Support NeoGAF

[Three]

The high performance console market is something that didn't exist prior to this acquisition. It's something that, at this point, is totally made up because there is literally no definition of it other than Xbox and PlayStation hardware is more powerful than Nintendo hardware.

I think even before this acquisition a lot of people had heated debates about whether it should be compared as a console when comparing the best selling consoles. eg https://www.neogaf.com/threads/swit...n-the-road-to-1.1615755/page-6#post-264433539

I don't think many would have been talking about "markets" specifically to begin with but I'm sure publishers treat the Switch differently to xbox and PS already in terms of releases for a reason.

 

[DarkMage619]

They've always been defined this way

Video games have not always been defined this way and you know it. Is the FTC protecting 'sub markets' or the video gaming market as a whole? Does Activision content only effect 'sub markets' or do they make content across all of video gaming from PC, console and mobile? Oh and does the XSS count in 'high performance' market? I love to see you defend that to the many XSS naysayers here.

No, the FTC is likely to argue that Nintendo doesn't related to the discussion of Call of Duty because the Nintendo market isn't interested in the same games as those who buy games for Xbox and PlayStation. And that would be a true statement. That doesn't exclude Switch from the video game market at all.

How would you know when it isn't even an option for them to purchase? Monster Hunter Rise is an incredibly popular 3rd party title that defies the idea that only first party games sell on Switch. CoD could very well do the same if given the opportunity.

 

[ReBurn]

Differences such as not having the same products you mean

Correlation does not equal causation. On the Venn diagram of Activision games and console releases there is overlap of Activision products between Switch and other consoles. This is demonstrably true. The only game where there isn't overlap is really Call of Duty. Is this one game enough to define the whole market? That's the crux of the argument and none of the opinions expressed here matter.

There are other games that PS5 and Xbox are capable of running but don't get.

Nothing there proves that "high performance" is the thing that defines anything.

Im not saying you're wrong. What I'm saying is that what you or I believe isn't relevant.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Video games have not always been defined this way and you know it.

Sub-markets have been defined this way. It's how PC, mobile and Consoles are segregated.

Is the FTC protecting 'sub markets' or the video gaming market as a whole?

They're defining a submarket that yes, does exist, that yes, needs to be considered, just like how the mobile market needs to be considered, just like how the PC market needs to be considered

Oh and does the XSS count in 'high performance' market? I love to see you defend that to the many XSS naysayers here.

Read the document and you'll find out

 

[feynoob]

How does our understanding matter in the slightest when it comes to what the FTC will have to prove in court? Did you forget the thread you're posting in?

Because switch doesn't have all new power hungry games.
It's simple as that.
FTC arent dumb. They did their research.

 

[Banjo64]

Funniest thing about this discussion is that the CMA cited Microsoft's own internal documents and metrics in helping to determine that the Switch doesn't compete for the same mindshare as Microsoft and Sony.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Correlation does not equal causation. On the Venn diagram of Activision games and console releases there is overlap of Activision products between Switch and other consoles. This is demonstrably true. The only game where there isn't overlap is really Call of Duty. Is this one game enough to define the whole market? That's the crux of the argument and none of the opinions expressed here matter.

There are other games that PS5 and Xbox are capable of running but don't get.

Nothing there proves that "high performance" is the thing that defines anything.

Im not saying you're wrong. What I'm saying is that what you or I believe isn't relevant.

Are you just arguing for the sake of it now? You're not actually going to contest the fact that performance is a barrier to releasing a product.

 

[Three]

Correlation does not equal causation. On the Venn diagram of Activision games and console releases there is overlap of Activision products between Switch and other consoles. This is demonstrably true. The only game where there isn't overlap is really Call of Duty.

What makes you think this? Yearly CoD is just one of the biggest. Same with CoD Warzone. Did Sekiro for example launch on switch?

 

[Topher]

How would you know when it isn't even an option for them to purchase? Monster Hunter Rise is an incredibly popular 3rd party title that defies the idea that only first party games sell on Switch. CoD could very well do the same if given the opportunity.

Anyone who follows the industry knows Monster Hunter is a rare exception to first party dominance on Switch. The best sellers list show that to be a fact. EA Sports games are annual top sellers on Xbox and PS. Not so on Switch.

Been over this plenty of times. Not going to rehash it all again. Believe what you want.

 

[ReBurn]

What makes you think this? Yearly CoD is just one of the biggest. Same with CoD Warzone. Did Sekiro for example launch on switch?

There are more reasons why games do or don't release somewhere other than whether the hardware is powerful enough to run them.

 

[feynoob]

There are more reasons why games do or don't release somewhere other than whether the hardware is powerful enough to run them.

Switch has a weak hardware.
It needs cloud to run games like control and resident evil.

 

[ReBurn]

Are you just arguing for the sake of it now? You're not actually going to contest the fact that performance is a barrier to releasing a product.

I'm trying to approach this from the perspective of what the FTC has to prove. It doesn't matter what our opinions are. I'm not trying to prove you wrong. I'm saying that the FTC has to prove that this acquisition is illegal and to do that they're trying to define a market that excludes the company that makes their case fall apart. It doesn't matter whether you believe it because you're not the one anyone has to prove anything to.

 

[ReBurn]

Switch has a weak hardware.
It needs cloud to run games like control and resident evil.

How is that relevant to what the FTC has to prove? You just proved how CoD could come to Switch regardless of how powerful it is.

 

[DarkMage619]

Funniest thing about this discussion is that the CMA cited Microsoft's own internal documents and metrics in helping to determine that the Switch doesn't compete for the same mindshare as Microsoft and Sony.

I thought I saw that MS considered themselves 3rd in the console space. Are you saying they agree with the FTC's analysis of the market that they are actually not competing with Nintendo at all?

To be honest I'm just happy to hear the XSS is a high performance device now. We need to get the word out. We can at least agree on that right Banjo64 ?

There are more reasons why games do or don't release somewhere other than whether the hardware is powerful enough to run them.

Agreed. Activision makes games that run on mobile phones. No way power is the reason they don't make games on Switch.

Anyone who follows the industry knows Monster Hunter is a rare exception to first party dominance on Switch. The best sellers list show that to be a fact. EA Sports games are annual top sellers on Xbox and PS. Not so on Switch.

Been over this plenty of times. Not going to rehash it all again. Believe what you want.

I believe the video game market is divided into PC, console and mobile markets. Xbox, PlayStation, and Switch are all consoles and competitive with each other for gamers time and money. To try and carve it up to leave out major companies is completely silly.

 

[Ezekiel_]

Funniest thing about this discussion is that the CMA cited Microsoft's own internal documents and metrics in helping to determine that the Switch doesn't compete for the same mindshare as Microsoft and Sony.

FTC does too. It's all laid out in the 'Relevant markets' section of the FTC's complaint. I guess some here think they understand the market better than MS.

As a side note, I don't know how you guys have it in you to keep arguing the same points over and over with the same few who have shown no desire to accept objective reality.

 

[OsirisBlack]

No drama, just expressing my disbelief that people can't understand it


No… they didn't. They said that Microsoft said they have no incentive to stop releasing Zenimax games on rival consoles. They didn't say it was a commitment. They didn't say that the EU cleared the deal based on that statement. They are just highlighting that it formed part of Microsoft's submission, and was pretty quickly found out to be a lie.

why is this so hard for people to understand? It's kind of weird.

 

[Three]

There are more reasons why games do or don't release somewhere other than whether the hardware is powerful enough to run them.

Ok but you're just speculating now as to why that audience differs so it wouldn't sell, correct. Wasn't my point anyway. Only showing that what you stated "The only game where there isn't overlap is really Call of Duty" isn't true.

 

[feynoob]

How is that relevant to what the FTC has to prove? You just proved how CoD could come to Switch regardless of how powerful it is.

Never seen a dense person like this.
I am tapping out of this conversation.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

As a side note, I don't know how you guys have it in you to keep arguing the same points over and over with the same few who have shown no desire to accept objective reality.

This is good practice after we've won the console war and I'm in charge of educating former xbox fanboys

 

[feynoob]

My opinion of these stupid topic so far.

 

[ReBurn]

Ok but you're just speculating now as to why that audience differs so it wouldn't sell, correct. Wasn't my point anyway. Only showing that what you stated "The only game where there isn't overlap is really Call of Duty" isn't true.

Other than your comment how many times has Sekiro been mentioned in this thread as the basis for why Switch should be excluded from the mystical high performance console market.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Agreed. Activision makes games that run on mobile phones. No way power is the reason they don't make games on Switch.

Think you've beaten your record for dumbest comment

 

[Oddvintagechap]

This shit isnt getting resolved till 2024

 

[ReBurn]

Never seen a dense person like this.
I am tapping out of this conversation.

You don't need to resort to personal attacks so it's just as well.

Weird that people get their feelings hurt when someone says that Switch gets Activision games and should be included in the market.

 

[feynoob]

You don't need to resort to personal attacks so it's just as well.

Weird that people get their feelings hurt when someone says that Switch gets Activision games and should be included in the market.

Dude, we are telling you current switch is shit, and not a competition to Xbox and PS.

FTC classified the switch as 8th gen.

COD is going to be on next gen switch, but not on current switch.

 

[jm89]

This shit isnt getting resolved till 2024

 

[Three]

To be honest I'm just happy to hear the XSS is a high performance device now. We need to get the word out. We can at least agree on that right Banjo64 ?

It's funny how much you are barking up the wrong tree with this. Banjo64 loves the XSS.

You also have to consider that MS make XSS game release with feature parity mandatory and some have been complaining about that very thing.

Other than your comment how many times has Sekiro been mentioned in this thread as the basis for why Switch should be excluded from the mystical high performance console market.

I'm not sure where you are going with this. You said the only game where Activision doesn't release on switch is CoD. I mentioned Sekiro as another. There was also Destiny before too and I'm not even including games like Diablo 4.

 

[kuncol02]

Yeah but you'd expect them to know better when they're filing a lawsuit and using commentary that will no doubt easily get challenged in courts.

They use the phrase "are the only big 4 publishers". Square, Embracer, Tencent and the like are non-entities I guess.




Mobile phones aren't a part of the console market, Switch is. There's a very key distinction.




None ? Any time we get a 10, 20 page UK sales or NPD sales thread, it includes all the consoles. Thanks for agreeing with me.

Wait. Their "the only big 4 publishers" didn't included Embracer which has currently 117 studios. You have to be joking.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Wait. Their "the only big 4 publishers" didn't included Embracer which has currently 117 studios. You have to be joking.

There are other big AAA publishers you could point out, like Capcom.

Embracer Group is not one of them.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Because switch doesn't have all new power hungry games.
It's simple as that.
FTC arent dumb. They did their research.

People used to complain it was just a bunch of ignorant old suits working this shit, now they complain they know too much.

 

[Banjo64]

I thought I saw that MS considered themselves 3rd in the console space.

They can say anything publicly, their own internal documents don't lie. (I've included some third party input too, although I doubt you'll read it).

163. In general, Microsoft's internal documents track PlayStation more closely than Nintendo, with Nintendo often being absent from any internal competitive assessment.173 One Microsoft internal document assesses [].174
164. Another Microsoft internal document points to the differences in the technical strategies of Xbox/PlayStation and Nintendo consoles [].175 This internal document considers [].176
165. The CMA has also received evidence from the Parties showing that [].177 This suggests that Xbox and PlayStation are closer substitutes to each other than to Nintendo Switch.

167. Regarding the Merged Entity's ability to foreclose Nintendo, third parties confirmed that Microsoft and Sony compete closely in gaming consoles, and that Nintendo is not as close a competitor.
168. One third party explained that Nintendo's business model differs from that of Sony's and Microsoft's, and that Nintendo competes more closely with companies outside of the gaming industry. For example, Nintendo has products such as Wii Fit, which are not traditional games and may compete with fitness apps and other non-game apps.178 This third party also explained that Nintendo's audience differs from other consoles, as its games are marketed as family-friendly with less focus on heavy violence or shooting games (eg Mario Kart and Super Mario).179
173 For example, see []. 174 [].
175 [].
176 [].
177 'Assessing the risk of input foreclosure in console gaming', section A.2.5, submitted by the Parties on 27 July 2022 in response to the CMA's RFI dated 9 June 2022.
178 Third-party response to question 3 of the CMA's RFI dated 27 May 2022.
179 Note of a call with a third party, dated 16 May 2022, paragraph 8.
Page 40 of 76

169. Another third-party publisher commented on the technical differences of Nintendo's consoles, noting that they had encountered difficulties when bringing a game to Nintendo Switch but no difficulty in bringing the same game to Xbox or PlayStation. This third party explained that this was because of the different type of hardware that Nintendo offers relative to Xbox and PlayStation.180

174. In relation to the Parties submissions that Nintendo is successful without offering CoD titles on its console, the CMA considers that this is likely due to its differentiated hardware and content that is generally targeted at a 'family-friendly audience.' The CMA believes that the availability of a few games exhibiting violence (such as Postal Redux) does not undermine its conclusion that most of Nintendo's content appeals to a different customer segment. In addition, the CMA notes that one of the reasons for the lack of CoD's availability on Nintendo suggested by the Parties is because the Nintendo Switch is not technically capable of supporting the
186 SIE's responses to the CMA's RFIs dated 8 June 2022 and 25 July 2022.
187 Several Microsoft internal documents state []. For example, see []; and [].
Page 42 of 76

latest version of CoD, which the CMA considers is further evidence that Nintendo is not as close a rival to PlayStation or Xbox.188 As such, the CMA does not consider that Nintendo's current success is sufficient evidence to show that Sony does not require access on competitive terms to ABK's content in order to compete against Microsoft.

To be honest I'm just happy to hear the XSS is a high performance device now. We need to get the word out. We can at least agree on that right

I do agree that the Series S is a high performance device though. I've said so over the last 2 years on GAF, that I prefer it to my PS5 and have ridiculed the fact that people think lower shadow settings is a significant trade off 4x more powerful than the Xbox One, what, 6 or 7 times more powerful than a Switch? Yeah it's high powered, can we kiss now?

 

[HoofHearted]

My opinion of these stupid topic so far.

 

[feynoob]

People used to complain it was just a bunch of ignorant old suits working this shit, now they complain they know too much.

What is worst is that, most of these guys don't really know much about the industry, yet they argue against the people who have resources to get those documents easily.

 

[adamsapple]

Wait. Their "the only big 4 publishers" didn't included Embracer which has currently 117 studios. You have to be joking.

No, like I said. The FTC are using a very narrow and restrictive definition of things here. It makes a better case if there's less things, makes it easier to show something as a "monopoly".

Capcom, Square, Embracer, Tencent etc. It leaves a lot of very big prominent publishers of AAA games.

FTC cited the big 4 as "the only" publishers which make AAA games.

lol.

I do agree that the Series S is a high performance device though. I've said so over the last 2 years on GAF, that I prefer it to my PS5 and have ridiculed the fact that people think lower shadow settings is a significant trade off 4x more powerful than the Xbox One, what, 6 or 7 times more powerful than a Switch? Yeah it's high powered, can we kiss now?

You're putting multiple users here in a jeopardy whether to give an agreeing emoticon or not with this statement

But just a post ago you said video game market. So Sony could go out there and buy AB and EA because of Apple.

Try looking at this from a pov other than a xbox fan who wants his plastic box to be número uno.

They could certainly put an offer if they financially could. AB was up for sale for a while, it was welcoming offers from all parties, they didn't just exclusively go to MS. The same is true for Zenimax.

This is not a gotcha.

How does our understanding matter in the slightest when it comes to what the FTC will have to prove in court? Did you forget the thread you're posting in?

Exactly.

We can bicker back and forth and it's clear different users have different opinions here.

The onus is on FTC to prove this in the court as they are the suing party.

I, personally, think they won't be able to prove it.

 

[Thirty7ven]

They could certainly put an offer if they financially could. AB was up for sale for a while, it was welcoming offers from all parties, they didn't just exclusively go to MS. The same is true for Zenimax.

If you think it would be good for the market for Sony to acquire AB and EA then that lets me know you don't know wtf you're talking about.

 

[adamsapple]

If you think it would be good for the market for Sony to acquire AB and EA then that let's me know you don't know wtf you're talking about.

I'm not talking about whether its good or not, that's a whole another can of worms.

I'm just saying that there is/was nothing preventing Sony from giving an offer to either Zenimax or Activision.

For all we know, they did. With Zenimax at least, it was heavily rumored before MS's acquisition was announced that Sony was bidding for them.

 

[Banjo64]

DarkMage619 here are just some of my internal documents to support my Series S love submission (can't be arsed browsing through 8 pages of results). The meme is my magnum opus.

Vertical, doesn't gather as much dust and a smaller footprint on my desk. The Series S looks fantastic stood up. My PS5 looks like a ginormous erect penis towering over everything in my bedroom, even eclipsing my wardrobe.

The Series S is actually my favourite next gen console. Silent, small, pretty, low power draw, great build quality. Games look stunning on my EX2510.

I wouldn't buy one for a 4k TV. But my monitor allows me to play games like Requiem at 40fps, match made in heaven.

And that's not the only one, there's plenty of stunning games on the Series S, and plenty that run at 120fps.

I don't care if I sound like a nut.

I'm glad the Series S uses less than half the power of the other two.

I hope Nintendo and Xbox continue to offer consoles with a small footprint, and I hope Sony join in too.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

With Zenimax at least, it was heavily rumored before MS's acquisition was announced that Sony was bidding for them.

By heavily rumoured you don't just mean some reddit post do you?

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

DarkMage619 here are just some of my internal documents to support my Series S love submission (can't be arsed browsing through 8 pages of results). The meme is my magnum opus.

I don't need my X anymore

I use my PS5 for when I need thiccness

I use my S when I'm the mood for something more petite

 

[DarkMage619]

Think you've beaten your record for dumbest comment

Nah bro that was your 'high performance market' nonsense. I do appreciate your acceptance of XSS into that space. It's a brave stance to take here.

DarkMage619 here are just some of my internal documents to support my Series S love submission (can't be arsed browsing through 8 pages of results). The meme is my magnum opus.

I never questioned your appreciation of the XSS it's just now everyone believes it's a 'high performance market' device! Even MS never made that claim. This acquisition is changing hearts and minds.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Nah bro that was your 'high performance market' nonsense. I do appreciate your acceptance of XSS into that space. It's a brave stance to take here.

Do you think MW2 can run on a mobile phone?

 

[feynoob]

Nice drama.

 

[Topher]

The thread

 

[Banjo64]

Do you think MW2 can run on a mobile phone?

Wasting time bro. Microsoft internally agree that the Switch doesn't compete for mindshare, other third parties (plural) agree and I'm sure Sony and Nintendo themselves agree too. Some guy on NeoGAF doesn't, oh well.

 

[Banjo64]

Oh yeah not to mention the CMA, FTC and probably EU (I've not seen) also agree.

 

[R3claimer117]

Wasting time bro. Microsoft internally agree that the Switch doesn't compete for mindshare, other third parties (plural) agree and I'm sure Sony and Nintendo themselves agree too. Some guy on NeoGAF doesn't, oh well.

Lol switch doesn't compete for mindshare? Glad you're the one running these companies you know it all! What stupidity.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Lol switch doesn't compete for mindshare? Glad you're the one running these companies you know it all! What stupidity.

Take it up with Microsoft, not Banjo

 

[Banjo64]

Lol switch doesn't compete for mindshare? Glad you're the one running these companies you know it all! What stupidity.

The same mindshare you dolt.

 

[feynoob]

Lol switch doesn't compete for mindshare? Glad you're the one running these companies you know it all! What stupidity.

 

[3liteDragon]

Explains why CMA decision is important for this deal.

Gonna be interesting to see where the CMA & the EU go with this, I think that's where all eyes should be on tbh.

Like I said before, the CMA & the EU have a higher chance of killing the deal than the FTC does, especially the CMA.