Support NeoGAF

[DarkMage619]

you should do the explaining.
trying to obfuscate MS as a Developer is ignorant at best.

You talk about obfuscation and try to split hairs about MS not being a developer because they own the studio? Seriously?

MS/Sony OWNS studios....THEY published their games.

MS/Sony are publishers.

and i ask again.
who publishes MLB on Xbox?

I answered this question already the MLB publishes the game on Xbox. That does not change the fact that Sony is responsible for the technical state of the game. I am not going to have a semantic argument about whether it's Sony or San Diego Studio. For the purpose of this discussion they are synonymous.

who is Sony saying could "degrade" CoD on PS?
Infinity Ward, Treyarch, Sledgehammer Games, Activision or Microsoft?

trying to equate CoD to MLB is very stupidly ignorant.

Sony is claiming that MS could degrade CoD. After the merger Activision becomes part of MS and there is no practical difference when it comes to the responsibility of the status of the game just like with MLB The Show.

It is ignorant of to claim there is some sort of difference between Sony and studio wholly owned by Sony. It is perfectly reasonable that if Sony is going to complain about the ability of MS to release a competent version of CoD we should see how competent Sony is at making MLB.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

It is perfectly reasonable that if Sony is going to complain about the ability of MS to release a competent version of CoD we should see how competent Sony is at making MLB.

 

[PaintTinJr]

...


Unfortunately the CMA legal framework seems to dictate much more the limits of how long that they can take.

Phase 2 is 24 weeks which can be extended by 8 weeks which they are already near the limits of.

The CMA could block and then delay it as MS/ABK would have to go through the CAT process but they can't just arbitrarily announce a 9 month review.

When I wrote that, I had it in the back of my mind - either reading it somewhere or from watching something on the BBC over the years - that the CMA bypass those timelines by just referring themselves to the CAT, and getting a judge to agree to a difference timeline, in which the court decision overrides the legislation timelines.

It just seems at odds with the common sense of processes we have in the UK to deal with matters that the regulator can't get adequate time it deems necessary to complete its task in a straightforward way if they really are tied to those timelines and are forced to either approve a deal -in a timeline - they wouldn't have if the buyer was intending to bypass regulation partners' in their home nation, or block a deal they hadn't had adequate assessment time of SLCs.

I wonder if the CMA have the option to make Microsoft go through the FTC process as part of the remedies to get the CMA approval.

 

[PaintTinJr]

...

Sony is claiming that MS could degrade CoD. After the merger Activision becomes part of MS and there is no practical difference when it comes to the responsibility of the status of the game just like with MLB The Show.

..

PlayStation will almost certainly have evidence of close to release games - that got sent for QA review by their certification team - that ran much better than the final game release, where Xbox had a "better than or equal" clause in the contract with that publisher, like the AC Unity 900p on PS4, or probably any version of CoD on PS3. They would probably be able to show that the hitches were done by wai/pauses being added to the code under decompiling, and is probably what they are fixing in firmware when they write "performance improvements" in their firmware notes.

It feels like a dangerous game to push PlayStation on proving such things IMO when I suspect they'll have receipts, and definitely for CoD if they do of Xbox's previous behaviour to make their case.

 

[Banjo64]

Why have we had days of discussion around MLB?

Do Sony have the ability to foreclose Microsoft with a baseball game? No? Ok then, so who the fuck cares? Oh, the people who want to twist the conversation to justify corporate boot licking? Carry on then.

 

[reksveks]

It just seems at odds with the common sense of processes we have in the UK to deal with matters that the regulator can't get adequate time it deems necessary to complete its task in a straightforward way if they really are tied to those timelines and are forced to either approve a deal -in a timeline - they wouldn't have if the buyer was intending to bypass regulation partners' in their home nation, or block a deal they hadn't had adequate assessment time of SLCs.

I would argue that they are rightly limited in by laws for a reason and it's to ensure that regulators can't abuse their power by having never ending investigations.

When I wrote that, I had it in the back of my mind - either reading it somewhere or from watching something on the BBC over the years - that the CMA bypass those timelines by just referring themselves to the CAT, and getting a judge to agree to a difference timeline, in which the court decision overrides the legislation timelines.

I haven't seen that before and not sure it is possible. It feels logically a bit iffy.

I wonder if the CMA have the option to make Microsoft go through the FTC process as part of the remedies to get the CMA approval.

I suspect that would cause major headaches honestly for everyone (MS and the CMA) and probably unpredecendent. I don't see it happening personally but hopefully we will know in a week or two, what the CMA have put forward.

 

[Morrie’s wig shop]

It's like the same Three people arguing and going in circles. It's in constant repeat of the same shit.
If a specific six members were banned from this thread. This thread would be dead.

The arguments that get argued 30 different ways are truly amazing in the world of speech craft. For that I truly appreciate this thread for the nonstop action in here.

 

[feynoob]

It's like the same Three people arguing and going in circles. It's in constant repeat of the same shit.
If a specific six members were banned from this thread. This thread would be dead.

The arguments that get argued 30 different ways are truly amazing in the world of speech craft. For that I truly appreciate this thread for the nonstop action in here.

Sometimes I wonder if they have a sixth sense power.
I am struggling very hard to prolong conversation here, while people here for some reason can make conversations from nothing and stretch out for too long.
Either I am stupid or these people are .

 

[mrmustard]

It's like the same Three people arguing and going in circles. It's in constant repeat of the same shit.

I see what you did there.

 

[Godot25]

that will be pretty dumb.

No it won't be dumb.

It will force FTC to put their money where their mouth is. Currently, FTC is prolonging this deal in their administrative court since they believed (in December) that CMA/EU will block this deal and they would get PR participation trophy against "big tech." If they really believe their case, they should sue in front of federal judge. But they won't do it because their case is weak as hell.
By trying to close merger after CMA/EU approval, Microsoft can basically force FTC to file an injunction in front of federal judge and not prolong decision making. But I honestly doubt that FTC would challenge deal in front of federal judge since they got embarrassed there lately. But it's ideological warrior Lina Khan so...maybe she is so desperate that she will waste another millions of taxpayers money to built a bad case that they will badly loose.

Or Microsoft will maybe wait so they can access Sony's documents on timed exclusives that judge has requested, so they can have cherry on top for successful acquisition.

But if CMA/EU will approve, chances for FTC are close to 0% to challenge this deal.

But the fact is that Microsoft needs to change merger agreement with ActiBlizz to close this deal over FTC's (almost) dead body. Which will of course require time. But as I said. If CMA/EU will approve, only PlayStation's most loyal would still believe that FTC can change anything.

 

[adamsapple]

 

[feynoob]

Sony is right on this one.
That message is poetic.

 

[adamsapple]

Sony is right on this one.
That message is poetic.

Something about reading a CoD message that isn't "UR MOM" is somehow uplifting, no matter the actual content of the message.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

No it won't be dumb.

It will force FTC to put their money where their mouth is. Currently, FTC is prolonging this deal in their administrative court since they believed (in December) that CMA/EU will block this deal and they would get PR participation trophy against "big tech." If they really believe their case, they should sue in front of federal judge. But they won't do it because their case is weak as hell.
By trying to close merger after CMA/EU approval, Microsoft can basically force FTC to file an injunction in front of federal judge and not prolong decision making. But I honestly doubt that FTC would challenge deal in front of federal judge since they got embarrassed there lately. But it's ideological warrior Lina Khan so...maybe she is so desperate that she will waste another millions of taxpayers money to built a bad case that they will badly loose.

Or Microsoft will maybe wait so they can access Sony's documents on timed exclusives that judge has requested, so they can have cherry on top for successful acquisition.

But if CMA/EU will approve, chances for FTC are close to 0% to challenge this deal.

But the fact is that Microsoft needs to change merger agreement with ActiBlizz to close this deal over FTC's (almost) dead body. Which will of course require time. But as I said. If CMA/EU will approve, only PlayStation's most loyal would still believe that FTC can change anything.

it will.

MS already won. they have nothing to lose waiting a bit more. on the contrary, if they decide to go forward they will be doing what FTC is arguing. (FTC doesn't have enough power or authority)

 

[feynoob]

Something about reading a CoD message that isn't "UR MOM" is somehow uplifting, no matter the actual content of the message.

They are stuck in the past, unable to evolve sadly.
So far, this is their trait. Best option is to use mute move, and their attack would be ineffective.

 

[Morrie’s wig shop]

Sometimes I wonder if they have a sixth sense power.
I am struggling very hard to prolong conversation here, while people here for some reason can make conversations from nothing and stretch out for too long.
Either I am stupid or these people are .

It's mind numbingly entertaining scrolling page after page and some of this shit reads like documents that were leaked from these corporations.

But it's all about what ifs and pretend timelines, it's fascinating. This thread could be used in some kind of social experiment about the breakdown and blurring the line of actual history and what transpired.

I can't be the only one reading through this thread and constantly saying to myself "wait that's not how it went down".

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

You talk about obfuscation and try to split hairs about MS not being a developer because they own the studio? Seriously?

there is a significant difference between a Developer and a Publisher.

I answered this question already the MLB publishes the game on Xbox. That does not change the fact that Sony is responsible for the technical state of the game. I am not going to have a semantic argument about whether it's Sony or San Diego Studio. For the purpose of this discussion they are synonymous.

they are not synonyms

Sony is claiming that MS could degrade CoD. After the merger Activision becomes part of MS and there is no practical difference when it comes to the responsibility of the status of the game just like with MLB The Show.

there is a big difference.

It is ignorant of to claim there is some sort of difference between Sony and a studio wholly owned by Sony. It is perfectly reasonable that if Sony is going to complain about the ability of MS to release a competent version of CoD we should see how competent Sony is at making MLB.

let me put it in this way.

SONY DOES NOT EARN MONEY FROM THE SALE OF MLB ON XBOX, NOR FROM THE GAME PASS DEAL.

those negotiations are between MLB and Xbox.

therefore, is the job of the MLB (as the publisher) to secure the quality and performance of such game.

they will need to pay/ oversee San Diego to guarantee that.

and we dont know the nature of the contract between Sony and the MLB.

this is a fundamental difference between
CoD and MLB.

people should find another example.

 

[feynoob]

It's mind numbingly entertaining scrolling page after page and some of this shit reads like documents that were leaked from these corporations.

But it's all about what ifs and pretend timelines, it's fascinating. This thread could be used in some kind of social experiment about the breakdown and blurring the line of actual history and what transpired.

I can't be the only one reading through this thread and constantly saying to myself "wait that's not how it went down".

I lost the plot a lot of times. So I just gave up and couldn't bother myself anymore.

Even at this point, it's hard for me to follow up with amount of crazy stuff that is coming out from this deal.

 

[SoloKingRobert]

Sony is right on this one.
That message is poetic.

 

[feynoob]

Let the king AI teach you how to write one.

In the world of gaming, there's a fanboy clan
For Call of Duty, they're the biggest fans
But one group stands out, above the rest
Playstation loyalists, they're the best

They'll argue and fight, defend their ground
Their love for Playstation, they'll always sound
From graphics to controls, they'll say it's superior
Their passion for the console, couldn't be any clearer

They'll talk about exclusives, and how they're the best
And when it comes to Call of Duty, they pass the test
With smooth gameplay and stunning visuals
They'll tell you why Playstation is so crucial

They'll boast about their skills, and how they dominate
On Playstation, they'll say it's their fate
And when it comes to online play, they're unbeatable
Their love for Playstation, irrefutable

So if you're a Call of Duty fan, and want to join the fray
Just know that Playstation fanboys, are here to stay
Their love for the console, unshakable and true
For Call of Duty, Playstation is the way to pursue.
PS I love you. And i asked the Ask AI app to write this for me. Get it for free --> https://get-askai.app

 

[DarkMage619]

PlayStation will almost certainly have evidence of close to release games - that got sent for QA review by their certification team - that ran much better than the final game release, where Xbox had a "better than or equal" clause in the contract with that publisher, like the AC Unity 900p on PS4, or probably any version of CoD on PS3. They would probably be able to show that the hitches were done by wai/pauses being added to the code under decompiling, and is probably what they are fixing in firmware when they write "performance improvements" in their firmware notes.

It feels like a dangerous game to push PlayStation on proving such things IMO when I suspect they'll have receipts, and definitely for CoD if they do of Xbox's previous behaviour to make their case.

There will most likely be an independent auditor that will confirm parity of CoD versions. There is no merit to the accusation that MS will degrade the game to harm the PlayStation brand. MS has developed games on PlayStation before and this issue has never come up. It's even more ridiculous to make that claim considering Activision is also well versed at PlayStation development and Sony has been quite clear that will say just about anything to try and get this deal blocked.

 

[reksveks]

There will most likely be an independent auditor that will confirm parity of CoD versions.

Not based of the current CMA position but that could change.

 

[DarkMage619]

there is a significant difference between a Developer and a Publisher.

Not when it comes to games developed by the publisher. In the case of Psychonauts 2 MS is both the developer and publisher. It is a first party title. Surprised you didn't know this. MLB on Xbox may not be published by Sony but it's still developed by them so Sony is responsible for the technical state of the game.

they are not synonyms

They are.

there is a big difference.

There is no difference in the examples I gave.

let me put it in this way.

SONY DOES NOT EARN MONEY FROM THE SALE OF MLB ON XBOX, NOR FROM THE GAME PASS DEAL.

So you are saying Sony developed MLB on Xbox for free? Highly dubious. Regardless of who pays them Sony is still responsible for the condition of the games on Xbox regardless of who published it.

those negotiations are between MLB and Xbox.

The negotiations to put MLB on Game pass is between MLB and MS. This doesn't change who developed the game.

therefore, is the job of the MLB (as the publisher) to secure the quality and performance of such game.

The MLB is not a developer and did not code the game, Sony did.

they will need to pay/ oversee San Diego to guarantee that.

and we dont know the nature of the contract between Sony and the MLB.

this is a fundamental difference between
CoD and MLB.

people should find another example.

I fundamentally disagree. Sony is the one paying the MLB for the license. Sony is meeting the requirement of that license by providing a version of the game on multiple platforms. It is still Sony's responsibility to ensure that game runs properly. This is a great example of the double standard Sony has when it comes to games on their platforms vs games on others.

Not based of the current CMA position but that could change.

I can still see that being an undertaking that MS has to follow to ensure that CoD remains on the platforms they promised. It also might be forced to toss Sony a bone. I suppose we'll all find out soon.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

.

is not double standards, is about being nuanced and truthful

there is a reason why Sony has singled out MS on those legal documents....MS is the publisher(and owner of those subsidiaries)

no one in an honest debate/ conversation would equate MS/Sony as a developer.

is like saying Take Two makes the GTA games.


"Videogame publishers and videogame developers are two distinct entities involved in the creation and distribution of video games.

A video game developer is a company or a team responsible for designing, programming, and creating the game itself. They are the ones who come up with the concept, create the gameplay mechanics, design the levels, and create the art, music, and sound effects. In short, they are responsible for bringing the game to life.

On the other hand, video game publishers are companies that provide funding, marketing, and distribution for the game. They take on the financial risk of the game's development and use their resources to promote and distribute it to the public.

Publishers also often provide developers with valuable feedback during the development process to help ensure that the final product meets market demands".


Sony as the MLB publisher on Play Station doesn't have any incentive to PAY/PUT MORE RESOURCES into a version in which THEY ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY MONEY.

Sony and the MLB could have different contracts like:

1. MLB has to pay for the Xbox Port.
2. Sony could pay for the Xbox Port and the license feed could be reduced

So, MLB (the publisher FOR THE XBOX VERSION) is the one in charge to secure the performance parity of such a version.

this could entail negotiations with Sony (owner of San Diego Studio) not just for the performance party but release one. (time).

so CoD and MLB can not be equated at all.

Sony doesn't even own the MLB IP.

Sony is not making money with the XBOX version (Physical, digital and Game Pass Release).

COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES

 

[Three]

Sophisticated just means they have experience of a culture and are not naive of it (for example watch twitch streams, who celebs like FaZe clan are, 'cultural' things like 360-no scopes, that sort of dumb stuff) it doesn't mean that they wear a monocle or that their experience is valuable.

 

[adamsapple]

Sophisticated just means they have experience of a culture and are not naive of it (for example watch twitch streams, who celebs like FaZe clan are, 'cultural' things like 360-no scopes, that sort of dumb stuff) it doesn't mean that they wear a monocle or that their experience is valuable.

no fun allowed .jpg

 

[DeepEnigma]

is not double standards, is about being nuanced and truthful

there is a reason why Sony has singled out MS on those legal documents....MS is the publisher(and owner of those subsidiaries)

no one in an honest debate/ conversation would equate MS/Sony as a developer.

is like saying Take Two makes the GTA games.


"Videogame publishers and videogame developers are two distinct entities involved in the creation and distribution of video games.

A video game developer is a company or a team responsible for designing, programming, and creating the game itself. They are the ones who come up with the concept, create the gameplay mechanics, design the levels, and create the art, music, and sound effects. In short, they are responsible for bringing the game to life.

On the other hand, video game publishers are companies that provide funding, marketing, and distribution for the game. They take on the financial risk of the game's development and use their resources to promote and distribute it to the public.

Publishers also often provide developers with valuable feedback during the development process to help ensure that the final product meets market demands".


Sony as the MLB publisher on Play Station doesn't have any incentive to PAY/PUT MORE RESOURCES into a version in which THEY ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY MONEY.

Sony and the MLB could have different contracts like:

1. MLB has to pay for the Xbox Port.
2. Sony could pay for the Xbox Port and the license feed could be reduced

So, MLB (the publisher FOR THE XBOX VERSION) is the one in charge to secure the performance parity of such a version.

this could entail negotiations with Sony (owner of San Diego Studio) not just for the performance party but release one. (time).

so CoD and MLB can not be equated at all.

Sony doesn't even own the MLB IP.

Sony is not making money with the XBOX version (Physical, digital and Game Pass Release).

COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES

SIr, sir, you need to apply that with a console war shill lens FOR THE BRAND™.

 

[Three]

no fun allowed .jpg

Funs allowed and the jokes were good, just pointing out examples of what's meant there.

 

[DarkMage619]

is not double standards, is about being nuanced and truthful

It absolutely is a double standard and Sony should be called out for it. They also should be called out for the state of Last of US Part 1 on PC as well. And yes I'm aware they contacted it out but that doesn't absolve them of the responsibility to deliver quality software. They demand near perfect performance on their platforms while delivering a lower standard on others. No one would even have brought this up if Sony hadn't made the claim.

It is all moot anyway because there is no historical evidence of MS degrading software on other platforms to harm those platforms or increase sales of their platforms. It's just more flinging of accusations to see it any of the regulators bite. Hopefully those regulators continue to take comments from the market leader with a grain of salt.

 

[DeepEnigma]

 

[Kvally]

And yes I'm aware they contacted it out but

ND did it.

 

[feynoob]

Sophisticated just means they have experience of a culture and are not naive of it (for example watch twitch streams, who celebs like FaZe clan are, 'cultural' things like 360-no scopes, that sort of dumb stuff) it doesn't mean that they wear a monocle or that their experience is valuable.

They dumb.
Sony is just giving them backhanded praise.

If you read the rest, you will know why. Especially with COD state yearly after yearly releases.

 

[feynoob]

Calm down have a Snicker.

 

[sainraja]

ND did it.

It seems to be Iron Galaxy; this graphic is pulled from the PS.blog post by Naughtydog. You can see Iron Galaxy's logo (bottom left, third logo). They also handled the Uncharted Legacy Collection port.

 

[Kvally]

It seems to be Iron Galaxy; this graphic is pulled from the PS.blog post by Naughtydog. You can see Iron Galaxy's logo (bottom left, third logo). They also handled the Uncharted Legacy Collection port.

It was confirmed that ND did most of the work. Check out the TLOU PC thread here. All the links were posted, with ND confirming this, and Digital Foundry asking ND as well.

 

[Three]

They dumb.
Sony is just giving them backhanded praise.

If you read the rest, you will know why. Especially with COD state yearly after yearly releases.

Why? What was backhanded? It only appears backhanded because of what you think of people buying COD every year and it not being something you would do.

I'm sure Gucci or Louis Vuitton would say their consumers are sophisticated too but I personally would never spend $3000 on a handbag and might even think those who do are a little gullible.

To them the COD player is "sophisticated" in that they are the type of people who follow that culture, who spend money on pro controllers with backpedals, who have to have the latest game or skin. People who are really into it.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

It absolutely is a double standard and Sony should be called out for it. They also should be called out for the state of Last of US Part 1 on PC as well. And yes I'm aware they contacted it out but that doesn't absolve them of the responsibility to deliver quality software. They demand near perfect performance on their platforms while delivering a lower standard on others. No one would even have brought this up if Sony hadn't made the claim.

why Sony and not ND or Iron Galaxy?
BECAUSE SONY IS THE PUBLISHER.

see?.

It is all moot anyway because there is no historical evidence of MS degrading software on other platforms to harm those platforms or increase sales of their platforms. It's just more flinging of accusations to see it any of the regulators bite. Hopefully those regulators continue to take comments from the market leader with a grain of salt.

of course. Sony is trying to be a pain in the ass for MS

 

[sainraja]

It was confirmed that ND did most of the work. Check out the TLOU PC thread here. All the links were posted, with ND confirming this, and Digital Foundry asking ND as well.

I am sure they had a hand in it since it is their IP after all, but I don't see why Iron Galaxy would be credited if they had no involvement, on an official channel at that.

 

[DarkMage619]

ND did it.

I thought it was Iron Galaxy but the point still remains. It's Sony's IP and they are ultimately responsible for the state of the game.

why Sony and not ND or Iron Galaxy?
BECAUSE SONY IS THE PUBLISHER.

see?.

I still don't. Sony is both a game publisher AND a developer. Just like MS. Them contracting to Iron Galaxy doesn't change their responsibilities to deliver quality software. The kind of software they demand. It is their IP after all.

of course. Sony is trying to be a pain in the ass for MS

It's business and I understand why they are hurling claims it just needs to be exposed for what it is. It is not a genuine concern for PlayStation software quality.

 

[Kvally]

I am sure they had a hand in it since it is their IP after all, but I don't see why Iron Galaxy would be credited if they had no involvement.

Hence why I mentioned ND did "most" of the work. Here nor there, it sounds like it was mostly ND according to ND and DF, and it sounds like ND going forward wants to do most of the work. Galaxy is also NOT credited on the Steam page, but they are for the Uncharted collection.

 

[The_Mike]

Sometimes I wonder if they have a sixth sense power.
I am struggling very hard to prolong conversation here, while people here for some reason can make conversations from nothing and stretch out for too long.
Either I am stupid or these people are .

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

I still don't. Sony is both a game publisher AND a developer. Just like MS. Them contracting to Iron Galaxy doesn't change their responsibilities to deliver quality software. The kind of software they demand. It is their IP after all.

you keep dying in this hill of ignorance. There is nothing else to talk about.

 

[DarkMage619]

you keep dying in this hill of ignorance. There is nothing else to talk about.

You deny that Sony is a game developer and call ME ignorant? I agree nothing else to say about that.

 

[feynoob]

Why? What was backhanded? It only appears backhanded because of what you think of people buying COD every year and it not being something you would do.

I'm sure Gucci or Louis Vuitton would say their consumers are sophisticated too but I personally would never spend $3000 on a handbag and might even think those who do are a little gullible.

To them the COD player is "sophisticated" in that they are the type of people who follow that culture, who spend money on pro controllers with backpedals, who have to have the latest game or skin. People who are really into it.

Passionate, quality, keen for the game. These quotes are backhanded.
Sony is making them appear like they are people who are not in toxic relationships with COD.

We are talking about the same people that cry about COD shit state, then continue to buy it again even though the last game was shit.

 

[Three]

I thought it was Iron Galaxy but the point still remains. It's Sony's IP and they are ultimately responsible for the state of the game.


I still don't. Sony is both a game publisher AND a developer. Just like MS. Them contracting to Iron Galaxy doesn't change their responsibilities to deliver quality software. The kind of software they demand. It is their IP after all.

It's business and I understand why they are hurling claims it just needs to be exposed for what it is. It is not a genuine concern for PlayStation software quality.

Now do Gears of War Ultimate edition on PC or maybe Quantum Break releasing completely broken on nvidia cards. Should be fun seeing the excuses when MS started committing to PC too.

 

[wolffy71]

Simple question... you just spent $600 on a Playstation, invested $100s more on software and more in hardware. The next version of COD drops and it runs a little better on xbox, or PC. Do you immediately go out and buy a new Xbox or PC?

Further there of the people that would want to, how many could actually afford it.

If you could afford it, how many would then abandon the Playstation for all their other games? Or would you just use both platforms?

Then from xbox pov... You spend $70 billion on a game. Then you say we are gonna make this game for the biggest portion of gamers and purposely release it in a poor state. Do you even consider how the terrible 1st impression of ur 70b game could harm your business going forward? Do you risk alienating the largest user base just so you can acquire the people from the 1st part of this post?

The entire concept of it damaging Sony is so silly and overly dramatic. It just doesn't make any real sense.

 

[Three]

Passionate, quality, keen for the game. These quotes are backhanded.
Sony is making them appear like they are people who are not in toxic relationships with COD.

We are talking about the same people that cry about COD shit state, then continue to buy it again even though the last game was shit.

Yeah I would say that's just you judging the playerbase so it only appears backhanded to you when it isn't.

 

[Kvally]

Now do Gears of War Ultimate edition on PC or maybe Quantum Break releasing completely broken on nvidia cards. Should be fun seeing the excuses when MS started committing to PC too.

Are you saying it's ok that Sony and MS release buggy games because one or the other does it?

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

You deny that Sony is a game developer and call ME ignorant? I agree nothing else to say about that.

yep. you are a pretty damn ignorant or you are willfully obfuscating facts due to being a troll/console warrior, unwilling to own your mistake.

so on and so forth:


TWO DIFFERENT ENTITIES.

 

[jose4gg]

Simple question... you just spent $600 on a Playstation, invested $100s more on software and more in hardware. The next version of COD drops and it runs a little better on xbox, or PC. Do you immediately go out and buy a new Xbox or PC?

Not today, but if you play COD competitively in tournaments or online consistently, if the following 2 or 3 versions of COD run better on Xbox, you will want to move.