kingfey
Banned
Its augmented reality universe, where you can use avatars to talk to other people.yeah wtf even is it!? like that movie ready player one?
Think of it like sword arts online concept.
Its augmented reality universe, where you can use avatars to talk to other people.yeah wtf even is it!? like that movie ready player one?
That would be your dream huh?We all knew Microsoft was going to push the narrative of we're so poor and small because the mobile market also counts, as if Call of Duty, Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo has any relevance in the mobile market.
Regardless, it's not the GAFers or the financial times reporter that Nadella needs to convince. It's the FTC and those guys don't give a rat's ass about the opinions of forum dwellers.
when you start feeling this way just means you’re getting old, cause similar things were said about video games in the past. Meta verse is a cool concept , just need to make sure that people aren’t able to exploit it in the same way they do other emerging technologies.It's supposed to be like some VR world, that has it's own community, currency. It's like second life. Ready Player One but on downers. It's a bridge too far if you ask me. People are already enthralled by screens damn near for the majority of the day. Let's just put you in the screen. Fuck the consequences. It's an invitation for the world to put their heads in the sand(box) and escape from real life. It was pathetic in the book and movie....even worse in these infant stages that seem to want to mimic it.
playstation fansWho thought they would be blocked by FTC?
The thing is that FTC decisions cannot be politically motivated and have to rely on the law. So even if they don't like something - like Facebook - they cannot just attack it without a solid proof. Like first time, their documents did not satisfy the courts for the example.., but this FTC is under a lot of pressure so there is the risk they do something that is politically motivated.
“Even post this acquisition, we will be number three with sort of low-teens share [of the video games market]
You need a monopoly reason to block that.We all knew Microsoft was going to push the narrative of we're so poor and small because the mobile market also counts, as if Call of Duty, Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo has any relevance in the mobile market.
Regardless, it's not the GAFers or the financial times reporter that Nadella needs to convince. It's the FTC and those guys don't give a rat's ass about the opinions of forum dwellers.
Call of Duty has no relevance in the mobile market?We all knew Microsoft was going to push the narrative of we're so poor and small because the mobile market also counts, as if Call of Duty, Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo has any relevance in the mobile market.
yeah wtf even is it!? like that movie ready player one?
That is low jab insult. he called gamers teens, even though we are adults who have kids.For some reason reading MS's CEO saying this out loud is funny to me
instead of the headset, it would glasses.It's basically internet 2.0. with internet 1.0 being now and basically mimics a library. with internet 2.0 being the internet.
For example.
This is you at school 20 years ago
School now:
This is internet 2.0 at school, u can build / maintain project any device and get direct work experience with it.
I think Wreck it Ralph did the metaverse better than Ready Player One. A shared hub space where you socialise and can enter different game worlds and have a persistent avatar with virtual items that can be used between all of them. Individual games have totally different art styles and physics models so it makes more sense to have them in their own distinct worlds rather than one single world where all the games are played within it. Even on a technical level, patching and updating games will be really weird and messy if they are not in their own sandboxes.It's clearly like a digital universe, think playstation home version of the internet, but controlling IP and properties to allow you to do things in a virtual space that maybe others can't, and videogame companies are the best weapon to create such things. Hell, Microsoft has the best pieces for a "universe or metaverse, Bethesda, Blizzard" If someone is making an imaginary virtual game world version of the internet that people can freely move between and engage in, those are two of the best teams possible. And they will also get the Call of Duty team that made warzone. Notice even Halo Infinite is now a more open style of game. They also got Sea of Thieves from Rare. Obsidian builds worlds, too.
I think that's what they're thinking. A ready player one type world. Or like that movie with Ryan Reynolds where he's a videogame NPC, minus the purpose being to commit in-game crimes or whatever lol.
Call of Duty has no relevance in the mobile market?
Call of Duty: Mobile hits 500 million downloads, over a $1 billion revenue
Call of Duty: Mobile hits 500 million downloads, +$1 billion revenuewww.pocketgamer.biz
The bigger problem would small studios. MS can buy 30 mini studios, and they wont reach bethesda sales.imagine if Microsoft starts going for single player publishers like Capcom, that would be problematic, doesnt matter whether they are third place or not.
A lot of the genius "analysts" here at NeoGAF did.
Clearly you never owned an N64, it had like 3 good games a year and gathered dust the rest of the time.Nintendo has never needed to rely on third party anyway. Especially outside japan
If the head of the FTC is a Sony Gaf user than 100% chance of happening.Who thought they would be blocked by FTC?
IF Disney can buy fox, star wars, and marvel, then FTC wont stop MS from buying activision.
MS isnt the market leader in the gaming industry. That is Tencent, followed by Sony.
Microsoft will go for small studios AND big publishers, they are going to eat up every publisher and say "we are still in third place, no monopoly here"The bigger problem would small studios. MS can buy 30 mini studios, and they wont reach bethesda sales.
A lot of the genius "analysts" here at NeoGAF did.
I'm pretty sure many of them also said Xbox can't just spend Microsoft's money and buy whatever they want a few years ago. Here we are. They bought Activision. And they just acquired the keyboard I was using to type thi...leflsfaowia
VR internet, internet 2. Just a bunch of buzzwords for now.
https://www.pushsquare.com/news/202...bungie-says-outspoken-analyst-michael-pachter
"Just to compare and contrast, EA bought Respawn about three or four years ago for $700 million with 400 developers. And those guys generate $700 million a year in revenue. Bungie does about $200 million in revenue. So I think Sony vastly overpaid."
"I think this was a statement that [Sony's] not going to let Microsoft get ahead of [it], so [it'll] just buy something out of desperation," Pachter adds, in rather damning fashion. "It's not really a deal that makes a whole lot of sense to me," he concludes.
I don't think this was a reaction to the Activision deal by Microsoft, but I do think Bungie's price tag was over-inflated. Thoughts?
Even if they buy Capcom, they still won't reach the second place even in revenue.imagine if Microsoft starts going for single player publishers like Capcom, that would be problematic, doesnt matter whether they are third place or not.
Eidos, Crystal Dynamics, IO, Avalanche, Sega, Capcom, lets go!Microsoft will go for small studios AND big publishers, they are going to eat up every publisher and say "we are still in third place, no monopoly here"
When large companies start talking about how they want more regulation it is because regulation serves not to restrict large corporations but to create a large enough barrier of entry to prevent any smaller competitors from entering the market.What's clever as hell here is how he is already offering concessions that Microsoft, as well as all tech companies should be willing to follow to make sure everything is fair and open in the future of a metaverse.
He's basically giving regulatory agencies the easiest avenue possible to establish new regulatory policy, which just so happens to be a VERY big and long desired goal of the current FTC chairwoman Lina Khan, as well as her former boss Rohit Chopra (current consumer financial protection bureau chief).
She has spoken often about wanting to impose on the tech industry major rules through regulation going forward that will have lasting impacts and will be followed by all, and the CEO of Microsoft, one of the largest corporations in the world, has literally just gift wrapped for her a massive win for the FTC with Satya Nadella himself pledging his company's commitment to abide by it. If she wants a major win, all she has to do is take it. Microsoft's lawyers are some clever ass people. This isn't accidental what he did.
but I lose the game I loved, I dont want to game on more than 1 platform >.<Even if they buy Capcom, they still won't reach the second place even in revenue.
I was reading Era and as you can see below, the narrative that Sony bought a huge publisher in the 90s is still getting spread by Xbox fans as if it was fact (that poster is one of the biggest fanboy on Era).
Psygnosis was a very small publisher without any big IPs. Wipeout was the only one that survive for awhile. The market was so small anyway, it is nothing compared with Bethesda/Activision. It was before the PS1, while MS bought 2 pubs in their 4th generation with tons of million-selling IPs. It is nothing alike.
Post in thread 'Jim Ryan says you should "expect more acquisitions" from PlayStation' https://www.resetera.com/threads/ji...sitions-from-playstation.546488/post-81357245
I think the post said they had 40% of the UK market. I have no idea if that’s true but they were absolutely huge on the Amiga. Question is, how big were they after the Commodore days?
They would have to ditch console spaces before that. If they do it, then they wont be in the monopoly after that.Microsoft will go for small studios AND big publishers, they are going to eat up every publisher and say "we are still in third place, no monopoly here"
“Even post this acquisition, we will be number three with sort of low-teens share [of the video games market] . . . We will be a bit player in what will be a highly fragmented place.”
I remember the golden post on era where a guy said that he can't play the same games if they are on xboxbut I lose the game I loved, I dont want to game on more than 1 platform >.<
Am I the only one interpreting this as thinly veiled threat?
if you take mustache and the hair, he looks like satya.
Big boy going in full dry not giving a f lol.
Who thought they would be blocked by FTC?
As long as Nintendo exists, Microsoft is not a monopoly. I mean Playstation 2 was not problematic for a lot of posters despite being effective a home console market share monopoly so...As long as they are in that market, there is risk of monopoly element after activision purchase.
We all knew Microsoft was going to push the narrative of we're so poor and small because the mobile market also counts, as if Call of Duty, Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo has any relevance in the mobile market.
Regardless, it's not the GAFers or the financial times reporter that Nadella needs to convince. It's the FTC and those guys don't give a rat's ass about the opinions of forum dwellers.