UK Government Investigating Xbox's Activision Buyout Further

I don't think people realize how much damage this deal is going to do to the entire gaming industry if it goes through. Microsoft is working themselves toward a monopoly and people seem to not give a damn.

Does this mean it won't go through if the UK doesn't agree?

It’ll go through. Any concerns the UK Gov have, will be settled by MSFT. It’ll take them a little bit longer, but it’s still going to go through.

@Snake_V5 IIRC, it basically needs to be approved everywhere that the company operates from. I’m not sure whether that’s everywhere that ActiBlizz operate or everywhere that Microsoft as a whole operate though.

If Randox bought Activision the UK government would've sanctioned it before the signature had even dried on the paperwork.

Embracer buy everything, no one cares.
Ms buy some ips that do well on other platforms and commit to still releasing them elsewhere, everyone loses their minds. Who cares?

@AdamNovice I mean, those two statements still work together and can be correct.

The deal will go through we all know that, the honest question is what affect it will have on the gaming industry in the long term? One thing is certain though, Gamepass subscription prices WILL increase once this is finalised, you can be assured of that

@Dr_Luigi they have to make money somehow right?

@AdamNovice This. He’s been out there repeatedly saying COD would still be coming to PS, but we know he talks out of the corner of his mouth all the time, leaving out key details on purpose. If there’s anything we’ve learned over the last few years it’s this: Do Not Trust Corporations.

The issue isn't COD leaving, it's COD on a $15 service for "free" every month and $70 on Playstation. We can't know for sure, but a subscription-based gaming market WILL affect development. At this point though, I don't think there's enough negative evidence to block a deal like this, besides the absurd amount of money, MS is saying all the right things, and Sony will technically not LOSE any of these popular IP.

Like almost everything else in the world its all about money. Take Life of P coming to GamePass day one for example, on PS you have to spend 60 quid for it. PS simply can't afford the tens of millions for new games to be day one on plus. If you think a company with a trillion compared to a company with many billions is nothing just look at both Xbox and PS latest big acquisitions, one being 70 bil with up to 50 odd games or more and the other being 3 bil with just one game. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't throwing many a millions per game on almost every 3rd party game for it to be on GamePass day one exclusively on their sub already a huge manipulation of the market just as much as spending 70 bil on a huge acquisition

I feel like I shouldn't have to say this again, but Microsoft lies about everything. They said they wouldn't make Bethesda games exclusive before that deal closed and now look what they're doing. They said they don't put effort into making other platforms smaller and every show they've done this year they try to pretend other platforms don't even exist.
Microsoft will say anything to get what they want. And when this deal closes, don't be surprised when their rhetoric changes completely.

@Beerheadgamer82 Exactly. There’s reporting that MS paid $600,000 to put Cooking Simulator on Gamepass. Cooking Simulator. I can only imagine what they’re paying to get bigger AAA games and high profile indies on the service and they’re doing it for almost every third party game that comes out, which absolutely hurts sales of those games everywhere else.

@Shstrick it was rumoured that Xbox payed 5 or 10 mil for an already 1 year old game Guardians of the Galaxy to be on GamePass. If true I can't imagine how much it would cost Life of P to be day one

What should also be noted from the above is the commitment from MicroSoft to ensure the SAME version of the game arrives on PlayStation on the same day. It should be remembered that this is not currently the state of play, wherein PlayStation gets the better version of the game including more content that is withheld from the Xbox community for a full year, at which point it becomes irrelevant because the next iteration of the game is released and the cycle repeats itself. So ultimately, when it comes to this one statement, it doesn't mean that PlayStation will be getting anything different or less than they would usually expect, only that both PlayStation and Xbox will be getting the same content. Therefore, I cannot see an issue here...

Think the deal will go ahead but maybe our government will do something good and put in some clauses that mean MS have to ensure Sony get all of the games still: might work in our favour this.

MS have gone for this acquisition more for the mobile gains than for cod.

But Sony is right to be concerned - they lose the marketing. Sony gamers shouldn’t be concerned though…nothings going to change for you. It’s doubtful xbox will exploit the cod marketing the same way PlayStation has.
What is pretty hilarious is the UK government concern that could lead to ‘worse terms’ for their rivals… Doesn’t Sonys marketing deals already do this?…exclusive betas, early access trying the game, timed exclusive game modes, timed exclusive map packs…
Nearly every marketing deal Sonys doing with third party offer exclusive content…these is not leading to ‘worse terms’ for Xbox gamers?

If MS were only interested in cod they should have just bought the marketing rights for it for this generation.

@nookie_egg - Look to Microsoft acquiring Rare and you'll understand people's concern when they make an acquisition, Rare was once a top-tier developer before being acquired by Microsoft, now they're basically a joke, a mere shell of what they once were.
Hell so far every acquisition Microsoft has made in the last 4-5 years has barred no fruit for its players, and yes games take time to make, but considering PlayStation was not given the same courtesy from 2013-2015, I see why people don't want to give Xbox/Microsoft the same courtesy, especially considering Xbox's so-so track record since 2016.

All makes perfect sense. MS trying to get around things by claiming they are not (immediately) going to stop these franchises on PlayStation is deliberately missing the point that, long term, they are just going to look to get around things by saying “it can be in PlayStation, if Sony allow it through Gamepass”. This is what must not be allowed to happen. Nobody, whether your favourite box is made by MS, Sony, or other, should want a company with the financial clout of MS being able to buy dominance. Dominance by one company is not good for consumers.

@SinfulDestroyer
Tencent aren’t a platform holder, either physical or subscription. If they were then we would care more.

@mrtennis1990 Don’t be soft. What possible ‘damage’ is this going to do? Not allow you to get exclusive content on games that are sold the same price on both platforms?

The only possible ‘damage’ MS purchases could possibly lead to is you having the option to pay for gamepass on a PlayStation console - or have the option to pay for gamepass on your tv…on your phone…on your Nintendo console…etc
It’s not going to lead to you requiring to buy an Xbox…that’s never been the plan.

@Dr_Luigi exactly

we are committed to making the same version of Call of Duty available on PlayStation on the same day the game launches elsewhere

Means: "we're totally willing to let GamePass onto PlayStation so those gamers can stream COD. So, Sony, do you also want COD to be playable through a PlayStation?"

@Dr_Luigi because it's so big is exactly why they'd want it exclusive to GamePass. To drive subscriber numbers.

Minecraft is different in that it's not a new game every year, so that wouldn't be worth the bad PR of removing it from other platforms. But COD won't be removed, just the new games will be on GamePass.

This is basically a formality at this point. I'm sure MS would go through with the acquisition so long its approved in the US, even if the UK was stubborn enough to prevent them from publishing in the country.

"access on much worse terms" would be forced to get a gamepass sub on PS to play any of those games imo. But who am I, everyone loves subs these days.

COD will arguably be better value on Xbox. Avengers was arguably better value on Playstation. Or another example, COD on Playstation has had it’s exclusive modes. But now everyone in the comments wants parity and equal value across the consoles lol.

You can watch Thor or Dr Strange on Disney plus as part of your sub; or you can pay £13.99 on another service and watch it there. Choice is good.

@AdamNovice comment #8 yea it’s a bad value proposition but there are games on PS Plus that aren’t on Gamepass at the moment; so you can buy them on Xbox or save money and get them as part of your subscription on Playstation. And vice versa. So…. What is the issue?

@Dr_Luigi For me, my stance will always be “don’t trust the trillion dollar corporation regardless of what they say and regardless of past precedent they seem to have set.” I’ll believe what they’re saying about COD not being exclusive in 5 or 6 years when existing contracts with PS are up.

Not that I disagree with everything you’re saying in this thread. I think you’ve been pretty insightful. I just think MS doesn’t really have to worry about the revenue lost making COD exclusive because of a few things:

1) they’re in the top 3 (maybe number 1 at this point) richest companies in the world, so I can see then being willing to lose tons of money to become the market leader in the long run

2) the Activision acquisition includes a lot of other big IP besides COD, so they could feasibly make up for lost revenue through those other IP (I.e. “we’re losing money on COD, but we’re raking it in from Diablo Immortal, World of Warcraft, and Overwatch 2 microtransactions, so who cares?”)

3) having COD exclusive to Xbox and Gamepass would be titanic in terms of gaining mindshare from the average gamer that plays COD every year. I know a lot of people that play COD regularly that would gladly jump ship from PS if it meant they could keep playing their favorite series.

That was a lot to type so I probably won’t respond anymore, but I appreciate the discussion . You seem like one of the good ones here, so I’ll probably keep reading what you write. Keep on keeping on!

@Fiendish-Beaver

both PlayStation and Xbox will be getting the same content. Therefore, I cannot see an issue here...

But it's not fair that poor Sony won't be able to pay AB anymore to make the non-PS versions of CoD inferior by locking content away from them!!!

And as has been said by some, this will just lead to MS dominating, increasing prices of games, and lowering quality! Eventually they will just give us Remasters for $70 and spend years patching their latest release of Horizon... oh wait... Sony is already doing that... huh...

@Dr_Luigi what are you talking about? Making the same version available is exactly what they said.

Lmao it feels like theyve had to say call of duty is still going to be on playstation every other month. And still nobody believes them god damn

I'm more worried about Tencent who little by little buy stakes of a company before devouring it whole. I rather Microsoft buy everything IF we have to choose between evil or dictatorial evil aka China.

All these companies that are purchased by either Tencent or NetEase should immediately be asked after stating how much freedom they now have "Is Taiwan a sovereign country?" Just watch as they twist themselves into pretzels with ultimately stating "new phone who dis?"

If COD went to gamepass I’d still buy it on PlayStation because that’s where I prefer to game.

@Shstrick idk man. I don’t believe a dev cares much about WHERE their game sells, as long as it sells or makes money. If they strike a deal with a Xbox, and are happy with the contract and payment, and still make sales elsewhere… who cares.

@Dr_Luigi that also doesn't mean a native PS version. That's your interpretation. In fact, very rarely do people use the term "same version" to refer to two different versions (Xbox version and PS version). It would've been much more natural to say "it will release on PS" if they meant there'll be a native PS version. They even say it'll be "available" not that'll it'll release or launch...

Statements like these are always very carefully worded so that they're not technically lying.

Silly Microsoft. They may fool some, but they know full well they intend to release Activision-Blizzard content for pennies on the dollar via Game Pass on Xbox, but $70 elsewhere. Simply commiting (for now) to release the game on all platforms doesn't mean you cannot be anti-competitive with it. They could do simple things beyond Game Pass like making Xbox the lead development platform (or other more dubious things) to ensure the Xbox versions are always better, etc.

Microsoft taking two major publishers, including the largest one, off the table to make up for decades of neglect with their first party is a bad thing for the industry any way you slice it.

@SplooshDmg Honestly, I want Sony to be the company I loved during the PS2 and PS4 generations, but what we get now is what happens every time a console becomes dominant for a generation. Concerns of price hikes and quality drops should be expressed, but not without realizing that Sony is doing that right now to all of us.

Sony needs some real competition, even if that means the competitors end up buying some third party developers and publishers.

@PenguinLtd "I think governments have left it too late to stop these monopolies"

For the last 40 years, western governments have been run on Neolib principles. They actively want monoplies.

@nookie_egg Neither Embracer or Tencent are platform holders, nor do they offer any kind of subscription service.

The more I think about the fact Sony pays for exclusive content in COD every year; the more pathetic they sound whinging about it all not being fair.

@AdamNovice ...and?

It's called "competition". Either step up, or don't.

Sony prides itself on having games that are available nowhere else but in Sony's ecosystem. It's only now branching out the PC - but, even then, the new games are on the console first for an undisclosed amount of time before they are dropped on PC. So that still makes the PlayStation the most viable option for Sony's titles due to possible FOMO.

I mean, just because the game is on Game Pass doesn't mean the game isn't for sale on Xbox for the same price as on PlayStation.

Game Pass is still a choice, not a requirement.

It actually ends up being about $10 more expensive to only subscribe to Game Pass Ultimate to play COD than it is to buy the game at $70 and then pay for Xbox Live Gold for a year (assuming you pay in 3-month increments): $170 vs $180.

Now, if Season Pass stuff for the game is also covered in GPU, then it changes things in terms of value. But it's possible that could still be a charge no matter what.

There is a precedent to this if you look at Doom Eternal. Only the base game is available on Game Pass, the extra stuff is still behind a pay wall.

The real bargain is for people who don't care about the multiplayer and get the base Game Pass subscription for one month, finish the game, and delete it and don't renew their subscription. Those individuals probably don't make up the bulk of the target audience, though.

I am sure it stings a little on this side of the aisle; but, again, that's competition for you. Does it make Xbox more appealing? Of course! But Sony's first-party titles ALSO make PlayStation more appealing to people. That's competition.

All regulators care about is if the deal prevents other companies from fairly competing. It doesn't.

I know MLB The Show is a tough pill to swallow on the PlayStation side of things when it drops on Game Pass Day 1. However, I am sure there is nothing stopping Sony from following suit and adding MLB The Show to PS Plus on Day 1. I am very interested in how that deal went down as I would think Sony would have to have gotten some money from the deal - money I am sure it was happy to receive despite the emotions of the PlayStation fan base.

As someone who owns a Series X (and a PS5 and a Switch), I want this to go through.

I want this deal to go through so I can play Activision Blizzard games on Game Pass - most especially the PC side of things as I couldn't give two hoots about COD: I want the prospect of PC versions of Blizzard's back catalog on Game Pass (my Surface Book 2 has an Nvidia 1060 6GB GPU, but it is still a mobile chipset, so it's not the best for modern games).

Yep, I am selfish and cheap (I get Game Pass for free and would be the one to get it for a month, play the game, and cancel if I was paying for it). Sorry, not sorry.

"The firm likens the acquisition to its previous purchase of Minecraft developer Mojang"

Great, so playstation will still get all future diablo, crash and spyro games

@mrtennis1990 I agree.

Look if Microsoft kept them independent and the games could still be released multiplatform and Xbox get certain perks then so be it that's more than fair if however they take it all away then obviously I don't agree so there has to be some leeway to Microsoft owning Activision.

@K1LLEGAL have you forgotten all about the PS3 and 360 gen when Xbox had exclusivity deals with CoD and a 1 year exclusivity deal with a Tomb Raider game or did that slip your mind

Apart from guaranteeing day 1 gamepass release,note also that Xbox's get out of jail monopoly P.R. dice roll is all about COD?
Nowhere are they promising (in between their previously stated aims of "reviving" other old IP's),that other games would definitely get PS releases.
Do I believe this will stop the deal? Unlikely...not in this day & age of Disney,Apple, Google, megacorps.

If the sales goes trough and all Activision games get on game pass day one than the UK will loose a lot of money from physical sales.
PlayStation is much bigger in the UK so all sales from physical disks for both console will evaporate instantly. Xbox doesn't sell the game but only the pass that is in their own financial system so the UK tax payer will see taxes rise eventually.

@Beerheadgamer82 didn’t slip my mind as everyone loves going back to the Rise of the Tomb Raider example. It’s brought up on like a weekly basis here. And yea so what? I’m not on about general exclusivity deals; we could do that all day regarding Square Enix or even Deathloop/Ghostwire etc. I’m just saying, regarding COD. Sony basically sounds like a big baby (the best way I know how to put it). HOWEVER; maybe they are acting up on purpose to try and dramatically stop the acquisition as a last ditch attempt. Doesn’t stop it being the case though.

Jeez guys, if all these games ended up on Gamepass don’t you think it would make Playstation have to step up and make their service better? E.g. healthy competition?

@Dr_Luigi unless Microsoft will give Activision tonnes of money to produce the type of games @AdamNovice is referring to then obviously look at the situation as Microsoft wont need to pay anything to put the games on gamepass and won't make as much money if they just put them on gamepass but they will attract more people but the cost of one gamepass sub doesn't equate to £70 game on PS5 for example.

When you times 100 subs by their price and then times 100 people buying a full game who will you earn more money from in one month?

On the other side some people can leave the sub whenever they want if it was really up to them and not stay with gamepass and then they lose that business from gamers who may only buy one month to play Cod then Microsoft again have lost on a sale of a normal retail price bought game.

@itsfoz and that clause should require Final Fantasy games on Xbox, right?

@CielloArc '...nor do they offer any kind of subscription service."

Not yet.

Microsoft is building their service around extremely popular franchises and multiplayer games. Smart. Sony is trying to play catch up with their future titles. Right now though staring down a service that ties in all these major franchises is tough. Especially given that Microsoft has both deeper pockets and a lower cost of running the service since they own the servers.

@K1LLEGAL nothing wrong with competition. Although 2 or 3 years ago Phil Spencer said himself he doesn't see Playstation or Nintendo as his competition. Now I'm not really sure what he means by that but if you look at Xbox strategy over the last few years I'd have to agree with him, that they aren't competition anymore. Pouring multiple hundreds of millions into many 3rd party games coming to GamePass day one exclusively on their sub, 7.5 bil Bethesda, 70 bil ActiBlizz, Ninja Theory and many more....... Phil knows PS or Ninty can't compete with billions when he has trillion. Healthy competition where

Xbox and GamePass are bad for the industry.

Was from Day 1, certainly is now.

Its also not profitable and only sustainable because of Microsofts deep pockets.

@get2sammyb

In my opinion, all it's going to take is one change in leadership at Microsoft for everything to come crumbling down.

Disagreements on Game Pass sustainability aside, this is true basically everywhere. I would say the current leadership on PlayStation is slowly taking the platform in the wrong direction, but again, that's opinion.

Point being, any bad leader can sink the greatest of companies, be it by changing too drastically in the wrong direction (Example: Nintendo during the N64/GC years,) or refusing to change when the world changes under your feet (example: Blockbuster Video.)

Gamepass will destroy gaming as we know it ,in 10 years time traditional gaming will be dead, all we will have is a multitude of cheap mobile style games,the epic 30 to 40 hr games will be gone.

@Toypop innovators ?

@SplooshDmg

What’s wrong with the Dualsense?

It’s the most comfortable controller Sony has ever released. And it’s much better made than the Dualshock 4 was.

@SplooshDmg what do you hate about the dual sense ,the only difference i see is the haptic feedback and adaptive triggers ,you do know you can turn that off right ?

Call me old and refusing to change, but I personally like the Dual Shock 4 controller way more than the Dual Sense. A personal thing, but I find it much easier to hit the option and share buttons without ever accidentally touching the touchpad, for one. I also like the smaller form factor and the full shaped (round) home button vs the molded PS logo button. And like the feel of a smaller form factor, too. It's also lighter.

I also happen to have like 6 or 8 DS4 controllers and it would had been a lot cheaper to have multiplayer couch games with house guests if I could just use that controller on all PS5 games, it's not like I seen a single game that requires any of the Dual Sense features to play, much less multiplayer ones.

Considering the Gates Foundation pumps hundreds of millions of pounds into the UK economy and government funding every year there is zero chance this will get opposed.

@Tasuki every company including Xbox in the gaming industry is allowed a slice of the gaming pie profits just as much as PS, Nintendo and everyone else is. PS purchased Insomniac for a few hundred million which comes with a few games made by 1 big team, Bungie a little over 3 billion with one game from 1 big team. Now then just look at all the different development teams included in the Bethesda ActiBlizz deals, there's literally hundreds of different games and different companies of developers within Beth and ActiBlizz. PS spending barely more than a few billion on recent acquisitions compared to almost 80 billion on Xbox recent acquisitions. Huge differences not only in price difference but the huge amount of games and developers they come with

@Royalblues Yeah it's strange. Just Embracer alone would be more of a monopoly than MS, and they are nowhere near that status. I'd absolutely expect this deal to go through, even if ms have to make some people's back pockets a bit heavier, but doubt it would even come to that.

@CielloArc Not yet at least, they have enough ip to do some kind of subscription option each, with more to come at a pretty steady pace.

@JustPlainLoco I mean I can't comment on the quality of Rare stuff as I only ever played Banjo at a mates house on N64, but that doesn't have much to do with this deal. If they buy the whole publisher and list of ip, it's theirs to do what they see fit with, if that means tucking it away in a vault never to be used again, so be it.

It'll all go through in the end with no issues. Money talks in all big industries. It reminds me of a really attractive looking woman picking an ugly rich man with a nice car but with a small you know what and a vile personality to go with it. Edit I'm going off on side paths again, apologies

This is all about one game series which will eventually be out of favour. Let Microsoft spend all their cash for a short term gain and let the next big thing move in.

@Dr_Luigi No for a sub like Gamepass I can probably agree with you that most gamers will take on annual passes and not just month by month basis but going on some things I do notice some people like to get a months say PS Plus or used to be PS Now to play a game to save them money which I can imagine some may do the same for Gamepass which saves spending money buying a game if they can just buy it on the pass for cheap to tryout.

No true sometimes I have to check the dates of my renewels etc.

Don't get me wrong you save a tonne of money by having the sub and rightly so.

This is true that people spend money in other areas where Push Square had done an article on how much Sony have made on the DLC side of things which brings in the most money for them, not that we are talking about Sony.

I do agree that Microsoft probably believe that it will succeed and it definitely is at this moment but is there a point where they find that one day it won't be cost effective anymore...then prices will rise.

I am surprised they manage to bring most day one releases to GamePass but I guess their money helps them bring them to the sub as they have no issue to cut some corners to bring savings to the gamers with the sub.

Gamepass brings Huge value I just hope it doesn't effect budgets for the likes of Cod and other games as this is a big sale.

@Dr_Luigi Too optimistic. The vast majority of people now subscribe using the cheap upgrade gwg pathway or sub through third world countries. If they really charge 15 per month or stricter with accounts sharing, no doubt a lot will leave. At the moment, it seems sustainable as they only release very few (most not so well received) first party games since its launch and make up with small independent games instead. Coincident or not, almost all of these 3rd party D1 independent games are available to rival services like PS plus or Epic at some point for free. Once they start release AAA first party games from studios they bought, that’s when to make assessment whether this is really sustainable without MS deep pocket.

And when will they hit this next stage?

@Dr_Luigi No one is contradicting. I told you above it may be sustainable now as they have only released very few first-party games since launch and mostly padded with 3rd party independent games. The real thing is when they start releasing their big first-party games.

I would say that isn't the loophole, MS just deliberately allows it to increase sub base (since launch- that's where the great value comes from). Surely they would close gwg upgrade at some point, but the important question then is will people want to continue with that price? The thing is most gamers are tech-savvy, and a lot of people have been subscribing through much cheaper 3rd world countries (which they cannot close).

Of course, they believe what they are doing. But the thing is they have burned a lot of money through Nokia and multiple mobile failures before. The point is being one of the richest companies, they have enough money to test the water.

@Dr_Luigi Dont underestimate the power of sharing among people. A lot of people I know subscribe streaming services through various means/share or exchange their passwords.. Yes these non tech savvy people.
First party AAA games cost hundred of millions to develop and their big first party new gen halo game is mostly deserted now despite multiplayer component is completely free. Not sure that would be cheaper for them compared to paying 6 digit figure for simulator game. It will take a few years to see how this play out. But let’s see if they can keep at this price after they start releasing first party AAA games REGULARLY (although they will take the burn initially). Of note is all the movie streaming services keep raising their price once they get a foothold (and subsequently lost subscribers although I reckon games are not as easy to pirate as movies).

@UltimateOtaku91 Matt Booty has already confirmed all brand new Acti Blizz games will be exclusive, and MS will likely pull COD off Playstation once Sony's market share plummets

We are witnessing the end of Playstation, either they go 3rd party, or get bought out by Apple or Google

It is going to be weird, Crash Spyro, Tony Hawk etc games that made the PS1 no longer on the Playstation platform and exclusive to Xbox.

Sony doesn't have the money to compete, they can only afford low tier studios like Haven, Housemarq, Savage Games.

Even when they bought Bungie for $4B they have to keep them multiplat because they can't afford the exclusivity, Sony badly needs the $$ from the Xbox player base, where MS can easily afford to starve Playstation

Things are looking bad right now

@Ricoht2 Microsoft today have said call of duty will stay on playstation and have most likely signed something with the FTC to make sure they stick with it.

Also matt booty said games with big communities across multiple platforms won't be broken apart and expect "select" brand-new titles to be exclusive.

So not all new titles will be exclusive, diablo and overwatch games will still be on playstation and so will crash and spyro, whilst new IP's will be xbox exclusive

If the future of gaming does become subscription services then there's no doubt Microsoft will have the monopoly on that front

@UltimateOtaku91 MS own CEO has stated they aren't making concessions so no, MS hasn't signed anything nor will they

"GAMES" yes keyword GAMES, not franchises, not series, not IP's meaning new games would be exclusive, just like Hellblade 2, just like Outer Worlds 2, just Elder Scrolls 6

So yes, new games will be exclusive regardless of weather they'd existing IP's or not. Sony only has themselves to blame for failing

@SplooshDmg

I dunno it’s the only PlayStation controller I would truly call 100% perfect from a comfort standpoint for me. The only controller that rivals the Xbox 360 controller for my hand size and my relaxed grip style. I hold my controllers pretty loose compared to most people. Also I will say that I owned a Duke with my original Xbox and that thing was a mess. It had less to do with the size for me and more to do with the analog stick design and the off canted buttons. Didn’t feel right.

I could see how it isn’t for everyone. She’s a big girl; my best friend has small hands and he doesn’t find it nearly as comfortable as I find it, although he got used to it over time. The DualShocks were always a bit too small for my liking. I dealt with it because I grew up with the early ones and modified my grip accordingly. But by the DS4 I really wanted Sony to go with something a hair larger for the PS5.

The controller itself isn’t perfect though. The battery life is trash; no improvement from the Dualshock 4 in that department. And the adaptive triggers are annoying in most games. Only Astro and Returnal have used them well so far; I turn them off for every other game.

The haptic engine for rumble is very nice though and most games take good advantage of the feature. I wish more Switch games would use the haptic features of the Switch Pro Controller since I’m always on that platform too.

@Tharsman

I will agree that Sony shouldn’t have locked out DS4’s. That was a bone headed decision that I hope they rescind at some point. All it would take is a firmware update. Only game I’ve played that sort of requires the controller is Returnal since they map the alt-fire ADS to a full trigger press while prime fire ADS was a half press. It works surprisingly well on that game since the adaptive trigger stops half way through the press firmly. But it could work on a DS4 by remapping the Alt-Fire to L1 on the older pad. Just wouldn’t feel as nice.

Their lockout caused me issues because I found that I couldn’t use my fight-pad with PS5 versions of fighting games. I had one of those Hori six button Saturn style pads; I get one with every console I buy since I play a ton of fighting games.

I was hoping to just use the one I already have for PS5 titles. But it doesn’t work. I can use it for BC fighting games (like DOA6) on my PS5 but it won’t work with Mortal Kombat XI. So I had to end up using the Dualsense for MK11. And the Dualsense is suboptimal for fighting games; it’s the one area where I feel the DS4 was better. The smaller size of the DS4 pad and lighter weight made it easier to do a off handed claw grip so you could maintain multiple fingers on the buttons.

@Would_you_kindly they already got it sewn up ( subs services) they already have 70% plus of the subs according to Sony. And that's before Sony raised Thier prices and Xbox havent had any first party aaas this year next year will b diffrent

I blame Sony cause for years they have been stubborn no we can't put our games anywhere that isn't our console , while Microsoft was already putting games out on pc and now they got TV/phone/ tablet /pc while Sony was being stubborn ...now they playing catch up and I bet they are wishing they did it sooner

@SplooshDmg

Yeah they shouldn’t have locked out the DS4 controllers. That was a super stupid decision that gave Microsoft a nice battle hammer to beat Sony with, since the Series consoles work fine with all Xbox One controllers. Maybe if some new leadership gets in control they’ll rescind that decision; all it would take to fix it would be a firmware update adding full DS4 support. I don’t even think the games would need to be updated.

In my other reply I explained why I hated that they locked out DS4 controllers. Sony basically made my Hori Saturn controller useless for the PS5. It doesn’t work with any PS5 fighting games. And so far no one has released a full PS5 compatible six button fight pad for it. There’s some arcade sticks available, but I’m a pad player to the bone. I’m not going to learn stick because Sony made a bone headed decision.

While Microsoft can say anything now, we all know it's subject to change once the buyout goes through. Talk is cheap.

Sony really needs to just bend and knee and allow Game Pass on their platform, it isn't like PS + is ever going to be a real competitor especially with MS gobbling up and taking away publishers

Playstation has lost Bethesda, Activision (except COD) Blizzard (except Diablo 4 and Overwatch 2, you can be your ass that new Blizzard Survival game will never see the light of day on Playstation)

COD on Playstation...what does that tell you? One of the biggest money makers on Playstation is owned by their primary competitor, MS gets to dictate the terms. Yeah Sony has Destiny which is a big IP but no where near the likes of COD, Minecraft and Diablo

How long before MS buys Sega? There goes Sonic, Yakuza and Persona and all Atlus games from Playstation

Embracer Group? Bye bye Tomb Raider, Deus Ex and all the other 8 bajllion IP's that Embracer owns

BTW Fun Fact: The biggest gaming Platform on Earth right now is actually the Google Playstore

don’t worry guys ; actiblizz only makes multiplayer games so it’s not really a loss to you guys right ?

and on the flip side , those who didn’t fall victim to the fanboy curse have other ways to play 😁

@BeerIsAwesome That Has Always been Microsofts problem they wait until something get big and real popular then they swoop in and buy it.

@SplooshDmg ok fair comment

@Dr_Luigi The thing is though, most people don’t pay the full price for GamePass, when you keep stating that if x number of people pay monthly for the service, Microsoft make y. That isn’t the case.

For example, just the people I work with who all but one have an Xbox S as a secondary to their PlayStation, they all do what I do, go on sites like Gamvio and purchase a month of GamePass Ultimate for £1.30 or thereabouts.

Most people I see on forums who I have spoken to do the same, the four staff in my local Game Store also do similar.

So until Microsoft stop things like that being possible, their service will never make the money they wish.

As it’s £11.99 a month here in the UK, yet I haven’t met a person in the UK that pays that price a month. Not even close, like I’ve stated, I pay less than 10% of that.

@Dr_Luigi completely agreed. Despite using them and finding them good for my personal benefit, I’m not a fan of streaming services. I am fascinated with how it shall all go, from the music industry, film to gaming. It’s all interesting to me, like right now Microsoft gives me value for money, but that’s due to my essentially evading their actual £11.99 a month.

Once I’d have to pay that a month, it suddenly competes with my wallet and time with the likes of Disney Plus, Apple TV, Netflix etc.

That’s going to be a hard sell on me personally. I need family plans like Apples for things. With everything. Well, want not need, you know what I mean haha.

'Microsoft has published a response on its official website where it reiterates its commitment to ensuring future Call of Duty games launch on PlayStation platforms' PURE BS!!! :-/ I really hope Microsoft doesn't get this deal but saying that then they might go for someone I do want to still be on PlayStation. Hmm, I don't know what to think now

@Get-Real lol, new troll account made 20 minutes ago. Move along pal

@Shepherd_Tallon Sony doesn't really have the IP or desirable games to compete wtih Nintendo, even they know this which is why they spend so much time and resources moneyhatting third party content

I mean seriously...an exclusive quest for Harry Potter?

@Get-Real it's not a problem for you now but as I'm sure you know once a company starts dominating the market & doesn't have any competition they get greedy

@Ricoht2 they aren't going to put gamepass on playstation because it would only benefit Microsoft they'd just see less sales from the ps store for games that are on gamepass

@Get-Real 🤣 I think we’ve all learned our lesson about trusting Sony recently, so no. But I do own a PlayStation and not an Xbox or gaming pc. As long as I can still play the games I like on the system I have and my money isn’t going directly to the CCP I don’t care who owns what.

@Toypop is that it ? A model they implemented because xbox was dead in the water and tech that only a small minority use ,way to go ms ,now if only they could get rid of the archaic AA batteries in there pads id be more impressed.

@Toypop so you stay up 24hrs playing games ? I find charging anything overnight whilst I'm sleeping ,usually does the trick for the whole day, cant think of any piece of tech these days that uses AA batteries, well apart from tv remotes and of course xbox pads.

@Toypop tell me you're in love with Phil spencer,without actually saying you love Phil spencer.

Oooh are we listing stuff that we have ,nah I wouldn't want to embarrass you like you have tried with me, one day you'll be mature enough to do it in a few lines,instead of a few paragraphs 😁

For people living in the EU, this would be the equivalent to China investigating MS.

@Dr_Luigi @Dr_Luigi For now they are making this far using firsty party exclusive promise. Have you seen this month gamepass entries? Completely rubbish. Do you simply they are making profits with dlc now? To survive, they need to make most games live services. Hence the latest Halo has gone into oblivion. Something are obvious that you don't even need to make assumption.

@Toypop nope I have all consoles, a pc ,a psvr and an oculus ,so I'm quite qualified to comment ,I also think gamepass is terrible for the industry,Phil spencer is a slimy toad of a man ,who couldn't answer a straight question if his life depended on it,I dont really see Sony as a villain, in what way exactly ?

@Toypop so what anti consumer practices are you actually referring to ? I buy keys from various regions for both consoles ,depending on parity ,although I do play on ps far more often as I find the xbox pad to be dreadful, it just feels cheap and nasty in comparison to the ps5s.,and no I don't want to buy an elite controller, ms should make a quality pad to go with their 500 quid console,I see a lot of talk about Sony charging 70 per game but I've never paid that much ,if you shop around you don't need to ,also ms charge the same, well thats if you want to buy and not rent

@PenguinLtd isn't that exactly what sony did and is still doing?

They have market lead in gaming so their surging pricing to 70 and just getting away with a bunch of awful anti consumer practices because no one gonna check them since most people have some sort of loyalty