Beth is just about to break the guy into admitting on air that foreclosure makes no sense lol
2 is between 1 and 3.
We're learning today guys.
then he followed up with commissioned by MSLawyer: "And based on your model they do not recommend withholding the game"
FTC Analyst: "On console"
whelp ..
Who said it had to make sense for Microsoft to do it?Beth is just about to break the guy into admitting on air that foreclosure makes no sense lol
No, someone on Era who is in the zoom call.
She is barking a lot but she isn't grasping some of the basic things he has explained multiple times.
They are different models meant to articulate different things. The fact this lawyer has had him explain the 20% conversion of the playstation user subset multiple times is eye-roll inducing. Of course not every playstation user would buy an Xbox — many don't care about COD, also have an Xbox or game on their PC.
She doesn't seem to want to hear an explanation for anything
Which requires an explanation, right?She's just looking for clarification behind his reasoning, that's fair
Microsoft is probably willing to take a hit on revenue to make certain games exclusive to build up gamepass or maybe lure gamers to Xbox.Who said it had to make sense for Microsoft to do it?
It doesn't make sense for zenimax games to be exclusive either. They are throwing away 60% of their potential profits away there too despite admitting making zenimax games exclusive even of they are 11/10 games isn't going to make someone buy an xbox instead of a PlayStation.
Why does it have to make sense for ms to pull of this move? They already have and it didn't make sense financially.
Which requires an explanation, right?
Not with them green peopleWhich requires an explanation, right?
Not everyone is a great at speaking when asked on the spot, especially in court. Phil showed that and Jim showed that.And he's getting all the time to give them, he's just not doing a good job of it.
just like "console warz"FTC guy should just say economic models are a social experiment.
Phil really mean, socialjust like "console warz"
Not everyone is a great at speaking when asked on the spot, especially in court. Phil showed that and Jim showed that.
He's not getting all the time though. Every time he starts talking about the factors that support his numbers, she cuts him off and tries to draw connections between his share model and foreclosure model.And he's getting all the time to give them, he's just not doing a good job of it.
He's not though. Every time he starts talking about the factors that support his numbers, she cuts him off and tries to draw connections between his share model and foreclosure model.
Does this shock you from a government organization?Phil and Jim aside, it feels like the FTC prepared 5 hours from the start of these hearings when they knew they were going to seek an injunction however long ago. I'm not sure what the FTC is trying to argue anymore and once again, they only asked for two days of this, but MS wanted five.
Does this shock you from a government organization?
Well yeah, gaming as a whole. But that does not detract with how important of a franchise it is, and how much revenue it brings in. Context and nuance.a large quantity of people surveyed don't even play COD... how "odd" ... say what?
Did the stream die?
NeinDid the stream die?
Professor Lee right now:
![]()
OH SHIT... "i only looked at the slides"
Guess you haven't been paying attention to the judge either then, both have had their say about this.I don't see how you can see this as her tearing him apart.
She's being as obtuse and ignorant as your standard lawyer. Just using tricks to try and force yes and no answers from questions that aren't that simple.
Of course, that's what she's being paid to do. It's not about the truth, it's about the quality of the argument and getting your opponent to say what you want them to say.