demigod
Member
So you can't name them, aka making shit up.
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
Jimmyisback
Banned
He's probably referring to Sony's first party games like horizon forbidden dawn returnal etc that releases years later and at full price. Probably why their games sell poorly on pcs.
Rick Dangerous
Banned
I'm totally against the deal and I'm no clown. You have apparently difficulties to grasp the global picture.The guys who hopes the deal doesn't get through and withdraw from the console market are the same clowns who cheered for Sony upping game prices because they would gladly pay extra for quality.
Which still is the minority in here, so be careful with generalising.
Those people are stupid, but far from the majority.
His post was literally 100 percent the opposite of what you made out of it.
Yet you manage to show your concern about your beloved company.
How can we help you ?
feynoob
Banned
Just because you don't hear about them, doesn't mean they don't exist.
they aren't as vocal as these guys are.
DForce
NaughtyDog Defense Force
You said there is, but no one pays attention to them. If you think that's true, then you should be able to name them.
Astray
Member
Sony in general has fanboys like any game company, but they don't aggressively use them like Microsoft does.
Furthermore, I genuinely think this use has reflected badly on the company, you have these insider types constantly tipping the company's hand on big acquisitions, they are also constantly teasing "big things" all the damn, which only makes it feel worse when MS doesn't deliver on all that teasing and results in backlash articles like we had.
MS should genuinely just use a normal marketing team like all teams do, leave the guerrilla marketing to companies like Devolver or something.
Furthermore, I genuinely think this use has reflected badly on the company, you have these insider types constantly tipping the company's hand on big acquisitions, they are also constantly teasing "big things" all the damn, which only makes it feel worse when MS doesn't deliver on all that teasing and results in backlash articles like we had.
MS should genuinely just use a normal marketing team like all teams do, leave the guerrilla marketing to companies like Devolver or something.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
We're only talking about popular journalists that are also Xbox fanboys/shills/whatever the term is.
I don't think there is any journalist that shills like this for PlayStation or take care of their agenda in their published articles. And if "nobody hears about them" that just means that there aren't any.
If you know of any, please share their names.
Last edited:
Jimmyisback
Banned
Public discourse like when Jim Ryan called the initial deal inadequate. Like that?
Edmund
is waiting for Starfield 7
I'm asking about paid professional journalists from eg IGN/Gamespot/Giant bomb etc. Not unknowns.
It was just a random thought that came to my head the other day trying to find the equivalent of Destin Legarie, Jez Cordon and gang
It's all cool though, don't sweat it! I often have weird random thoughts in the shower.
Banjo64
cumsessed
No, not like that.
Nothing1234
Banned
An interview with a publication is not the same as hot takes on Twitter.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Jim Ryan went public to expose Phil Spencer's lie after Phil released a false public statement regarding Sony. Until Phil involved Sony, Jim didn't use the public forum.
This was in response to Phil Spencer's public statements that Sony and Microsoft held talks and that COD will remain available on PlayStation. Jim gave his statement to inform the public that Phil was lying about Microsoft and Sony's private discussion.
Phil Spencer Confirms Call of Duty Will Remain on PlayStation Platforms
Microsoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer comments on the company's desire to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation platforms, following calls with Sony.
gamerant.com
read the subheading, "following calls with Sony." Phil involved Sony in a public statement. Sony responded back in public. Jim didn't initiate this.
Last edited:
Jimmyisback
Banned
No difference in my opinion. It all public discourse
Bonsaibäumchen
Member
Wasn't Schreier called a Sony shill again and again?I'm asking about paid professional journalists from eg IGN/Gamespot/Giant bomb etc. Not unknowns.
It was just a random thought that came to my head the other day trying to find the equivalent of Destin Legarie, Jez Cordon and gang
It's all cool though, don't sweat it! I often have weird random thoughts in the shower.
Jimmyisback
Banned
I don't fault Jim Ryan for looking out for Sony's best interest. Phil is doing the same as well as all other other ms employees who have some sort of say in this deal.
Jimmyisback
Banned
Yup... Funny but so true.
Edmund
is waiting for Starfield 7
Surely you can't lump Schreier together with the 4 Horsemen of Xbawks (Jez/Ryan/Destin/Tom Warren).
Schreier conducts himself in a much more professional manner.
Even Colin Moriarty who is a PlayStation fan conducts himself well and doesn't do any console warring.
Last edited:
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
It's fine and expected for both executives to look out for their respective company's interests. But misrepresenting communication and implying something false that can be used against the competitor is not right -- regardless of who does it.
feynoob
Banned
Bonsaibäumchen
Member
That wasn't my intention.
Just thinking about journalists that have reported in favor of Sony generally more often in the eyes of GAF Community.
Edmund
is waiting for Starfield 7
It's a playstation shill licking her dualshock.
Heisenberg007
Ask her to get on with the times and lick the dualsense edge instead.
Jimmyisback
Banned
Greg Miller Colin Moriarty Paul tassi at the top my head. Feel free to disagree.
Bonsaibäumchen
Member
Not trying to console war but have been thinking about this latlely:
What I don't get is why people are still paying attention to these clowns?
Haven't these exact people been trying to convince the Xbox consumer base that XSX and XSS would get a lot better at performance on games because of some mysterious tools that haven't been ready on launch?
What happend to that topic anyways? It just died down and nobody seems to be talking about it anymore? Its like everyone just pretends this whole premise never existed? Why is no Xbox owner / MS fan who was believing in it furious about this ordeal?
Last edited:
Jimmyisback
Banned
Misrepresenting communication? Nahhh But we are going around in circles. Continue to believe what you want though.
demigod
Member
Paul Tassi is an xbox boy, he just flip flops for clicks.
I don't think that brought the discussion into the public. They didn't care. I think it was Phil's interview onslaught in September where he kept repeating this line in TV/video interviews and to publications.
Phil: "In January, we provided a signed agreement to Sony to guarantee Call of Duty on PlayStation, with feature and content parity, for at least several more years beyond the current Sony contract, an offer that goes well beyond typical gaming industry agreements,"
That's what set off the public discourse and Jim responding to it stating the exact details of it and what he thought. Before that MS were just saying they will keep Activision IP on Playstation and gave no details about time periods. That was what he was exposing, the exact terms of this discussion that was brought into the public.
Paul Tassi isn't a PS fan. He just likes posting clickbait articles that work both ways. Case in point:
Greg Miller and Colin Moriarty might have a PS preference but they are not out there posting batshit crazy content on twitter like Jez and co.
Brad Sams is usually pretty cool too and doesn't deserve to be lumped with the likes of Jez and Tom. He doesn't post stupid stuff like "PS5 holding back this gen because the Series S has a faster CPU" or losing his shit and posting a lengthy article lambasting the CMA when they object to his overlord. He's just somebody who makes a living posting MS stuff but doesn't unconditionally worship them like Tom and Jez do.
Last edited:
Jimmyisback
Banned
But that's the thing. To a warrior what you see as reasonable posts comes across as warring to the other side or as you like to put it bat shit crazy. But we are on different camps. No secret that you bat for Playstation and that's fine.
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
I mean on one hand Microsoft did just that. Note that they've failed in some sense and hence we are where we're at. They've also had moderate success and that success lead to Sony really having to step things up in 1st party software development and is primarily the reason why they're where they are today.
It isn't out of the realm of possibility that one of the companies I mentioned could buy their way into the market. If anything they could buy Xbox and XGS from Microsoft.
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
Sounds like bias on your part honestly. Most of the media are Sony shills, that's why they don't stand out. Xbox shills stand out because they are the outliers.
I don't think that's the case at all. I can clearly see for example that Brad Sams is level headed just as I can with Colin because even though their coverage is usually MS or PS content respectively they don't bend the truth or say anything stupid to paint either company in a good or bad light. They just say it how it is.
Jimmyisback
Banned
No way he's an xbox fanboy. He even admits to writing more "anti-xbox" articles. It generates clicks.
MasterCornholio
Member
Isn't not being vocal the entire point of this?
If there are hardcore Sony fanboys that maintain a level of professional in journalism isn't that the right thing to do?
Like these guys can be fanboys but if they maintain a professional image I don't think anyone would have an issue with that.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Leaving a few tweets for you (remove the space before .com) by Brad Sams
https://twitter. com/bdsams/status/1271245248019210241?s=20
https://twitter. com/bdsams/status/1306355243010134018?s=20
https://twitter. com/bdsams/status/1508784976401154060?s=20
https://twitter. com/bdsams/status/1284153236031787010?s=20
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Sucking up to PlayStation
GHG
Gold Member
The seige mentality is still strong I see.
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Do you want to make Microsoft to withdraw entirely from the console market?
Try to read the entire sentence.
Did you cheer when Sony upped their prices and said you gladly pay more for quality?
If you want to help me, then get past your reading comprehension.
Last edited:
DForce
NaughtyDog Defense Force
This is the narrative Xbox fans have been trying to push over the past 6 years.
Journalists typically called out Xbox because of their lack of first-party games. This has been a big issue for Xbox and many Xbox fans denied it.
This is why you would always hear Xbox fanboys say, "Only the hardcore fans worry about Exclusives. It's all about multiplatform games." This narrative is slowly dying within the Xbox community because they're realizing that Xbox does in fact need compelling exclusives to grow the Xbox brand.
Xbox fans would also cry media bias whenever Metacritic scores are released.
The Xbox fans refused to believe that Microsoft needed to do better the last generation. They blamed everyone else besides Microsoft.
twilo99
Member
With Microsoft two subsets of gamers get the games day one, Xbox console owners and PC gamers.
As a PC gamer that's important for me..
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
Companies leave industries all the time.
Why did Microsoft shutter the windows phone after buying Nokia for 7 billion dollars? How much did they sell Nokia for? 350 million dollars. They kept them for only 3 years...
Microsoft is flush with cash from 365 and they're using that money to invest and double down on gaming subscriptions and cloud with Activision. That isn't a guarantee of the future of Xbox though. Especially should this M&A not go through.
If GamePass doesn't succeed and Xbox doesn't transform its position in the industry, I don't expect Microsoft to stay put. And I'm again, unsure as to why people find this a hot take when Microsoft themselves stated they considered leaving the industry. Maybe you ignore that because of the investments they've made recently, but that honestly doesn't mean anything. Microsoft is not primarily a video game company and they never will be. Their primary products are Windows and Office.
You look at Sony and is there a chance they get out of gaming? Absolutely. It's less likely because they're in a market position placing them at the top, but does the trend of PC and mobile gaming erode the console business entirely in the future? What the market looks like today, isn't necessarily what it'll be in 2040. You look at how brick and mortar retail has been mostly shut out of gaming in just the last 10 years by digital and online warehouse.
Things change, be a student of history and business.
Microsoft's history in the game industry mirrors a lot of Sega's. Difficult first entry, but mistakes from their chief competitor allowed their second entry to be more successful, but the 3rd entry wasn't nearly as successful. We'll see if the 4th entry is similarly the last entry.
Cloud gaming may eventually seize the day as well, but being too ahead of the market has caused many a company to struggle or fail. We're not there yet, but the day you can remove the console as a necessity and either replace it with a streaming stick or even have it built into TVs is a game changer for the industry. The problem they'll face then is the tv manufacturers will try to ape royalties. This is exactly what happened with the shift to CDs. Sony wanted royalties and Nintendo wasn't about that life. Enter Sony. But without a console, 3rd party software companies will ALSO see the potential of escaping the need of paying royalties, by maybe releasing their own app on a TV or their own streaming stick.
We're entering the wild west and people think the status quo is just going to continue. There has never been a sustained status quo in gaming.
Atari was the market leader. Then it was Nintendo. Atari was essentially out the next day. Then it was Sony. Then Sega left the industry and Microsoft entered. Then we went digital. Nintendo pivoted and found its own success with the Wii and Switch. Meanwhile, Mobile gaming has become huge worldwide and PC has rebounded from their dark days due to Steam (and again digital). This doesn't even touch much on iOS, Android, and Apple Arcade...
Sony has been the market leader for the longest amount of time, but that's really not saying much either. Before them, Nintendo had been the market leader for what 10-15 years give or take?
Dick Jones
Banned
Two IGN lads tweeted this about 10 minutes apart. When people checked those "journalists" hadn't an Xbox achievement in two weeks. Is this paid shilling or reporting?
IFireflyl
Gold Member
I'm a PC gamer. I don't want Microsoft (or Sony) controlling this many large studios and IPs. It's not good for us in the long run.
IFireflyl
Gold Member
This is ridiculous.
Leaving a few tweets for you (remove the space before .com) by Brad Sams
https://twitter.com/bdsams/status/1271245248019210241?s=20
https://twitter.com/bdsams/status/1306355243010134018?s=20
https://twitter.com/bdsams/status/1508784976401154060?s=20
https://twitter.com/bdsams/status/1284153236031787010?s=20
The tweets don't seem to load beyond the first 2 but I'm not sure what's wrong with what he said there in the ones that did. It seems fine to me since it's his preference/view but it's not stupid like the crazy stuff Tom and Jez post. Like trying to suggest Series S is faster than the PS5 and the PS5 is holding things back. Maybe the tweets that didn't load are different and I'm mistaken.
Had MS not bought them 3 subsets would have got them. I'm pretty sure that had Sony bought Bethesda you would see games in development like Starfield and Redfall still come to PC and xbox.
Sony don't make big publisher/studio aquisitions very often but when they do they have less financial incentive to sever projects and cut losses from other platforms especially ones already in development because they would need that money more than MS to pay for the acquisition and the publisher is less likely to accept.
You already have examples of the few publisher/studio with projects that released to PC and all rival consoles with an acquisition from Sony: Wipeout, GPolice, Destruction Derby, Destiny, etc.
In future releases though that might deviate. MS would have less of an incentive to cut unannounced stuff from PC compared to Sony with where they are now. I would say however that the only reason we are in this situation where MS release to windows is because xbox one failed. If they had the market strength they had in the 360 gen they would have continued to treat PC like second class citizens getting late ports or no ports at all.
Last edited:
jm89
Member
People think Sony are gonna sit with their finger up their ass and let Microsoft buy the industry. 100% Sony are gonna be looking for an acquisition and publisher like Square enix would be the easiest target.
So that time exclusives people bitch about is now gonna become permanently gone from your system. Congratulations Xbox fan who cheers this deal and bitches about gamepass not getting FF now you permanently won't have FF.
Making things far worse for both set of fans.
Last edited:
Topher
Identifies as young
Good God, that is specific. You must be talking about a total of one person. So which poster is it?
Either that, or you are making up some wild generalization which makes the rest of your post ironic as hell....
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
Both Microsoft and Sony recognize that they're in a race for the future of gaming and that race isn't going to be dependent on console hardware. It'll be dependent on content creation. There is a future coming where every content creator can create and sell their own content without relying on a single storefront and paying them royalties.
Look at Netflix. You can find Netflix on every smart tv and every device. We're going to enter a dicey period where carriage costs are going to become difficult to ascertain.
This is a lazy and predictable response.
reinking
Gold Member
Please interpret this for me so I do not make that mistake in the future.
As for "my beloved company." I do lean more toward PlayStation but that is only because they have been giving me more of the experiences I like. I always buy all consoles (FOMO) and my loyalty will easily change if MS or Nintendo start offering more of those experiences. You have a lean toward MS. It's fine. We all have preferences. I am far from wanting MS to fail. All of that being said, I was sort of joking anyway. I definitely wasn't taking it that seriously. You can pretty much assume that from my post (especially in this thread) from here on out. This is my hobby and not my job.
Last edited:
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
Sony is definitely going to look for an acquisition. Is Square Enix really the easiest? Define easiest.
At 6 billion dollars plus premium, what does Square Enix give you today that you don't already have through exclusivity deals which are less risky and costly?
I'd argue that Sony needs to look at companies that offer something that Sony doesn't have and can't easily get.
CDPR (WRPG, sizeable studio, PC storefront) TakeTwo (size, expertise in open world, sports, Mobile), Capcom or Sega (variety of IP, mascots, cross media)
Other than T2 the others are considerably cheaper than Square Enix.
Fans want AAA gaming and that isn't sustainable in a fractured industry. We're going to see consolidation. It's a fact. We're also going to see the end of consoles eventually. Consoles already have become prebuilt PCs.
- Status