Support NeoGAF

[PaintTinJr]

They still have legal limitations that aka the time they can take but let's just leave it.

Well if the time limit is beyond them now, there is another case in that link that might prove pertinent to this merger decision by the CMA, next week.

In a previous case the blocked merging buyer appealed the CMA SLC decision to the CAT on the grounds of lack of information provided by the CMA (in effect lack of discovery sharing) - the CMA using data that hadn't been supplied to buyer to make their case - and the CAT agreed with the CMA that the buyer had sufficient data to make their case to the CMA, and that CMA was under no obligation to supply all its information in mergers.

Anyway, now that Microsoft have superseded Sony's supplied figures to the CMA with their own data - getting the provisional Console SLC removed - the CMA can argue that Microsoft have shown themselves to have adequate data to analyse the console SLC, and so the CMA could reintroduce the console SLC in the final ruling, using internal data for their probabilistic test they've never supplied externally, and would be on sold ground giving Microsoft no way to overturn that lack of discovery of info prior to the final finds based on the previous CAT case ruling setting precedence.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Pretty sure if there was actual evidence of MS degrading other platforms games Sony would have presented it a long, long time ago with video highlights. It's OK to simply acknowledge that Sony is making any claim they can get regulators to stop the deal. The claims don't have to plausible or sincere.

There is almost certainly lots of info/receipts, but it likely goes both ways - most likely in the PS2/OG Xbox era where the Xbox games were probably nerfed like MGS2 - so the question is whether PlayStation blocking this merger is more valuable than airing dirty laundry.

Nerfing other platforms' games would be a bad look all round, but would carry a different issue for Microsoft in this $70b acquisition trying to acquire the essential input :CoD with that as the obvious means of gradual partial foreclosure.

As I said already I'd be shocked if John Carmack being questioned about Rage's PS3 performance in the demo level - free of his Zenimax NDA because he was under oath - would say he personally failed to get Rage running at a locked 60fps on PS3 in the demo after his months of optimising for the platform. It is far more likely he would explain exactly what the marketing deal did and didn't mean, and defend his own reputation and development skills to the hilt, instead.

 

[wolffy71]

Why are we assuming those are the only blades that Microsoft produced? They have datacenters everywhere for many reasons. Their Azure servers are capable of cloud gaming. It's not like they wouldn't have the infrastructure in place to accomplish this goal.

http://[URL]https://azure.microsoft.com/en-ca/solutions/gaming/

[/URL]

http://[URL]https://www.atmosera.com/blog/5-ways-just-about-anyone-can-use-azure/

[/URL]

Idk for sure but doesn't streaming PC games require pretty good specs to actually be a good product? For big AAA titles and multiplayer? Maybe

 

[adamsapple]

Sony could always get John Carmack subpoenaed I guess, given he was gagged from talking about Rage performance on PS3 around launch because of a 360 marketing deal parent Zenimax probably signed.

Prior to launch John had stated that the (Opengl based) Windows version of Rage ran faster on Linux through WINE, than natively on Windows - essentially throwing shade at the Direct HAL degrading Opengl performance in favour of DirectX. And prior to launch he'd said alot about all the impressive optimisation he'd done specifically for the PS3 Cell processor - and it runs amazingly well after the opening demo level - yet no surprise DF gave the face off result based on the demo level and awarded it to the platform with the marketing deal, go figure, eh?

We're reaching some charlie day level conspiracy with these posts now lol.

Just to debunk one of your points, Rage's DF comparison covered things like races that happen later into the game.

Rage also has a very large driving component too - from various race types staged on pre-defined circuits to a very large, expansive game world you can explore at will. These sections spectacularly demonstrate the potential of id tech 5 in creating huge, tremendously detailed environments while mostly retaining the all-important 60FPS update. Here is where we see some deviation from the locked frame-rate we saw in the shooting sections: id allows itself to render out some lovely, often screen-filling explosive effects, and it's clear that the additional load on GPU fill-rate caused by this liberal application of full res alpha can prove to be too much - we see a momentary drop in performance plus screen-tear.

Secondly, the PS3 was NOTORIOUS for development for multi-platform developers. Even first party studios called it "a nightmare" to develop on the PS3. Even Mark Cerny fondly recounts the mistakes Sony made with the console, including examples of how it can take a long time for engines to be optimized for that console.

The hills we die on are getting weirder by every new page.

 

[DarkMage619]

You asked for historical of Microsoft degrading platforms, not Xbox. You got your answer. Take it on the chin

I thought people were intelligent enough to realize this was a discussion about a video game acquisition. The accusation wasn't about MS's delivery of web browsers. If you didn't know that you've already 'taken it to the chin' repeatedly.

We can but what's the point when you'll create an excuse for every single one?


You're using a single Sony PC port to say there is some nefarious stuff going on when in reality they probably released that port for the HBO show in a bit of a hurry. I mention poor PC ports of MCC, Gears Ultimate edition, and Quantum break when they did their PC push and you deflect with nonsense about what MS have said to Sony.

If I mention that their acquisitions had resulted in PS5 getting inferior games in comparison to xbox too (nefarious or not), like Doom Eternal running better, Minecraft not getting performance and gameplay updates till year(s) later, psychonauts 2 not getting features like HD and 120fps, 4K on PS5, Hellblade not getting a next gen raytracing, 120fps, 4k update on PS5.
You will just say they have no obligation to. Then if COD becames inferior on PS after the acquisition gets the OK you would do the same, how there is no obligation for them to support playstation as well as xbox.

Come the next acquisition you would once again argue that there is no historical evidence of degraded software on other platforms after an acquisition and make new excuses how what is happening isn't reality, only sony does that nefarious shit because replays rarely dipped 7fps in some new port they did.

First off I wasn't the one claiming that MS is attempting to release buggy software on rival consoles to hurt their business. If that claim is made the onus is on the accuser to prove that point. Sony is responsible for the state of Last of Us on PC and MLB on rival consoles. Your support of their hypocrisy does not change their baseless allegations. You always talk about my excuses yet you do the same thing just for a different company. Pot meet kettle.

At least you brought up games and that's relevant so I'll address some of your comments:

Minecraft was delayed on PlayStation because Sony did not want to support cross play. Not surprising that you'd blame MS for Sony's decision but it is what it is. Regardless when they changed their position the games were updated. Shocking.

Doom Eternal had a slight VRS advantage because the PlayStation 5 does not support the feature in their hardware. The was performance parity. Hardly a case of bugs introduced to hurt the PlayStation brand as the allegations claim.

PlayStation is not entitled to get updated Hellblade or any other title. MS owns the IP and MS paid to upgrade the game on their platforms. Sony not receiving an update does NOT constitute bugs being introduced into a game. Same is true for Psychonauts 2. PlayStation did not have to get the games at all. You know this yet still brought it up. Weird sense of entitlement.

Bottom line is from Ghostwire Toyko, to Deathloop, to the numerous Minecraft titles including the PlayStation VR version, and all of the timely updates to FO76 and ESO MS, has honored its commitments to other platforms including ones they do not own. Netscape, which has nothing to do with this acquisition, does not change this fact.

I find it hilarious that some people here strenuously argued that Nintendo is not part of the market yet will bring up Netscape as a sign of MS' malevolence. All that than to just accept that Sony hasn't made a good argument why this deal should not go through.

Sony and Nintendo(I continue to accept they are in this space) have dominate positions in the market and this deal will not change that. Seek solace in the numerous console sales threads because this industry is big enough for all these companies and MS gaining more studios will not hurt you or your favorite platform's status.

There is almost certainly lots of info/receipts, but it likely goes both ways - most likely in the PS2/OG Xbox era where the Xbox games were probably nerfed like MGS2 - so the question is whether PlayStation blocking this merger is more valuable than airing dirty laundry.

At this point Sony has shown no sign of holding back accusations. If they had evidence they certainly would have presented it.

 

[ResilientBanana]

Idk for sure but doesn't streaming PC games require pretty good specs to actually be a good product? For big AAA titles and multiplayer? Maybe

At 1080p/60? You're thinking too small anyway. Azure servers are pretty stacked spec wise

Virtual Machine series | Microsoft Azure

See Azure's variety of virtual machines (VMs) for all of your application needs—from entry-level VMs for dev/test to GPU-enabled VMs for intensive workloads.

azure.microsoft.com

 

[reksveks]

Amazon's Luna service isn't PC hardware either though. It's server based, like most cloud gaming. Xbox Cloud streamed games are a special case. But even then, the Xbox Blades which top out at 1080p/60, are custom for cloud streaming. Most likely server based as well, but also utilizing a beefy XSX GPU/CPU config

I am not saying that cloud gaming/Luna is literally pc hardware, they all are custom server blades. Although we may need to define what pc hardware is.

The bolded was basically the point, they have been customised and are running a custom os to the point that it doesn't supposed PC titles as is. As in previous comment, they can use a different blade/hw config if they want to for the pc games.

I think we are talking past each other.

 

[PaintTinJr]

We're reaching some charlie day level conspiracy with these posts now lol.

Just to debunk one of your points, Rage's DF comparison covered things like races that happen later into the game.



Secondly, the PS3 was NOTORIOUS for development for multi-platform developers. Even first party studios called it "a nightmare" to develop on the PS3. Even Mark Cerny fondly recounts the mistakes Sony made with the console, including examples of how it can take a long time for engines to be optimized for that console.

The hills we die on are getting weirder by every new page.

Believe what you like. I read and watched a lot of the info direct from John months prior to release about Rage.

What was released on PS3 didn't tally with his own words about his optimisation work for the PS3 in the previous months, and the marketing deal wit hxbox effectively gagged him. The game running better on Linux with WINE than natively on Windows under the opaque DirectX Hardware abstraction layer when he tried it is also food for thought about whether Windows degrades other graphics APIs on Windows to the benefit of DirectX.

John certainly wasn't struggling to work with the PS3 hardware by the time Rage released, so it having been difficult for others has no bearing. It was just another device for him at that point.

 

[PaintTinJr]

...


At this point Sony has shown no sign of holding back accusations. If they had evidence they certainly would have presented it.

They may already have, as I mentioned in a previous post, the CMA - from previous ruling/appeal - are under no obligation to share all the info they have with any concerned party.

 

[ResilientBanana]

I am not saying that cloud gaming/Luna is literally pc hardware, they all are custom server blades. Although we may need to define what pc hardware is.

The bolded was basically the point, they have been customised and are running a custom os to the point that it doesn't supposed PC titles as is. As in previous comment, they can use a different blade/hw config if they want to for the pc games.

I think we are talking past each other.

Again, you're limiting yourself when it comes to server hardware. When it comes to Xbox games, yes, the hardware should be custom. However, PC gaming is different and the games are already set up to work on a plethora of hardware. They don't need to be as optimized as and Xbox game would need to be.

There's a massive range that Microsoft has to offer when it comes to server hardware and to produce games at 1080p at say.. medium settings isn't all that task intensive for the machines that Microsoft has available in their server farms. See my previous post.

 

[adamsapple]

Believe what you like. I read and watched a lot of the info direct from John months prior to release about Rage.

What was released on PS3 didn't tally with his own words about his optimisation work for the PS3 in the previous months, and the marketing deal wit hxbox effectively gagged him. The game running better on Linux with WINE than natively on Windows under the opaque DirectX Hardware abstraction layer when he tried it is also food for thought about whether Windows degrades other graphics APIs on Windows to the benefit of DirectX.

John certainly wasn't struggling to work with the PS3 hardware by the time Rage released, so it having been difficult for others has no bearing. It was just another device for him at that point.

Report: Rage Runs Faster on 360, Carmack Confirms

www.shacknews.com

Edge magazine has found that the Xbox 360 version of id Software's shooter Rage matches the PC target of 60 frames-per-second, while the PlayStation 3 currently only manages to run the game at 20-30 FPS, a discrepancy that id's John Carmack does not deny.

"The PS3 lags a little bit behind in terms of getting the performance out of it," said Carmack in the latest issue of Edge according to CVG. "The rasteriser is just a little bit slower--no two ways about that." Added the 'Mack: "The RSX is slower than what we have in the 360. The CPU is about the same, but the 360 makes it easier to split things off, and that's what a lot of the work has been, splitting it all into jobs on the PS3."

A year before the games release, the game was running half the performance of the 360. They polished the PS3 version to bring it to a comparable level in that extra development time.

I'm not sure what you were expecting, the PS3 to run the game at 1080p/60 ? , when most of the way through development it was very far behind because of RSX and PS3's split memory limitations.

To counter what you said, John specifically *WAS* struggling to work with the PS3, by his own admission, before Rage came out. It's not a matter of "believe what you like", it's official statements from the creator himself.

 

[reksveks]

Anyway, now that Microsoft have superseded Sony's supplied figures to the CMA with their own data - getting the provisional Console SLC removed - the CMA can argue that Microsoft have shown themselves to have adequate data to analyse the console SLC, and so the CMA could reintroduce the console SLC in the final ruling, using internal data for their probabilistic test they've never supplied externally, and would be on sold ground giving Microsoft no way to overturn that lack of discovery of info prior to the final finds based on the previous CAT case ruling setting precedence.

Is that supposed to be inadequate?

Remember that the CMA wasnt forced to use MS data, they could have rejected it just like they previously rejected Sony's survey and assumptions. They may change their mind again.

 

[reksveks]

Again, you're limiting yourself when it comes to server hardware. When it comes to Xbox games, yes, the hardware should be custom. However, PC gaming is different and the games are already set up to work on a plethora of hardware. They don't need to be as optimized as and Xbox game would need to be.

I didn't say otherwise

There's a massive range that Microsoft has to offer when it comes to server hardware and to produce games at 1080p at say.. medium settings isn't all that task intensive for the machines that Microsoft has available in their server farms. See my previous post.

Again I didn't say otherwise.

I am just saying what xcloud currently is, i am not saying what they can't do in the future.

 

[PaintTinJr]

..

Remember that the CMA wasnt forced to use MS data, they could have rejected it just like they previously rejected Sony's survey and assumptions. They may change their mind again.

I agree, but that could very well be a ploy by the CMA to have hog tied Microsoft to data that isn't what the CMA use in the final findings and frees them from Microsoft being able to argue against it on appeal.

 

[IntentionalPun]

Luna runs Windows, which means it's "PC based." The term PC basically means "x86/x64 based hardware running Windows or Linux" being a server doesn't really change that. Luna also literally runs on Microsoft Windows OS... the games are Windows games, with some small hooks built into them to handle how Luna works. Same idea as a game coded for Steam vs. one coded for Windows Store. The game itself is the same, but it has to expose configuration and some hooks for the launcher that is used.

Any MS 1st party game could easily be released for Luna, they'd just need to add a Luna version to their workflow (with the hooks and everything) just like they have a Windows Store version and a Steam version.

 

[reksveks]

I agree, but that could very well be a ploy by the CMA to have hog tied Microsoft to data that isn't what the CMA use in the final findings and frees them from Microsoft being able to argue against it on appeal.

In the previous case, did the CMA update the findings post the deadline?

We are coming close to that deadline. Tomorrow iirc.

 

[3liteDragon]

Is that supposed to be inadequate?

Remember that the CMA wasnt forced to use MS data, they could have rejected it just like they previously rejected Sony's survey and assumptions. They may change their mind again.

I agree, but that could very well be a ploy by the CMA to have hog tied Microsoft to data that isn't what the CMA use in the final findings and frees them from Microsoft being able to argue against it on appeal.

I still don't get why they would go back & update their provisional findings like that, even lawyers who spoke to FT called it very unusual & rare. Wondering if this actually does have something do with their stance changing again in the final ruling.

 

[PaintTinJr]

http://[URL]https://www.shacknews.com/article/59783/report-rage-runs-faster-on

[/URL]





A year before the games release, the game was running half the performance of the 360. They polished the PS3 version to bring it to a comparable level in that extra development time.

I'm not sure what you were expecting, the PS3 to run the game at 1080p/60 ? , when most of the way through development it was very far behind because of RSX and PS3's split memory limitations.

To counter what you said, John specifically *WAS* struggling to work with the PS3, by his own admission, before Rage came out. It's not a matter of "believe what you like", it's official statements from the creator himself.

/s
You are correct, what was I thinking talking about John's own technical words (stuff like moving data between memory pools just in time) when I could have got those sound bites from Edge and CVG that are technically correct, but still don't contradict that results on the PS3 were far superior when using the whole console, like using the whole of the resources John was talking about in his dev stuff in the month's prior to release.

 

[reksveks]

Luna runs Windows, which means it's "PC based." The term PC basically means "x86/x64 based hardware running Windows or Linux" being a server doesn't really change that. Luna also literally runs on Microsoft Windows OS... the games are Windows games, with some small hooks built into them to handle how Luna works. Same idea as a game coded for Steam vs. one coded for Windows Store. The game itself is the same, but it has to expose configuration and some hooks for the launcher that is used.

Any MS 1st party game could easily be released for Luna, they'd just need to add a Luna version to their workflow (with the hooks and everything) just like they have a Windows Store version and a Steam version.

I just don't know why we are talking about this.

All I said was that xcloud currently doesn't support pc games and therefore the EE deal would require something new either from MS or EE.

Off-topic, I would support Luna if I was MS if this deal required it.

 

[IntentionalPun]

I just don't know why we are talking about this.

All I said was that xcloud currently doesn't support pc games and therefore the EE deal would require something new either from MS or EE.

Off-topic, I would support Luna if I was MS if this deal required it.

I was just correcting the guy who said "Luna isn't PC based, it's server based" which is just an odd statement lol

MS would definitely have to write software for a PC based game streaming service for sure. They absolutely could use the same blades though, as Xbox is just x86/x64 based hardware with chip-based security stopping people from installing Windows (or anything other than the Xbox OS.)

But yeah it'd be a project.. and if they want it to not have a Shadow PC / GeForce Now like experience that's essentially remote desktop-ing into Windows, they'd need games to have some sort of hooks in them, and the games would need to remove the ability to be configured by the end user w/ different graphics settings and all that.

 

[feynoob]

I still don't get why they would go back & update their provisional findings like that, even lawyers who spoke to FT called it very unusual & rare. Wondering if this actually does have something do with their stance changing again in the final ruling.

They failed their math test. Which meant that the original findings were wrong.
You can't use wrong provisional findings to support your point. As that could affect their integrity.

 

[splattered]

They failed their math test. Which meant that the original findings were wrong.
You can't use wrong provisional findings to support your point. As that could affect their integrity.

I don't understand why people don't understand this.

The CMA basically HAD to.

Did they want to? No way in hell, but this is a MUCH better look for them than trying to sweep a big mistake under the rug.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Feels like a weird one, wonder how this looks in practice.

It's like throwing around a 10-year deal to Cox Cable or Comcast. THESE AREN'T EVEN GAMING COMPANIES!!! THEY'RE SERVICE PROVIDERS!!!

Will Microsoft trot out a deal with BP and DoorDash next week? Fuk it, let's find out.

 

[splattered]

It's like throwing around a 10-year deal to Cox Cable or Comcast. THESE AREN'T EVEN GAMING COMPANIES!!! THEY'RE SERVICE PROVIDERS!!!

Will Microsoft trot out a deal with BP and DoorDash next week? Fuk it, let's find out.

Hmm i'd love a complimentary Gamepass subscription with my internet service provider contract.

 

[DeepEnigma]

It's like throwing around a 10-year deal to Cox Cable or Comcast. THESE AREN'T EVEN GAMING COMPANIES!!! THEY'RE SERVICE PROVIDERS!!!

Will Microsoft trot out a deal with BP and DoorDash next week? Fuk it, let's find out.

Sign up for Dash Pass for 2 years and get Game Pass with a Series S for $150.

 

[feynoob]

It's like throwing around a 10-year deal to Cox Cable or Comcast. THESE AREN'T EVEN GAMING COMPANIES!!! THEY'RE SERVICE PROVIDERS!!!

Will Microsoft trot out a deal with BP and DoorDash next week? Fuk it, let's find out.

It's what regulators want.
There is no limit to how many companies can get these deals.

 

[IntentionalPun]

Feels like a weird one, wonder how this looks in practice.

Sorry, just saw your original post.

Could simply be Gamepass PC bundled into EE home broadband subscriptions.

A bit odd, but nothing really crazy considering what T-Mobile bundles into their subscriptions (including stuff like.. free ice cream lol)

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

I thought people were intelligent enough to realize this was a discussion about a video game acquisition. The accusation wasn't about MS's delivery of web browsers. If you didn't know that you've already 'taken it to the chin' repeatedly.

You're a goddamn mage and intelligence is your lowest stat. Embarrassing

Respec your build mate

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

He keeps asking for "historical evidence of MS degrading software" . You give him some then he makes an excuse why those don't actually count. Netscape was just one of many, intentionally breaking Novell's NDS for NT was another. Our very own Brad Smith there to offer cash settlements and fight in court for them all.

I need to look up on this Novell NDS stuff, first time I'm hearing of it.

Sign up for Dash Pass for 2 years and get Game Pass with a Series S for $150.

Mmm, I can almost smell the KFC chicken skin grease on that cheap two-tone plastic.

 

[feynoob]

You're a goddamn mage and intelligence is your lowest stat. Embarrassing

Respec your build mate

Boomers are not intelligent. Give him some slack.

 

[reksveks]

Sorry, just saw your original post.

Could simply be Gamepass PC bundled into EE home broadband subscriptions.

A bit odd, but nothing really crazy considering what T-Mobile bundles into their subscriptions (including stuff like.. free ice cream lol)

No worries, GPU is already a part of some plans which includes Gamepass PC but yeah, it's not very clear to what they mean.

 

[tpieman2029]

Quiet before the storm.

 

[IntentionalPun]

No worries, GPU is already a part of some plans which includes Gamepass PC but yeah, it's not very clear to what they mean.

It's probably just extending that to 10 years then I guess.

Why just PC? Well my theory is MS won't be able to put all ABK games on Gamepass day 1 because of that.. but it's possible they could put them on PC Gamepass if those marketing deals don't cover them.

Or simply give vouchers or something for PC games to get around those deals..

It's just more lip service to regulators like just about every word out of MS's mouth(s) for the past year lol

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Hmm i'd love a complimentary Gamepass subscription with my internet service provider contract.

Of course you would. All it requires is for multi-trillion dollar conglomerates to buy up more big properties in industries so they can subsidize deals like candy to everyone and their mother.

Personally I don't want massive companies getting even bigger and buying their way to the top just so I can get cheap deals and freebies.

It's what regulators want.
There is no limit to how many companies can get these deals.

If the standards of regulators for these 10-year deals is this low, then no wonder these companies can just buy their way around economies with impunity.

Microsoft never named EE, Nvidia or Boostroid as competitors. They named Google, Amazon, and Apple. Microsoft are still doing nothing in providing deals or fair terms for named actual competitors in these proceedings. No 10-year deal with Amazon Luna. No 10-year mobile storefront deal with Google and Amazon.

In fact, that mobile storefront access hasn't been presented as a point of concern by regulators is a failure on their part, but I'm guessing companies like Google will press on this sooner or later, if they haven't already. Phil Spencer kind of revealed MS's mobile storefront hand too early and now that's something of another part of the puzzle that has to be considered here, IMHO.

 

[PaintTinJr]

I still don't get why they would go back & update their provisional findings like that, even lawyers who spoke to FT called it very unusual & rare. Wondering if this actually does have something do with their stance changing again in the final ruling.

Because leaving the error in would have been usable as a means to get the CAT to rule against the CMA on procedural errors if they blocked the acquisition.

By correcting the error with Microsoft data they have committed Microsoft to showing they have data to argue the point about a console SLC, which the CMA could then blindside them with new data in the final findings that reinstates the console SLC and would make it even harder to challenge on CAT appeal.

 

[feynoob]

If the standards of regulators for these 10-year deals is this low, then no wonder these companies can just buy their way around economies with impunity.

Microsoft never named EE, Nvidia or Boostroid as competitors. They named Google, Amazon, and Apple. Microsoft are still doing nothing in providing deals or fair terms for named actual competitors in these proceedings. No 10-year deal with Amazon Luna. No 10-year mobile storefront deal with Google and Amazon.

In fact, that mobile storefront access hasn't been presented as a point of concern by regulators is a failure on their part, but I'm guessing companies like Google will press on this sooner or later, if they haven't already. Phil Spencer kind of revealed MS's mobile storefront hand too early and now that's something of another part of the puzzle that has to be considered here, IMHO.

Cloud has no restrictions to certain companies.
Any company who offers cloud can have a slice in this market.
Regulators want activitision content to be offered to those companies, and make sure MS doesn't withhold those content.
10 year contract is a better deal for these companies as they won't be able to get a deal like this again, plus it gives them a boost in this market.

 

[feynoob]

By correcting the error with Microsoft data they have committed Microsoft to showing they have data to argue the point about a console SLC, which the CMA could then blindside them with new data in the final findings that reinstates the console SLC and would make it even harder to challenge on CAT appeal.

CMA did use MS math in every possible way.
Unless there is a hidden math, I doubt CMA would go back on their findings.
They already made the mistake first. They won't do the same mistake again. Especially when they took the decision to the public.
Doing 180* on that decision would undermine CMA ability, and would make them a laughing stock.

 

[reksveks]

Two weeks plus a day anyways...

 

[MasterCornholio]

You're a goddamn mage and intelligence is your lowest stat. Embarrassing

Respec your build mate

I taught him all that he knows.

 

[SoloKingRobert]

Cloud has no restrictions to certain companies.
Any company who offers cloud can have a slice in this market.
Regulators want activitision content to be offered to those companies, and make sure MS doesn't withhold those content.
10 year contract is a better deal for these companies as they won't be able to get a deal like this again, plus it gives them a boost in this market.

Yeah, at a price. Microsoft isn't going to release the latest Call of Duty games on PS Plus Extra for Free. With other cloud Providers like Nvidia the consumers needs to purchase the game first, before using Nvidia Geforce Now.

 

[feynoob]

Yeah, at a price. Microsoft isn't going to release the latest Call of Duty games on PS Plus Extra for Free.

Sony would need to pay like they did with Activision. Unless you mean extra content like characters.

 

[feynoob]

Two weeks plus a day anyways...

You need to have a ready on that day.

 

[reksveks]

Microsoft never named EE, Nvidia or Boostroid as competitors. They named Google, Amazon, and Apple. Microsoft are still doing nothing in providing deals or fair terms for named actual competitors in these proceedings. No 10-year deal with Amazon Luna. No 10-year mobile storefront deal with Google and Amazon.

In fact, that mobile storefront access hasn't been presented as a point of concern by regulators is a failure on their part, but I'm guessing companies like Google will press on this sooner or later, if they haven't already. Phil Spencer kind of revealed MS's mobile storefront hand too early and now that's something of another part of the puzzle that has to be considered here, IMHO.

Hmm, what's the concern about mobile storefront access?

Microsoft is going to withhold games from Google play store? And play store isn't going to be able to compete?

Exclusive content isn't 100% anti-competitive / anti-trust worthy.

Unfortunately there are certain things that you can do when you are a small player of a market vs a bigger player.

Concidentally Google got a 32m dollar fine from the Korean regulators, in part because they alongside Apple dominate app distribution.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/...elease-games-competitors-platform-2023-04-11/

Also no regulators have brought up mobile app store distribution as a relevant market so a ten year deal could be seen as performative.

 

[reksveks]

You need to have a ready on that day.

Going to be in the office sadly

 

[feynoob]

Going to be in the office sadly

Better.
You will have a lot of content to read when you get home.

 

[Bernardougf]

Take a breath. Relax.

Snowflakes nowdays.... dont have a clue what anger or irritation really looks like ... Im relaxed as one can be my friend

 

[feynoob]

Snowflakes nowdays.... dont have a clue what anger or irritation really looks like ... Im relaxed as one can be my friend

But not with the amount of weed that you are smoking.
Sometimes it's good idea to come in term with reality.

 

[Bernardougf]

You're a goddamn mage and intelligence is your lowest stat. Embarrassing

Respec your build mate

lol

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Concidentally Google got a 32m dollar fine from the Korean regulators, in part because they alongside Apple dominate app distribution.

Yeah, Microsoft and Xbox will get a lot of slack simply because their market share is much smaller. And Microsoft has resources to fight against other big tech giants - after for them, their market share can only grow while other platforms have to sustain theirs.

I do think that if high end home console market takes off, Sony might be in a pickle due to their marketshare and foreclosure strategies.

 

[Bernardougf]

But not with the amount of weed that you are smoking.
Sometimes it's good idea to come in term with reality.

Ok shill...