This is fucking nonsense. Bethesda were the one offering games to Sony for them to pay for timed exclusivity. Sony according to reports at rhe time actually DECLINED starfield. Has they not it woukd have been part of the same deal that led to timed exclusivity for deathloop and Tokyo ghostwire.
At any rate its still bolocks because Microsoft has the ability to outbid Sony on each and every 3rd party exclusive. They don't/can't because they are committed to day one o...
I mean that remark by the judge was telling but also fucking nonsense. It matters how the deal effects Sony because they are microsofts main competitor and they have tens of millions of customers who may now be at a disadvantage or find gsmes don't launch that they woukd have expected to launch on their console. The judge also made the remark "doesn't everyone own a pc wirth 1.5k or more that can therefore play videogames"? Well that should say it all imo.
This "hey I saved a tonne of money" attitude is dangerous though cos those games still cost as much to make, they still need that investment. They just now bring in much smaller or no return. That will have an impact on their budgets and thus the quality of the games and the nunber of developers who will have jobs working on stuff.
@zhipp it's not really sustainable though because they have to pay for more than the 4 AAA titles a year which are yet to materialise in a given year. Plus the actual budgets for AAA games are actually often larger than the budgets cited by a good 25% as there are things not included in that budget. So 4 titles you are looking at a billion a year plus running costs for support studios they'll own. A current ceiling on paid gamespass subscriptions it seems of about 25-30 million people...
The issue no one's talking about- it's sustainable for Sony, they can sell enough copies. Know who it isn't sustainable for? Microsoft..... because if gamespass. If they have their way and whole industry goes in that direction we can kiss goodbye to big budget gsmes like this.
It's somewhat irrelevant each government is only really responsible for their local market and each market is different.
@giovanni the standard of proof in a case like this is NOT beyond a shadow of doubt (which isn't actually a legal term, that's just the term they use in Hollywood films the real term is "Beyond all reasonable doubt". In a civil proceeding like this it's "on the balance of the evidence it is more likely than not". Also this judge isn't actually meant to be ruling that the acquisition should be stopped for good. She is simply meant to be ruling if it appears ...
Yes, the point is MS were bitching that sony did this abd it turns out they don't....
That isn't what happened at all. Sony had higher expenditure going into ps1 because they were starting from scratch. They had to setup studios and buy a few becsuae they had nothing. It was a totally new venture for them and unlike any of there other ones. They may have been a larger company than Sega but not by that much and its not like they actually had the whole companies funding to back them then. Given the risk investors and the board would have set them a pretty strict budget and i...
Yeah they did only issue MS has is the games gotta go to games pass day 1 which is why they clearly discussed dropping that because it meant they basically had to covet all the dev costs to get a 3rd party exclusive. Content was and still is coating them alot more than it costs Sony because Sony picks stuff up for ps now after it's released and already recouped its dev costs and made a profit ideally or is at least part of the way there. Its also why ps plus has more AAA titles and is ar...
You clearly didn't read the other article. The emails show its not about adding value to their service its about removing it from others. They are pretty unequivocal about that in the other emails.
What are you on about? I'm quite far through and frankly the story had been pretty phenomenal for the most part. It's well written and not only that the characters really come to life and you care about them and understand their motivations.
Reckon that eill be zelda:BOW I certainly think it should probably be ff16. Its really really really good.
@jimlyan I can do several things at once... I'm enjoying ff16, following updates on the trial (it's not looking great for MS I think Pete hines testimony might have done their case some serious damage ) and writing parts of my MSc thesis. Ff16 is amazing.
I keep seeing this narrative but the origins of the company are irrelevant. Sony USA is a massive usa based company that pays large amounts of tax in the USA and employs USA citizens. I keep seeing thus weird narrative from some and it betrays and element of Xenephobia among those pushing it.
The FTC's job like the CMA is to ensure competition in the markets to maintain healthy pro-consumer market conditions. They don't care if its Sony or Nintendo or ea or whoever ...
I think buying a publisher that is in trouble and likely going under is a different situation or buying one worth less than a certain amount. But as a general rule yeah you are correct.
Your comment means it's a legit argument for the FTC to make because as you say MS is clearly gonna donthe same thing again.
It's actually worse than that. Turns out they literally went and changed terms of contract with Disney for indianna Jones game lol
Correct although bungie is one studio people seem to forget activision is like a network of ehat 19 console development studios?
The same applied to starfiekd and elderscrolls however and they have done it.... so any reason to think they won't do it with all ABK properties soon is naive. Only reason they have not todo it is if they want to buy more publishers. Then they stick to multiplatform releases buy what else they want then overnight they'd remove them all from