That is different to what you said/claimed earlier
You can control+F and type in 'foreclosure strategy' and it comes up 9 times. I'm not going to list every single instance of it. Points 26 and 27 pretty much describe the inability to compete because potential returns would drop significantly, and developers would no longer get paid as much and therefore third party studios have less incentive to release titles on playstation and 27. without call of duty revenue they will no longer be able to create great first party titles.
I have tried on several occasions to post a response that just wouldn't lead to less than stellar response coming back from you. Honestly, you're pissy right now, and it's impossible to have a discussion that doesn't involve you insulting people on this thread either directly or indirectly. Neither you nor I benefit from this; it's obvious a truce is in order.
I think for a large portion of those participating in this thread, what happens behind regulatory, and the decisions made there are entirely out of our control. Everyone here would accept that as it is, and no one here is saying that they know what the future response will be. Most people are definitely unhappy with the responses, and you're reading about that here, how people cope with that is entirely their own. But your strategy has been largely to declare this dissent as 'noise' and conspiracy theory pushing, denial and misterxmedia fanboyism. You've declared me as PR for Hoeg, and declare me incapable of understanding your posts entirely, just like earlier you badgered me for having no knowledge of any sort of accountancy. Both insulting, but a little funny, but impossible to know if you're joking or not, so I have to call you on those points, and you're suddenly, like, hey it's your issue you can't understand what I'm saying, you're incredibly bad at it so stop trying. Except here you are writing about how frustrated you are posting here, perhaps the readers aren't the problem, but the issue is how you engage with other forum members here? In particular members can feel your general lack of respect for anyone who disagrees with your points?
It is normal for people to engage in commentary if they see something they feel is unfair whether it impacts them or not.
So, why not let them? What is the worst that could happen? You're getting real time data how people feel about regulatory process. Perhaps in the midst of all this complaining people will be able to understand your humour? I think we could use more of it here at B3D, perhaps the culture here is too serious. We could use more lively banter, if people were able to discern it from an insult.
But I think among the dissent, there can be a fairly neutral debate on the merit of the arguments presented by the bodies and corporations, which I was largely assuming that is what people here are discussing.
You can still post useful information among the dissent.
You're frustrated, it's clear. That happens. It's not a technical topic. There's no reason to try to moderate the dissent and downplay any post that isn't neutral. We aren't the regulatory body, that's not our job. If people are doing a job on our behalf, people can complain, that's precisely what politics is. I've no horse in this race, merger cancelled then it's status quo for everything. Merger approved, honestly, I still think status quo, MAYBE a little shift, at best we get back to how close 360 and PS3 were. Don't care what the outcome is, though I would care about Blizzard games returning in form, but that's not a driving reason for me to post here.
I'm still waiting for an remastered MW3, which probable isn't coming.
