mrmustard
Banned
Don't bother common sense doesn't fit the narrative.
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
phil_t98
#SonyToo
some people will say anything to defend their plastic box. I honestly have no problem with MLB port but its Sonys own statement about comparisons and how it influences people to buy the best version of the game. it opens question about the port of the game
Which is better, no game or slightly lower performance in replays in a port?
Which is better no PC versions of games or possibly some stutters in PC in ports?
Not saying you should be happy, make a mountain out of it all you want just saying there is a net positive for the platform whereas you're going to a negative from a buyout in the other.
You mean people like you. Tell me what influences people more about buying a specific version, No MLB version to buy on xbox or lower framerate port of MLB on xbox? What did xbox lose?
Maybe it's because they know what a change is. Sony Dan Diago made no port before, now they are making a port with less experience on xbox. there was no degradation on xbox, in fact the port makes xbox more attractive and increases net sales for xbox. Activision was making good performing COD on Playstation, now they might get degraded versions from MS after a buyout. What has xbox lost with MLB? What has PS gained with the buyout?
Last edited:
phil_t98
#SonyToo
if that was Microsoft you would be calling them out left right and centre
as I said when/if Microsoft finalises this deal and xbox becomes lead platform for COD lets see you opinion then. better to have a bad port than no port eh?
look at Sonys words about comparisons and then look at the game they released, but yeah we should just be happy they want to call out others for potentially releasing bad ports while they release bad ports of their own games on other platforms
You still don't get it I see. If MS started making Ori on PS, nobody sane would be complaining that it might run at a lower framerate on PS than xbox. If Sony theoretically bought Epic or Fromsoftware and xbox started getting degraded versions of Fortnite or Souls games I'm sure there will be no complaining from you too, it's fair game after all.
phil_t98
#SonyToo
I ain't the one who put out a statement of comparisons by the likes of DF influence gamers and where they by the game. After releasing bad ports of games on other platforms
What is it your not getting?
Not sure what's relevant about what you're saying now to what we were saying but even still, surely you can see that if DF influences gamers MS choosing to degrade COD after a buyout would result in lowered game sales on PS whereas a lower framerate port of MLB on xbox still results in a positive sales increase for xbox. Xbox hasn't been degraded in any way.
Last edited:
PaintTinJr
Gold Member
Most definitely, but it would take 9 Studios - beyond PlayStations current financial and time limits to compete on an impending SLC.
As I already mentioned in another comment. ATVI as a company likely has a bigger market cap than PlayStation, so Microsoft claiming they need to add a company bigger than PlayStation to Xbox's library of games - which is already more studios than PlayStation - to compete with PlayStation in the UK market - where they have a 40% market share - and the regulators not call bullshit on that as an obvious SLC is some economical gymnastics at work.
I'm sure if Microsoft agreed to donate the 9 studios to a independent divested company without the old games or IP, Sony would be okay with the merger, as those 9 studios would have a new competing FPS out in 12months, much like EA's (Sports FC) situation with the Fifa license.
phil_t98
#SonyToo
You're focusing to much on COD and not looking at the statement. Sony knows that gamers look at the site like DF and choose we're to buy games from it.
It's not about sales of a game xbox didn't have it's about Sony releasing a game that isn't on par with its Sony version of the game and they know the best version sells more. Plus the sales on PS give them more money that they would get off Xbox.
PaintTinJr
Gold Member
Yeah, them getting a new game even if that cgi issue caused by the Xbox's poor tools (as there's no to-the-metal on Series AFAIK) is a massive improvement on the status quo.
It is also that PlayStation are forced to make the game available on Xbox, they didn't want to do it, and wouldn't had it not been a requirement of the MLB license, and yet have still done a great job for cross-gen multiplatform parity
I'm concentrating too much on COD? What do you think the statement
is about?
PropellerEar
was right. Common sense doesn't apply.
Last edited:
phil_t98
#SonyToo
I'm concentrating too much on COD? What do you think the statement
is about?
It's about how gamers are influenced as which version of a game is better they buy that version of the game
Even though Sony releases a bad port of its own game on another system. Keep warring my friend
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
#Phil_t98Too
POKEYCLYDE
Member
The realities of development when ABK is under Xbox will be different from ABK being independent.
Right now, I assume the baseline platform being developed for is PS5. That'll change to the Series X/S. Whatever slight edge the PS5 has over the XSX will go in the opposite direction.
We don't even know if there will be a noticeable difference between future versions of CoD. But to jump to "Microsoft will make the Playstation CoD games run worse to attract gamers to Xbox!" is insane.
MLB is being brought up to show that even under Sony, technical parity isn't a cakewalk, (if there's some technical discrepancy in the future between CoD versions it doesn't mean something nefarious is going on) and if it is a cakewalk... then Sony is doing exactly what they're worried Microsoft might do.
BrutalTruth_
Banned
You know why it's being brought up it's really not difficult to see why.
Sony is literally doing what they're worried MS might do to them, that's a hard fact.
It's laughable to give Sony a pass and not see the irony.
Eh. There's a guy on the previous page angry that MS didn't make a PS5 native version of Psychonauts 2.
Doom Eternal had a next gen update for PS5 months after the acquisition. Let's keep these discussions honest.
Ar¢tos
Member
Hard fact? LOL! Where is the proof?
Seems more logical that San Diego inexperience with Xbox development is the cause of MLB issues.
How many MLBs has Sony released on Xbox and how many CODs has Activision released on PlayStation?
Not just lower framerate replays, though.
We're looking at scenario where the PS4 Pro has more graphical modes and higher resolution than the more powerful Series S.
Let's not forget that there are two SKUs for Xbox Series.
Ar¢tos
Member
The same Series S that can't play One X versions of games?
It's a bit stupid comparing consoles of different gens.
There is nothing to compare Series S to. It's.... unique, kinda between gens.
Last edited:
Yes, the Series S can't play One X versions of Xbox One games without any tinkering because it has smaller VRAM than the One X and a somewhat weaker GPU.
This is not an issue when comparing against the PS4 Pro which it surpasses in every metric.
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
The reaching here is so hard you're less likely to pull a muscle actually playing baseball
Last edited:
Ar¢tos
Member
So not being able to play Xbox One X versions is OK, but at the same time it must have parity with Ps4 Pro?
And you are basing this on total RAM only, not even available RAM.
Ok..............
Parity? the Series S is significantly more powerful than the PS4 Pro.
I really don't believe you know enough about the subject matter to engage in this discussion.
Ar¢tos
Member
And more powerful than the One X but still can't play those games.
It's convenient to disregard the studio inexperience with Xbox development and API differences.
It's really shocking that a studio manages to make a better version for hardware it is used to develop for....
It just goes to show that Sony shouldn't bring parity into the argument because it's not a common thing to do for no reason.
Snake29
Banned
Uuh...didn't they advertised VRS exclusive for the Xbox version?
HoofHearted
Member
Agreed and I still get a little choked up every time I see it…..
The PS5 APU doesn't have the hardware to support hardware based vrs.
So yes but it's more of a technical issue rather than commercial
Last edited:
According to the DF analysis, id used the hardware based tier 2 VRS that's only available on Series hardware to achieve slightly higher resolution on Series X.
But that's another matter entirely. How do you go from saying 'there's no native PS5 version' to claiming 'there's a PS5 version but there's no VRS'?
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
VRS is a hardware level feature, it was a part of Xbox marketing like how SSD was part of PS5's marketing and conferences.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Credit: Idas.
NEXT KEY DATES:
- April 10th 2023: the Canada Competition Bureau will update the list of merger reviews completed during the previous month (probably nothing will come out of it, but my guess is that sooner rather than later there will be a decision).
- April 12th 2023: final deadline for all parties' responses/submissions to the CMA.
- April 14th 2023: the CMA will likely issue the remedies working paper (MS/ABK will have 5 working days to respond).
- Early April 2023: the EC will keep assessing the market test conducted for the remedies proposed by MS.
- April 18th 2023: second extension of the original outside date. If MS quits by that date they have to pay a termination fee of $2,500,000,000; if they don't, the outside date gets extended until July 18th 2023.
- April 26th 2023: final report and remedies from the CMA.
- April 28th 2023: decision from New Zealand.
- May 2023: decision from the SAMR in China.
- May 22nd 2023: provisional deadline for a decision from the EC.
- July 18th 2023: The end of the second extension and final outside date in the merger agreement. If MS quits by that date they have to pay a termination fee of $3,000,000,000; if they don't, they'll have to renegotiate the outside date with ABK.
- August 2nd 2023: beginning of the FTC in-house trial.
- Early 2024: decision from the FTC administrative law judge.
- Anything beyond that: unknown
----
UK Has No Margin For Error in Microsoft-Activision Deal (from the Washington Post, on April 3rd)
New bit of "info" (opinion):
NEXT KEY DATES:
- April 10th 2023: the Canada Competition Bureau will update the list of merger reviews completed during the previous month (probably nothing will come out of it, but my guess is that sooner rather than later there will be a decision).
- April 12th 2023: final deadline for all parties' responses/submissions to the CMA.
- April 14th 2023: the CMA will likely issue the remedies working paper (MS/ABK will have 5 working days to respond).
- Early April 2023: the EC will keep assessing the market test conducted for the remedies proposed by MS.
- April 18th 2023: second extension of the original outside date. If MS quits by that date they have to pay a termination fee of $2,500,000,000; if they don't, the outside date gets extended until July 18th 2023.
- April 26th 2023: final report and remedies from the CMA.
- April 28th 2023: decision from New Zealand.
- May 2023: decision from the SAMR in China.
- May 22nd 2023: provisional deadline for a decision from the EC.
- July 18th 2023: The end of the second extension and final outside date in the merger agreement. If MS quits by that date they have to pay a termination fee of $3,000,000,000; if they don't, they'll have to renegotiate the outside date with ABK.
- August 2nd 2023: beginning of the FTC in-house trial.
- Early 2024: decision from the FTC administrative law judge.
- Anything beyond that: unknown
----
UK Has No Margin For Error in Microsoft-Activision Deal (from the Washington Post, on April 3rd)
New bit of "info" (opinion):
The guy wasn't 'angry', they weren't even complaining, the person just said it's happened before as precedent. people were still under the illusion that it hasn't happened or is impossible. Look below:
Psychonauts 2 was just given as an example there where MS released a game through an acquired studio that ran at double the framerate on Series X Vs PS5 with HDR support too on xbox only. Double the framerate on Series S vs the more powerful PS5. Forget about 20% in replays. We're talking literally 100% framerate advantage for the entire thing and with HDR.
Secondly, Psychonauts 2 was an acquisition. If Psychonauts 1 was a MS studio game exclusive MS decided to do a playstation port nobody would even complain if one of their studios branched out to developing on different platform and struggled to do just as good a job.
But it's not the current reality which is why there are complaints to begin with. It's to get concessions or a block so that it doesn't become reality. That's the point because they know MS can do that if allowed to. People are conveniently ignoring the point. Would they be OK with a reality where a once good performing multiplatform game like say Fifa or fortnite was acquired and started to degrade in quality on xbox? We're not talking about a studio branching out to include your platform here.
A good performing PS version of the game is currently a cakewalk under Activison already. If a MS studio decided to port their game to other platforms and struggled to get as good performance as their own platform, nobody would care. If FS2020 came to PS and performed worse on PS5 would anyone complain do you think? Compare that to the possibility of Sony acquiring EA or Namco Bandai and halving the framerate of the next elden ring on xbox, or the next Fifa.
I know why it's being brought up. Because people want to deflect with a daft comparison where they got a game and it didn't perform as well on their platform.
This only shows how daft the complaints are. If the PS4 Pro was being favoured why did they offer the same modes on Xbox One X as the PS4 Pro?
Meanwhile Psychonauts 2 which outdates MLB ran better with HDR and double the framerate on an XSS than it did on a PS5 and you're OK with this and possibly CoD being degraded after an acquisition. Nope the port you got that you didn't have before by a studio that never made xbox games before having 20% framerate dips in replays is the real evil in the world.
Last edited:
jshaver488
Member
Psychonauts 2 ran better on series x than ps5 because there was no ps5 version of psychonauts 2.
Loxus
Member
Thanks for keeping us updated on this merger.
I tried reading through this thread for updates and I don't know what this thread is anymore.
Early 2024 for a decision from the FTC?
I don't think some people mental state can last that long without a conclusion to this merger.
It ran better on Series S not just X. when PS6 comes out and MS just says there is no PS6 version of COD just Xbox Next. Xbox Next version of CoD runs at double the framerate at 8K on xbox only. What then?
Why people wouldn't want companies to fight for impartial development environments is beyond me. What would you lose if MS weren't allowed to do this due to an obligation?
Last edited:
phil_t98
#SonyToo
Well like you said, it's a game the PS6 never had so they should be happy with a version theynever had .
See that's how your logic works
Microsoft bought DoubleFine and fulfilled the kickstarter promise of a PS4 game. There were no promises to bring the game to PS5.
I'm 100% sure you know this, because this was debated significantly here, so you're just being disingenuous. You're comparing performance of a native next gen game vs a PS4 game running in BC?
This has been pointed out to you repeatedly. The only reason MLB is being brought up is to show how ironic it is that Sony is claiming performance disparity as measured by the likes of Digital Foundry would be used to damage sales on their platform, meanwhile in their own multiplatform game, there's clear performance disparity in their favor.
I'm yet to see anyone in this thread say they're ok with COD being degraded post acquisition. On the contrary, any sane person here knows it is extremely implausible that MS would deliberately degrade performance on PlayStation. It's a last ditch ploy by Sony to try to sway the CMA. Can't understand why you're gullibly swallowing it hook, line and sinker. I bet even Jim Ryan knows that's nonsense.
PaintTinJr
Gold Member
Async Engines(ACE)? Async processing is something PlayStation used heavily on the base PS4 to get more out of the RPM (rapid Pack Maths FLOPs Doubling) capability of AMD's hardware. So the S iisn't more powerful in all situations without tinkering and certainly not when factoring in first party familiarity with exclusive PS4/Pro features. Even the unified RAM setup, and memory redundancy saving puts the Pro at advantages to the Series S in memory limited cross-gen situations like MLB, in all likelihood.
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
If you think that's the same logic then unfortunately I can't help you.
In fact that's the stupid thing I've read today. Unless you think the worry should be going and breaking already released games what are you even saying here?
Answer this very simple question, would you be happy if Sony acquired EA, Epic or FromSoftware and iterations in the FIFA franchise, Souls games, or Fortnite started to degrade or perform badly on xbox? Then people tried to justify that shit because MS' Psychonauts 2 had 100% framerate advantage on xbox or Doom eternal had a 44% resolution advantage on xbox?
Yes, bro. The Series S is more powerful than the PS4/PS4 Pro.
You think BC on PS5 automatically makes every 30fps game 60fps?
Which is why MS put a 10 year deal in front of Sony for content and performance parity, to be overseen by a third party and with deviations enforced and punished by the EC. That completely covers that issue.
Naturally, Sony didn't sign.
So yes, that obligation for impartial development was on the table, guaranteeing Sony day and date content, no exclusive content for MS and performance parity, subject to hardware constraints. But you already knew this.
phil_t98
#SonyToo
The most stupidest thing on here today is you saying Xbox fans should be happy with a game that runs worse on their platform because it was a game they never had befor.
Your logic is so wonky to defend your plastic box. Sony is the one saying comparisons matter but your saying it only matters if it's an Xbox owned game and is on PS to
Edit
Nowhere has Microsoft said they will degrade games. It's Sonys own words about comparisons effecting sales and they released a degraded game on Xbox earlier. Puts their own words under fire you just can't see it. By bringing up Sony buying other studios so wonky to because that isn't happening. What we do know is Sony keeps as much exclusive content to themselves as much as possible and advertises so to attract people to their eco system. Microsoft offering a deal were everything is equal across both platforms but Sony don't wanna sign a deal
Last edited:
Sony own and always owned Sony San Diego and fulfulled their promise to bring MLB to xbox. There was no promise to bring a better performing game to xbox series X.
I'm 100% sure you know this.
And I've said it can't damage sales because it's resulted in a net increase in sales whereas the other results in a loss of sales. You don't think this applies to xbox games on PS too?
Yes they have. The CMA can ask for parity as a concession and that's actually how it started because somebody said that concession doesn't and shouldn't happen.
PaintTinJr
Gold Member
That is only a valid point if PlayStation had access to the metal of the Xbox hardware, which they don't, and you know they don't. cgi rendering on middleware engines is provided by the sdk for the hardware. We've had lots of excuses about the tools for xbox, why doesn't that give the MLB a free pass on cgi rendering too in your opinion?
PaintTinJr
Gold Member
There are finite development resources, and unlike when ATVI is independent and rewards the market leader with complimenting their "market leading" hardware with software, a Microsoft owned CoD will do the absolute minimum legally required.
phil_t98
#SonyToo
It's not Sony's fault that GDK is a wonky dev suite with inefficient APIs and bloat
So by that logic if Microsoft end up buying Cod and optimise the engine for Xbox as much as it can and it's the lead platform to develop all vids for then it isn't Microsoft's fault that's Sonys api's ain't the same as Xbox's
ChuckeRearmed
Member
Microsoft will close without FTC approval. Essentially it boils to when CMA and EU close. Even SAMR is probably not that important.
phil_t98
#SonyToo
They will make the game the same as the Xbox version and have the same content. Remember if Sony don't sign a nee agreement then they get exclusive content for next 2 or 3 years. If they don't sign a deal then that could change after that
feynoob
Banned
It is. I don't know why they are making it bigger.
Watching them is like watching this.
- Status