Sony Is Acting Unfairly Against Xbox in Japan, US Congress Members Say

It is hilarious and won’t be the last we hear about Sonys practices

Money and influence is on MS’s side as always. Truth and morality be damned for the monopolistic satan.

Amusingly Sony have a far larger proportion of the EU and US market than they do Japan as far as I can see.

Poor Microsoft, can't people see they're the underdog??

Microsoft is only spending 69 billion for a few studios while Sony are being bullies by making Microsoft irrelevant in a very small market...

Smh, the audacity of some people 😤

And people, this is why I will never buy a MS product ever again. I'm sad even now that I bought a genuine copy of Windows in 2015 when I had a PC.

"Would someone think of the poor trillion-dollar corporation and their brave struggle against a considerably smaller and less powerful company?!"

You gotta love the reporting on most sites lately. If you have been following the Activision Blizzard deal you'd be aware it's the that regulators aren't interested in Nintendo, PC, Mobile etc. It was also the regulators that segregated them into categories not Microsoft. So why would Microsoft present figures to regulators that there gonna dismiss. It's a waste of time & money. Topic of contention is the high end console market PS Vs Xbox & cloud gaming.

Getting sad. Ms doesn't even try in Japan. And their gamers don't even want to pay for games. Ff15 and other Japanese titles likely barely sell on Xbox.

If xbox make great games for japanese audience, like nintendo, maybe sony (lol) will not hold monopoly in japan.

But seriously, it's mobile and nintendo that hold monopoly in there, not sony.

Maybe focus on gun control eh Washington? You know, actual important stuff.

this political crap is gettin outta hand now .

“ What do you think of this whole affair?”

i think both of them suck . where are my exclusives ?

@RawnDawn I mean they are hardly irrelevant to them if they fight that Activision acquisition so hard.

Yep, i couldnt believe it when i read this last night. Someone has clearly had a word to get this brought up. Surely there are bigger concerns in the world right now.

All the more reason this ridiculous fawning over 'little' microsoft needs to end.

Some people might not like Sony, but i guarantee they will dislike the gaming industry even more if Microsoft bulldozer Sony out of it.

I think Sony just needs to accept that the Activision Blizzard deal is going to go through now. They don't want to find themselves losing out on exclusivity deals elsewhere as a result of all of this.

I still vote PS4 / PS5 over than XBOX Series.
XBOX doesn't have exclusive kids games / family games like during Kinect era anymore.

Have they actually looked at the sales figures over there for both hardware and software? Although US Congress does seem a bit out of touch with reality following the Tiktok hearing 😂

Let's be honest, Sony's influence in its country of birth is dwarfed by Nintendo ever since Sony pulled the PSP and botched the Vita.

Perhaps Microsoft are fed up of constantly coming 3rd in the console market and aren't used to being a (relative) failure and are throwing all their toys out as it's happening again.

Given their laughable failure with Windoze Phones (anyone remember the fake burial of an iPhone and an Android one?), the XBone getting crushed compared to the PS4 & Switch, not to mention the unassailable PS2. Heck, even the PS3 managed to sell more units than the 360, so I'm kind of surprised they're not used to it by now. Perhaps they should bog off into software only land like Sega?

@Kevw2006
Unfortunately their reality is sticking up for those who give them / make them lots of money and jobs. If they can get a nationalist jab in there to win further support then they will.

The TikTok thing is fair enough though.

Washington, Microsoft's home state. In addition, the company is Cantwell's largest political donor, having forked over more than half a million dollars over the past few decades.

Half a million over 30yrs from employees of Microsoft who likely work in Washington and part of their Tax dollars happens to go their Senator does not make that Senator a PAID MS SHILL - Watch Hoeg's Law on it...

You have a Japanese company trying to dictate what 2 US based Company's can/cannot do for 'fear' of losing their Dominant position, all the while have been 'Hurting' US Gaming companies (not just MS btw but certainly have the MONOPOLY in Japan on 'High-End Consoles' - a 'term' Sony themselves argued to 'dismiss' Nintendo as 'competition' in any argument re A/B.

It's been clear for years that MS has exceptionally 'few' Japanese Games but when you find out that Sony is doing Shady stuff in Japan to prevent those devs/studios from releasing, thus 'blocking' competition in Japan, that's a concern and with US-Japan 'trade' agreements and allowing 'fair' competition for Japanese companies in the US is expected to be reciprocated by Japan - Sony 'expects' to Compete in the US but won't let MS 'compete' in Japan.

All the while, Judges, Senators etc have all come out to Support the Deal, protect a US company from 'overseas' ownership (TenCent could buy A/B) and thus benefit the US economy, US employment etc. https://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2023/03/22/gaming_the_ftc_japan_colludes_with_antitrust_regulators_against_msft_888621.html

@sanderson72
I’m sure they are used to it and don’t care about the Japanese market. This is all just PR and keeping the Sony lawyers busy. Perhaps trying to put a bit of pressure on the regulators by twisting the narrative too. All very sad and just shows the type of company and people MS are. As if all the previous evidence wasn’t enough.

On one hand it is entirely politically driven and overblown. Xbox's lack of success can be attributed to their own mistakes and bad way to handle Japanese market.

But on the other hand it is hilarious. Sony fought tooth and nails to create artificial "high performance console market" without Nintendo and pushed this narrative to regulators like CMA and FTC so they would stop ABK deal. And now they are essentially reaping what thew sown. So they can blame themselves...

@BAMozzy
Doesn’t matter if it’s 30 years or 30 seconds, if you provide lots of jobs in a state, and lots of tax dollars, that’s enough, even without the personal kickbacks and financial backing.

And it’s not a Japanese company trying to dictate, it’s an American regulatory body. Of course Sony will do what they can to see things go their way. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t also bad for the consumer market. It is.

And what makes you think Sony need to enter in to “shady practices” to stop MS in Japan? MS have no presence in Japan, and Sony have little influence considering the small portion of the market they hold. Not to mention they have actually done everything in their power to distance themselves from, and actively insult, most of the local Japanese devs and players, and shut down many of their studios making Japanese output.

I just don’t see how anything you said is even slightly accurate.

@Godot25 The N64 and GameCube were more powerful than the PS1 and PS2. Nintendo are the ones that changed business model by going for cheap hardware sold to more casual customers or previous non-gamers with the Wii. Remember, PlayStation only exists because Nintendo dropped out of a deal with Sony at the last minute to make a CD add-on for the SNES (another Nintendo console more powerful than its competitor, the Mega Drive in this case.)

Microsoft showing why it can't be trusted to do this deal.

@LightningLeader It's No Worse then microsoft buying up large publishers and keeping their games off playstation.

@Loamy
Considering they have US military contracts worth billions of dollars, I’m guessing quite a bit.

Its funny how all these senators biggest financial contributors are Microsoft. ***** is corrupt

Wonder if Sony is regretting throwing a tantrum about ABK and bringing all this attention to them yet.

Those Microsoft political "donations" are undoubtedly greasing palms much like the same way you keep seeing school massacres & no action for the same reasons.

Microsoft are drumming the "USA,USA!" flag to justify their buying up the 3rd party AAA studios, bankrolling Gamepass & indie timed exclusives (& let's not forget games like Octopath traveller never seeing light of day after an extended Gamepass stay),& want to buy up the Japanese publishers if they get half a chance.

They are exercising their Microsoft piggy bank to buy up existing AAA 3rd parties to remove sequels & new IP's from Sony platforms (Redfall etc.),spending billions whilst insisting their smaller sized opposition come up with in house alternatives!

But if they're not allowed to buy them up,then create the scare campaign they'll fall into foreign hands for the arms race they've very much initiated under "Gaming for all" Phil Spencer.🙄

@Sakisa
You can’t just give up as the underdog, otherwise disgusting bullies will always get away with their actions. Regardless of the outcome, I hope Sony don’t regret standing up for themselves and their customers, indeed, the whole gaming consumer base (minus a few shortsighted individuals who just want cheap games).

@nomither6 first sensible post I’ve seen. The think that bothers me most is both have had a lack of exclusives this gen and they’re both seemingly too busy squabbling over Activision.

@Matroska You missed the point what I was trying to say

Microsoft said: Console games industry is Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony and since Nintendo does not have COD and is thriving without it, COD can't be deemed as "essential product."

Sony said: But Nintendo does not count, because they are not part of "high performance" console market and therefore COD is essential product because in this category of consoles we just made up there is only Microsoft and Sony

CMA and FTC agreed with Sony's definition of market. But because of that, Microsoft can now claim that Sony have 98% of Japanese market and 80% of EU market because Nintendo does not count, since Sony wanted it that way and regulators used it as definition of a market.

So they literally brought it on themselves. Because you can't have it both ways.

@thefourfoldroot1 Its still a Japanese Company pressurizing to block a US company buying a US company and that this Japanese Company that has a complete monopoly of the 'High-End' Console market - a term Sony first brought up. In Japan, Sony has 98% of the 'High-end' Market PS5 vs Series X - and 'block' Japanese Devs/Pubs from releasing their games on Xbox so they 'can't' compete on an 'even' playing field in Japan - yet Sony 'expect' to compete 'fairly' in the US.

Let's just look at Square Enixs Final Fantasy, Forspoken etc, Capcoms Street Fighter 5 - numerous other Japanese games ONLY on Playstation in the 'High End' Console market. Games not OWNED or made by Sony. A LOT of Senators get money 'indirectly' from Sony too btw so its nothing. They can ask their Senator to look into things - especially with 'new' evidence coming out - even the Epic vs Apple uncovered some bad practices - like trying to charge Epic for every 'Cross-platform' player on Other platforms as 'compensation' for a LOST sale in Fortnite on theirs. If I 'choose' to play on Mobile because I'm out, Sony expects to be Compensated because I didn't play on Playstation.

MS are perfectly within their right to bring things to their Senator, their 'local' politician in Charge of their State, especially with 'evidence' to support their Claim that Sony is Anti-competitive and allowed to get away with it in Japan yet pushing the US to block a deal that is NOT anti-competitive on BS grounds - they brought it on themselves - first by establishing 'High End Consoles' as a Separate market and then claiming that MS are Anti-Competitive with this buy-out and didn't expect to be 'looked' at or scrutinised themselves...

But isn't up to the Japanese consumer what console they buy? So they are saying the Japanese should somehow be persuaded to buy an xbox instead to make it fair? How pathetic.

Even if xbox had the exact same games in Japan as playstation, the market gap would pretty much be the same.

The best part is sony doesn't even pay the majority of developers in Japan for exclusivity deals, they just don't want to put their games on xbox. I'd also say Nintendo has more Japanese exclusive games over playstation.

@LightningLeader But when MS do it its fine though?

"In addition, the company is Cantwell's largest political donor, having forked over more than half a million dollars over the past few decades."

Rumour is this is the 'same' amount of money that 'certain' users on this website 'receive' from MS to 'shill' for them 🤔

These political big wigs obviously aren't gamers and should stay out of matters they know nothing about.

@BAMozzy
“ Sony has 98% of the 'High-end' Market PS5 vs Series X - and 'block' Japanese Devs/Pubs from releasing their games on Xbox ”

You realise that makes no sense right? Why would these devs want to release their games on a platform with so little support? There are a few exceptions, such as FF that would have wider appeal sure, but Sony often help those games get made and only have timed exclusivity anyway. If the devs don’t think it’s worth the work porting a game that says more about MS than Sony.

“ even the Epic vs Apple uncovered some bad practices - like trying to charge Epic for every 'Cross-platform' player on Other platforms”

As I understand it Sony get a higher cut based on their higher install base. That’s perfectly fair and reasonable.

“ especially with 'evidence' to support their Claim that Sony is Anti-competitive and allowed to get away with it in Japan yet pushing the US to block a deal that is NOT anti-competitive on BS grounds”

Here you show your bias. It starts by even trying to compare buying a huge multiplatform publisher with timed exclusives, and gets progressively worse from there.

Look, I don’t particularly like how Sony operate, and often criticise them for all types of things, but you are stretching with these “arguments”, you really are.

In the UK, companies 'lobbying' politicians to speak up for them (usually due to an incentive) is considered 'dodgy' and frowned upon in the press.

"The Senator who raised this and 6 of the 10 Reps are from Microsoft's home state
And MS' government affairs people have discussed this issue with members of Congress."

Like I said, dodgy!

@thefourfoldroot1 The fact that Sony owns 98% of the Market in Japan is partly down to the fact that they block Japanese made games from Xbox and the ONLY platform to offer these in Western countries too preventing Xbox from offering Japanese made games ANYWHERE - not just in Japan but that helps Sony Monopolise the 'High-end' Console Market as Xbox 'can't' compete fairly in Japan as it can't provide Japanese gamers with Japanese games - Sony are not only 'blocking' MS from being able to Compete in Japan, they are preventing Xbox from bringing Japanese games to their Customers everywhere else too.

You are defending Anti-consumer Sony practices - using their 'dominant' position to bully Publishers into paying 'more' to Sony or 'miss out' on their 'big' customer base.

CoD is just 1 game that wouldn't suddenly make MS the dominant Platform, wouldn't give MS a 'monopoly' on Gaming - even if they were to make it exclusive. There are a LOT of other Publishers/Studios still making games and MS won't suddenly own over 50% of ALL IP's Studio's Publishers etc to 'monopolise' or be 'anti-competitive'. Its not like Sony doesn't have its OWN exclusives, OWN award winning IP's, OWN studios etc to 'compete' with MS's owned IP's, Studio's, Exclusives.

Instead of just Forza, Gears and Halo competing against Uncharted, Last of Us, Spider-Man, Wolverine, Horizon, God of War, Gran Turismo, R&C, Returnal etc etc, they also now have Avowed, Hellblade, Redfall, Starfield, Perfect Dark, Hi-Fi Rush etc...

If there's one thing I know about politics it is that politicians love to waste time and money. This is a perfect representation of that. "Oh what's that? We got more than enough problems over here in the States? Eh whatever let's focus on a fabricated story about the game industry in Japan. That's what our voters care about!" 🤦‍♂️

It's taken 3 generations of trying to play fair but now Microsoft back to slowly revealing their true nature. Huge corporate buy outs
Buying off government officials left right and center to get their gaming monopoly on track to match the PC monopoly .

@BAMozzy
No, they do not own 98-% of the Japanese high end market! Whose lies have you been swallowing in order to come to that ridiculous conclusion? You forget PC.

And if you want to restrict it to the “high power console” segment, have you looked at how much that category has as market share in Japan anyway? (hint: almost none of it). Bit pointless right?

I don’t want to go into Xbox’s attempt to break into Japan and their failure to do so. That is all history you can look up. Suffice it to say, they tried at the start of the 360 era and then pretty much gave up when the superlative Lost Odyssey and okay Blue Dragon failed to convince everyone they needed an Xbox. They simply had too few exclusives to offer the market at the time and decided (like Sony has now it seems) that the money wasn’t there to be worth the focus. Did you really expect MS to come straight into the Japanese market, with barely any games that appealed, and get any market share? Did you expect third parties to bother porting their games to a failure of a device?

@Anthony_Daniels
Yes, pretty much exactly this. Surprised it took them this long honestly, but subscription services require content, and they’ve already admitted themselves they are incapable of making it to the same quality as their key competitor, so here we are.

They'll be going after Mario next

It was Sony who defined this "high end" console market with their FTC/CMA arguments. Maybe it wasn't a good idea to fight so hard over the abk deal that was never getting blocked.

Nothing will come of this thing with congress but Sony shouldn't be surprised the microscope is back on them after they flew so close to the sun with their ridiculous abk arguments. They literally complained that MS might have exclusive in game content someday for COD while paying for exclusive in game content for COD.

It's an intentional play on "high-end" market segmentation which Sony argued for. I don't think this needs to be dissected as anything more than that.

It's a silly argument for a wholly different reason; the high end market was almost dead in Japan for a long while. It's been recovering slowly in the last few years, but there isn't much of a market.

In the end, you need a market to be monopolized before you can monopolize it. Maybe in the future this argument might actually become meaningful once their high end market recovers fully.

Push Square, please be extra careful covering this! You called the 98% figure misleading in two articles without understanding that it was referring to the 98% high-end console market—a term Sony used in its argument against the Microsoft acquisition. This is about Sony vs. Microsoft given this drawing of the line, so don’t bring up PC or Nintendo, please.

@Lonejester
Nobody in Japan cares about MS as they have not bothered making exclusives that appeal to that market. Not since the start of the 360 era anyway.

In fact, Japan cares so little that they just allowed the acquisition to pass in their country. Because MS are irrelevant.

Further, the “high end console market segment” that seems recently made up, is irrelevant in Japan too.

Honestly, even if every single game that is on PlayStation was on the Xbox in Japan, there would be zero changes in the buying practices of the Japanese public. For 3 generations there has been little change in the way the console race has been, Microsoft is last place each time and it’s purely down to the fact that the Japanese would far rather support Japanese consoles rather than American consoles, especially Nintendo.

@thefourfoldroot1 I wasn’t arguing that the term made sense, just that it be appropriately understood and covered by the article.

@Bionic-Spencer
“ Microsoft is last place each time and it’s purely down to the fact that the Japanese would far rather support Japanese consoles rather than American consoles, especially Nintendo.”

Are you sure that it isn’t to do with MS having no exclusives that appeal to the Japanese market? They tried a couple a few generations ago then gave up as there is no real market there anymore. That’s also why Sony haven’t bothered making any games that appeal there, and in fact have destroyed relationships with Japanese devs and gamers.

@LightningLeader Japanese companies stick together. It's a different dynamic to that of The US and Americans can't understand it.

Also Xbox are a bit hypocritical here as I'm pretty certain during the 360 gen they had quite a few Japanese exclusives that didn't come to the PlayStation 3 to try and gain popularity in Japan and failed, yet sony is doing the same and are successful, its like Microsoft are acting like a jealous brat over that fact.

@Bionic-Spencer exactly this. Nintendo have been the kings out there for decades, even when their console for that generation socks.

@thefourfoldroot1 They cancelled all the exclusives they had that would appeal to the Japanese. It's their own fault.

In related news, a Japanese government official has initiated harsh criticism against the U.S. for their lack of regulation of the high end truck industry where American produced General Motors trucks hold an unfair market share over Toyota. 🙄

I’m kidding of course, but it is just so annoying to see Congress politicize this business rivalry. Especially when it’s another sovereign nation’s economy. Stay in your lane, Senator.

@Korgon Yeah, that thought crossed my mind too — regardless of whether there is a legitimate issue here (my opinion is that it’s not our place to strong-arm another country’s government into making laws to make one of the wealthiest companies in the world wealthier), I can think of a hundred more pressing domestic and international issues that the US government could be spending time and effort addressing.

@thefourfoldroot1 I don't have the 'exact' figures myself to argue about Exact percentage points but Playstation users vs Xbox users in Japan is a MASSIVE difference.

It may not be '98%' across all Playstation Consoles vs all Xbox Consoles, but based on Sales Data, Sony have a 'massive' lead over Xbox - its certainly more than 80% of the 'high-end' console sector as that is ONLY Playstation vs Xbox Consoles and Sony completely dominates Xbox sales in Japan.

That is the point - Sony are arguing about their 'own' chance to compete with MS and that CoD Exclusivity would KILL them - despite '98%' domination in Japan, 80% domination in EU, 60% domination in the US over Xbox specifically. Aggressively trying to block two US based companies from 'merging' to be 'more' competitive with Sony and how Sony 'prevent' US companies from competing in Japan yet expect their domination protected in the US...

@Bionic-Spencer "Microsoft is last place each time and it’s purely down to the fact that the Japanese would far rather support Japanese consoles rather than American consoles, especially Nintendo."

That's a myth. Such a prevalent one at that. What boggles my mind is that the logic only works one way; there are plenty of foreign companies which don't fair well in the US against US companies, and we magically gain more perspective and think it's because US companies are better at catering to US consumer needs.

@BAMozzy Is it comparing apples to oranges though? The Microsoft model is not about game sales or console sales, rather subscription services and putting GamePass on everything like PC’s and smart TVs. I don’t know what the GamePass subscription numbers in Japan are, so I can’t say.

But every time there’s game sales data, the Xbox games are usually absent because I think the company honestly doesn’t care how many games they sell, so long as GamePass is successful

@BAMozzy
I see where you are confused. You are trying to compare high end console dominance (in Japan) with potential market dominance including subscription and streaming worldwide (which is what the other regulators are looking at). Even the U.K., who say they have no issue with the console side, are still investigating the subscription and streaming side, which we all know is all MS care about.

@Sil_Am I'm confused why you wouldn't buy a ms product anymore.

@Godot25 you have any idea what you're talking about?

@EhronLocke their player base is always the same when it comes to sony. They believe sony have a monopoly on the Japanese Market but also believe Microsoft buy THE two biggest publishers in gaming and waving money around that it's competitors can't compete with isn't a monopoly. They are hypocrites of the highest level.

@Th3solution I know that there are other options for MS to try and 'compete' in Japan - like Cloud/PC releases, but it was Sony themselves that were making certain assumptions - like Nintendo not being 'relevant' to discussion as they are not 'High-End' Consoles - so the lack of CoD as an example of not being 'essential' to succeed is not 'relevant' for governing bodies to consider - only LOOK at the High End market.

Anyway, it seems that the JFTC (Japanese equivalent to CMA, FTC etc) has now approved the deal too. I don't care about what 'history' a Dev/Publisher had as a 3rd Party Publisher/Studio, having to be 'Multi-platform' to maximise Sales potential to bring in revenue to keep making games. As soon as they are bought by a Platform owner, they 'cease' to be multi-platform 3rd Party Studios and become 1st Party Studios and ANY IP's they owned, are now 1st Party IP's - like Sunset Overdrive and Destiny are now Sony IP's - regardless of those Studio's History.

They paid nearly $80bn to 'OWN' those IP's, Studios and Publishing Rights. Its no different from Embracer buying Tomb Raider IP from Square Enix or selling it to Amazon, buying Crystal Dynamics from SE - Square Enix can no longer make Tomb Raider or use CD to make new games for their Portfolio - just because they don't own a Platform to Publish specifically to, doesn't change the fact that as a Company, no longer can make Tomb Raider available to Square Enix fans. They didn't spend $80bn to keep their Rival platform supplied with THEIR games. If Sony buy Square Enix, you wouldn't expect Final Fantasy to remain multi-platform...

Sony PlayStation also have a monopoly in my living room and gaming room. And why is that?.... they actually released games I want to play, consistently for years 😱😱😱

Sleeping on making good games for years and panic buying the biggest PUBLISHERS that release games with guaranteed sales is such a poor money driven approach. Back creativity or gtfo.

Microsoft want Gamepass to be the gaming app version of windows. And they are going about it in the same sly way.

Also, I noticed during some football that Xbox are advertising the £240odd Series S as being true next generation power, or something like that. So they are trying to target the UK market by making it seem like Series S is equivalent to all 'Next Gen' but half the price, it seems 🙄 cough*advertising standards*cough

We will see what happens in the long run - but Playstation can kiss goodbye to all new IP's and/or Single Player games - like Elder Scrolls 6, Fallout (both start 'fresh' every time, new character created etc), Starfield, Redfall, Hi-Fi Rush etc.

It will be interesting to see what develops from this - whether Sony will 'change' to 'compete' with MS and their growing IP's, Growing list of Exclusives. It won't be just Halo, Gears and Forza anymore to compete against Sony's award winning IP's, they have Starfield, Redfall, Elder Scrolls, Avowed, Fable, Perfect Dark, Hellblade etc etc as well...

@BAMozzy
“ it was Sony themselves that were making certain assumptions - like Nintendo not being 'relevant' to discussion as they are not 'High-End' Consoles - so the lack of CoD as an example of not being 'essential' to succeed is not 'relevant' ”

Because, In a discussion about COD, it is entirely irrelevant to bring up Switch, a console that doesn’t and cannot run the game (which is why MS quickly rushed to sign an agreement with them, to fool the courts into thinking COD on Switch and Nex gen platforms is at all comparable)

Whereas, in a discussion about market dominance in Japan, Nintendo is obviously relevant.

Anyone pretending not to see the difference in context there is just showing themselves to be a bit of a sad fanboy honestly.

“ Playstation can kiss goodbye to all new IP's and/or Single Player games - like Elder Scrolls 6, Fallout (both start 'fresh' every time, new character created etc), Starfield, Redfall, Hi-Fi Rush etc.”

They were already never coming to PS. Or are you just trying to preemptively protect MS from the whole “case by case” thing by claiming Sony pissed them off too much? Lol

@BAMozzy Yeah, I think it’s a fairly complex issue. And I can see both sides. It does seem that regulators are “losing sight of the forest for the trees” however, as governments and attorneys tend to do.

What’s funny is how Nintendo must be just sitting back and laughing all the way to the bank whilst they watch these two other companies beat each other up.

What would be interesting is if any other company would try to make a legit handheld console to compete with the Switch and then there would be a true anti-monopoly discussion to be had.

@CutchuSlow Cause they are a scummy company with s**ty practices. Making politicians say stuff like this? That's the scummiest of them all, imho.

We need politicians to pass intelligence tests before they can run. We also need term limits. Both those things would fix this situation.

@Th3solution Its a complex and rapidly changing Market. A few years ago, CoD was 'doomed' as PUBG, Fortnite etc were gaining massive traction - but Warzone helped them stay 'relevant'. Back when the 360 launched, the Multi-player FPS game was 'Halo' and everyone was trying to 'Compete' with that - inc Sony with Killzone, Resistance etc. However with MS marketing CoD heavily to promote Gold as well of course, CoD 'grew' into the 'Halo' Killer.

MS can release CoD on a Nintendo Switch - if they can bring games like Doom, Wolfenstein, Witcher 3 etc to Nintendo, then they can bring CoD to it - albeit at 'low' Res and/or 30fps - also through Ubitus too (which Streams' to Switch so could offer a 1080/60fps option.

As for the Hand-Held market, I cannot see MS wanting to enter with their OWN hardware and it really makes 'little' sense. They already Support Steam (and therefore Steam Deck) and have Cloud options for all 'mobile/portable' devices. Some third Party manufacturers could make a Streaming handheld with Game Pass Cloud and therefore MS doesn't 'need' the R&D costs, design and manufacturing costs, distribution costs etc - likely to take a 'loss' or at best 'break even' with to sell Hardware when they could also come to some agreement with Nintendo over putting Game Pass App on their Hardware and everyone has some 'mobile' device to play on so why buy a Portable Xbox?

Nintendo would argue that they are not just competing with Sony/MS and could argue they are also competing with the most popular Gaming device - the place where the majority og gamers play - their Mobiles...

@elpardo1984 exactly

@EhronLocke but it is Sony complaining about it and saying it is an unfair practice while doing it.

It's bizarre that they would expect government to step in and "prevent" actions they are currently using.

I admire Sonys courage to tell regulators "as market leader, only we should be able to do this" but I'm not surprised they are facing clapback.

@Somebody
Erm…are you honestly trying to equate some timed exclusives with buying up an entire publishing group that’s as big as your main competitor?

Monopoly commissions wouldn’t look at those things in nearly the same light, I assure you, and neither would an unbiased person that has thought things through sufficiently.

@Lonejester I said the same the last time they wrote an article claiming it's misleading. It's either the writer hasn't been keeping up with the acquisition or it's to stir up a reaction.

@thefourfoldroot1 I'm only relaying sonys complaint that this deal might lead to exclusive in game content for Xbox. Something that they currently have over Xbox. Their argument made no sense.

When Sony made call of duty exclusivity the sole complaint it would only make sense that governments would research the topic and find exclusivity is a common tactic and one that sony relies on heavily.

@EhronLocke it was one of their official complaints to CMA and FTC. They would be harmed by exclusive in game content for COD on Xbox. Something they currently have over xbox.

In the US our kids are being exposed to gun violence everywhere. Another school shooting happened just yesterday. But heaven forbid our “leaders” do anything about it instead of taking the time to placate donors like Microsoft.

It would be great to see some actual governing go on, just as a change of pace.

@Somebody
They didn’t make that the sole complaint but, regardless, there is still a difference between an open market for buying timed exclusive stuff, and one company owning everything. Surely you can see that. Especially as MS could have outbid Sony any time, if they had wanted to, in said open market. Also a massive difference between exclusive bits and a fully exclusive game, which may well have been the case had the regulators not looked at things and got concessions from MS.

If one of the manufacturers publishes a game, or is heavily involved with the development of a game, they have every right to decide where it goes, but this practice of paying third-parties to simply exclude certain platforms (sometimes indefinitely) is gross and needs to end.

While I agree Microsoft has largely been failing on their own merits, it doesn't help on Sony's end that their aggressive efforts to snap up exclusivity for as many big titles as possible on PS5 has been an open secret for a while.

@Th3solution

"What’s funny is how Nintendo must be just sitting back and laughing all the way to the bank whilst they watch these two other companies beat each other up."

I've been saying this for a while. Nintendo has smartly kept its trap shut regarding this whole debacle and has only profited as a result. So far, via the 10 year Call of Duty deal, which, let's be real, will primarily be relevant to the far more powerful (based on leaks) successor device. This is after an entire console generation with no CoD support whatsoever.

Nintendo also not pushing back on the 'high performance console' framework that these companies constructed to exclude Nintendo's role in the market means they're also being left out of a discussion about the Japanese market, which is actually hilarious when you consider how much an iron grip Nintendo has had on the region for years.

Joe Biden "You ain't Japanese if you don't vote for me or the democratic party" 😜

"Oh Sony so anti customer for doing what Microsoft does buying timed exclusivity and exclusivity deals"

@thefourfoldroot1 I don't agree that COD would have been exclusive without concessions or that one company now owns everything. But again I was only pointing out the lunacy of sonys complaint that was literally their current practice with the title.

@EhronLocke From the perspective of a company well behind sony and nintendo in marketspace and exclusive content, buying a publisher seems like a solid strategy. If the deal put them way out in front of the competition than yes it would be scummy and regulators should do something but that is clearly not the case here.

@BAMozzy Barring a couple of high profile examples, where is your evidence that Sony actively blocks "the majority" of Japanese games from Xbox? And cause Microsoft said so isn't really evidence.

Sony lawyers will make sort work of this, it shows how out of touch they are.

@Somebody
Regardless of whether it would have been (I think having it free on Gamepass would have been enough for MS) it could have been, which is why Sony supporting the regulators was not lunacy, but eminently sensible.

As to the exclusives (ignoring the difference between timed and always exclusives), this was only one subsection of a complaint that outlined the possible dangers with a platform holder owning COD. If you decide you’d like to focus on that one little bit because you think it’s amusing then 🤷‍♂️

OMG this is getting out of control! Poor small company Microsoft being edged out of the japanese market after they lost any kind of consumer trust with red ring back in the days. And it also couldn’t have anything to do with the fact that Japanese players could be more loyal to Japanese brands or that Xbox has nothing that exciting for them on offer? Let’s moneyhat politicians and stir nationalism …eeeeww.
Seriously on the verge of boycotting any kind of Microsoft product.

Wow, so many people getting upset. Let's not pretend Sony is an angel. They have been doing shady deals for years to hurt their competitors. They brought this on themselves with trying to block this merger. Now their dirty laundry is going to be exposed. When you have both sides of the aisle (Dem & Repub) looking into this, watch out. This should get interesting, especially with Jim Ryan testifying under oath before Congress.

Its hard not to get annoyed when the people in power are responsible for governing something they clearly know very little about.

This whole thing is hysterical to me. Imagine thinking the Japanese gaming market matters in the slightest in 2023.

Regardless of what your take on the ActiBliz Microsoft/Sony drama is, Sony really stepped in it and has the wrong eyes on it now.

@Westernwolf4 I agree

Wording is the most important piece to this whole thing.

If it found that Sony is paying Japanese developers to either not release specifically on Xbox (and only Xbox) or to make the Xbox versions the worst performing version of a game compared to PlayStation, I can see where questions should be raised and looked into as anti-competitive practices - especially if still opens a window for a Nintendo release (barring technical feasibility, of course). It could be seen as specifically singling out the American company in favor of the Japanese country.

If this is just a case where Sony is simply partnering with Japanese developers to make system exclusive titles, then that's just business and Microsoft just needs to evaluate how it conducts business in Japan to build better developer relations.

Japan is a very loyal country and would prefer to do business with Japanese businesses.

I'm so confused, are they going to take into account when MS did "shady deal" to make Japanese games exclusive for the 360? And how even that still failed to get them into the JP market? That thumbnail really says it all and the funny part is, PS is slowly going that way too. Monopoly lmao

@cburg I don't think anyone here is trying to claim that Sony are innocent of anything here. The main complaint seems to be that they are getting a lot of flack for engaging in practices that Microsoft have, and still do, engage in themselves. That fact seems to be clearly forgotten about when people say things like Sony have brought this on themselves. They also HAD to try and stop the merger, it just simply wouldn't have looked good if they had just sat there and did nothing. I would fully expect Microsoft to have done just as much to try and stop it if it was Sony buying ABK. Let's not forget that Microsoft have been guilty of engaging in some shady business practices in the past and anyone who doesn't believe they are capable of doing it again is being naive.

@Khayl

It's worth noting that seven of the ten representatives are from Washington, Microsoft's home state. In addition, the company is Cantwell's largest political donor, having forked over more than half a million dollars over the past few decades.

I think this is worth clarifying, per your own link, Microsoft itself is not the largest donor, individuals that work for Microsoft are, and even that is not accurate either. Look below and you will find the largest "industry" are retired individuals, nearly 3x as many. Obviously, retired individuals don't fill in an employer field when they file a campaign contribution.

Microsoft itself has not made direct contributions, at least not documented ones, to this candidate.

Microsoft is one of the largest employers in that state, so it's only natural that they would turn out high on this page.

Not much is going to come of this nonsense. That would actually mean that the US government was actually competent enough to do something. And just because they sent a letter pushing it doesn’t mean anything will happen. This whole thing is just getting idiotic now and I’m tired of hearing about it.

So because Xbox are 3rd (mostly always last in the console space) that gives them the green light for buying up huge acquisitions. So that means if Sony are market leaders and they were also able to afford huge acquisitions similar to Microsoft, means Sony will not be able to buy similar huge acquisitions because they are the market leaders. I couldn't make this s**t up if I tried

I just want this to end so the toxic comments on both sides can end.

OK. Well, it’ll probably never end but stories like this won’t be around to fan the flames.

The best part of American politics is the politicians will say anything if you pay them enough.

@wiiware They are using the definition that Sony proposed to the FatC/CMA/EU, ir didu forget that Sony Said that Nintendo is not on the same market as Xbox and PlayStation, ALL what Sony Said to regulators.

@thefourfoldroot1 Well "high-end consoles" that IS a definition created by Sony, só It is a maleta created by Sony definition, maybe they should not have created...

@MaikonCSGarcia
Or maybe it should just not be used where not relevant. Does that require too much brain power for the courts / politicians?

@thefourfoldroot1 Ah yes, where it is and isn't relevant, aka, when it's convenient and beneficial for Sony and they don't have to pay the piper for their own cutthroat tactics.

They made their bed, and I hope they're very uncomfortable in it.

Meh, just like how MS is going to have hiw way in the Activision thing using money to guy people. Sony can use money to buy people too. That's how the world works.

This is just a meaningless. Sony pays for the development of things that don't belong to them and they have done this for decades. If the best term they can use to try to make a big deal after something so simple is "unfair" won't change anything.

@Sakisa
Erm, no. Try as you might, you won’t convince any intelligent person that Nintendo is relevant to a COD discussion when they don’t run COD, or irrelevant to a Japanese gaming discussion when they dominate the market…

It is amusing watching all these people try though. So carry on.

@Ralizah As fellow American, do you have any thoughts as to whether you are bothered by the Congress getting involved in something like this? I’m not very comfortable with meddling in other nation’s policies as I fear the world thinks we do that too much as it is.

@Sil_Am but you're ok with what sony has done so far?

@Sakisa calling "tantrum" battling something that has the potential to ruin your business sounds very beta from you tbh (console exclusives didn't ruin xbox, xbox had everything and threw it away with the xbox one).

And no I don't think they are worried about this, they knew it was inevitable from the beginning, all of this is just to win time so the ps5 sells. And they did, almos 2 years in time and still counting so for them it was worth it. What the americans say or not actually doesn't matter because it's not the first time they try.

This is Microsoft money doing the talking at this point.

@thefourfoldroot1 Is it different than Sony locking down the premiere world known beloved franchise that only releases their mainline games on high end consoles simply because they have first dibs? Piss off with the selectiveness when Sony has for years locked down Final Fantasy and refer to my earlier statement.

Sony made their bed, they can lie in it.

@GymratAmarillo I don't see how it would ruin their business. Is Sony so reliant on a third party game they hold simple exclusivity perks for that Microsoft owning them and guaranteeing them 10 years would really bury Sony? With them bragging early in the gen they'd force Microsoft out of the console market?

@CutchuSlow enlighten me, what has Sony done, other than some timed exclusives, which every platform holder is guilty of? Do you see Sony lobbying politicians to spout bullcrap? Do you see Sony buying publishers with hundreds of IPs? Are you one of those who equate Bethesda + Activision to Insomniac + Bungie?

@Th3solution After seeing that hearing on Tik-Tok recently, I wouldn't trust these old coots to manage their own Facebook accounts, let alone dictate restrictions on one of the largest tech-related industries in the world.

To be clear, though: I doubt anything will come of this legislatively. Barely anything that's not to the direct benefit of the military-industrial complex gets passed anymore, and while Microsoft is rich and powerful and likely has massive sway over the system, they don't seem bent on retaliation against Sony.

This is mostly just entertaining drama.

@Sakisa
You seem to have abandoned your previous argument as lost, and now gone onto something completely different. Sony having, as you say “first dibs” on FF. but, OK, I’m free at the minute.

Timed exclusivity is very different from controlling ownership. Selling temporary exclusivity in an open market to the highest bidder is just free commerce. FF, for all the nostalgia, doesn’t sell in the same way COD does, so buying temporary ownership is really not market altering. And that is what this is about, whether MS buying a publisher the same size as their main competitor (Sony) is going to destabilise the market leading to a negative impact on consumers. If MS simply bought timed exclusivity to FF none of this would have been investigated, because they are completely different things at different scales.

And remember, this is only timed exclusivity. These games generally come to Xbox if the publishers decide there is a market. The fact they often don’t, even after exclusivity periods end, is more a reflection on MS than Sony.

Also, although I like to avoid “whataboutism” if you are going to denounce timed exclusivity, then what about all these Gamepass games which don’t release on PS Plus until they’ve left Gamepass, often joining there day 1? I have no problem with that, but presumably you do.

So, basically MS is paying politicians to pressure the US government to interfere in a market from a different country based in a delusional monopoly from Sony. Cringe.

@Sakisa That very same game that you are questioning if Sony are so reliant on is the very same one that Microsoft are so desperately trying to take ownership of. The very fact that they are dangling it as the carrot in deals to try and push the acquisition through shows how important MS think it is too.

Sounds fair. After all the scrutiny that Sony has deemed necessary for the Activision-Blizzard buyout despite no one batting an eyelash about their Bungie buy-out. I don’t really care at this point, the politics of game companies are generally redundant and are more like old men screaming at clouds.

Worst case scenario… Sony loses Call of Duty in 10-15 years. Big whoop. Sony still has Battlefield, Killzone, and any other multiplat FPS released. I didn’t buy a PS5 for Call of Duty, I bought it for Ratchet and Clank, Sockboy, Gran Turismo, and Monster Hunter - because Sony and Nintendo are the real homes to Monster Hunter and Microsoft is just trying to keep up.

I see one of the biggest hypocrites is on here again 😉 talks about playstation fans whinging on PX yet he's here whinging himself 😂.

@KaijuKaiser Call of duty doesn't sell more than some of playstations exclusives. God of war Ragnarok sold 11 million units on playstation in 4 months, the newest call of duty hasn't got that many sales on playstation. As as total series it has sold a lot on playstation yes but that's only because it gets released every year or two, but with each game individually there's a few playstation games that sell better such as Spiderman, GOW, Uncharted and TLOU, even Horizon Zero Dawn has sold over 20 million copies, so on playstation alone call of duty isn't bigger.

Call of duty obviously sells millions more as well on Xbox and PC but playstation doesn't see any of that money.

@Wilforce No one batted an eyelid at Bungie as it was categorically stated at the time that Bungie will continue to operate in an independent manner releasing multiplatform games. It was a condition of the buyout.

@UltimateOtaku91 God of War Ragnarok may have sold more than CoD on PS but CoD will still be bringing in way more money to Sony through microtransactions. Same with all of the other games you mentioned.

@KaijuKaiser You’re right… even when put up for public comment 99% of the comments to the FTC will be bots both for and against the buyout anyways.

@Kevw2006 Microsoft has said the same thing about all of their acquisitions the past decade, but we all know that’s not true. Sony has given us no reason to trust them anymore than Microsoft. Neither company should be trusted with their acquisitions.

@Wilforce it's in the terms of their deal that Bungie can self publish and release on any platforms they choose. I think they were rather insistent on maintaining their independence. Although I don't recall Microsoft ever stating that they would continue to release multiplatform games after they have bought a developer apart from when there was a pre-existing contract or announcement in place, and those have all been honoured to be fair. Other than that they have been fairly vague about whether releases would be multiplatform, and they still are largely being vague about it.

People keep circling back to ff7remake as being anti consumer, to justify ABK purchase, but it's not like SE has a big market in the Xbox community. Most of their sales are split like the following:
55% Sony
40% Nintendo
5% Microsoft
It can make sense why they wouldn't go through the effort of publishing it on Xbox if they don't expect to see enough profit to justify doing so. The game wouldn't even run on the switch.

@Sil_Am sorry I don't wanna start a debate. We just see things differently I guess. And I believe Sony has been anti consumer since jim Ryan took over. I used to like Sony. Everything I used to buy was Sony. I even have a Sony phone. I've had a Sony phone since Sony Ericsson lol. But I don't like how things are with Sony now. So I've switched teams. I don't like xbox either. I've been tricked into believing they listen to us, but they don't. I gave my PS4 away. I'm looking to sell my xbox. And I'm going to work on upgrading my pc.

I miss the days when gamers didn't care about this crap. Politicians are the worst.

@sanderson72 windows phone was the best phone I ever used. I feel like I'm back in the stone age using a Samsung Galaxy.

I can almost literally see the cogs of the machine at work here. Microsoft is now putting all their corporate weight into making the Activision deal go through. Not in court, where it belongs though.

The sad thing is this deal will exponentially raise the damage that Microsoft's business model is causing to the industry at large. And the sadder thing is that most people will only realize this when it is too late.

@Kevw2006 I’ve tried to find the terms of that deal, but they have not been made public. What I have found is an FAQ from Bungie indicating that they intend to continue self-publishing games. However, that is a statement provided by Bungie, not Sony… Since Sony owns Bungie, they can essentially do whatever they want in the long term. That FAQ could just as easily be thrown out once there is a change in leadership or on a whim from the Sony executive board. It is an olive branch that Sony could just as easily snap, the same way Microsoft did with Bethesda.

To add on… There is some legalese that identifies Bungie as an Independent Subsidiary, which Microsoft uses the same definition for their subsidiaries. While it’s true that there is a level of autonomy for an independent subsidiary, that autonomy is just as easily derailed if the parent company becomes disenfranchised. Sony could simply vote out the board and vote in people favorable or withhold supplemental funding.

I suppose their definition of "high end" games would exclude Nintendo and mobile. Several people on here discount Switch entirely as a valid platform because of the disparity in power.

I do think that this whole thing could be very damaging for Sony though. Them refusing to sign a deal means that Xbox would be under no obligation to give them anything they want. I'm not saying it would make financial sense to take CoD from PlayStation entirely, but there could definitely be Xbox exclusive perks/launch dates etc. if Sony refuse to sign and this deal, likely goes through.

American politics showing their true colors. Guess their bank accounts are rising now. Not saying European politics are any better, pretty much the same.

Yeah... this is holarious cause Sony is not even close to being the highest share of the japanese market.
It's the US being corrupt again. Microsoft is giving these politicians money to bring this up and they are slaves to the donations.
Also, the US congress doesn't have a say on the Japanese market.

The levels of depravity Microsoft is showing is exactly why this merger is dangerous to the consumer.

Money talks and MS are throwing their cash around.

@BAMozzy Sony does not own 98% of the market. They don't even own 50%.
Nintendo owns a much bigger share. That is absolute BS.
If Xbox doesn't have more, it's cause they failed to appeal to the market. You know... starting by the fact that their product is literally called the "death box", which they made no attempt to rebrand. The victimisation is hilariously bad.

@thefourfoldroot1 The market definition is not changeable according to Sony's will, this is the existing market and in which Sony and Microsoft find themselves by the FTC/CMA/EU this will be the definition used in the future, sony has created something and will have to deal with it. This is not the case for Brazil which includes PC and Switch in the market, but it is logical for US politicians to use their regulatory body's definition of the market.where is the Japan to follow what was said or not, and follow the definition used by the JFTC, which recently approved the purchase.

@MaikonCSGarcia
Man I don’t know where to start with that, well, drivel, in all honestly.

In fact I just deleted most of my post because it was stating things so obvious that I sounded too condescending.

Suffice it to say there is no feasible market of “high end console gaming” in Japan for anybody to hold a monopoly in. If nobody else is sufficiently releasing competing products then you can’t punish the only player for being a de facto monopoly, especially when said market is so insignificant as to barely exist within the wider populations’ consciousness.

It would be like the courts ruling LG has a monopoly on TV’s…in my house…even if nobody else was available for me to buy TVs from. Just ludicrous!

This is clearly just MS paying those beholden to them for jobs to throw up a smokescreen of ridiculousness.

And, please, try to understand that the reason Nintendo wasn’t considered in the ABK case was that the Switch is indeed irrelevant. It does not run CoD! Obviously Nintendo would NOT be irrelevant when considering if someone has a monopoly in Japan’s gaming market, because they ARE in Japan’s gaming market 🙄

@thefourfoldroot1 no the argument no and if CoD pink or n on Switch it was probably made by Sony was that Nintendo is not part of the same market, not about CoD, but market, according to SONY Nintendo is not part of the same market.

US senators acting according to their regulatory body makes sense, as I said it is up to the JFTC to know if it interests them or not.

@MaikonCSGarcia
What are you on about? This whole thing was about the prospect of using COD to eventually monopolise the market. What possible reason could anyone have for considering Nintendo in that case when they don’t have CoD? Explain that one to me. Clearly they are in a different market.

Now, to say Sony monopolise the Japanese market is clearly stupid. If you want to say “Sony monopolise the high end console market that doesn’t exist outside of them” then sure. But you can’t technically monopolise a market nobody else wants to be in. If nobody else wants to be in it then it’s not a market, and MS gave up on Japan 2 generations ago.

@Nem And according to Sony, Nintendo are not counted as they are not 'High End' and therefore don't compete in the SAME Market.

As Sony themselves brought this 'High-end' Console definition to their Argument in an attempt to 'BLOCK' the MS deal, MS are able to turn that against Sony who has a Massive lead over Xbox in Japan - a 'Monopoly' on the High End Console market. Do you honestly think that losing CoD in Japan for example on Playstation, that would suddenly see Xbox 'compete' with Sony, that Xbox would significantly catch up? NO - hence the JFTC passed the deal with NO concessions or even needing to go to 'Phase 2'.

Sony made the 'argument' that they shouldn't look at Nintendo and how they have Succeeded without CoD for years, how they have more hardware in gamers hands without CoD, because they are not relevant, they are not 'high-end'. Therefore, MS turned that around and said f you can't count Nintendo in the US, EU, UK etc, then if we look at Japan, Sony Monopolise the High End market and 'block' MS from trying to Compete...

Sony basically opened themselves up for this by arguing against this deal, which will 'increase' Competition, not harm it and give Consumers a LOT more choice - even if CoD went 'exclusive'. You may 'lose' 1 platform (Playstation) but gain all those that Cloud can reach anywhere in the world on whatever devices they have - hardware CoD would 'never' be on to compete with 'Sony's' IP's.

If Sony had accepted that MS would buy A/B and signed a 10yr Deal guaranteeing CoD on their platform, guaranteeing Parity and that their CoD fanbase on Playstation will definitely get CoD, that basically guarantees the vast majority would remain on PS, would continue to buy thus making Sony money at 'NO' cost to themselves. They would be 'looking' after their Customers and securing a 'BIG' IP for the 'long-term' to basically remove CoD as a competitor to their own 'exclusives'. Gamers will still see 'CoD' on PS so won't be a factor in deciding to buy PS or XB hardware - and not for their 'next' gen either...

@EhronLocke There was a leaked screenshot that suggested Shin Megami Tensai games are coming to Xbox too, the screenshot didn't list PS as one of the available platforms so that could suggest it's coming to Xbox but not PS. All rumours at the moment though so until anything is officially announced we can't be sure

@BAMozzy No, they did not open themselves up for that. Sony was in the japanese market before microsoft was.
What you are saying is they had the monopoly of that market and microsoft failed to get in.
But these arguments that stores only want to carry sony products is clearly false. They do that cause Xbox is a loss for them cause it doesn't sell. Microsoft doesn't have a right to a big market share just for showing up and Sony did not buy a bunch of publishers to stop MS from having multi plats. They did not actually make any monopolistic moves. So it does not equate at all.

The 10 year deal is irrelevant and MS would just deliver inferior versions anyways. Sony is completely right. What Microsoft is doing is stifling competition. It's like the bully saying if you do what they say, they won't steal your lunch money for 10 days. Gee... what a great deal.

@EhronLocke Fingers crossed it is. Although I'm still playing through Persona 3 and then have 4 to play after that so they will keep me occupied in the meantime.

Notice you never try to point out why Nintendo is being ignored…where the roots of that thinking came from. Why is that?

I am sure lobbying has a great deal as to why these US reps are even chiming in. Xbox won't catch up again if ever any more unless a miracle happens next-gen. We are maybe a decade+ off from any new consoles.