Microsoft acquired Activision Blizzard King for $69 Billion on 2023-10-13

[eastmen]

Microsoft are in third place now, so they could save that $70bn. Who are they afraid will displace them from third place into fourth, Ouya? I've lived on this ball of dirt orbiting the bright fiery orb for quite a few years and I have become accustomed to things changing. If Microsoft really think that spending $70bn will not change their market position, then that really would make "zero business sense"(tm).

Is Phil Spencer the worst executive around? No, of course he isn't. But he is a man who speaketh with a forked tongue. You can't both be convinced that "exclusivity is a backbone of the industry" and be committed to less exclusivity whilst making previously-announced cross platform games like Starfield console exclusive. Because you're saying one thing, and doing another.

Just an idea.. but perhaps we should stop listening to these highly-paid company executives? It feels like they're all trying to peddle a particular narrative that really only exists to support their company's strategic business interests. I'm beginning to feel like none of them care about gamers at all.

Apple , Google and amazon ? Netflix ? heck even trencent hasn't dipped their feet into streaming or hardware yet

For MS purchasing Activision increases the studios they have which increases the content they can offer to get subscribers on game pass and people to purchase xboxes. It also gives them IP that has a following instead of trying to create new IP out of thin air .

What is with the odd hatred of Spencer ? Spencer talks about exclusivity in terms of hardware. It used to be that An xbox game would only be on xbox consoles and a playstation game would only be on sony consoles. Now the exclusivity for MS games isn't tied to xbox hardware. MS first party titles are now released on xbox hardware , xbox for pc , xcloud and also steam. They are all day and date. Phil is saying one thing and then doing the same thing they are saying

I think there are many people out there that the cost of a playstation 5 or even a series s is to expensive. But buying a used xbox controller to connect to their tv and streaming hundreds of games a month for $15 fits into their budget.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

It doesn't mean they will move from being in third to first or even second, may mean they close up the gap though.
So it does make sense.

If you look at what Microsoft have spent recently on gaming acquisitions it's closing on $100bn at this point and if that doesn't move them from 3rd to 2nd, in terms of market share, you have to question what the motivation is because the actual combined profitability of Nintendo and Sony would take decades to recoup that investment.

Like many, I believe that Microsoft's pivot into data monetisation that is the driver here, and that market position isn't important to them at all. So using it as a counter as to why the merger should (or shouldn't) take place is disingenuous. It's con artists's ability to distract with something important while he steal's your watch.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Apple , Google and amazon ? Netflix ? heck even trencent hasn't dipped their feet into streaming or hardware yet

I don't see any evidence that makes me believe Apple, Google, Amazon or Netflix are competitors to Microsoft's console or PC gaming business. I have no idea who Trencent are, nor does google.

For MS purchasing Activision increases the studios they have which increases the content they can offer to get subscribers on game pass and people to purchase xboxes. It also gives them IP that has a following instead of trying to create new IP out of thin air .

Yes, Microsoft's reasons for wanting to buy Activision Blizzard are clear and obvious.

What is with the odd hatred of Spencer ? Spencer talks about exclusivity in terms of hardware. It used to be that An xbox game would only be on xbox consoles and a playstation game would only be on sony consoles.

I don't hate Phil Spencer, I don't know Phil Spencer. But like Jim Ryan at PlayStation, I don't believe a damn word he says. Both are corporate suits where the role includes making gamers things that these multi-million dollar businesses care about individual gamers. What is weird is the way these executives are almost revered by some on these forums like they have completely stalled all of the Kool-aid.

Phil Spencer's statements on exclusivity have only been given when being questioned about acquisitions and what it means for PlayStation gamers so when you say he's talking abut Xbox and PC (or even PlayStation and PC), that isn't what he is saying - regardless of what you think he is meaning. Phil Spencer, just like Jim Ryan would if the situation is reversed, is just trotting out the usual defence and deflective lines. We love all gamers, we want everybody to be able to play games he says cancelling Starfield on PS5 and announcing Elder Scrolls VI isn't coming to PS5 either.

You would have to be crazy rabid fanboy to deny these statements and actions are contradictory. I own a Series X and I'm really happy with it, but the way some lap up corporate bullshit on these forums and - worse - try to defend it, boggles my mind. It's like folks have completely lost their objectivity or ability to see a snake oil salesman right in front of them. Saying this, but doing that.

 

[eastmen]

I don't see any evidence that makes me believe Apple, Google, Amazon or Netflix are competitors to Microsoft's console or PC gaming business. I have no idea who Trencent are, nor does google.



Yes, Microsoft's reasons for wanting to buy Activision Blizzard are clear and obvious.



I don't hate Phil Spencer, I don't know Phil Spencer. But like Jim Ryan at PlayStation, I don't believe a damn word he says. Both are corporate suits where the role includes making gamers things that these multi-million dollar businesses care about individual gamers. What is weird is the way these executives are almost revered by some on these forums like they have completely stalled all of the Kool-aid.

Phil Spencer's statements on exclusivity have only been given when being questioned about acquisitions and what it means for PlayStation gamers so when you say he's talking abut Xbox and PC (or even PlayStation and PC), that isn't what he is saying - regardless of what you think he is meaning. Phil Spencer, just like Jim Ryan would if the situation is reversed, is just trotting out the usual defence and deflective lines. We love all gamers, we want everybody to be able to play games he says cancelling Starfield on PS5 and announcing Elder Scrolls VI isn't coming to PS5 either.

You would have to be crazy rabid fanboy to deny these statements and actions are contradictory. I own a Series X and I'm really happy with it, but the way some lap up corporate bullshit on these forums and - worse - try to defend it, boggles my mind. It's like folks have completely lost their objectivity or ability to see a snake oil salesman right in front of them. Saying this, but doing that.

Apple has IOS which is one of the biggest gaming platforms in the world. Google has stadia and owns youtube which is either the largest or second largest game content streaming platform in the world. Amazon has Luna and owns twitch which is either the largest or second largest game content streaming platform in the world. Sorry I added a R to Tencent

Tencent - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Tencent is the world's largest video game vendor,[7] as well as one of the most financially valuable companies.[8] It is among the largest social media,[9] venture capital, and investment corporations.[10][11] Its services include social networks, music, web portals, e-commerce, mobile games, internet services, payment systems, smartphones, and multiplayer online games.[12] It operates the instant messengers Tencent QQ and WeChat, and QQ.com.[13] It also owns Tencent Music.

Oh I believe both of them. They both want to increase the money their companies make so they make more money. Its really easy. They will do whatever is in their companies best interests and if the consumers benefit then that is great for them and if not well the company will do better.

I disagree about his comments. You consistently leave out xcloud from your thoughts. Starfield on PS5 or Elder scrolls on ps5 (which it may never have come to anyway since it could be next gen only) doesn't go against what he has said. He wants everyone to be able to play the games and everyone can. Just get a subscription to xcloud or buy an xbox or get it on steam. Literally any playstation owner can do any of those.

The statements are only contradictory because you want them to fit into content continuing to come to the playstation. But that was never in the cards for a purchase. Just like with Sony purchasing bungie , they will only keep content on other platforms whre it makes sense. If you look at what sony has said they have only committed to keeping destiny 2 multiplatform. A title that is nearing end of life in early 2023.

At the end of the day I would rather have a company buy a studio and say okay from now on if you want this companies games you need to buy this hardware or this subscription or get a pc. Vs oh here is this game you've been hyped about for 2 -3 years oh yea there is exclusive content for only this platform now and so if you buy it on any platform other than that you aren't getting the full game.

But hey if this is upsetting you so much you might want to stop reading the news because with the global economy tanking a lot of companies in the video game industry will consolidate.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Apple has IOS which is one of the biggest gaming platforms in the world. Google has stadia and owns youtube which is either the largest or second largest game content streaming platform in the world.

I'm not convinced Microsoft's console and PC space is threatened by the ad-laden shitstorm that is iOS and Android mobile gaming. Microsoft did say back in 2020 that they saw Stadia, not Sony, as their gaming competition. In hindsight, this has proven not to be the case and is it Nvidia who have the largest streaming game service.

I don't know how Microsoft think about competition, but if they fear being usurped by any large company that is experimenting in the gaming space then Microsoft must exist in a perpetual state of fear and I find that very difficult to believe.

Oh I believe both of them. They both want to increase the money their companies make so they make more money. Its really easy. They will do whatever is in their companies best interests and if the consumers benefit then that is great for them and if not well the company will do better.

You're mixing up what they say with what they want.

I disagree about his comments. You consistently leave out xcloud from your thoughts. Starfield on PS5 or Elder scrolls on ps5 (which it may never have come to anyway since it could be next gen only) doesn't go against what he has said. He wants everyone to be able to play the games and everyone can. Just get a subscription to xcloud or buy an xbox or get it on steam. Literally any playstation owner can do any of those.

Yeah, I'm sure if Microsoft didn't by Zenimax then Bethesda definitely would have not brought Elder Scrolls VI to PlayStation. That makes perfect sense. You like to mention Xbox Cloud as a solution, but how do you access Xbox Cloud from a PS5? As far as I know you can't. There are plenty of places where you can't access it even if you own an Xbox because it's not even available in all of the EU.

The statements are only contradictory because you want them to fit into content continuing to come to the playstation. But that was never in the cards for a purchase.

Which contradicts what Phil Spencer said to Bloomberg in 2020, when we said the decision on whether to bring titles to other consoles would be done on a case-by-case basis. However it seems key games were indeed never on the cards, so it would have been more honest to say no, key first party titles would not be coming to PlayStation consoles.

Just like with Sony purchasing bungie , they will only keep content on other platforms whre it makes sense. If you look at what sony has said they have only committed to keeping destiny 2 multiplatform. A title that is nearing end of life in early 2023.

Sony committed to keep Bungie independent and said future Bungie games wouldn't be exclusive to PlayStation. That's a very different message and goes beyond Destiny 2. But as I've posted endlessly before, Sony will need to satisfy regulators.

At the end of the day I would rather have a company buy a studio and say okay from now on if you want this companies games you need to buy this hardware or this subscription or get a pc. Vs oh here is this game you've been hyped about for 2 -3 years oh yea there is exclusive content for only this platform now and so if you buy it on any platform other than that you aren't getting the full game.

I would like that too, that is really clear. That isn't what Phil Spencer said, which was “We’ll take other consoles on a case-by-case basis.".

 

[eastmen]

I'm not convinced Microsoft's console and PC space is threatened by the ad-laden shitstorm that is iOS and Android mobile gaming. Microsoft did say back in 2020 that they saw Stadia, not Sony, as their gaming competition. In hindsight, this has proven not to be the case and is it Nvidia who have the largest streaming game service.

I don't know how Microsoft think about competition, but if they fear being usurped by any large company that is experimenting in the gaming space then Microsoft must exist in a perpetual state of fear and I find that very difficult to believe.



You're mixing up what they say with what they want.



Yeah, I'm sure if Microsoft didn't by Zenimax then Bethesda definitely would have not brought Elder Scrolls VI to PlayStation. That makes perfect sense. You like to mention Xbox Cloud as a solution, but how do you access Xbox Cloud from a PS5? As far as I know you can't. There are plenty of places where you can't access it even if you own an Xbox because it's not even available in all of the EU.



Which contradicts what Phil Spencer said to Bloomberg in 2020, when we said the decision on whether to bring titles to other consoles would be done on a case-by-case basis. However it seems key games were indeed never on the cards, so it would have been more honest to say no, key first party titles would not be coming to PlayStation consoles.



Sony committed to keep Bungie independent and said future Bungie games wouldn't be exclusive to PlayStation. That's a very different message and goes beyond Destiny 2. But as I've posted endlessly before, Sony will need to satisfy regulators.


I would like that too, that is really clear. That isn't what Phil Spencer said, which was “We’ll take other consoles on a case-by-case basis.".

1) You may not be convinced but that is how the market is moving. Phone gaming is extremely popular and is only growing as is phone gaming esp as phones are able to more accurately mimic console gaming . i am not sure what microsoft saying stadia was their competition and not sony and then you saying oh it was proven wwrong its Nvidia. It just shows you how easily disruptive the market it is. MS saw a threat coming from streaming services and Google was the biggest one making moves. Now here we are in 2022 and sony has copied much of MS's streaming plan and geforce now is doing well and Google and Amazon stumbled. But that doesn't mean anything. Apple TV and Amazon prime video both struggled out of the gate and are much more successful because those companies can continue to invest into content until its successful.

2) I'm doing neither.

3) Yea if Microsoft didn't by Zenimax then sony would have because sony was also bidding. What do you think the over under of Starfield and Elder Scrolls being on the xbox if that happened ? What do you think the outrage on these forums and others would have been like ?

4) I am not sure what you are trying to say here. The titles MS chooses to be cross platform and what is exclusive is a case by case basis. So far the only two announced and dated games from Zenimax/ bethesda that are exclusive are new IP. Elder scrolls has no release date or year or platforms announced. We don't know what games MS will keep cross platform or not. We know they seem to be willing to keep COD cross platform for at least an additional 3 years. There is no talk from sony or ms or fans about any of the other games.

5) Yes Sony said that future bungie games wouldn't be exclusive to Playstation. That means pc. The only game they pledged xbox support from is the already released destiny. if you can show me where they say bungies next game will be on xbox or where they say destiny 3 then I would love to see it.

6) microsoft has to own Activision and then negotiate contracts with other companies before they can make clear what is going on with the IP. There is only so much MS can do pre purchase closing. At the end of the day MS will still want to be in a postion where they can negotiate the contracts for how these games get on other platforms just as activision did before. If ms promised diablo on switch it would put ms in a really weak negotiation postion. but you already know that.

There are going to be a bunch of games where the cost of supporting more platforms will be cost prohibited. There are going to be times a game may fall on the wrong side of a generation to warrant putting it on a competing platform.


I think people don't understand the nuance that contracts typically go through. Even the governments wont force MS to create bad deals for themselves after purchase.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

1) You may not be convinced but that is how the market is moving. Phone gaming is extremely popular and is only growing as is phone gaming esp as phones are able to more accurately mimic console gaming .

Whilst mobile gaming utterly dwarfs home consoles (Apple's profits from iOS gaming alone far exceed Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony profits combined), few mobile game delivering the full home console experience. Part of it is because of the screen size and interface. Mobile gaming on mobile hardware poses little thread to mainstream console gaming, they largely exist in separate spaces.

i am not sure what microsoft saying stadia was their competition and not sony and then you saying oh it was proven wwrong its Nvidia. It just shows you how easily disruptive the market it is.

Where is the disruption? Microsoft were behind Nvidia and ahead of Google when they said Stadia was their competitor and the situation has not changed. That's not disruption, that's the status quo.

MS saw a threat coming from streaming services and Google was the biggest one making moves. Now here we are in 2022 and sony has copied much of MS's streaming plan and geforce now is doing well and Google and Amazon stumbled.

You're saying Sony are copying Microsoft despite Sony investing in streaming ten years earlier? The "copying" argument is a bit schoolyard-ish don't you think? Businesses will go where they think growth will be. Sometimes they get it right, somethings they get it wrong. I'm not commenting on video stuff and I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up. Video isn't interactive entertainment.

Yea if Microsoft didn't by Zenimax then sony would have because sony was also bidding. What do you think the over under of Starfield and Elder Scrolls being on the xbox if that happened ? What do you think the outrage on these forums and others would have been like ?

And what number was Sony bidding? Because bidding =/= accepting. I've also not seen any independent source say Sony were interested in buying Zenimax. Based on the size of Sony's acquisitions prior and since, such an acquisiton would have been incredibly unusual. I can not think of a think instance where Sony has acquired a company to obtain IP. Every acquisition they have made was where they already owned the IP, or where the IP the studio was known for, dropped by the wayside,.

I am not sure what you are trying to say here. The titles MS chooses to be cross platform and what is exclusive is a case by case basis. So far the only two announced and dated games from Zenimax/ bethesda that are exclusive are new IP.

What I am saying? What are, you saying? You just posted Microsoft supporting PlayStation post-acquisition "was never in the cards for a purchase.". So was it never on the cards, or is it case by case? I'm confused.

Elder scrolls has no release date or year or platforms announced.

But Phil Spencer said it wasn't coming to PlayStation. This is the guy you say you believe right?

Yes Sony said that future bungie games wouldn't be exclusive to Playstation. That means pc.

Sony has been asked this several times. Future Bungie will not be PlayStation consoles exclusive. The proposed terms of Sony buying Bungie leaves creative control in the hands of Bungie. Bungie are not becoming a PlayStation Studio. There has been no talk of "case by case" decisions, unless you can quote something nobody has yet reported?

 

[Nesh]

Microsoft Activision acquisition expected to face deeper investigations in UK, EU

Microsoft's $68.7 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard is expected to be investigated extensively by both UK and …

www.gamesindustry.biz

https://twitter.com/x/status/1570437619263176704

And when you read their actual full response you get things like:

Spencer was also questioned on another of Sony's concerns - that Microsoft, even while publishing COD on PlayStation, would include COD in Game Pass, leaving customers with a choice of paying $70 on PlayStation or getting access as part of their Xbox subscription.

The Xbox boss responded by saying that rather than stifling competition, the growth of Game Pass was the product of his company's attempts to compete with Sony.

"When I look at something like Game Pass specifically, I think it's the output of competition in our market," Spencer replied. "We sat back as Microsoft and Xbox and we thought 'how can we innovate and create value... to players?' And we came up with a new model for customers building out their library of games, and gamers love it. I think that's what competition is about.

"Competition is about driving competitors to innovate, driving competitors to do new things like cloud, like subscriptions, like building new intellectual property. And everything we've been focused on is how do we compete effectively, how do we deliver more value to our customers."

On the matter of exclusivity, Spencer noted that the practice was commonplace in the video games industry, and had been for years, while Xbox was also making its games available via PC and cloud.

"Exclusivity of titles has been something which has just been a backbone of our industry for an awfully long time," Spencer said. "We made a move a few years ago that when we ship our games we'll ship them on console and PC. We obviously make them available to almost anybody with a web browser today - you can go to xbox.com/play and play our games via the cloud. We're about giving more access to our games to players going forward. That's our goal.

"So when we think about exclusivity for us, we're going to have exclusive titles on Xbox - we do today, it's part of our platform to drive affinity for what we do - but we want those games to end up being played by more players than they've ever been played before, and we build out the technology and innovation to make that possible."

I mean, Sony isnt dump. They know behind the PR how competition can and will use flagship titles like COD. Thats how businesses work. They aren't philanthropic or moral organizations. They are competing corporations that will do anything to take hold as much market share as possible to maximize profits.

 

[eastmen]

Whilst mobile gaming utterly dwarfs home consoles (Apple's profits from iOS gaming alone far exceed Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony profits combined), few mobile game delivering the full home console experience. Part of it is because of the screen size and interface. Mobile gaming on mobile hardware poses little thread to mainstream console gaming, they largely exist in separate spaces.


Where is the disruption? Microsoft were behind Nvidia and ahead of Google when they said Stadia was their competitor and the situation has not changed. That's not disruption, that's the status quo.



You're saying Sony are copying Microsoft despite Sony investing in streaming ten years earlier? The "copying" argument is a bit schoolyard-ish don't you think? Businesses will go where they think growth will be. Sometimes they get it right, somethings they get it wrong. I'm not commenting on video stuff and I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up. Video isn't interactive entertainment.



And what number was Sony bidding? Because bidding =/= accepting. I've also not seen any independent source say Sony were interested in buying Zenimax. Based on the size of Sony's acquisitions prior and since, such an acquisiton would have been incredibly unusual. I can not think of a think instance where Sony has acquired a company to obtain IP. Every acquisition they have made was where they already owned the IP, or where the IP the studio was known for, dropped by the wayside,.



What I am saying? What are, you saying? You just posted Microsoft supporting PlayStation post-acquisition "was never in the cards for a purchase.". So was it never on the cards, or is it case by case? I'm confused.




But Phil Spencer said it wasn't coming to PlayStation. This is the guy you say you believe right?



Sony has been asked this several times. Future Bungie will not be PlayStation consoles exclusive. The proposed terms of Sony buying Bungie leaves creative control in the hands of Bungie. Bungie are not becoming a PlayStation Studio. There has been no talk of "case by case" decisions, unless you can quote something nobody has yet reported?

1) That continues to evolve , 10 years ago shooters and other games were almost unheard of , now you can get almost any genre on a phone and just as complex , sometimes its the same game with changed controls. The space continues to blur.

2) The last numbers I can find for Geforce now would be 10m subscribers and for MS game pass its 25m ? So I am not sure what you are saying. When MS talked about competition they hadn't even launched xcloud yet , it was still in beta.

3) I am talking about the gamepass subscription. You can say its schoolyard-ish all you want but its an accurate way to discribe something. MS copied a lot of what sega was doing and were able to propel console gaming to the online era that we are in now. It was great that MS stepped in to fill that void. It ended up with Sony making much better products and nintendo... well let them be quirky

4) I mean people were talking about it before talks of MS buying it came up. This was 9 months before everyone was shocked by the announcement of MS buying bethesda
Jan 2020 https://www.pushsquare.com/news/202...da_parent_company_zenimax_and_all_its_studios
The number they were bidding was obviously less than Microsoft

5) For all games to be on Playstation.
6) well guess thats it and easy for a playsation gamer to know where to get it. much better than buying a game that is missing content cause one company paid for a marketing deal.

7) Yes it will be on steam. No where has Sony confirmed that all future games from Bungine will be on Xbox. I mean it wouldn't be that hard for sony to confirm would it. Isn't that what you want Ms to do ? So why not sony. Sony just has to say we are confirming that every game bungie makes now and forever will be on xbox. Sounds simple right ?

Anyway its not worth continuing. Its obvious by the way you approach what sony says and ms says and blindly accept one and not the other even though its the same

 

[Silent_Buddha]

One thing to consider. Regardless of whether or not Sony allows there to be an official Game Pass Cloud Streaming app on PlayStation, there's a good chance that most TVs that a consumer will hook their PlayStation up to will eventually have a native Game Pass app available in the TV itself. Currently it's only on select Samsung TVs but MS would certainly like it to be available across as many TV sets as possible.

Regards,
SB

 

[Deleted member 11852]

That continues to evolve , 10 years ago shooters and other games were almost unheard of , now you can get almost any genre on a phone and just as complex , sometimes its the same game with changed controls. The space continues to blur.

Mobile gaming certainly includes the same genres, but full on console/PC experiences like Rome Total War are incredibly rare. And there is a reason for this, part of it is that smaller screen devices with touch UIs do need to consider complexity of controls, and the other is that the vast majority of mobile games are designed to pick-up and put in a very short bursts which is why they're almost all designed shorts bursts of gameplay. This is very different to home consoles which have games with deep mechanics, or sprawling cinematic adventures. Where is the mobile equivalent of Unchartered? Gear of War? Mass Effect? Spider-Man? Halo? Ratchet & Clank? Cyberpunk 2077? God of War? The Witcher? Fable? The Last of Us?

2) The last numbers I can find for Geforce now would be 10m subscribers and for MS game pass its 25m ? So I am not sure what you are saying. When MS talked about competition they hadn't even launched xcloud yet , it was still in beta.

You're comparing Geforce Now (a streaming service) with GamePass, not Xbox Cloud. The number Microsoft gave recently was 10m.

I absolutely believe steaming games is the eventual future for everybody but right now streaming games is limited by where you live/want to game, which dictates which services are available due to locality, which dictates which are offered and your internet connection will dictate the quality of the video, audio and basic experience which is tied to latency.

I am talking about the gamepass subscription. You can say its schoolyard-ish all you want but its an accurate way to discribe something. MS copied a lot of what sega was doing and were able to propel console gaming to the online era that we are in now. It was great that MS stepped in to fill that void. It ended up with Sony making much better products and nintendo... well let them be quirky

So were Microsoft copying Sony when they went into the mature video games industry? Or were they just pursuing a new business venture? And yes.. competition is great. And this is why this entire thread exists!

I mean people were talking about it before talks of MS buying it came up. This was 9 months before everyone was shocked by the announcement of MS buying bethesda

So it was idle speculation then, or as your Push Square article calls it, "a ridiculous rumour".

Anyway its not worth continuing. Its obvious by the way you approach what sony says and ms says and blindly accept one and not the other even though its the same

I agree it's pointless containing. I don't take anything either company says at face value, but I think it ironic you said this above. My mind is literally blown right now.

 

[Nesh]

Mobile gaming certainly includes the same genres, but full on console/PC experiences like Rome Total War are incredibly rare. And there is a reason for this, part of it is that smaller screen devices with touch UIs do need to consider complexity of controls, and the other is that the vast majority of mobile games are designed to pick-up and put in a very short bursts which is why they're almost all designed shorts bursts of gameplay. This is very different to home consoles which have games with deep mechanics, or sprawling cinematic adventures. Where is the mobile equivalent of Unchartered? Gear of War? Mass Effect? Spider-Man? Halo? Ratchet & Clank? Cyberpunk 2077? God of War? The Witcher? Fable? The Last of Us?



You're comparing Geforce Now (a streaming service) with GamePass, not Xbox Cloud. The number Microsoft gave recently was 10m.

I absolutely believe steaming games is the eventual future for everybody but right now streaming games is limited by where you live/want to game, which dictates which services are available due to locality, which dictates which are offered and your internet connection will dictate the quality of the video, audio and basic experience which is tied to latency.


So were Microsoft copying Sony when they went into the mature video games industry? Or were they just pursuing a new business venture? And yes.. competition is great. And this is why this entire thread exists!



So it was idle speculation then, or as your Push Square article calls it, "a ridiculous rumour".


I agree it's pointless containing. I don't take anything either company says at face value, but I think it ironic you said this above. My mind is literally blown right now.

At this point its pretty obvious he has double or wrong standards about what competition is and what are the benefits of proper competition.

 

[eastmen]

Don't worry about it according to Famitsu and Phil xbox has jesus for 2023

https://twitter.com/x/status/1571106349752242176

They will corner the christian market

Game pass is also virtuous

https://twitter.com/x/status/1571106844894167040

Also hung out with Kojima a lot

https://twitter.com/x/status/1570972365504532482

 

[see colon]

Sony has been asked this several times. Future Bungie will not be PlayStation consoles exclusive. The proposed terms of Sony buying Bungie leaves creative control in the hands of Bungie. Bungie are not becoming a PlayStation Studio. There has been no talk of "case by case" decisions, unless you can quote something nobody has yet reported?

Bungie's example is an interesting one, because while Sony and Bungie have stated there was no mandate for exclusivity, it was never guaranteed that and Xbox version of future Bungle titles would be made. And that is sort of the issue at hand in Sony's objection to the Activision purchase. They want to mandate Call of Duty be released on Playstation, and not leave that up to the studio heads or parent company.

This would be like Netflix trying to force DC movies and TV shows to appear on their service after the HBO/Discovery merger and the sale of The CW. But that didn't happen. For those who don't know that history, Netflix had agreements to bring most if not all of The CW's content to Netflix very soon after the season finale of those showed aired. Most reports indicate that The CW never made money on it's first run programing, but made up for it by selling it's streaming rights. The CW was owned by CBS and Warner Bros, and is in a pending sale to Nextar post HBO/Discorvery merger. Once the Nextar sale was announced, most of the CD comics shows began getting cancelled. As far as I've read, Nextflix hasn't tried to force The CW to produce shows or promise streaming rights after any current agreements end. It would look pretty silly if they did.

 

[Nesh]

Don't worry about it according to Famitsu and Phil xbox has jesus for 2023

https://twitter.com/x/status/1571106349752242176

They will corner the christian market

Game pass is also virtuous

https://twitter.com/x/status/1571106844894167040

Also hung out with Kojima a lot

https://twitter.com/x/status/1570972365504532482

Not sure if serious or just trolling

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Bungie's example is an interesting one, because while Sony and Bungie have stated there was no mandate for exclusivity, it was never guaranteed that and Xbox version of future Bungle titles would be made. And that is sort of the issue at hand in Sony's objection to the Activision purchase. They want to mandate Call of Duty be released on Playstation, and not leave that up to the studio heads or parent company.

This is exactly what Sony want, and what Microsoft don't want to commit too. And I think you can see why both companies want the impossible and why there is no achievable middle-ground - assuming regulators feel it is their role to make that decision.

I'm not keen on using video steaming/distribution as a good analogy for video game exclusivity for two reasons. One, the scale and economics are completely different as is the risk/reward/timelines for developing TV/movie content versus video games, but also because the distribution rights situation in TV/movies is incredibly fragmented across regions. In part this is because the number and composition of broadcaster/distrbutors/streamers in different regions are very different, but everybody making the content wants it to be available to as wide a market as possible, albeit not not necessarily on the same timetable, which introduces greater risk of loss due to piracy. This leads to Star Trek being on Netflix UK but not Netflix US and hundreds of others bonkers scenarios.

With videoganes under major publishers, it's mostly all or nothing.

 

[eastmen]

Bungie's example is an interesting one, because while Sony and Bungie have stated there was no mandate for exclusivity, it was never guaranteed that and Xbox version of future Bungle titles would be made. And that is sort of the issue at hand in Sony's objection to the Activision purchase. They want to mandate Call of Duty be released on Playstation, and not leave that up to the studio heads or parent company.

This would be like Netflix trying to force DC movies and TV shows to appear on their service after the HBO/Discovery merger and the sale of The CW. But that didn't happen. For those who don't know that history, Netflix had agreements to bring most if not all of The CW's content to Netflix very soon after the season finale of those showed aired. Most reports indicate that The CW never made money on it's first run programing, but made up for it by selling it's streaming rights. The CW was owned by CBS and Warner Bros, and is in a pending sale to Nextar post HBO/Discorvery merger. Once the Nextar sale was announced, most of the CD comics shows began getting cancelled. As far as I've read, Nextflix hasn't tried to force The CW to produce shows or promise streaming rights after any current agreements end. It would look pretty silly if they did.

Yes except that the Netflix parable is industry standard. Disney bought fox and started removing fox programming from non Disney platforms as contracts ended. It's just the way the industry works when a company is purchased. Some might not want to admit it but for many out there gaming content is just as disposable as tv shows or movies. To keep people paying for Disney + or Discovery + or Game pass you need a continuous stream of new content. The content can vary as you don't need Oscar quality new movies you can put out a crappy live action remake of pinoccho and people will watch it cause they have the subscription anyway. But you do need things popular enough to keep subscribers looking forward to. So for Disney plus it be your Star wars and marvel shows that generate buzz for people to stay subscribed.

If I can subcribe to disney + and get the marvel shows and star wars shows or I can subscribe to netflix and get them all too plus the netflix stuff why would I subscribe to disney plus ?

 

[see colon]

Yes except that the Netflix parable is industry standard. Disney bought fox and started removing fox programming from non Disney platforms as contracts ended.

This is true for subscription services, but you can buy/rent Disney/Marvel/Star Wars/Fox movies almost anywhere. The Batman is on HBO, but I can also buy or rent it in the Microsoft Store. They aren't exactly exclusives in the way that we think of video game exclusives.

 

[eastmen]

This is true for subscription services, but you can buy/rent Disney/Marvel/Star Wars/Fox movies almost anywhere. The Batman is on HBO, but I can also buy or rent it in the Microsoft Store. They aren't exactly exclusives in the way that we think of video game exclusives.

That is a relic of the way the movie and tv industry used to function. You used to put a movie in a thearter have it run for 3 months then 6 months later put it on vhs then dvd then bluray and finally it would go to syndication. This has been going on almost all my life since the early 80s when the home market started. But listen to Matt Damon , the dvd/bluray sales are dwindling as a revenue market. So soon you won be able to do that. Right now if I wanted to see the mandlorian or boba fett the only option is streaming on disney plus . I'd wager once dvd/bluray sales hit a critical point that they will simply stop selling them and we are accelerating to that point really quickly. I'd even wager that as something like Disney + and Discovery hits critical mass and cable subscribers dwindle there will be even less ways to watch it.

All the industries have their own baggage to shed and all have their own ebs and flows. Like with music there are some artists exclusively on some streaming services and some podcasts like Rogan only on certain platforms. But a lot of music can still be bought on cd and records. I have a feeling that the cd market will eventually collapse. CDs are still one of the highest quality formats on the market. But amazon/spotify/tidal/apple are all introducing higher and higher quality options. Eventually those will be standard on streaming platforms and I think that is when cds go away. Records are different people buy them for many reasons but I don't think they will ever become the standard anymore.

Even with video games. The pc started in the late 90s to switch over to digital only. How many pc games have gotten physical releases in these last 5-10 years? On the console the change over started happening later and its only continuing to progress with more digital purchases now than physical. Last gen we had only one console refresh half way through that was digital only but now both MS and Sony have digital only console models at the start of the generation. It will only pick up steam... heh see what i did there.

If anything the streaming options are going to allow a lot more people to play console games at a much lower buy in. If you don't want to buy a console you can subscribe to game pass and play it on devices you already own. I am sure that sony's option will be on just as many devices in the coming year. Same goes with all the other players on the market.

 

[see colon]

That is a relic of the way the movie and tv industry used to function. You used to put a movie in a thearter have it run for 3 months then 6 months later put it on vhs then dvd then bluray and finally it would go to syndication. This has been going on almost all my life since the early 80s when the home market started. But listen to Matt Damon , the dvd/bluray sales are dwindling as a revenue market. So soon you won be able to do that. Right now if I wanted to see the mandlorian or boba fett the only option is streaming on disney plus . I'd wager once dvd/bluray sales hit a critical point that they will simply stop selling them and we are accelerating to that point really quickly. I'd even wager that as something like Disney + and Discovery hits critical mass and cable subscribers dwindle there will be even less ways to watch it.

Except this exact thing is what has been happening with Playstation titles. The first run is on Playstation consoles, and then they "home video" it onto Steam and Epic. It's a relic of movies that shows the current movements in video games.