they go to work everyday and deliver.

THey couldve mentioned TLOU factions but they chose to mention Wolverine. Interesting.

 

[Topher]

What actually sucks is we have people saying Microsoft can just go out and secure third party deals for gamepass and they should...then we literally find out Sony has actual contract terms stopping Microsoft from being able to do that...

It's actually disgusting how sony acts. I hope this shit goes to court and we actually get to find out how far the rabbit hole goes.

Nonsense. Why are you pretending that Sony has marketing agreements with every AAA game ever released? They don't. And the few they do, the contracts last a year at most with 6 month right to refuse. So where are all the AAA games on Game Pass that have no contracts with Sony? Where is Cyberpunk 2077 which has a marketing agreement with Microsoft? Fact is Microsoft isn't going to pay what it would take to get those AAA games on the service. Hate to break it to everyone, but Xbox doesn't have a free pass to the Microsoft vault to take truckloads of cash out at will.

 

[DenchDeckard]

Nonsense. Why are you pretending that Sony has marketing agreements with every AAA game ever released? They don't. And the few they do, the contracts last a year at most with 6 month right to refuse. So where are all the AAA games on Game Pass that have no contracts with Sony? Where is Cyberpunk 2077 which has a marketing agreement with Microsoft? Fact is Microsoft isn't going to pay what it would take to get those AAA games on the service. Hate to break it to everyone, but Xbox doesn't have a free pass to the Microsoft vault to take truckloads of cash out at will.

We don't know the contracts until we know the contracts.

First capcom, and then Activision with cod for a number of years...who's next?

How do you know for certain what deals are in place, like they wouldn't be under NDA..we need this shit to come out imo...let it all out...warts and all. Both sides will have skeletons and I'd love ro see them...I'm sure we all would.

 

[Skifi28]

Horizon remaster confirmed by Nintendo.

 

[bluecowboys]

Sony blocking COD on game pass and other streaming services is forcing people who only want to play COD (a lot of gamers) to buy a 400/500 dollar console. If that isn't anti consumer than I don't know what is.

 

[remember_spinal]

This just in: Microsoft also announced Ghost of Tsushima 2, Metal Gear Solid Remake, Astrobot Goes to Hollywood, Death Edging and Bloodborne 2 are also releasing in 2023

 

[DForce]

Sony blocking COD on game pass and other streaming services is forcing people who only want to play COD (a lot of gamers) to buy a 400/500 dollar console. If that isn't anti consumer than I don't know what is.

Microsoft buying publishers and making all their games exclusive is more anti-consumer.

 

[xHunter]

Sony blocking COD on game pass and other streaming services is forcing people who only want to play COD (a lot of gamers) to buy a 400/500 dollar console. If that isn't anti consumer than I don't know what is.

Phones are free now? I dont understand your logic. You will need a device to play the games even if they are on a streaming service.

 

[kebaldo]

Sony blocking COD on game pass and other streaming services is forcing people who only want to play COD (a lot of gamers) to buy a 400/500 dollar console. If that isn't anti consumer than I don't know what is.

Dude you are forced to spend money on a pc ora console to play any game lol Where the fuck do you pretend to play cod? on your toaster?

 

[01011001]

Microsoft buying publishers and making all their games exclusive is more anti-consumer.

their games can be played on any device that can run Chromium based browsers at reasonably speeds.
so technically, almost the entire world can play them without buying an Xbox

 

[DJ12]

Dude you are forced to spend money on a pc ora console to play any game lol Where the fuck do you pretend to play cod? on your toaster?

his xbox fridge I expect.

 

[GHG]

Sony blocking COD on game pass and other streaming services is forcing people who only want to play COD (a lot of gamers) to buy a 400/500 dollar console. If that isn't anti consumer than I don't know what is.

Also who the hell is streaming call of duty?

Beyond that activision themselves removed it from GeForce Now:

Nvidia: GeForce Now lost Activision games over ‘misunderstanding’

Company hopes to get them back to streaming service later

www.polygon.com

You guys are really trying to make out like Xbox are some humanitarian company for gamers and not your plain old for-profit business. How impressionable are you? Do your fathers not love you?

 

[Elios83]

Lol if this is the way they're approaching regulators with truth facts....lol good luck gaining credibility
Or they're confusing Wolverine with Spiderman?

 

[DForce]

their games can be played on any device that can run Chromium based browsers at reasonably speeds.
so technically, almost the entire world can play them without buying an Xbox

Making it run on browsers while taking it off PlayStation is worse than marketing deals.

You guys have a hard time admitting MS has a history of making anti-consumer moves.

Just admit it and move on. It shouldn't be that difficult lol

 

[IFireflyl]

You have your own report from CADE and CMA where MS already leaves evidence that this is so... But no official report is necessary because it is purely logical and it is already accepted.

Playstation's market share is more than 2:1 vs Xbox globally and much higher in key markets like Europe and Japan the gap is much bigger.

When MS goes to studio publishers it has a much harder time convincing them that their AAA game from famous IP is interesting to release exclusively on Xbox and leave out a 2x larger user base. That is, either they are denied or they are convinced that it costs much more to compensate for the loss of sales in PS. It is common knowledge.
For MS, or any other agent that wants to "compete" in the console market, it must face that situation of power and strength of Sony in the market...

The logical thing is that each company uses its strengths, and that of MS is economic as Sony is its market leading position and brand power and takes advantage of it.

Well hopefully the CMA is breaking down this dam. To reasonable minds it stands to conclude that Sony's dominant market position nets them favourable deals in these types of negotiations.

Microsoft paid $100 million for a single year of Tomb Raider.

What is Sony paying for multiple years of Final Fantasy?

Let's see how even the existing landscape is, and that it isn't already a foreclosure concern. Is this not enough evidence for Microsoft to justify their pivot so that they can compete?

Let's be very clear about something: if a developer/publisher chooses to offer Sony a better deal of their own volition, not due to strong-arming by Sony, that isn't something that can be used against Sony. If I sell a product and want to make an exclusivity agreement with Amazon and not Newegg, that's entirely within my right and it isn't anti-competitive. It becomes anti-competitive if Amazon, as an example, tells me I'm not allowed to do business with Newegg. There is no evidence that I have seen (and if it's there please point it out to me) that shows that Sony is strong-arming developers/publishers to Microsoft's detriment. If that IS the case then I'm fully onboard that they should be punished, and if that is known to be the case then I don't understand how they aren't being punished as that violates anti-competition laws in multiple countries.

 

[GHG]

their games can be played on any device that can run Chromium based browsers at reasonably speeds.
so technically, almost the entire world can play them without buying an Xbox

What and a computer along with a strong Internet connection and close proximity to one of their datacenters isn't required?

Don't let me catch you of all people stanning for cloud streaming all of a sudden.

 

[bluecowboys]

Also who the hell is streaming call of duty?

Beyond that activision themselves removed it from GeForce Now:

http://[URL][URL][URL]https://www.p...ctivision-games-pulled-blizzard-nvidia-reason

[/URL][/URL][/URL]

You guys are really trying to make out like Xbox are some humanitarian company for gamers and not your plain old for-profit business. How impressionable are you? Do your fathers not love you?

I don't see how a steam version that requires a gaming PC which is more EXPENSIVE than a console is helping your case lol. Activision removed the game from geoforce probably because Sony has a clause against subscription services which will include geoforce.

A lot of people are starting to use cloud streaming. In fact, there was quite a size-able group of people playing Destiny 2 on stadia. If you looked at the latest videos and articles from publications such as IGN you will see how great cloud gaming can be. Especially if it saves the casual gamers 400/500 dollars.

 

[01011001]

Making it run on browsers while taking it off PlayStation is worse than marketing deals.

You guys have a hard time admitting MS has a history of making anti-consumer moves.

Just admit it and move on. It shouldn't be that difficult lol

every company has a history of making anti consumer moves. Sony is ridiculously anti consumer and always has been.

why can't I use my Dualshock 4 in PS5 games? there is LITERALLY no reason for that other than Sony locking them down through software, even tho they have all the features neccessary to play EVERY PS5 game, and the console already detects the controller perfectly fine and allows my to play PS4 games with it.

How about Sony having a perfectly capable PS2 emulator that when softmodded on a PS4 can play more PS2 titles at perfect or near perfect states than there are backwards compatible games on Xbox One/SX, and not making the system backwards compatible but instead selling the games through the store and subscriptions?

How about PS1 backwards compatibility, using either their own emulator they used on PSP, Vita and PS3, or sourcing a well made third party emulator like they did with the PS1 Classic?

what are the reasons for these decisions? hint: they aren't made with the consumer in mind

What and a computer along with a strong Internet connection with close proximity to one of their datacenters isn't required?

Don't let me catch you of all people stanning for cloud streaming all of a sudden.

(I was mostly joking with that comment)

 

[Hero of Spielberg]

every company has a history of making anti consumer moves. Sony is ridiculously anti consumer and always has been.

why can't I use my Dualshock 4 in PS5 games? there is LITERALLY no reason for that other than Sony locking them down through software, even tho they have all the features neccessary to play EVERY PS5 game, and the console already detects the controller perfectly fine and allows my to play PS4 games with it.

How about Sony having a perfectly capable PS2 emulator that when softmodded on a PS4 can play more PS2 titles at perfect or near perfect states than there are backwards compatible games on Xbox One/SX, and not making the system backwards compatible but instead selling the games through the store and subscriptions?

How about PS1 backwards compatibility, using either their own emulator they used on PSP, Vita and PS3, or sourcing a well made third party emulator like they did with the PS1 Classic?

what are the reasons for these decisions? hint: they aren't made with the consumer in mind



(I was mostly joking with that comment)

Sony really are the biggest dicks when it comes to letting me play games I've already bought from them on new consoles.

Edit: I forgot the dickishness of Nintendo on this too.

 

[DForce]

every company has a history of making anti consumer moves. Sony is ridiculously anti consumer and always has been.

why can't I use my Dualshock 4 in PS5 games? there is LITERALLY no reason for that other than Sony locking them down through software, even tho they have all the features neccessary to play EVERY PS5 game.

How about Sony having a perfectly capable PS2 emulator that when softmodded on a PS4 can play more PS2 titles at perfect or near perfect states than there are backwards compatible games on Xbox One/SX?

How about PS1 backwards compatibility, using either their own emulator they used on PSP, Vita and PS3, or sourcing a well made third party emulator like they did with the PS1 Classic?

what are the reasons for these decisions? hint: they aren't made with the consumer in mind

Every company? Then why are you trying to excuse Microsoft anti-consumer practices?

Every time Microsoft Anti-consumer practices are brought up, there's always an excuse from an Xbox fan to make it acceptable and non-anti-consumer.

Buying publishers and removing games from the platform is worse than the things you just listed. Microsoft didn't want crossplay during the 360 era but now they were all for it last gen.

Stop trying to defend MS anti-consumer practices. You know buying publishers and removing the game from the platform is far worse.

 

[kebaldo]

I don't see how a steam version that requires a gaming PC which is more EXPENSIVE than a console is helping your case lol. Activision removed the game from geoforce probably because Sony has a clause against subscription services which will include geoforce.

A lot of people are starting to use cloud streaming. In fact, there was quite a size-able group of people playing Destiny 2 on stadia. If you looked at the latest videos and articles from publications such as IGN you will see how great cloud gaming can be. Especially if it saves the casual games 400/500 dollars.

Dude I have a freaking Stadia + Chromecast at home so I'm titled to speak on this stream shit: it sucks hard. Probably less then 10k gamers in the world are enjoying a stream that is nearly seamless as a PC/console. Streaming at this moment in time and for the next 10/15 years is just the classic "and you can do this too on our console" thing...

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Activision removed the game from geoforce probably because Sony has a clause against subscription services which will include geoforce.

For COD. Not all their games lmao

Try harder

 

[Topher]

We don't know the contracts until we know the contracts.

First capcom, and then Activision with cod for a number of years...who's next?

How do you know for certain what deals are in place, like they wouldn't be under NDA..we need this shit to come out imo...let it all out...warts and all.

Who's next for Microsoft? Why are you not asking that question? Instead you are making incredibly broad assumptions for the sole purpose of blaming Sony and crying about how Microsoft is somehow the victim here, trillions be damned.

 

[GHG]

I don't see how a steam version that requires a gaming PC which is more EXPENSIVE than a console is helping your case lol. Activision removed the game probably because Sony has a clause against subscription services which will include geoforce.

A lot of people are starting to use cloud streaming. In fact, there was quite a size-able group of people playing Destiny 2 on stadia. In fact, if you looked at the latest videos and articles from publications such as IGN you will see how great cloud gaming can be. Especially if it saves the casual games 400/500 dollars.

A build equivalent to the minimum specs can be had for less than the figures you're stating.

If there were indeed a sizable group playing on Stadia they wouldn't have needed to shut down.

Also, try reading for once Lognor, this is from the article I linked:

Bloomberg reported that Activision Blizzard wanted to negotiate a new commercial agreement for its games when GeForce came out of its beta period.

 

[Banjo64]

I don't see how a steam version that requires a gaming PC which is more EXPENSIVE than a console is helping your case lol. Activision removed the game from geoforce probably because Sony has a clause against subscription services which will include geoforce.

A lot of people are starting to use cloud streaming. In fact, there was quite a size-able group of people playing Destiny 2 on stadia. If you looked at the latest videos and articles from publications such as IGN you will see how great cloud gaming can be. Especially if it saves the casual gamers 400/500 dollars.

So you've moved on from your 'MS can just pull out of the UK' argument, and now it's 'everyone can play CoD, a twitch shooter, on their grandchild's Amazon Fire HD tablet using touch controls, now let's all hold hands and sing kumbaya'.

What percentage of CoD players, or people who play console CoD, do you actually think would legitimately prefer to stream it?

And CoD mobile does exist for players who don't want a console. It was downloaded nearly 300m times in its first year on the market and is one of the most successful mobile games ever.

 

[remember_spinal]

Lol if this is the way they're approaching regulators with truth facts....lol good luck gaining credibility
Or they're confusing Wolverine with Spiderman?

Nope they listed spider-man 2 as well.

Microsoft has way higher expectations for sonys release schedule than even sony. Insomniac are gonna release two AAA single player games with 10 months of each other

 

[bluecowboys]

For COD. Not all their games lmao

Try harder

COD is the game I was referring to and Sony removed it from Stadia, GeoForce, and Xbox game pass. Essentially they are using the market dominance to stop cloud gaming and hurting the consumer.

 

[adamsapple]

If there were indeed a sizable group playing on Stadia they wouldn't have needed to shut down.

To be fair, Stadia's problems were far reaching than just not having more marquee games.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

COD is the game I was referring to and Sony removed it from Stadia, GeoForce, and Xbox game pass. Essentially they are using the market dominance to stop cloud gaming and hurting the consumer.

World of Warcraft was removed from GeForce

Was that Sony's doing too?

 

[PaintTinJr]

Don't you see you are the only one with such biased takes?
I don't know what Microsoft has done to you but everything is well now, you can stop fighting this fight

How are they biased takes when it is based on what happened and is still happening - with DirectX being closed source and no version for linux like SteamOS, and IE4 styled integration of DirectX with the Xbox game bar?

Here's a quote from the verturnbeat's 2010 part 1 article that is the source of the opening paragraph in Xbox's wiki page.

( https://web.archive.org/web/20220927133400/https://venturebeat.com/games/making-of-the-xbox-1/ )

One of the apocryphal stories was that Bill Gates approached Sony's CEO, Noboyuki Idei (pictured right), before the PlayStation 2 game console was announced. Gates wanted Sony to use Microsoft's programming tools, but Idei turned Gates down. Idei said that Gates flew into a rage, taking the affront surprisingly personally. Later, Idei said in an interview with Ken Auletta of the New Yorker, "With Microsoft, open architecture means Microsoft architecture."

Sony's decision not to depend on Microsoft was no surprise. Everyone in the tech industry knew not to turn their back on Microsoft, based on what happened decades ago when IBM gave its PC operating system rights to Microsoft. So Sony decided to make its own software for its machine.

Sony announced the PS 2 on March 2, 1999. Sony game chief Ken Kutaragi called it a "revolutionary computer entertainment system set to reinvent the nature of video games." Trip Hawkins, who ran the rival 3DO game company, called Sony's box a "Trojan Horse," meant to get into the home as a game machine and then becoming the gateway for all home entertainment. With such a machine, no one would need a personal computer in the home. Andrew House, then-senior vice president of marketing at Sony's U.S. game division said that Sony had broader ambitions.

"If it is just a game console, then we have failed," he said.

Gates had seen it coming. After his meeting with Sony's Idei, Gates returned to Redmond, telling his people that Sony wanted the PS 2 to compete with the PC, that it was going to be more than a TV set-top or game box: It was going to be a threat to Microsoft's Windows franchise.

And here is a quote from the second part

( https://web.archive.org/web/20220921065140/https://venturebeat.com/games/the-making-of-the-xbox-part-2/ )

Only a company like Microsoft could absorb such losses. And Bill Gates saw the strategic value in stopping Sony in its tracks and building a second pillar for Microsoft software, beyond productivity, based on entertainment in the home.

He knew the battle for the living room would play out over two decades, not just four years. Microsoft earned credibility

 

[kebaldo]

every company has a history of making anti consumer moves. Sony is ridiculously anti consumer and always has been.

why can't I use my Dualshock 4 in PS5 games? there is LITERALLY no reason for that other than Sony locking them down through software, even tho they have all the features neccessary to play EVERY PS5 game, and the console already detects the controller perfectly fine and allows my to play PS4 games with it.

How about Sony having a perfectly capable PS2 emulator that when softmodded on a PS4 can play more PS2 titles at perfect or near perfect states than there are backwards compatible games on Xbox One/SX, and not making the system backwards compatible but instead selling the games through the store and subscriptions?

How about PS1 backwards compatibility, using either their own emulator they used on PSP, Vita and PS3, or sourcing a well made third party emulator like they did with the PS1 Classic?

what are the reasons for these decisions? hint: they aren't made with the consumer in mind

Dude theres no company out there thats not trying to take all your money and treat you as a cash cow. They litteraly exist to our money with all the shitty and shade ways they can find... Even Nintendo is milking us with their online "services". No one is safe...



So sad to see this industry going down so badly... This acquisition was just the thing that speeded all up. Ms acquiring Activison, in the future Sony will do a shitty move to respond like for example buying CD Project... and at the end who is the only one who takes the big fat eggplant up their popo holes? us gamers lol

 

[Alexios]

So will everyone expect this to be open world? I hope we see different styles of games. It could be a more focused experience with no fluff and still be good right? Make every encounter meaningful and furthering story or gameplay, make gameplay engaging and skill based to enable that? I guess it may be less replayable, or rather not replayable but not easy to just jump in to mess around without progressing like all the open world games have a lot of fluff to engage with if you care to. But still. They can find a way I'm sure (that's better than straight up arena/challenge maps a la Batman).

 

[GHG]

COD is the game I was referring to and Sony removed it from Stadia, GeoForce, and Xbox game pass. Essentially they are using the market dominance to stop cloud gaming and hurting the consumer.

Call of Duty was never on Stadia. What on earth are you talking about?

 

[Topher]

These the same Microsoft lawyers who are trying to paint PlayStation as the God of gaming and Xbox as a mere weakling?

 

[bluecowboys]

Dude I have a freaking Stadia + Chromecast at home so I'm titled to speak on this stream shit: it sucks hard. Probably less then 10k gamers in the world are enjoying a stream that is nearly seamless as a PC/console. Streaming at this moment in time and for the next 10/15 years is just the classic "and you can do this too on our console" thing...

I use cloud streaming and outside of the occasional lag (every 20 or so minutes) it works pretty well. Not as good as console, but it still good especially the money you can save from not buying a console/hard drives. Not to mention you can play it almost anywhere. I'm sure there are more than 10k gamers enjoying it but once again you are lying