NEW YORK, May 13 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- MTV Networks, a division of Viacom (NYSE: VIA, VIA.B), today announced a broad-ranging, first-of-its-kind programming partnership with Microsoft Corp. for Electronic Entertainment Expo 2010 (E3 Expo 2010), the video game industry's leading trade show. For the first time, only MTV Networks will take viewers inside the spectacular controller-free games and entertainment with "The World Premiere of 'Project Natal' for Xbox 360" experience, a spectacular live performance imagined by Cirque du Soleil, and live to the Xbox 360 Media Briefing for game announcements, world premieres and breaking news on the future of the Xbox 360 video game and entertainment system.
8K UUHD with path tracing at 5000 FPS is great, but what if you only have $300?
So the BG3 guys found an optimization for all other platforms by way of the little engine that could... interesting.
Read the article headline and think “this sound like a Microsoft own site “ click on it read windowscentral and almost spayed my boss with water 🤣
Now about the article I’m not going to read it🤷🏿
"[...]but what if you only have $300?"
Apparently you would have to keep saving money. LOL no seriously. The console they show for this article cost $350. The irony...
I didnt know you could spay using water. That's such a common procedure so maybe they can now?
But why your boss though?
A mid-mid-gen upgrade will never be called a new gen console, no matter how you put it or how many excuses you try to make up.
In this case why bother cause they could have started with XSX, which was out only 1 or 2 years..
We need proper experiences worthy of new gen of consoles. XSS is a laughable attempt..
Y'all can add Lords of the fallen to the list of titles that PS5 outperforms series x.
Yup. Way too much advanced asset management for the Xbox to handle with that one.
The typical "it's holding us back" argument aside, from a sales perspective, the S is selling way more than the X (wasn't it like 75% of total?), so you could make the case that if it wasn't for the S, Xbox would have like 25% of the sales they have now...
Not necessarily. If the S wasn’t there, maybe the X would have sold more units as there was no option?
In the end it’s anybody’s guess with the “if’s” and “but’s” imo.
Crazy that they're only around 5 million Series Xs out there compared to PS5's 40 million.
Xbox has shown they couldn't give a shit about hardware, which is a shame and one of the reasons I feel like if you own a PC there is 0 point in having an Xbox. They want game pass on everyone's phone, PC, TV, fridge, you name it. They are a software company first and foremost.
Eventually the end goal will be game pass on Playstation and they can sack off consoles altogether, whether Sony would be up for that, highly doubt it, but that's their end game in my opinion.
Yah highly doubt playstation would ever allow that. It's like Mcdonalds allowing their big macs to be sold at burger king. Kind of like their intent to buy nintendo, nice thought but never going to happen.
Exactly why i didn't get a series console, it was time for a new pc i just needed a reason to bite the bullet. Im always putting off buying a new pc and just upgrade and upgrade but it was time and GPU came with gamepass so win win i guess. I was going to get a series x but ps5 seemed like a better option when i considered my pc.
I seriously doubt we will see gamepass on PS5. Things have been getting crazy lately so its not a definite but i just cant compute Sony going along with the idea.
I personally think CoD is the start.. they'll buy up IP to back Sony into a corner and give them no choice. Want Call of duty and Elder scrolls on your platform? Along side Halo, gears Forza and all the other shit tonne of IP we own? Brill, we will leave the console business, but you put game pass on Playstation like you've done with EA play.
Makes perfect business sense to me. I wouldn't want that to happen, I'd rather they focus on making games that compete with Sony, but Phil already said they will never outsell Sony, similar to how they'll never outsell Apple when it comes to hardware. They'll go down the windows route and get all of their software on any available platform. Steam Deck, playstation, switch 2, whatever.
Mark my words that shits coming.
From now on then that's what I'll see it as...just an option.
In other words ..all mainline PS5 consoles are much more powerful than the mainline Xbox series console...
So yet again PlayStation holds the most powerful console and gamer share.
Wait, how does that make PS5 more powerful than Series X? Please explain that logic?
I have both systems, but that makes zero sense
@GamerRN
No point trying to reason with fanboy logic. By extension, they're implying that the Switch was the most powerful console last gen.
This is what happens when you have people jumping the gun for some quick doom and gloom headlines. Not to mention getting opinions from devs that were possibly frustrated that they would have to do some extra tinkering for the S. And to an extent, rightly so. But the optimization and trades are there to make a game play on the S. It's a budget console and it should be treated as such.
But I have to laugh at the rest of the crowd who actually told people that the S was holding back this gen and pretended to be shocked that the S wouldn't have the bells and whistles that the X or PS5 would.
It's almost as if they were reaching, hard.
@attilayavuzer
they look a lot better while having a weaker console than the X, that alone should tell you everything
Did you forget the original pr blurbs for the s? What about the original announce video that ms then privated after launch? You know ms over promised on the s and it has caused problems, too many devs have claimed it for it to be a lie.
https://youtu.be/u6ftY7t8bJ...
"This means that the xbox series s delivers the same next gen experiance and features as series x, just at a reduced resolution"
All you need is a handful of games to do that for the statement to be true. It's like sony putting 8k on their box.
@Hole "All you need is a handful of games to do that for the statement to be true". Bullshit....it should ve EVERY game because that's what was promised.
Seriously fox? How many times have we seen the series s version with more than just a resolution cut? Almost every single release has way more than that done to it.
Isn't 8k printed on the xbox chip and it's box? hasn't had a single 8k piece of content though has it? So it's more like that, no 🤔
The S means there will never be a current gen. game built specifically for the SX. Most devs and publishers don't have the talent to optimize like BG3.
BTW, I only game at 30,000 fps...This article is a stupid take. The only thing good about the S is that it kept MSXbox way below 2nd place.
We already know 2023 has been a banger year for video games, but we now have the stats to back it up.
author could have mentioned final fantasy 16 but instead mentions hi fi rush as a below 90 game that's decent. although i agree with the main sentiment that the industry is volatile and there are a lot of layoffs. The author of this article only talks about recent events when it suits him or her.
Completely disagree. Tbh the best game of the year comes out tomorrow. Star ocean 2 remake, to this day one of the best jrpg, and the best space rpg
Nah, 2007-2008 was legendary, but it's been a pretty good year. I'm hoping for good announcements too at the VGAs
There is a generation of low paid game “journalists” that weren’t cognizant of the gaming industry in 2007-2008.
I promise I'm not TRYING to.be contrarion with this comment bit I bought FF16 and couldn't finish it. To me the story seemed boring compared to classic FFs and seemed as though it was more interested in being a game of thrones clone than a true final fantasy. Just my opinion.
Interesting. I've played/tried every FF and its the only one since 7 with a good story to me, mainly because its finally devoid of any weaby cheesy dialogue.
Chile regulator Fiscalía Nacional Económica (FNE) approved Microsoft's purchase of Activision Blizzard on Thursday. In the press release, the regulator explained that with other big third-party companies such as Electronic Arts, Epic Games, Ubisoft, and others, there was still plentiful competition.
"As other responsible regulators review the facts, we expect more approvals like this one," said Lulu Cheng Meservey, EVP of corporate affairs at Activision Blizzard.
So what, they gotta get approved from every country just to aquire them. US, EU what matters right
Every country that both parties are a trading entity in failing the approval they need to remain seperate entities in that country or pull out which means they would likely require a new distributor in that country like another publisher best example I can think of is how Capcom publish some Rockstar games titles in Japan like the GTA games after localisation. In most cases it's not drawn out or public like this.
EU may not approve it. FTC case isn't as strong as it could be. There are better arguments they could have made for sure.
it's true, every country could approve but once US disapprove, everything becomes rejected. or cancelled.
I think a certain number of countries (FTC) equivalents have to approve the deal. I think it's like 16 of them. However, lawsuits like the one the FTC launched can kill the bid I believe no matter how many countries pass it. The more approvals the deal gets I would say makes the lawsuit weaker.
https://seekingalpha.com/ar...
"The acquisition needs antitrust approval from 16 countries."... from the source above.
Yes the place where MS sells their game on PC doesn't care as well as the place CoD doesn't belong.... Also, Steam develops about as many games as Xbox so I'd hardly call them "games creator"
What do you mean “doesn’t belong”? Switch is the only ‘mobile console’ so to speak, why should I not be able to play COD on my switch? 🤔
Sony and any gamer who realizes where this leads should be against this sort of conduct.
Where does this lead? The fact is you nor I know where this could lead. It could…
1. Lead to Activision being more Microtransaction heavy based on the fact that all games will be on Gamepass
2. Lead to Activision classics and standards to have more development time and be of higher quality
3. Lead to more low quality games and us being beta testers
The fact is you do not know and neither does Sony. Gamers in general seem to not care or be on board for this. I for one, would love to not pay $70 a year for CoD if I can get it on Gamepass. Not to mention all the great Blizzard games I can play on my crummy pc via Xcloud. As of right now, I don’t see anything but positives with this… not to mention to Sony owners, this would lead to more synergy between Microsoft and Sony. I would love for Microsoft to leave the console space and just live off of their GamePass app on my PlayStation in the future. Best of both worlds
Sony should have realized where this was headed when they failed to give Microsoft any respect. So many Sony fans put Microsoft down no matter what. That led to game exclusivity for Sony and lower sales for Microsoft. It was completely predictable that Microsoft would eventually start buying companies once they got ceo support.
And then there is the idiot comment above. He wanted respect for some reason. And this is what we are up against people. A bunch of ego hurt MS fans going along with MS buying up multiplayer games so that they can talk about what they have exclusives wise. Nevermind that they would have had the same games even if MS hadnt bought Activision.
S2killinit
You know Jackshit where this leads.
You're anti-anything-MS , your bias shows.
Sony and their minions seem to be worried that MS might get an edge in the market with this deal.
It will lead to permanent GAAS as Microsoft ultimately wants. They tried with the launch of the Xbox One an got a huge backlash when gamers rejected their always online requirement and they had to backtrrack. Now they have been slowly pushing the same thing with the Gamepass service and have gained a foothold.
Eventually gamers will have no choice but to pay a regular subscription to access the majority of the AAA games.
@Jack
I know exactly where it leads, they are buying up the industry that used to make multiplatform games to make them exclusive, thats where it leads. Games everyone including xbox owners would have enjoyed anyway are going to become exclusive and xbox fans should he happy for some reason even though it just makes the industry a smaller place. If you are too blind to see that others will do the same and where that goes then keep following Microsoft but then dont bitch later when the shoe is on the other foot.
This acquisition will lead to anyone with deep pockets rushing in and making their own walled gardens. Say goodbye to being able to play almost any game anywhere. THAT’s why Microsoft PR has been banging on about wanting to make games available and all that, its because they were planning this shit show the whole time and they are doing the exact opposite.
Fu&k em for pulling this crap they should have made their own studios and added to the industry not eat up multiplatform publishers.
While some gamers may realize where it leads, Sony realizes and care about their lost profit only.
Nintendo approves because it sees this as a way to destroy Sony and because they know their console sells because of their exclusive franchises like Mario, Zelda, etc.
Lol steam they aren't on board they just don't cause it doesn't effect them. Nintendo is Nintendo they don't care cause it doesn't effect them either and cod online multiplayer is trash on it that what people play it for
May take a little longer than originally thought, but as has been said in the past, the deal will go through. So tired of waking up every day to a Xbox+ABK article. ABK & their employees wants this, MS wants this, it will not hinder competition, let it go. Interested to see what the FTC argues in court on this, if their best examples are from 20 years ago case seems weak.
It doesn’t matter what MS wants or what the employees want. There’s still rules/laws in monopolizing competition to take from competitors. I agree that this is becoming more of an annoying daily read than anything but it doesn’t just work by what they want. What they want and what they get are two different things.
True…. So let’s talk about the ‘monopoly’ then, which is a situation where there is a single seller of a commodity in an industry market place. What percentage of the market would MS own should this deal go through that makes this a monopoly? Interested in a serious and objective discussion btw
And how exactly would MS have a monopoly if the own Activision? Nobody has ever explained that just a bunch of BS speculation…
@Hardknock & Speaktruth
Im not sure if the LEGAL threshold to block such move is “monopoly” or “anti-competitiveness” but I do know that as a gamer Im concerned for its anti-competitive effect on the industry. Not just now, but also in the future. If deal goes through, others will follow, yahoo, google, apple, sony, amazon, tencent, etc. This merger & acquisition will set legal precedence, and anyone with a deep pocket will rush in to grab a chunk of the industry.
Then.. they will all put up their walls and have gamers pay for their walled gardens. So you are looking into a future where instead of picking from a multitude of multiplat games, you will have to determine which monthly service you would like to pay for. You will lose access to all games in the way you have access to them today. THIS is the future Microsoft is pushing for.
Follow them at your own risk. This buyout will not give xbox gamers more games than they would have had, it just deprives others from what they would have had. Put yourself in others’ shoes for a second.
@ S2Killinit three things:
1. This is the CURRENT state of gaming. Where can I go to play FF16 next year?
2. You do not KNOW that that is what MS will do. On top of this, they have made PUBLIC assurances. This would be pretty tough to walk back
3. The basis of this conversation WAS monopolies. Let’s not pivot away from it now that it’s not a provable point.
@Hardknock
"What percentage of the market would MS own should this deal go through that makes this a monopoly?"
They won't ever answer or explain that. It's all just repeated talking points from the few here
What's anti-competitive about the deal. Say something tangible. Anti-competitive based on what?
Flake
Do a little industry research (because I ain't doing it for you) and go look up numbers and stats, and you will find that this deal doesn't even come close to a monopoly.
Better yet , look up the definition of monopoly.... this isn't it.
Jez goes to great lengths to keep the name of the country out of the headline.
"Microsoft's purchase of Activision Blizzard approved in Chile"
Doesn't quite have the same impact does it?
Lol, and people said there will be no cameras. MS isn't spending that much money to not allow cameras. This is going to be fun to watch
So much for MS being camera shy with Natal. They must be pretty confident with it to broadcast it on live tv.
Although you better be able to watch this live in the UK too.
NO CAMERAS allowed in the invite for media. But MTV is ok :)
MTV? LOL two wrong doesn't make a right. S&M