Very interesting stuff. Can't wait to see what the future holds. I have to say though, this gen is definitely more competitive than last gen which was not very competitive. I'm glad MS is giving Sony something to mull over this gen.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Microsoft responds to Sony's claim that Call of Duty is unrivaled & unique (Claims Sony is paying to block games from Gamepass)
- Thread starter Idas
- Start date
- Activision/Blizzard
no as sony isnt the defending party. They stated their stance and their stance won't vary. MS is the one under the scope, hence why they get a rebuttal
I think WetWaffle who also responded to my post kind of gets my point a little better than you have here. The limitations you mention above are all those imposed by Sony on themselves.
I'm saying Sony had the capability to do these things, with the hardware units they were (and are) selling, the amount of studios they have, their financial capability and just the sheer size of the company they have the power to at least try and create something in this space.
Do you believe that it would have been absolutely impossible for Sony to create a GaaS shooter in the last eight years?
![00Quan[T]](/data/avatar/31681832007/115484-m.jpg){kind=avatar}
Well, Microsoft also can't get deals for Gamepass because Sony pays to keep games away from it. I guess they made their onw bed here.
Yeah. Any attempts to draw an equivalence to these acquisitions with the occasional timed exclusive (which people on this forum have been seething over) is crazy.
It wasn't long ago that timed exclusives were seen as shitty moves.
I'm subbed to gamepass for the next three years. Am I supposed to argue against myself getting more value for money I've already paid?
Why beat around the bush here? Why not just say Sony locking out Destiny content for two plus years on Xbox?
You go poking the bear for 20 years and I guess this happens lol, answering the question, "Why does the bigger corp not simply consume the smaller corp?"
A brave new world.
Of course MS is right in terms of the logic, but this is still a scummy road we're going down. The platforms will respond in kind until they implode into a merger.
A brave new world.
Of course MS is right in terms of the logic, but this is still a scummy road we're going down. The platforms will respond in kind until they implode into a merger.
Microsoft can certainly get deals with gamepass by making their own deals. The cost to add a game to gamepass is likely more than it costs to keep a game off of it.
Of course, but legally speaking by all anti-trust laws the acquisition should hold through without any concessions. The wiggle room is if regulators decide to sue to block some parts just to throw a wrench in the process.
I'd assume it's the opposite. What studio in their right mind would take less money and less potential consumers experiencing their products?
Yes, they can make their own deals
what do you think this thread is about... a deal for game pass :)
based on what we knw of gamepass deals. This would vary immensely on the product
Maybes it's been mentioned within this thread, but I found it interesting that Microsoft made sure to say the CoD would still be available in a buy-to-play format on PlayStation consoles.
It is like Microsoft is saying, hey you can have my bishop right now, but I just confirmed taking your queen next move.
To clarify, Call of Duty will continue to be available to buy on PlayStation consoles. But since Microsoft is envisioning a sub-to-play future that is not tied to a single device, they still have essentially tied up CoD exclusivity for Gamepass as consoles slowly fade away from the equation. So not only will the get that sweet sweet CoD PlayStation purchase revenue in the short-term, they have also essentially cut off one of the biggest IP in America from their biggest competitor in the long-term.
It is like Microsoft is saying, hey you can have my bishop right now, but I just confirmed taking your queen next move.
To clarify, Call of Duty will continue to be available to buy on PlayStation consoles. But since Microsoft is envisioning a sub-to-play future that is not tied to a single device, they still have essentially tied up CoD exclusivity for Gamepass as consoles slowly fade away from the equation. So not only will the get that sweet sweet CoD PlayStation purchase revenue in the short-term, they have also essentially cut off one of the biggest IP in America from their biggest competitor in the long-term.
Last edited:
I agree.
Walmart has done that with mom and pop retail stores by price undercutting before, killing the competition. Amazon is doing to the same to Walmart as well.
Everything is cyclical, PS2 arrogance led to PS3 disaster launch. 360 arrogance led to XBO disaster launch.
Netflix streaming started at 7.99 and is now at 15.49 almost doubling.
Right now it is an arms race on who can stock pile more IPs and have exclusive content.
"MS says that Microsoft's ability to continue expanding Game Pass has been hampered by Sony's desire to inhibit such growth. Sony pays for "blocking rights" to prevent developers from adding content to Game Pass and other competing subscription services (then there is a bunch of redacted content)."
MS just "found a way" to get their deals for gamepass.
The idea that Microsoft were forced into their hyper aggressive acquisition strategy because of Sony locking down third party content is bizarre, not least because Microsoft repeatedly engage in the practice themselves.
I don't agree. I think there's a difference between purchasing an entire studio, meaning you take on their debts and all development costs, and paying another studio a few million dollars to prevent a game releasing somewhere else.
If you don't, then hey that's okay. Different opinions and all that.
What's bizarre about it?
Your competitor is cutting away possibilities for your new found strategy, then MS adjusted their methods.
Now Sony needs to adjust their strategy again to keep competing, that's how this works and will continue to happen time and time again.
Absolutely a valid concern and the backbone that underpins our capitalistic society but at the same time Game Pass' success of shaking up the distribution model in the gaming industry will, at least in the short term, benefit consumers by spurring competition and necessitating the market to adapt to them.
There's always a point at where consumers start to become exploited as price points and services become less beneficial but more options to consume content and levelling the playing field is a necessity, IMO, in an industry that has milked people dry for far too long.
That poster seems to take issue with Microsoft "undercutting" the competition though and I think it's a shortsighted take that fails to understand or acknowledge Microsoft's current position in the industry. Subscription models rely on incentivizing consumers to adopt a service and retain it which is exactly what they're focusing on through the acquisitions and deals they've made/provide.
Through the XB1 generation Sony had such a strong market position they were able to exploit it to make these deals far more cheaply than MS could because of the respective cost of cutting out or restricting the opposing platform.
Only purchasing supplier in the chain is anticompetitive. Keeping games off Gamepass is anti-consumer but exclusive product is 100% okay with current anti-trust laws.
Then that's Sony's problem, if they can't keep up with this, they need to find a way to keep afloat.
Nintendo is doing just fine.
Its definitely interesting. Xbox is and has been, playing the long game with all their acquisitions and this shift in focus to Gamepass. A strategy that is working out for them. If their bet is that the future is more of a sub future (with buy to play always being an option, just smaller) then their wording would allow them to make is exclusive from a sub standpoint. Means nothing now, but 5 -10 years from now, could have major impact.
I def dont think its the sole reason, but it is a factor. Normally it would not have been a big deal, but when paired with the Xbox One gen and MS's shift in gaming perspective, it does become more of a point. At the end of the day, in the context of the second half of last gen, Xbox basically had to rebuild itself. It lacked 1st party studios, lacked the market share, and with Sony money hatting, lacked 3rd party (obviously that's a bit hyperbolic but ya get the point). So, while MS definitely did Money hat during the 360, Sony was never at the lvl Xbox was in the One era. The PS3 even began to eclipse the 360 near the tail end of the gen.
I can assure you, MS buying or not buying ABK has no bearing on how hyper capitalist Microsoft are, and the tech and gaming industry is.
I dont think Nintendo has any idea any of this is happening (obviously they do but they just dont care haha)
I mean thats literally what competition is?
Should Xbox just sit back and not want to compete? Should Sony do the same?
The people who are console warring or getting upset about this response are ignoring that this was just lawyers doing what lawyers do. They had to respond to the statements, they logically pointed out flaws in the SIE reasoning and advocated for their preferred result.
All the hand wringing and pointing out the things that "both sides" do is pointless. This is dry, emotionless logic meant only to persuade a regulatory body. Now if someone could get Phil to dish on a podcast...I'd like to hear that.
All the hand wringing and pointing out the things that "both sides" do is pointless. This is dry, emotionless logic meant only to persuade a regulatory body. Now if someone could get Phil to dish on a podcast...I'd like to hear that.
Spot on. Sony just doesn't want to lose it's strong market position. They made themselves comfortable and are scared that another company could take their spot.
I'm personally in favor of the acquisition because it literally benefits me. I don't care about MS financials, I care that as someone who subscribes to Game Pass for a very low price, I'll get access to previous and future Acti-Blizz titles free of additional charges.
Incidentally, I also support it on the grounds it's the only way to remove Kotick from office, apparently.
I'll champion when Sony buys Square as well. I think acquisitions/exclusives are good, lead to more competition, and better games for consumers. But thats a whole other topic…
I figure it's sort of like a cycle race. The leader is peddling hard moving the pack forward. Then the leader is like, "This sucks. Lets all coast". So they start to coast making that coasting sound bikes make when you stop peddling notifying back markers they are no longer peddling but coasting. However, someone doesn't get the message and, in fact, peddles harder.
Last edited:
Purchasing a very publishing arm carries some risk, but ultimately, it gives them infinite more leverage to wield against the competition than an occasional timed exclusive.
At the end of the day, the effect on the competitors and consumers is worse.
Didn't you know Microsoft bought Activsion Blizzard to combat Final Fantasy 7 Remake and the Spider-Man DLC in Avengers exclusivity.
"Hey, that's different"
Who knows? With COD we have Warzone 1, Warzone 2, F2P zombie and a bunch of contractually obligated COD games...Those are certainly not exclusive for sure. Everything else is up in the air.
I am pretty sure that Xbox does not operate in the loss and the acquisitions do not count as Xbox expenses either. Microsoft makes 200b in revenue per year. Xbox is at 8% of their revenue right. Literally invisible for shareholders to care.
In gaming space - they are.
Yeah. That's where I was like…oh, Sony's just real upset that the sub service will look too attractive for the average gamer.
I wonder what the long term effects of the subscription service are to their several hundred million dollar games will be. Can Sony continue to invest that much if they lose some more market share? I wonder that the tipping point will be. I'm neither here nor there, I buy the big Sony games and kinda get everything else on Xbox or PC, so I guess it could affect me down the road. Very interesting times indeed.
Worse effect on consumers? Which consumers?
Do you mean Ps consumers who have been used to getting exclusive cod deals like early access maps, or possibly even the entire campaign this year.
Do you mean Xbox consumers who've had to wait months for certain maps or game modes?
Or do you mean consumers that subscribe to gamepass, who will now have access to the game for a very affordable price?
So you are trying to undermine the damage that Sony's moneyhats did?
They won't be able to pay those juicy 70$ and 10$ for upgrades /s
Don't forget exclusive modes
Right.
And MS would be just as irked if the converse happened.
Big brands like COD over XBL have certainly built them a strong brand over the years. If they lost COD during the XB1 days, they'd have been in some real serious trouble.