Support NeoGAF

[mckmas8808]

I don't care about the value (look at the value based on size if you must). If Sony was buying it for $80 billion (if they could have afforded it), I wouldn't have a feeling one way or the other. And I am not supporting the merger at all. In fact, as a gamer, I prefer LESS consolidation. I prefer LESS exclusives. I prefer more games for consumers. I prefer better quality games for consumers. I prefer more competition in the gaming industry to lower pricing, improving game quality and benefit us, the consumer most.

Well.....I'm assuming you find the ruling today to be a bad day for gamers.

 

[SportsFan581]

they don't need to win, they just need the appeals court to extend a temporary injunction until the case is heard

to be fair, absolutely no one is surprised you voted that way

I am vocal in my opinions, so, not exactly a closely guarded secret there.

 

[docchicken]

That is what you would call putting all your eggs in one basket. And yes, Sony is talented enough to come up with a COD killer, and will react accordingly. There is a reason they are one of the most successful gaming companies. Quality games is what sells PlayStation.

The eggs and basket analogy is completely irrelevant.

Despite their talent, they unequivocally don't have what it takes to take out COD. In order to build a "COD killer" the sort of infrastructure required would require them decades to construct similar support studios. I highly doubt a ~100B hardware-focused company will achieve that while navigating through all of the risks and keeping shareholders happy.

 

[GHG]

If Sony gets pushed out by MS, there won't be another major player investing as much into gaming as them, and gaming could possibly be dominated by low-effort mobile model games.

Well that's the ultimate goal.

When people say the big budget single player games are "unsustainable" or words to that effect, what they really mean is "unsustainable for subscription services".

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Fact is regulators have given the go ahead.

It's up to Sony to show just how committed they are now. They were willing to buy 20th Century Fox, before Disney outbid everyone. So if they wanna play bean counter and let MS have free license to eat their lunch then that in itself also shows how much they value PlayStation.

Well, they could just ask their lawyers for more advice pursing more Bungie companies out there, or buying up more music labels (I think Sony 100% bought out EMI Music a few years ago).

Sony scoops up companies too. It's just that they arent as big as Activision.

 

[mckmas8808]

Ea and t2 could still need a new owner tho.

 

[zapper]

That is what you would call putting all your eggs in one basket. And yes, Sony is talented enough to come up with a COD killer, and will react accordingly. There is a reason they are one of the most successful gaming companies. Quality games is what sells PlayStation.

for me this is false, I haven't seen cod competitors for a decade, just as I don't see any of fifa, fortnite, minecraft or gta.
sony is good but overnight can not create a cod killer. and here we always talk about cod but in reality abk is a lot of stuff, cod was the biggest problem but also replace all the other ip? only if you have the budget of microsoft or other big and you can buy them all.
I'm not saying that it will end up like sega, it's almost impossible, but that it resizes like nintendo is possible, with all that goes with it (teams like nd can exist in a smaller context?and it's sony's spearhead that all other studios are following).

 

[Schmick]

If xCloud is taken away from GPU i'll be pissed off.

 

[graywolf323]

Wild. The only predictable thing was that the unpredictable would happen.

FTC suing to block despite reports that it was gonna pass. The CMA dropping the console SLC. The CMA then blocking based on the cloud. FTC being denied it's PI and the TRO made shorter. Then the CMA coming back to the negotiating table.

The overwhelming sentiment now is that this deal is going to happen. Wouldn't surprise me if something came out of left field to stop the deal.

yep I remember the poll in this thread went up before CMA dropped the console SLC, I remember thinking I should have vote differently than structural changes after that but then the CMA blocked it base don the cloud SLC and I was like dang I should have voted no only for us to have swung back around again

I am vocal in my opinions, so, not exactly a closely guarded secret there.

yeah and you're honest about it which I respect plus at least you've been open to actual discussions (if I thought you were just a troll I'd have blocked you like I've had to do with so many of these obvious alts)

I may not agree with your reasoning or conclusions but they at least seem to be honest

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Your first two paragraphs. There is no bigger culprit in gaming since GamePass launched than MGS with that kind of stuff.

was Cyberpunk day one on Game Pass?
was Anthem day one on Game Pass?
was Battlefield day one on Game Pass?
was Avengers day one on Game Pass?
and the list goes on...even Nintendo dosen't space this shit.

Now...the second paragraph. Just look at the Top 10 games every year: you are going to find the usual suspects (from every other publisher) and maybe One New IP.

this is a widespread industry issue. not only Xbox.

. So I just don't think this is some amazing move that will be great for everyone.

i am not saying it is. i am saying is disruptive.

You saying this is what the industry needs right now, well. I just disagree

of course you disagree. because 'game pass big evil' is what your confirmation bias is telling you.

. Give all the IPs to Nintendo and really shake things up? Sure. I'd consider it a success if Mircrosoft could just tread water with these franchises, and it's not like Activision was doing an amazing job in the first place. Halo Infinite isn't exactly a hopeful example of how to do GaaS.

and this is why is so hilarious to see people having meltdown over MS owning KING and the other two.

 

[Kvally]

The eggs and basket analogy is completely irrelevant.

To you, sure.

Despite their talent, they unequivocally don't have what it takes to take out COD. In order to build a "COD killer" the sort of infrastructure required would require them decades to construct similar support studios. I highly doubt a ~100B hardware-focused company will achieve that while navigating through all of the risks and keeping shareholders happy.

Fortnite and Apex rolled in matches and bests COD in short time and both of those game print money. $6billion in 2022 for Fortnite alone. Sony can easily obtain the "infrastructure" they need. There is a reason Sony has been acquiring studios left and right. Especially Bungie. There is a reason they have quadrupled down on live service games. They want a piece of the COD and Warzone and Fortnite and Apex pie.

 

[Ronin_7]

Shit is moving fast !

My bet is that CMA accepts remedies & acquisition closes.

 

[Kvally]

sony is good but overnight

It's not going to happen overnight. But Sony is the one at fault for relying on third party MTX from a single game to fund their first party studios.

 

[Solidus_T]

Well that's the ultimate goal.

When people say the big budget single player games are "unsustainable" or words to that effect, what they really mean is "unsustainable for subscription services".

Yes, from a financial speculator, executive-trying-to-cut-costs-for-his-paycheck point of view, big budget great games are "unsustainable." In other words, to those who really don't care that much for gaming as an artistic medium, despite the fact that video games are larger than music and film combined, these games are "unsustainable.

 

[tmlDan]

Didn't stop them from claiming it's profitable multiple times.



Default stance is that Game Pass is profitable and until we have more information that's the stance I'm going to take because that's all we know at this point. I doubt any company, Microsoft included, is going to give you the information you're asking for because why would they?

I also have proof he's lied multiple times to the public without any ramifications, why are you believing him without any shared documents with budget breakdowns he can't wiggle out of?

 

[Negotiator101]

FTC lost
CMA backing down
Acquisition is a go

If that happens it's the greatest Hail Mary Microsoft have ever pulled off.

 

[Sanepar]

Well that's the ultimate goal.

When people say the big budget single player games are "unsustainable" or words to that effect, what they really mean is "unsustainable for subscription services".

And if u take out who brings high quality sp game to the table u can delivery your low quality model to everyone.

But i would say they will lose some audience who will not move to this model. But probably will be irrelevant in numbers.

 

[RickMasters]

And what about when they remove those games for Playstation consoles?

Call me crazy for thinking that wont happen. people called me crazy for thinking the deal would go through. and we seen how thats turned out.


Will they keep things like the next tony haws, crash bandicoot and maybe bran new IP, or rebooted old IP, for xbox? yes. I think so. for 70Bn thats how its gonna go.


Will COD go anywhere? honestly I dont think MS will remove it. its gonna bring them way more money to keep things as they are though COD will be on gamepass being the only change here. I could be wrong. But I dont see them removing COD. the other IPs , i think future iterations will be exclusive.

 

[Banjo64]

Yep the only way COD dies is if it kills itself. Much like how Battlefield and Halo have.

And if there's a hypothetical way for that to happen, surely getting rid of Bobby and falling under Xbox's incompetent management would be top of the list.

 

[T0minator]

What are the chances of GP prices going up even more before they start putting Activision titles on the service?

I'd bet the chances are pretty high

 

[Varteras]

Yep the only way COD dies is if it kills itself. Much like how Battlefield and Halo have.

There needs to be a gap in that area of the market for there to be a desire for people to invest the necessary amount to build something that can serve as an alternative. Right now there isn't, anyone who is pumping money into trying to compete with current COD will just be wasting time and money.

The only realistic option for the time being is for Sony to do what they can to take the edge off. Heavily promote a competitor like XDefiant. Continue to work on their own offerings. The goal being to shift as many people as possible away from CoD. Their only option outside of that, and it would be fucking wild, would be to refuse CoD on PlayStation going forward. They already threatened to refuse ABK access to devkits for their future consoles. Meaning they'd already be taking a step to CoD not being on the platform. That would obviously be a heavy blow to PlayStation, but it would also screw Xbox out of revenue from CoD. Seeing as how they're sure to see greatly reduced sales on their own platform.

 

[LordCBH]

What are the chances of GP prices going up even more before they start putting Activision titles on the service?

I'd bet the chances are pretty high

Before? Maybe not. But it will certainly go up right before the next new COD releases on it.

 

[Vox Machina]

Without ms showing us how they came to that "profit" how would you know? I don't think they necessarily lied but iam 100% sure they twisted some numbers to get "profitable"

Dunno what to tell you other than Game Pass is profitable. Do what you want with that information.

So starting in 2024 is there any reason as to why Xbox Series consoles can't sell close to or around the same amount Nintendo Switch and the PS5 sells? If they can't, what will be their excuse next time?

Xbox (the business) doesn't need to match console sales in order to be successful. After all, Tencent sells exactly zero consoles and they're making absolute bank.

 

[Punished Miku]

Sony is the one at fault for relying on third party MTX from a single game to fund their first party studios.

The argument that Sony depends on Call of Duty to produce lavishly expensive 1st party games is pretty telling. Go check out the other thread on "$200 million for Last of Us is unsustainable" to see a sea of people pointing out how it's totally sustainable and made back all of its money in a day. The answer definitely changes a lot depending on the context.

 

[Kvally]

That would obviously be a heavy blow to PlayStation, but it would also screw Xbox out of revenue from CoD. Seeing as how they're sure to see greatly reduced sales on their own platform.

That would also backfire, as those gamers will then move to the Xbox/PC ecosystem from PS to play COD.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

To you, sure.


Fortnite and Apex rolled in matches and bests COD in short time and both of those game print money. $6billion in 2022 for Fortnite alone. Sony can easily obtain the "infrastructure" they need. There is a reason Sony has been acquiring studios left and right. Especially Bungie. There is a reason they have quadrupled down on live service games. They want a piece of the COD and Warzone and Fortnite and Apex pie.

Yup.

And Fortnite wasnt even first promoted as it is now. The game was initially previewed as some kind of survival game. Then suddenly it's a big bright F2P battle royal game out of nowhere. So if an offshoot game can be one of the most successful GAAS games ever, anyone can do it. As you said Apex came out of nowhere too as a stealth launch! Very successful too.

As for Sony knowing how to make great GAAS for console who knows. They havent poured much energy into it since KZ Shadowfall 10 years ago and all the MP games on PS3. Iy'll be interesting to see what GAAS games they launch as there's supposed to be 10 or so in development. And that supposedly doesnt include any Bungie games either.

 

[LordCBH]

The only realistic option for the time being is for Sony to do what they can to take the edge off. Heavily promote a competitor like XDefiant. Continue to work on their own offerings. The goal being to shift as many people as possible away from CoD. Their only option outside of that, and it would be fucking wild, would be to refuse CoD on PlayStation going forward. They already threatened to refuse ABK access to devkits for their future consoles. Meaning they'd already be taking a step to CoD not being on the platform. That would obviously be a heavy blow to PlayStation, but it would also screw Xbox out of revenue from CoD. Seeing as how they're sure to see greatly reduced sales on their own platform.

I've been wanting SOCOM to come back for years.

 

[RaZoR No1]

Soo...
soon all this will be over?
After 69k+ (nice) posts?
From a random big bomba news to a very long fight, MS is finally winning and getting ABK?

With all the revived Wednesday / Sega news/rumours, will MS be even able to get another devs or publisher or have they sealed their "fate" with the ABK purchase and cannot continue their buying streak?

I cannot imagine that someone would even allow MS to get another one after this deal closes. Isnt MS now one of the, if not even the biggest dev/publishers now with 40+ studios??

 

[ToadMan]

yeah I've never understood the logic of that argument, why is the onus on Sony to build a COD competitor just because Microsoft can afford to buy the largest 3rd party publisher? given how flush with cash MS is why doesn't Xbox just build it's own instead?

MS did make a CoD killer - but CoD is a bullet sponge so it's taking longer than expected...

 

[Fabieter]

Dunno what to tell you other than Game Pass is profitable. Do what you want with that information.



Xbox (the business) doesn't need to match console sales in order to be successful. After all, Tencent sells exactly zero consoles and they're making absolute bank.

Like I said twisted numbers until proven otherwise.

 

[coffinbirth]

For the record, this purchase means very little to me aside from Day One Game Pass access to CoD, buuut...

Now it will be interesting to see if Sony decides to shoot their foot completely off here and stick to that bonkers no PS6 devkits for Activision stance. That WOULD be bad for gamers.

 

[zapper]

It's not going to happen overnight. But Sony is the one at fault for relying on third party MTX from a single game to fund their first party studios.

overnight or 10 years nothing changes, no cod competitor was born in a similar if not longer period of time, we will see xdefiant but what if ms also acquires ubisoft? lol

yes it's sony's fault too, but it remains an unpredictable event, at least in gaming

 

[Thirty7ven]

It's not going to happen overnight. But Sony is the one at fault for relying on third party MTX from a single game to fund their first party studios.

You're dumb if you think Sony was relying exclusively on COD MTX. Much like Xbox, hello use your brain, they rely on third party to make bigger profits, all of them, not just COD.

The only effect this will have is that Sony will accelerate investment on PlayStation again.

It will be fun in two years when we are back to this conversation and basically the only thing that has changed is that Xbox increased its revenue source. "Wait till MS takes away COD" is going to be the line until the end of the generation.

 

[Solidus_T]

Call me crazy for thinking that wont happen. people called me crazy for thinking the deal would go through. and we seen how thats turned out.


Will they keep things like the next tony haws, crash bandicoot and maybe bran new IP, or rebooted old IP, for xbox? yes. I think so. for 70Bn thats how its gonna go.


Will COD go anywhere? honestly I dont think MS will remove it. its gonna bring them way more money to keep things as they are though COD will be on gamepass being the only change here. I could be wrong. But I dont see them removing COD. the other IPs , i think future iterations will be exclusive.

After everything from the PI hearing, I would say that MS's sole intention is to remove future ABK releases from Playstation.

 

[GHG]

Yes, from a financial speculator, executive-trying-to-cut-costs-for-his-paycheck point of view, big budget great games are "unsustainable." In other words, to those who really don't care that much for gaming as an artistic medium, despite the fact that video games are larger than music and film combined, these games are "unsustainable.

Yep, which is why it always baffles me when I see people who are supposed to be gamers crying about the budgets and manpower required to make games of that scale.

The reality is, much like any big budget project in any industry, if the final product is good enough then it will be sustainable. And that's all we should concern ourselves with - is the game good or not and is it worthy of a purchase?

Take away the final question (in italics) and you're left with an industry that doesn't need to have a regard for the quality of their work. That's a dangerous place to go but it looks like where we are heading.

 

[Punished Miku]

The only effect this will have is that Sony will accelerate investment on PlayStation again.

It will be fun in two years when we are back to this conversation and basically the only thing that has changed is that Xbox increased its revenue source. "Wait till MS takes away COD" is going to be the line until the end of the generation.

100% agree.

 

[RickMasters]

I have no confidence in EA / Dice anymore. They seem far too obsessed with trends than making the best possible shooter these days.

Bungie has potential for a legit competitor though. Not in terms of annual releases, but as a live service game.

1) Destiny's bones (basic gunplay);
2) Modern earth based military shooter; and
3) New expansions / maps every few months,

could definitely compete if they fire on most cylinders. And if they got creative / bold on who the factions represent, you just never know what could happen.

I dont think "Modern earth based military shooter" is really bungies thing. they do sci fi shooters. thats their bag. id imagine the 'mundane' settings are not quiet exotic enough for bungies taste. plus they will have their handsful with content for marathon. Maybe one of their other teams would be better suited to making a modern warfare style military shooter. but that has never been bungies thing.

 

[graywolf323]

Yep, which is why it always baffles me when I see people who are supposed to be gamers crying about the budgets and manpower required to make games of that scale.

The reality is, much like any big budget project in any industry, if the final product is good enough then it will be sustainable. And that's all we should concern ourselves with - is the game good or not and is it worthy of a purchase?

Take away the final question (in italics) and you're left with an industry that doesn't need to have a regard for the quality of their work. That's a dangerous place to go but it looks like where we are heading.

 

[Kvally]

overnight or 10 years nothing changes, no cod competitor was born in a similar if not longer period of time, we will see xdefiant but what if ms also acquires ubisoft? lol

yes it's sony's fault too, but it remains an unpredictable event, at least in gaming

The thing here is, Sony will still be getting their money from COD sales on the PS Store for MTX and the games.

 

[NickFire]

Fact is regulators have given the go ahead.

It's up to Sony to show just how committed they are now. They were willing to buy 20th Century Fox, before Disney outbid everyone. So if they wanna play bean counter and let MS have free license to eat their lunch then that in itself also shows how much they value PlayStation.

Instead of a content / arms race, I'd prefer they double down on "for the players." Maybe stop charging for online. Stop including games in a free collection we already got free. Stop giving a PS4 version of a 1st party game and charging for PS5 upgrade. Maybe offer discounts for remasters to people who already bought older versions once or twice. Make free demo's available for all games (within reason). Be a little more candid with future plans, and make sure not to let false narratives fester in the future (like generations).

Last time they felt threatened things worked out well in the end. Hopefully this leads to them being a little more grass roots with their customers.

 

[Varteras]

That would also backfire, as those gamers will then move to the Xbox/PC ecosystem from PS to play COD.

You assume. But even the CMA, using Microsoft's own numbers, showed that even if CoD went exclusive, it wouldn't be enough.

 

[Fabieter]

For the record, this purchase means very little to me aside from Day One Game Pass access to CoD, buuut...

Now it will be interesting to see if Sony decides to shoot their foot completely off here and stick to that bonkers no PS6 devkits for Activision stance. That WOULD be bad for gamers.

Avb wont get a dev kit super early. That just makes sense. You can be sure that bungie wont get a dev kit super early either.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

It's not going to happen overnight. But Sony is the one at fault for relying on third party MTX from a single game to fund their first party studios.

True.

The reason why those old Sony shooters didn't catch on is because they spread themselves thin on a million shooters. They made more shooter franchises than Activision, EA and MS combined. The latter 3 focused on a couple shooter brands each. Sony had endless shooters including those PC MMO games they ported to PS3. Of course the online suer base will be spread out too much. Funny thing is some of their shooter franchises got good reviews, so what they should had done is stick to it. Just do 1-2 splashy shooters and who knows. By PS5 time it could be giant. They cut the cord on MP GAAS games right when console gamers were going digital and eating up MTX and season passes and stuff. Thats when the money started rolling in for shooters.

 

[RickMasters]

After everything from the PI hearing, I would say that MS's sole intention is to remove future ABK releases from Playstation.

I agree with that. you dont spend 70 bn and not make things exclusive. Just Not COD, its a golden goose. a cash cow. an IP in a pretty unique situation clearly. but future releases of other IP, I can agree i think those will be exclusive.

 

[Sanepar]

Fact is regulators have given the go ahead.

It's up to Sony to show just how committed they are now. They were willing to buy 20th Century Fox, before Disney outbid everyone. So if they wanna play bean counter and let MS have free license to eat their lunch then that in itself also shows how much they value PlayStation.

Playstation is almost 50% of Sony revenue and they always prioritize aquisitions for other business just show how bad their strategy is. Their last relevant aaa was god of war. Their next will come 11 months later. They can't compete like that. Ms will be releasing at least 4-6 big aaa every year. They have 33 fucking studios.

 

[Kvally]

You assume. But even the CMA, using Microsoft's own numbers, showed that even if CoD went exclusive, it wouldn't be enough.

Correct. But as people keep saying here on the forum, that COD is such a powerhouse, clearly if it was that powerful, people would flock to Xbox and PC to play it.

 

[Solidus_T]

Yep, which is why it always baffles me when I see people who are supposed to be gamers crying about the budgets and manpower required to make games of that scale.

The reality is, much like any big budget project in any industry, if the final product is good enough then it will be sustainable. And that's all we should concern ourselves with - is the game good or not and is it worthy of a purchase?

Take away the final question (in italics) and you're left with an industry that doesn't need to have a regard for the quality of their work. That's a dangerous place to go but it looks like where we are heading.

I've always disliked people who use those arguments. The same types of people employed these arguments in support of Konami firing Kojima and his team - all while MGSV made back its entire budget on its launch day. Despite this, you'll still hear people supporting firing him.

I started to believe back then, and I still believe now, that they just don't really like video games. I want my games to be as good as they can be. The naysayers? I guess they want a certain company to succeed financially regardless of video game content.

 

[FoxMcChief]

Has Sony said anything about the FTC and CMA today?

 

[adamsapple]

Now it will be interesting to see if Sony decides to shoot their foot completely off here and stick to that bonkers no PS6 devkits for Activision stance. That WOULD be bad for gamers.

If they stick to it and refuse to send dev kits, that's gonna have a tangible impact on at least the first couple of CoD games of the new generation and Sony will create the "they can release a worse version" scenario by their own hands.

 

[Draugoth]

Sony needs to buy Square Enix before Microsoft can't.