GHG
Gold Member
Sir, have you familiarised yourself with the esteemed organisation by the name of CADE?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Sony Wants To Grow PlayStation By Making Xbox Smaller, Phil Spencer Says
- Thread starter Solidsnake_1
- Start date
- News Cringe
Sir, have you familiarised yourself with the esteemed organisation by the name of CADE?
oldergamer
Member
Thats not necessarily true. You need to be in a position of advantage to make it work. Most publishers arent going to do a deal like that unless its on the console with higher sales numbers. Or there is some other benefit like reduced fees on that platform.
Do you get how it works? We arent talking marketing deals only here.
Buy exclusives to drive up console sales as the primary place to get games. After years of doing this it creates a market that is more difficult for the competition. Makes your platform the defacto place to play. Then get marketing rights or exclusive deals that last for years.
Signing deals to prevent games appearing on bundles or services adds to that.
Sony stepped this up after ps3 failed to be in a spot to do so. Ms and steve Ballmer fucked up with xbox launch and the never recovered. Sony took being the market leader with ps4 used that advantage to continue to stifle competition. Even when selling triple what others sell. They then tried to do that at the start of this gen even before the systems were released, by using ps4 as the way into starting the exclusive discussion.
Its a easy proposition. The give us marketing or a timed exclusive rights and we reduce or waive the fee on ps4 when you release cross gen games.
You might think its good business but its using market position to lock out competitors long term on way to a monopoly.
Spencer saying they grow by making xbox smaller is 100% accurate when you realize there are a limited amount of consoles sold each gen say in the total range of 330 million. unless you are in a spot like nintendo, where they had to reinvent themselves, then sony and ms are battling it out for the same 180 million units by trying to get a bigger percentage of that market.
Ms reinvented itself in how it made money from gaming by expanding the walled garden to include other platforms and services together. while not bowing out of consoles like sega. Gamepass gave them a way forward without signing exclusive contracts and a different way for publishers to sell games. This disrupted sonys model for first party and third party, to the point where sony stated cutting deals to prevent games appearing on the service.
That is an unfair use of market position imo.
Last edited:
ChoosableOne
ChoosableAll
I can smell it. The biggest console war in history is coming. God bless your controllers and make your aim assist better.
Setsuna Mudou
Member
Let's be clear about something that most people seem to miss. Before any significant M&A happens it's the duty of the regulators to contact the competing parties and get their views on the particular deal. This doesn't start from the competitors "whining" about stuff in media, but it's the regulators soliciting a response.
There are teams of lawyers on each side dealing with this sort of inquiries from the regulators and it's their job to take those things seriously.
The bigger the deal, the more scrutiny will take, but this sort of inquiry happens even in much smaller M&As on any given market.
And I know this from personal experience having worked for a bit more than 8 years in a very high profile law firm that focuses on massive corporate deals and transactions (not as a lawyer, but in IT/Automation Management). There are literally processes in place where the buying party has to provide direct contacts of the competitors (phone numbers, emails, etc) for the regulator to survey and discuss. I would be surprised if in this case Microsoft wasn't the one forced to inform the regulators that Sony would be one of the competitors that should be surveyed for the approval of the deal.
Setsuna Mudou
Member
That's Phil's side of the story. He doesn't need to come to public and say that, the regulators will do their job and the lawyers will pass on his concerns. There's nothing to be won by him coming to public with this bullshit. It's unprofessional as fuck and reeks of desperation.
Cheezewizz
Banned
Well no... they didn't actually. Which was stated by MS in their reply to the FTC, as well as the EU themselves stating that they had no expectation for MS to make all Bethesda games exclusive. If that weren't enough, the EU regulators report is available online. So it's not difficult to see that not only is the FTC's claim false, but that the concessions MS agreed to between the two deals is dramatically different.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
FTC - "Microsoft made assurances that they had no incentives to make Zenimax games exclusive"
EU - "Microsoft made no commitments to ensure zenimax games remain multiplatform"
Both statements are true. Just take a little bit of fact-checking.
clampzyn
Member
Sony crying lmao, if they know how CoD is so big and a big money maker then why don't they compete against MS on buying abk instead of crying over it. Sony already got a big solid customers base because of their exclusives, MS is trying to put up a competition so Sony doesn't sit pretty on the market and set their games at 100$ and consoles by 1000$ by 2023. If xbox gave up you'd be seeing half-4ssed triple A games from sony because they will literally have no competition.
Last edited:
Victor Omega
Member
Dear Gaf,
While consumers can't incite a console/content war, let these companies do it.
While consumers can't incite a console/content war, let these companies do it.
Last edited:
PharaoTutAnchAmun
Member
No he is on Booty's and stuttering Nadella's level right now.
They should stop talking cous they make it only worse, it will be a long time before the chase will be closed....
Last edited:
Cheezewizz
Banned
Ok, so when dissecting this factual evidence. Why isn't everyone coming to the same conclusions? Who is considered a 3rd party? Should we only consider what the FTC, CMA, and EU regulators say as fact, and dismiss the regulators such as CADE fiction? Is Microsoft considered a 3rd party?
Except that's not really the truth at all. Why would state that we should just consider the facts. Only to immediately contradict yourself? Of course their concerns are valid, but not necessarily because their reasons for being concerned are though. they're simply valid because they're regulators. Also, how could it be possible for MS to offer solutions to get the deal done, when the FTC refused to even listen to MS and what solutions they were willing to offer, and went straight to suing them to block the deal entirely?
Ahh, what happened to all that more dissecting facts and less opinions mumbo jumbo you were just talking about? So posting about CMA corruption conspiracies are out, but posts about FTC corruption conspiracies (Like taking bribes) are in? Posts suggesting the FTC are lying is out, but saying MS is lying is in? Anyone who agrees Brazil's regulators is a bad actor/moron?
I'm sorry, but your whole take here is straight up garbage. It's possible for people to hear the same data and come away with two different opinions. People like you who insist others only listen to this, but not listen to that, are the same people that believe anyone who is arrested by the police is automatically guilty of the crime. We should just all go along with the regulators because it's just not possible for any of them to possibly have ulterior motives... well of course except for any regulators that don't agree with you of course, because obviously they're shady.
Sony hasn't mobile presende, haven't you heard of Fate/Grand order, its one of the biggest in the world...
Banjo64
cumsessed
Last edited:
nowhat
Member
onesvenus
Member
I don't want to read 9 pages but isn't that kind of obvious?
Sony is not doing anything special about increasing the total number of videogame players so all it's growth would come from reducing market share of their competitors.
Microsoft is doing cloud to increase the total number of players. If that works, they can gain players without removing them from other ecosystems
Sony is not doing anything special about increasing the total number of videogame players so all it's growth would come from reducing market share of their competitors.
Microsoft is doing cloud to increase the total number of players. If that works, they can gain players without removing them from other ecosystems
Well first of all it's extremely misleading from the FTC to say this because people immediately assume that MS lied in the past. The whole point of the EU comission's statement is to clear Ms from that slander, let's not pretend not to see it. Why would the EU commission come out with that calrification a day after the FTC? They saw what the FTC was doing, saw they were being used as a pawn to discredit Microsoft and wanted no part of it. Nice spin though.
You are also omitting that MS this time has made not just statements but actual commitments that they never made in the Bethesda deal. the FTC is ignoring the fact that contracts have actually been signed and comparing it with a situation where promises hadn't even been made. It doesn't get more disingenuous. The FTC knows they won't get away with it in court and are just abusing their power of nuisance. Motives still unclear.
Last edited:
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Because they effectively did.
The EU was asked a question. A question we're not privy to. They weren't responding to the FTCs claim.
Last edited:
Captain Toad
Banned
Are you honestly this ignorant?
MisterXDTV
Member
No shit, other publishers are gonna be HAPPY if Activision becomes first party. It leaves them a lot of space to gain market share on Playstation
Once Call of Duty gets on Game Pass, how many people will keep buying it?
Other big third party publishers are gonna lose their biggest competitor this way....
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Fundamentally the point is that some bought MS as the white knight saving the industry view or are pretending it were the case for real and if they bought EA and Ubisoft next they would make the same accepting arguments.
Last edited:
Snake29
Banned
Because this "one company" is the biggest place for CoD. There are only 2 consoles were you see Cod and PC...not anywhere else. So it's pretty fucking normal that Sony fights against this. They acquired a publisher with a big multiplayer game.
You think MS would say at Sony "meh you can have it, we don't need CoD"? And about Phil, there is much much much more context behind close doors. Phil is just fuelling the fanboys and he doesn't tell the whole story, only whats favouring him and Xbox.
Phil is the one that is contently in the media not Jim.
Last edited:
Fuz
Banned
EEE
MisterXDTV
Member
And Microsoft owns both Xbox and PC (via Windows)
Last edited:
GHG
Gold Member
Like clockwork.
Last edited:
K2D
Banned
"Phil Spencer dishing out bad faith"
.. should be the title of this topic.
He's probably right about about Sony wanting to grow larger, but MS shrinking is a biproduct of that, not a means to an end. I think (hope) Sony (or someone at Sony, maybe not Jim) acknowledges that.
Sony has a history of tending a 'Walled Garden'. The same goes for Microsoft during Xbox 360 era (for those with short memory). Their decisions to swallow Zenimax is a dubious one. Especially looking at how they've treated IP's obtained in the past.
Buying one of the industry's biggest publishers is on a whole other level, and I anticipate that the deal will be stopped. I hope this can set a president for other (i.e Tencent/Amazon etc) trying similar things in the future.
.. should be the title of this topic.
He's probably right about about Sony wanting to grow larger, but MS shrinking is a biproduct of that, not a means to an end. I think (hope) Sony (or someone at Sony, maybe not Jim) acknowledges that.
Sony has a history of tending a 'Walled Garden'. The same goes for Microsoft during Xbox 360 era (for those with short memory). Their decisions to swallow Zenimax is a dubious one. Especially looking at how they've treated IP's obtained in the past.
Buying one of the industry's biggest publishers is on a whole other level, and I anticipate that the deal will be stopped. I hope this can set a president for other (i.e Tencent/Amazon etc) trying similar things in the future.
Prove it. The EU Commission disagrees and said so loud and clear.
GHG
Gold Member
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
It's be done to death in the OT. Go and read through if you're actually interested in understanding the facts (I know you're not)
Last edited:
I'll go with the word of the EU commission on whether or not Microsoft promised them not to make Starfield and Redfall exclusive and the impact this had on the integrity of the gaming market.
Thanks for recommending me better sources of information though.
Moridianae
Member
My biggest issue with this whole thing is the fact that it's a bad look on Phil.
Acquisitions as a whole aren't great, but to my knowledge, every Sony acquisition has been a *developer* who was hitherto known for being essentially Sony-centric anyway.
They brought them into the fold and developed their talents, which is why Sony's first-party stuff is the best around.
The only exception to that rule was Bungie, but I don't think Sony put any rules or time limits on their stuff as part of the agreement that I recall.
Microsoft has bought some devs, but has yet to grow out to the same level by any means, so their response is to bust our the check book and buy publishers and all franchises associated with them and get mad when people call them out on such an action.
Acquisitions as a whole aren't great, but to my knowledge, every Sony acquisition has been a *developer* who was hitherto known for being essentially Sony-centric anyway.
They brought them into the fold and developed their talents, which is why Sony's first-party stuff is the best around.
The only exception to that rule was Bungie, but I don't think Sony put any rules or time limits on their stuff as part of the agreement that I recall.
Microsoft has bought some devs, but has yet to grow out to the same level by any means, so their response is to bust our the check book and buy publishers and all franchises associated with them and get mad when people call them out on such an action.
alabtrosMyster
Member
It's an amazing, deal, you pay and then you get all these games you don't care about for FREE!
Who would have thought people were brilliant enough to thing stuff they pay for was free.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Here you go. You can start here.
Let me know if there are any words you don't understand. Always happy to help the mentally challenged.
Topher
Identifies as young
Yeah, it's called market share.
If it isn't illegal then it is completely fair, especially when it is all shit Microsoft has done themselves. All this griping about Sony abusing a trillion+ dollar company is incredibly cringe.
If it isn't illegal then it is completely fair, especially when it is all shit Microsoft has done themselves. All this griping about Sony abusing a trillion+ dollar company is incredibly cringe.
Last edited:
disgusting part, it’s exactly what he is doing,
basically trying to make xbox bigger by making whole industry smaller.
thats their way out, after decades of incompetence and blunders.
like you go at a pace of acquiring a huge third party publisher every year, and expect people to not make any noise. gtfo
basically trying to make xbox bigger by making whole industry smaller.
thats their way out, after decades of incompetence and blunders.
like you go at a pace of acquiring a huge third party publisher every year, and expect people to not make any noise. gtfo
Moridianae
Member
Exactly. Reads like sour grapes--you didn't put in the work with the developers you did get..here we are in 2023 and Xbox remains synonymous with Halo, Forza and Gears(throw in Fable maybe).
So your response is to go out and buy whole publishers and try to make the following exclusive(and they have or will):
Fallout
Elder Scrolls
Starfield
Doom
Overwatch
Diablo
Warcraft
Call of Duty
Probably several more I'm forgetting to list and expect people not to be upset in this day and age with corporations already trying folks patience with their buyouts(Amazon, Musk, etc)
GHG
Gold Member
You seem to do it enough to have a stance regarding something you're clearly not informed about though. Funny that.
Unknown?
Member
Sony and Microsoft were BOTH paying for timed exclusives. That is where one game from a particular company eventually goes to all platforms.
Buying a publisher ensures that ALL games from said company are permanently exclusive. There is no correlation between the two.
This makes no sense because both the big boy and charismatic boy have been doing the same thing this whole time. Now the big boy is buying huge percentages of the industry, not just a few timed exclusives here and there.
levyjl1988
Banned
You can clearly tell who the PS fanboys are in this thread. At least I’ll get to play Starfield on my Xbox when it releases. Pc players will enjoy it too. PS losses out, now you know that’s how it feels. I’m sick of all the fucking exclusivity deals Sony has with multi platform content in multi-platform games. Fuck off Sony PS. They can’t even keep a good IP going like Gravity Rush and kill the servers, fuck Sony PlayStation.
Gavon West
Spread's Cheeks for Intrusive Ads
You are correct! Both companies have done it. In fact, Microsoft acquiring studios is just a bigger, more expensive version of what Sony does because they can afford to. So it's baffling that they are making as much of a fuss that they are.
That said, Microsoft attempted to purchase a 3rd party deal with Tomb Raider, and the whole of the gaming community went thermonuclear!
Is what it is, I suppose.