One consistent theme throughout the entire sorry Activision Blizzard buyout saga has been how both Sony and Microsoft have utterly dismantled their own businesses in attempt to convince regulators to get their own way. The latest effort comes courtesy of the US Federal Trade Commission’s ongoing court case, where trillion dollar tech titan Microsoft has once again attempted to paint itself as the underdog, in an effort to get its $69 billion buyout through.
“Xbox's console has consistently ranked third (of three) behind PlayStation in sales,” the Redmond firm pointed out, parading the fact that it has just 16 per cent market share. “Xbox has lost the console wars and its rivals are positioned to continue to dominate, including by leveraging exclusive content. Xbox has consistently ranked third in consoles behind PlayStation and Nintendo.”
While it’s true that PlayStation has routinely used its position to secure timed and console exclusives – like Final Fantasy 16, for example, which launched today – it’s a tactic generally employed by all manufacturers. In fact, it was recently revealed that Redfall was in development for PS5 prior to Bethesda’s buyout of the publisher – and Starfield was also famously planned for PlayStation at one point as well.
There’s no arguing with Microsoft’s comment about Xbox trailing PlayStation and Nintendo in hardware sales, as these are facts. However, it’s hard to take a company’s underdog act at face value when it’s only occurring as part of an attempt to close a $69 billion buyout – an acquisition so unthinkably big that the Redmond firm is only one of a handful of companies on the planet with pockets deep enough to fund it.
[source theverge.com, via eurogamer.net]
Comments 119
They kinda defeated themselves midway through the 360 generation. Before that they were spanking Sony with Halo and Gears.
I hope that when they acquire ABK they focus on SP games, but MP will always make more money.
They have lost the wars but a world without Xbox is a world where the PS5 price would be higher or a world where the Dreamcast 2 is announced. I would hope for the latter but know the former to be the inevitable.
I can’t wait until this is all over
Is there a article on jim Ryan lying saying that ps is screwed if Xbox make cod exclusive and can't survive ....yet sending emails saying he knows Microsoft wouldn't make cod exclusive yet told the everyone like the CMA they worried about that ..hmmmmmm
https://www.tweaktown.com/news/92033/jim-ryan-private-emails-show-he-doesnt-think-call-of-duty-will-be-made-exclusive-to-xbox/index.html
Xbox is a great third place console. I highly recommend getting one behind a PC, PlayStation, and Nintendo device. Although, if you have a PC, there's no need for an Xbox.
Hopefully, the ABK acquisition is stopped and Xbox can continue doing Xbox things, perhaps even focusing some money on their own studios to make them better instead of just buying whatever is popular. Acquiring ABK would give Microsoft an extraordinary amount of leverage over their main competitor, which is the thing competent regulators (so far just the FTC and CMA) are supposed to stop.
Of course you guys picked this up!!! 200+ comments, here we go!
Removed - trolling/baiting
@Qu1n0n3z I for one don't care who is number one. I have my own reasons to prefer playing on XB this gen, and Game Pass is only a minor one, but it still a reason.
I have no clue what kind of person only buys and uses products only if they are the #1 top sellers in their respective markets.
@BeerIsAwesome
Imagine bringing up a decade old kickstarter project and a cloud service into a conversation to try to claim the third place in a 3-participant race isn't considered the "loser". At least bring up contemporaries like the Atari VCS and the Evercade VS (not that anyone would consider either a serious modern console either.)
I'm no Xbox owner but to say that you lost just because you're 3rd place is ridiculous. The console brand is still as popular as ever especially in the west
Another titbit from this filing 68% of Xbox users are named either Ryan or Brodie
@BeerIsAwesome well put. Why can't we just all play together?
The saddest part of this is them actually using the term "console wars". This has now officially devolved into an argument between manchildren.
Not Sony or Nintendos fault that Xbox is always 3rd. Just goes to show being a trillion dollar company doesn't guarantee you being the market leader. Releasing high quality 1st party games consistently almost every year goes along way for being market leader and PS has done that job consistently better than Xbox, I'm sorry that's just a fact not made up nonsense. They are currently starting to turn things around on 1st party but if they didn't recently purchase Bethesda and Ninja Theory all they'd have this year would be Forza again. Amazes me how little they'd have if purchasing Bethesda wasn't possible
@TheCollector316 ask Ninja theory how much Ms invests in its studios, they went from thousands of dollars to millions and millions along with tools and equipment the likes they would never have had. They are already doing that. 😊
@number1024 i would be behind that, instead of having to buy 3, heck i would even like it if i could use my Xbox controller on PS5, that alone would help me, the only reason i don’t use my PS5 more is the controllers sticks are slippery and not a great feel in hand. Otherwise i wouldn’t need much from Xbox. I’d love a console that could play Mario Kart, God of War, and Gears! 😊
@number1024 indeed, or just let all consoles play all games and then it's up to you what company you buy them from, that would drop prices in a heartbeat!
Oh I think I've just seen the capitalist flaw in my plan.
@BeerIsAwesome to be honest, amount of money MS has burned through 4 generations to stay 3rd i gaming market has never been made public. But it is surely bigger than Ouya or Stadia investments.
In that sense, they indeed lost the war. But it is exclusively their own fault (hindsight is always 20/20, but you can precisely point to moment when they messed up each of the generations, sometimes even during announcement).
Just because they are in third position doesn’t mean they should just be able to buy up the largest content creators and (eventually) take content away from their competitors (as they did with Bethesda) to corner the new streaming market. That is bad for gamers with zero benefits for anyone (nothing is stopping COD going to Gamepass, MS clearly have the money).
Yet to hear anyone give any reason as to why this is necessary to benefit any gamer anywhere. In fact, letting MS just use their trillions to buy up everyone they want is clearly bad, and exactly what these competition agencies are made to prevent.
There is another option for Microsoft gamers know about quite well - “get good”
Poor whittle Microsoft. How could they ever compete with that big bad bully Sony!?
Really though it is funny to see Microsoft acting like Playstation is invincible...and then Playstation acts like Microsoft is too powerful to compete with. It's just a matter of both companies trying to say the right thing to help their case. That's all.
@Tharsman Sega was never number 1 and they were loved by the gamers, Sony fan’s dislike Xbox cause MS is rich and in 3rd place and it’s a easy way to come online and make them seem more important for owning the console with the highest sales. I like my PS cause of the few exclusives they have, not their controllers or Ui no matter how many they sell. But yes this site picks up a lot of Xbox stories cause they know the fan’s will attack in large numbers instead of embracing the industry as a whole. Don’t forget they love to say a 2 trillion dollar company losing is shameful but then when they spend money to show they are committed it’s wrong, so only use the money the way we tell you, not the way that we dislike. ABK is for sale, if not MS someone else will buy them, it’s unlikely they go back on the market and not listen to further offers if MS can’t get the deal done. Sony would love to buy them but at the moment Sony is trying to be worth more than Nintendo.
@number1024 i like the sticks just not the grip or the hump in the middle, i wish it was recessed so my thumbs fit in it not slipping over it. If that makes sense, you know the how convex vs concave issues i have going on. I bought the Edge controller in hopes they would come out with different cap options, but so far they have 2 choices and i find them both to be bad. Here’s hoping they fix that cause i do enjoy some of this controller for Sony as i disliked everything about the Six Axis and DualShock 4.
I think this is just an act or an excuse so they can buy even more publishers and devs going forward.
Yawn. So over this. That showcase from Xbox proved that they could put on a good show without buying up ActiBlizz, this whole thing needs to just be forgotten.
@Tharsman Agree!! I dont care either, whats interesting to me is that on every discussion or comment on internet around this topic, it seems like gamepass is the only valid (for them)/heavy argument they have to defend xbox as a console since theres a complete lack of quantity and/or quality of games.
“It is not an exclusivity play at all,” said Ryan. “They’re thinking bigger than that and they have the cash to make moves like this. I’ve spent a fair amount of time with [Phil] Spencer Bobby [Kotick] and I’m pretty sure we will continue to see Call of Duty on PlayStation for years to come.”
Is this surprising? No, not really. Still, them trying to cast themselves as underdogs is quite laughable.
@Qu1n0n3z Personally I disagree xbox lacks quantity or quality games. What they lack is big triple A console exclusive games, that tend to have much broader appeal.
It might be a matter of taste, but Xbox has a significant number of first party, high quality, but lower budget exclusive games right now. Games like Hi-Fi Rush, Tell Me Why, Forza, Age of Empires, Grounded, Pentiment, As Dusk Falls, Flight Sim, etc (wont list everything here.) These are all high quality, very well made games with lots of polish, they are just not gigantic triple A narrative adventure games.
@Ashina But 3rd in a 3 console race is losing.
@Tharsman Agreed. Hi-Fi Rush is still my GoTY so far and I own a Switch and PS5 too.
I love that every argument from Microsoft is "we suck, it's our own fault, we pushed Game Pass that cratered our sales, we said exclusives didn't matter when they clearly do, now please let us buy up the industry as a reward".
I didn't see Nintendo buy 69 billion dollars worth of developers in the GameCube or WiiU era. Maybe the FTC should limit Sony and Microsoft's acquisition to what Nintendo spends on acquisition. That would shut them up once and for all.
Had Microsoft won the console wars, they would be able to buy the entire planet. Glad they lost the wars so they could only spend 69b$ on Activision.
@Tharsman yeah! you are right agree on that one!
@BeerIsAwesome The Ouya didn't live long, it died way before the wiki actually states. The thing didn't really have even a year of viable life span. Everyone forgot about the thing the minute PS4 and XBO launched. It basically was an iPhone 4 without a screen, after all. As for Stadia, it's not a console.
I bought an Atari VCS last Christmas, was on a good sale from Atari's own website. It's gorgeous but I only have it as a display piece, never hooked it up to anything. I, of course, own the one with the fake wood paneling, no longer available I'm afraid.
@Tharsman I think it (ouya) was considered a fairly good value emulation machine for a while, kind of lived on in that regard.
@PixelDragon yes those poor people. Nothing but total workplace domination to console themselves with.
They never fully recovered from the One's awful initial reception and the required Kinect thing they ended up backtracking on.
Its their own fault 🤷♂️
So you kind of make Microsoft's point, @BeerIsAwesome. They are in third place with just 16% of the market share. When you really are the little guy, there is always the chance that you will fail. There is a reason why Xbox is buying these studios, and that is because they cannot secure a single third-party exclusive. They have not had a single AAA third-party exclusive this generation because there market share is so minimal that they either stump up a huge sum of money to compensate the Developer for the loss of sales by not being on the behemoth that is the PS5 or they flat out buy the Developer. The latter makes more financial sense; paying the Developer for exclusivity will not bring in sufficient new Xbox owners or Game Pass subscribers to cover the cost, however, buy the Developer outright, and all profits from the game you wanted to secure, plus the entire back-catalogue is theirs. If you view it in those terms, with the market share that Xbox currently has, and you can understand why they are attempting to buy ABK. I truly believe that if the ABS acquisition fails, at 16% there is a distinct possibility that Xbox will cease to exist, and that is bad for everyone, including those that game on the PlayStation.
The Xbox and the PlayStation are after a similar gamer, whilst the Switch is not. So if Xbox is not around to keep PlayStation in check in terms of pricing for games and consoles, Sony will be rubbing their hands in glee, as a captured market allows them to do whatever they like, and you can bet that what we think of it will count for nothing...
Thing is, @PixelDragon, yes they are a huge company, but it is owned by Investors. Investors expect a return on their investment. Microsoft seek a return on their Xbox portfolio, if that does not happen, they will have no option but to pull the plug. They simply cannot keep throwing money at a loss making element in their company.
I see people speak of the enormity of Microsoft's wealth, as if it was in the back pocket of Bill Gates, but that simply isn't the case. Their money is tied up in investments, they don't have trillions sat in a bank account. I'm not suggesting that they don't have money, but I don't think they the liquidity that many seem to assume.
As I say, if Xbox cannot turn a profit, Microsoft with sell it or scrap it. Someone like Tencent, Google or Amazon might be interested, but even they will expect to see a return on their investment, so there are no guarantees...
This is silly. I certainly don't want Sony to be a monopoly (that's bad for everyone) but as the first comment said, Microsoft played themselves. After the 360 generation they were so sure that they dominated the field that they engaged in a ton of anti-player maneuvers which sent them onto the path they're on now. I would LOVE if they got their act together enough to keep things competitive, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't still feel a sense of schadenfreude from what they tried to pull.
Getting so sick of reading this dross across these two sites.
@Triumph741
In what world do you live in? Every generation that MS has pushed its’ XBox consoles, they’ve consistently been outsold hardware wise. It was even more prominent back in PS2/OG XBox where games weren’t downloaded - hardware sales were (and by many metrics still are) pivotal in order for console success. The PS2 sold over 150M consoles. I don’t know the sales figures for the Xbox because they weren’t by any means memorable.
You know why? Because Sony mopped the floor with MS. I’m not even picking sides/being a fanboy or anything - it’s just clear as day that, at least back then, MS was never winning the console wars. Not even close. It’s closer in more recent generations; which are still observably in favor for Sony.
But hey Xbox fans. It could be worse. There was at one point a “Windows Phone”. shivers
@WizardJ Actually the x360 was kicking ass, but then they decided to do more casual kinect type games.
@WizardJ To be fair, they did sell roughly the same amount of 360s as PS3s over its life, though if we factored in the number of people that bought 2, 3, or even 4 to replace RROD failed units outside of warranty, I am sure the numbers of active consoles was a lot lower. Every other generation had Sony easily ahead of MS though.
Success means that there are a lot of studios that will exclusively target that system (even without deals) which conversely means being in last place will reduce the likelihood of a game being released on your system of choice. This is the main reason that console wars are a thing. We are fighting to be the platform of choice for developers/publishers.
It would be nice if you could install the Xbox runtimes on Playstation, and vise versa, and enjoy the games on your platform of choice.
@WizardJ
Windows Phone OS was actually fantastic. It took years for both iOS and Android to catch up to some of its more important features.
Agreed, @PixelDragon. I do think that Microsoft are in a bit of a bind though. In terms of consoles share, Xbox sits at just 16%. It is why they have not had a single AAA third-party exclusive this generation, whereas Sony have had several.
It's easy maths really;
Xbox goes to a Developer and seeks exclusivity and the Developer says fine, but you need to compensate me for the 84% of potential lost sales that I will incur by skipping out on the PlayStation. Xbox cannot close that deal because the sums simply don't add up. They would need to sell X amount of consoles, and attract X amount of new subscribers to Game Pass to cover the cost of third-party exclusivity, yet they know they simply cannot do that.
On the other hand, Sony can go to a Developer, promise mass marketing for their game, and seek a discount on an exclusivity deal with the Developer. The Developer looks at the stats, and agrees because the marketing power of Sony, dwarfs the lowly 16% of potential sales they might get if they were to sell on the Xbox too.
It's not about how much money Microsoft has in this matter, it is about the goliath that is the PlayStation, and the lowly state of the Xbox. It's a problem for sure...
I'm with you on this, @AsterZero. All too often we are left to make assumptions regarding the Xbox because they are shocking at keeping us informed. They either dodge the questions or give a vague half-answer that ends up raising more questions than it answered...
@Fiendish-Beaver While everything you said is true, keep in mind that its not always the platform holders approaching the developers/publishers. Often its the other way around with publishers or developers actively looking to get a round of funding, or secure a better deal, or a marketing push.
I absolutely agree with you, @PixelDragon. Microsoft have said they lost the most important generation to date in the Xbox One/PS4 era, and I totally agree. They completely messed it up at the point of the One's reveal, and they have never recovered.
The big difference now though, is that for about the last 2 years of the previous generation, and the entirety of the current one. Microsoft have been full square behind Xbox. That wasn't the case before. It was as if the Xbox was a little side project. Of course now, gaming is the biggest entertainment industry there is, and so now Microsoft are showing an interest as they can see there is money to be made. That is why they are investing so heavily in the Xbox. However I do think this is make or break generation for Microsoft. If Xbox falls still further behind the PlayStation, and the profits are just not being made, I think Microsoft will pull the plug, and I don't think that will be good for any of us, no matter how much some might dislike Microsoft...
Oh absolutely, @thedevilsjester, and those Developers will look at the market share that Xbox has, and turn to the PlayStation instead...
@Fiendish-Beaver Yeeeeah this is true. It's annoying that Microsoft took as long to understand the game they were in as Sony did. We look at the film industry and how Disney/Marvel/Star Wars etc are lackluster now because they know they're too big to fail so they just do the bare minimum to turn a profit. Right now we're blessed with so much from Sony because they're still in the middle of curb-stomping Microsoft.
You're so right, Microsoft needs to get their act together. At the same time (still not disagreeing with you here, just adding to the convo), it feels like a waste of time if they're on this "woe is me" crusade due to their own bad business practices.
It's hard to take this any way but complete BS. They only have themselves to blame for being the "underdog". Instead of sitting there and letting their catalog of exclusive dry up because all they focused on were a handful of the same franchises ever since midway through the 360's generation, maybe they could have put even a little bit of effort into their catalog of games. They had the momentum, and while Sony may do some underhanded things nowadays to keep games away from Xbox, that shouldn't be so damaging. Xbox still should have plenty of games otherwise even without having to beg to buy a giant publisher. Nobody that has the authority to make a decision on this buyout should feel sorry for Microsoft or buy any of their BS as, once again, this was their doing. They aren't the victims. If they had even remotely competent management, they would still be a lot more competitive.
Do I wish Xbox would just wither away and die? No, as that would just make PlayStation worse to be honest, but that doesn't mean Microsoft isn't full of crap either.
@number1024 yeah full mouse and keyboard would be nice. I would hook that up for some games for sure. Yeah i know we will never see a fully embraced industry, cause bad news and smear stories get more clicks. But it would be nice as a player base to respect others play styles and brand preferences.
Xbox is definitely the underdog in the console space. They arent really telling any tales there.
Their parent company has deep pockets but they are still in a distant 3rd even with abk.
It is an exclusivity deal where they lose the console war only for 72 hours before the AKB buyout trial.
It’s still crazy to me that back in 2001 Microsoft came out swinging so strong. The Xbox got destroyed by the PS2, but Microsoft secured ports like GTA and even MGS 2 (granted the OG Xbox version of MGS2 is pretty bad; definitely a game that was designed for the unique architecture of the PS2) and also got a ton of PC ports to the system. Also they secured the largest backing of Sega, who released a huge number of games on the OG Xbox that skipped the PS2 and GameCube.
The early 360 years were similar. The Xbox platform was so strong during those years. Even President Obama referred to the “Xbox” instead of the “PlayStation” during a speech he made about getting American kids in shape lol.
Then by the end of the 360 era it completely took a dump. The brand was dying. The Xbox One just stabbed the last knife.
It’s incredible how a company came so strong out of the gate in an industry dominated by two other companies. And then just fell apart even though they had the resources to mitigate the damage. Unlike Sega.
Didn’t Microsoft cull/drop a lot of their first party studios in the 360 days?
I loved my Xbox 360 back then & the games were awesome. I just remember seeing one studio after another being disbanded & wondering how they were going to compete.
Only took them 10 years to realise it was a mistake.
They kinda put themselves here in the first place. No doubt the old Xbox chief Poobah back then would’ve got a huge payout & pat on the back
Obligatory "nice". 😜
Meh, Sony can be salty about it. PlayStation should be just fine. I don't hear the Sony hardcore bemoan their exclusives, but a few exclusives outside the Sony sphere is apparently the greatest crime in human history to some. 🙄
Microsoft strategy: If you can't beat them, eat them.
@OrtadragoonX I guess that's the difference between passionate gamers who wanted to make a console and corporate suits getting involved and trying to make it...something else.
I found that Xbox Documentary to be fascinating regarding it's start. There was a passion for Xbox console-making that eventually died in a board room of suits.
I have a Series X and I prefer the Xbox platform for the majority of my gaming needs. My Switch and my PS5 are exclusive-only machines.
I am interested to see the future of Xbox as a console in the next few years.
It's starting to feel like this ABK acquisition is Microsoft's "out" of the console market space and simply going the way of Sega and becoming a third-party publisher and Game Pass provider.
I feel like if Microsoft continues to make any kind of gaming hardware going forward, it will just be a small form-factor gaming PC that doesn't require any specific "console version" to be made - it'll just run Windows and come with a wireless keyboard and touchpad combo and an Xbox Gamepad.
I hope not, though. Sony needs a competitor.
We've already seen a small taste of the arrogance Sony has had being at the top. Microsoft handled the transition to current-gen way better than Sony and Sony was left scrambling to figure it out a comparable solution.
Cross-gen upgrades? Yeah, you can probably thank Smart Delivery for that as I am sure Sony had 0 intentions of offering any. I mean, it was even clear when Sony charged $10 just because...what...it's the PS5 version? It was free on Xbox side - well, unless a publisher didn't use Smart Delivery, of course.
Messy Save imports. Poor UI management for PS4/PS5 game. The list goes on. Even PushSquare had article after article of cringe-worthy actions Sony took with the PS5 transition.
Clearly Sony wanted to completely ignore any of that and force people to have one or the other.
Acquisition succeeds or fails, we need a competitor to Sony because there is clear evidence Sony will steam-roll it's consumers at any opportunity.
But you know, what, it didn't matter one bit because PlayStation is now the common gaming vernacular. It's all about getting "the new PlayStation".
I could point out all of Sony's flaws until I was blue in the face and it wouldn't matter. People wanted "the new PlayStation".
Which brings us to the point Microsoft is trying to make. Sure, Microsoft messed that up for itself. But it's still a valid point to make.
@Jamesblob
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Sony
Oh look at that, Sony has acquired 22 game studios since the year 2000 alone. Totally fine when Sony buys out studios, yet MS doing it is the biggest crime ever.
"Organically grown". If you mean "Let's buy X studio today, develop a new I. P. with them for tomorrow", then duh, of course. The only other option is to continue an already established series with the acquired studio, like COD for example, and/or a successful studio with a popular track record, like Bethesda. OR SONY WITH INSOMNIAC, as another example. A close relationship for years, finally leading to a purchase in 2019. That's fine for Sony, but not MS? Nonsense. This is about money at the end of the day, not you and your favourite plastic box.
Essentially, "Sony good Xbox bad!!!". Such a hypocrite.
@Beerheadgamer82
Microsoft is yet another example of just because you are huge or even the market leader doesn't mean you have quality control, look at 90 percent of what comes out of Netflix, and the 10 percent that's actually good gets canned after 1 or 2 seasons.
@EVIL-C That’s less than one a year. That’s totally reasonable and not industry hostile.
Do you know what applying prudence to a situation is?
@GamingFan4Lyf
Funnily enough I was primarily an Xbox guy in the early 7th Gen. I traded my PS3 preorder for a 360 when Gears released. And I stuck with them through four RROD 360s.
But towards the end of that cycle I noticed that Microsoft was kind of forgetting about us hardcore gamers. They were focusing way too much on Kinect and not building any new hardcore IPs. They abandoned the winning strategy they had (big hardcore title releases at least once per quarter and their best in class online gaming infrastructure) and chased the Wii crowd, who were already starting to move to mobile gaming by that point.
So when my last 360 took a dump, I got a new one sent to me from Microsoft, and traded it for a PS3. Sony had won me back to the fold at that time because they were releasing banger after banger in exclusive first party titles.
I considered the Xbox One over the PS4, but when I saw Kinect required and the price tag, the decision was made for me. Microsoft abandoned us. I never looked back after I got my PS4 shortly after launch.
But like you I agree that we need a healthy Microsoft in the industry to keep Sony (and to a lesser extent Nintendo who doesn’t exactly compete in the same space) from being complete arrogant jerks. Sony has made some daft anti-consumer decisions this generation so far, but ultimately I am satisfied with my PS5 and Switch combination.
I’m worried that if the Xbox completely disappears, Sony will attempt to become 1980s Nintendo. Which the industry doesn’t need to ever go through again. Old Nintendo was it is best once Sega really provided them with some competition with the Genesis. The SNES is still my favorite console of all time. And I don’t think it would have been nearly as beloved and excellent without Sega right there keeping Nintendo in check.
The issue with the Series consoles to me is that there just weren’t any games that showed off its capabilities in any way for the longest time. And that hurt its long term appeal. Microsoft kept making promises it couldn’t keep. Like the Halo Infinite fiasco. While Sony has made some bad decisions this generation, they did promise a bunch of heavy hitter first party games. And they did achieve that, even if some of them were cross gen games.
When I looked at the two near launch (I always consider both options) I just had this feeling that the Series consoles would sputter in terms of exclusive software. I figured better to bank on the PS5, where I would still get all the big 3rd party games I wanted with a nice helping of Sony 1st party games on top of it. Plus I had a pretty large digital library at that point. It would have been hard to start back over from scratch.
@Tharsman
Microsoft really needed Halo Infinite to deliver.
It’s crazy how such an important game kind of floundered immediately upon release.
Of course as Phil said one game won’t change the overall equation. But that was their most hyped game in YEARS. They really needed to stick the landing with it. And they sort of screwed it all up.
Now it’s up to Starfield. Which thankfully looks like it’s going to succeed where Halo Infinite flopped around and died at.
@mrtennis1990 why?
I'm sitting here waiting for this to go one way or the other and then for Xbox to start producing games this gen that finally entice me into their ecosystem, alongside my PS5 and Switch. Either they'll do that through this acquisition or, if it doesn't go through, by investing their $69bn in loose change in their own existing/newly spun-up studios.
@Tharsman It's the other way around, really. It's not that people want it because it's the top seller, it's that it's the top seller because people want it. There just isn't a reason to get a Series X over a PC, PS5 or Switch. I don't say this in a fanboy way - I had an Xbox, Dreamcast, Gamecube and a PS2, and I had a 360, Wii and not a PS3. Since then I, and other people I know, haven't seen a reason to carry on getting Xboxes, though. I haven't even seen an XB1 or Series X in real life. It's like Xboxes haven't existed since the 360 for most gamers, and the stats referred to above seem to back that up. The weird thing is that even if this acquisition goes through, you'd still be better off getting a PC over an Xbox. They're in a really odd position.
I agree that we must stop agreeing, @PixelDragon. It's simply not on... 😂
Absolute rubbish. They're second place after blowing their lead when they tried to kill pre-owned games last generation.
They have $69bn to spend on acquisitions. Sony do not. They're doing just fine without the deal, especially now the Zenimax acquisition is starting to come home with exclusives like Starfield.
Microsoft are second place through their own failings and neither of them should get to own a large part of the publishing sphere. At all. No consumer benefit to that, in fact the opposite.
@EVIL-C Sony has bought Studios not entire Publishers. Microsoft has bought studios over the years too.
The reason no one has batted an eyelid is because they're small changes and therefore small scale.
This is huge in scale because it's an entire publisher with a vast catalogue. The Zenimax acquisition raised a LOT of if eyebrows because it was larger in scale, just not as large as this one. A lot of people were against the Zenimax acquisition for the same reasons, most of which have come to fruition over the course of the years.
Try to compare apples to apples.
I don't treat any of the consoles as number 1,2 or 3. I buy consoles because ai like the idea of variety nothing more. Xbox games are generally cheaper 2nd hand than Sony's so I buy them. I like Sony's console, I like Mircosoft and Nintendo for all different reasons but I certainly don't think of them in terms of better or worse! I'm a gamer and in some respespects a collector (have games going back to the Atari age). I like the variety of having multi consoles and exclusives. Halo Xbox, Uncharted PlayStation, Mario Nintendo. All these companies aren't poor and none of them are going anywhere soon and with the advent of this stupid digital era , prices will go up anyway regardless of competition or buyouts. They aren't in it to please consumers, they are there to make money! I really couldn't give a monkeys about console wars and buyouts, just quality games which will probably suffer as a result of all this fighting and court cases.
@Green-Bandit there is a difference in using your money to fund or create something new, or to use it to take away from the competition. With the abk deal money only flows to investors not necessarily to abk. So, the funding situation for the abk studios does not automatically improve. But the abk portfolio is locked behind the xbox brand. Of course, the initial benefit for the xbox gamers would be the day one inclusion into gp of abk titles. But it is not clear whether the future titles will receive the same amount of funding. So, it could well be that the game quality goes down. If the money would be used instead to invest into e.g. perfect dark or fable, there would be a benefit for the consumer. Or even if the money would be used to fund titles of external studios e.g. the next cod title. But, in a buyout only investors benefit eventually, not consumers. None of the 69 billion dollars will be used to create games, unless the investors take the money and invest it in other gaming companies. To see the 69 billion dollar buyout as something positive for the xbox brand is short sighted. It will only harm the competition but not necessarily improve anything on the xbox side of things.
If Xbox really has lost...
Then they shouldn't be doing any exclusives at all.
They're just wasting good games like HiFi Rush.
Gamepass doesn't work. It just kills sales across the platform.
No one on Xbox wants to buy anything anymore, it's dysfunctional.
So a massive multinational computing company is trying to paint itself as an “underdog” (a non-competitor) so that it can benefit by allowing the Federal Trade Commission to pass a buyout/merger/acquisition that has the net monetary value of the GDP of several small countries put together? Have I got this right? I thought the FTC was meant to prevent unfair business practices. Microsoft+Activision is NOT a merger. It is a cartel.
Oh, and just for the record, I have no particular bias one way or the other. I own both a PS5 and a Series X. Because there are actually good exclusives on both consoles, and I am kinda greedy that way. Never had a Nintendo, though.
Well back in the day I was always an xbox mainly player. It had very strong games on the original xbox and 360 and a great controller and a fairly reliable UI. I just didn't see anything that Sony could tempt me with. Then we got to PS3 and the PS4 and Sony absolutely got their stuff together with great game after great game and I think, tbh, Microsoft took their hands off the wheel, got complacent and took their fanbase for granted and are now reaping this period.
Both Sony and MS have relatively deep pockets, difference now is that Sony have cracked releasing a series of very strong games that are reviewed very well with an insane marketing campaign behind them.
MS either needs to really get behind the Xbox and really do some research on what the "gamers" want and make some swift changes or they'll lose even more subs. I don't want either brand to fail, however this is their own doing and buying out a massive brand so the other one can't have it really isn't going to be the win they think it is unless their model changes.
I'm assuming Microsoft's lawyers & corporates taking the witness box are carrying kittens & puppy dogs whilst playing sad songs testifying!😂
Of course "Gamer" Phil Spencer already had a pre-rehersal academy award performance with his infamous Kinda Funny Games appearance & his claims that "Starfield won't get people to sell their ps5's!", comments after the Redfall fiasco!🙄
They keep pointing to their lower console sales whilst ignoring their domination in the Windows PC market,their drive in that sector to push needing a Microsoft account just to login to your PC & switch off their data tracking preferences. (The same account used for Xbox & the MS Store)
Likewise it also ignores their ambitions to expand Gamepass & Xcloud streaming across PC & as many platforms as possible. All conveniently backed up by Microsoft's massive presence in the Azure market already!
The "we're the poor little indie 2.3 trillion dollar monopoly & need to buy all these AAA publishers & IP's as permanent exclusives to compete!" P.R. sob story would be laughable if not for the fact that so many places like the EU have fallen for it & their "ten year deals".
Almost as much as their equating the Bungie buyout as "equal" to Microsoft's buyouts of Zenimax Bethesda & now Activision Blizzard. They will hardly stop with Activision assuming they outlawyer the FTC in the courts.🙄
Even more funny since Sony literally has offered nothing to gamers for 3 years. Yes, that's more than MS (since they have even less exclusives than none) but if there ever was a chance... Not one single game worth getting the PS5 for. Yet. As soon as those 1st party exclusives will actually hit, it will be a completely different world anyway.
@Green-Bandit I wish Sony would allow use of the DS4 to play PS5 games. So much more comfortable to hold than the oversized (and overweight) DS5s.
Removed - trolling/baiting
Guess what? When you do a bad job, you deserve to lose.
Using your fat money reserves to buy half the market is not exactly fair competition or consumer friendly.
If you fail and you don't know how to make it right, leave. Market was here before you and will be fine without you MS. Likely will atract new companies willing to put the leg work in that are better managed.
If my digital collection was all that mattered i would've stayed with Xbox after the 360. I would not have bought a Switch either cause my classics were stuck on the Wii and Wii U. It's BS. It does not impede adoption. MS just knows it can't make a good job attracting people with good games cause they suck at it, so they outright buy half the market so there is no choice. It's weak and underhanded and should be blocked. Otherwise what is stopping a google or an apple from coming in and swooping everything else? Apparantly fair game from MS logic. Loser talk. Stop ruining our market . Leave if you aren't good enough to succeed on your own merits.
I don't think they should have said that as a defense. They basically just said, "Since we can't beat our competition by offering better games we decided to take the nuclear approach and buyout the competition." If anything, that's an admission of anti-competitive practices.
@mrtennis1990 ''..... however these are facts....'
im sorry but xbox has been taking "L's" for a long time, and no one wants to admit it.
ive been called a "SONY PONY" for only speaking truths... what a crazy time in the world we are in now...
@Triumph741 Kinect wasn't a hit, but nothing hurt Xbox more than the 360 red rings.
In the 360's lifespan, I had to replace 8 360's all from red ring.
And everyone I knew were in the same boat, going through 6 or 7 xboxes, that defect wasn't small in those effected.
No matter that the new consoles afterward didn't have those issues, if you look back 360 had a good lead over Playstation because Sony were a year later with PS3 and way overpriced.
There were a few other missteps, but xbox plummeted exactly after red rings were peaking and seemingly never got a big chunk of customers back ever again, regardless of what they put out.
@gaston i am 50/50 on the Xbox deal, while i find it completely legal, and ABK is for sale for someone to buy. I don’t see how it gives us Xbox owners anything. But i understand that it gives MS King, and that opens the door for them into mobile. Thats what this deal is largely for and has been from the get go. MS has said if the deal passes they will build a mobile Storefront. Mobile games destroy console games in money made. I never bought COD on PS cause of the controller anyways, so i would still play my shooters on Xbox. I gain nothing in this deal as a Xbox owner, but i lose nothing as a PS5 owner. So i am neutral. But i see the play here for MS with King. This is the kind of money that will help MS’s bottom line as Candy Crush alone prints money. Ask Ninja Theory if MS is investing money into its studios. HellBlade 2 has tech and money in it that would have never been possible had that not become first party. So this idea that buying ABK holds back studios from developing isn’t true. They are investing a lot to new studios, Ninja being one but Inexile being another. These studios have grown double in size and tech. That i can get onboard with the ABK deal just to get King is something of a internet fight club more than anything. I’m ready for that to be over with and let the games start to decide who’s really winning.
@sanderson72 i see that asked for a lot. On the Xbox side you can use any Xbox controller as i see that as fair. Sony want’s the sales of the new controller and even added features into the new controller to prompt people to use the new Dual Sense. But those can be turned off so a DS4 would seem easy to use. This is what others are giving Sony a free pass on and that’s they turned into a concerned profit machine vs feeling like a gaming company back in the early PS console years. I miss that PlayStation.
@OrtadragoonX I see your point about Series consoles. There hasn't really been much in the way of well-received exclusives, yet.
Halo Infinite was a disaster.
Redfall (I personally like it) was DOA. There is hope for a turn around, but time will tell
Flight Simulator is niche
Grounded is niche
Pentiment is niche
Age of Empires is niche (and more PC-focused anyways)
But there is hope:
Psychonauts 2 was well-received
Hi-Fi Rush came out of no where and was well-received
Forza Horizon 5 was well-received
I think Starfield will deliver (even though I'm not a huge Bethesda RPG fan)
Fable looks amazing
Avowed needs a little polish, but is otherwise Obsidian doing what Obsidian does best.
Hellblade II is coming and looks amazing (even if what was shown has all been real-time cutscene)
Clockwork Revolution looks interesting (even if people are calling it a Bioshock Infinite clone)
Perfect Dark is in development.
Gears 6 is in development.
Outer Worlds 2 is in development.
Untitled Hideo Kojima game is in development.
There are just so many games that Microsoft has in active development that are already known and more unknowns as well.
Microsoft really just needs to reel in those developers and get them out. Microsoft could do what Sony was able to do with the PS3 and turn things around at the tail-end of the console's lifecycle.
On the flip side, Sony put out it's heavy hitters early and, based on the most recent Showcase, doesn't seem have much in the pipeline in the immediate future other than Spider-Man 2 (at least from a first-party standpoint). Third-party partnerships are going to be driving the PS5 for a while, I think.
It's all going to boil down to 2024. Microsoft could gain some ground with Starfield in 2023, but if Microsoft can't deliver in 2024, it's going to be time to rethink things.
I just don't see Microsoft continuing to hemorrhage money focusing on only Series consoles and PC - it's going to have to branch outside its ecosystem.
I don't foresee dominance over PS5, but maybe as a secondary console (a sale is a sale). It just needs to close the gap.
@Green-Bandit Yes, I miss that Playstation company too. Even in the Layden/House/Tretton era, I think this would've been offered as a given free option. But in the Ryan/Hulst era, well, they just seem like a money grabbing bunch of accountants.
@Martsmall of course there isn't lol only pro Sony stuff here
Even stevie wonder can see they making themselves look as vulnerable as possible for the court hearing
Being third doesn't justify buying other top publishers. Period
the thing is ps5 is still selling like crazy and they still have a bunch of games they are working on that hasn't been announced yet. throw all of that in with 2 major final fantasy games releasing in a years time span , i don't really think sony needs to worry too much imo.
PlayStation and Nintendo have got 1st and 2nd solely through their own efforts, IP and hard work. MS should do the same and not “cheat” by buying their way to the top.
These comments from them just make them sound like a spoilt kid not getting their way after their own failures.
It's hard to feel sorry for MS. They keep saying it's not as simple as having quality games, but it really is. PlayStation has always been my main console, but I also have a Switch because I don't want to miss Nintendo's 1st party offerings. If Xbox had an equivalent of God of War or Zelda, you can bet I'd have a Series S (or maybe even X) on my shelf as well. But I don't, because there's no reason to. Yeah backwards compatibility blah blah blah, but if you're hoping people buy your console simply to play games from 2 or 3 generations ago, you're doing it wrong.
@burning_as_souls I was fortunate to not be affected by the RROD, though it's worth mentioning I didn't get a 360 until 2009 which was after at least one revision. But I did prefer it to my PS3. What swayed me was that disaster of a presentation in 2013, as well as only selling the Xbone with Kinect initially. It was as simple as "I couldn't care less about Kinect, so let's save $100 and go with a PS4." And I haven't owned an Xbox since the 360.
@sanderson72 Sure feels that way from time to time. I am ok with companies making their money, but also give us choice. Controllers shouldn’t be one size fit’s all, even tho they do a lot of R&D to fit hands of all sizes. The Dual Sense is my favorite Sony controller to date, but still not as comfy for my hands as the Xbox controller. I wish you could use the DS4. Might make you enjoy certain games more and play better. A controller is so important to the overall experience. No rumble or stiff triggers can make up for confront in the hands and speed around the pad. Games that require me to be fast and all over the buttons are an auto buy on Xbox. Slower games i can get away on PS controllers.
MS only has itself to blame. It was making shrewd moves during the start of the 360 era and was competing at a very high level. Then it all went south. I can't say for sure it would've been able to do much better in Japan than it did, but should've kept signing exclusive deals with Japanese devs even if it meant having to pay a premium to make up for lost sales that could be gained on PS3. The focus on Kinect never should've happened and Rare and its IP should've been used a lot smarter. Then came Don Mattrick's baby, the Xbox One, no explanation needed after that, still haven't come close to recovering.
I'm a big fan of the Xbox brand, have owned one every generation and I think the more competition, the better, so I want to see Xbox be great again. Series X is a great piece of hardware but its potential is being wasted by incompetent 'leadership' and it's not just Phil Spencer alone, it's the people who could be in line to be his successor as well. Major problem.
@burning_as_souls Kinect on 360 was most certainly a hit. Not only did it sell extremely well, but its games were also incredibly successful. I remember when a Gran Turismo game launched and it couldn't beat some Kinect games, because they sold so well (esp before Christmas).
On Xb1 it certainly flopped
“So we’re going to buy all the big developers to force people to buy our console”
@HonestHick If MS would really just be interested in King, they could have upfront proposed the run Activision and Blizzard like Sony runs Bungi i.e. as more or less separate companies which do what they want. But MS did not. Instead they just proposed some petty deals with small streaming companies to please the regulators. It is not clear what kind of deal MS proposed to Sony but it likely wasn't a particularly attractive deal or a deal with possible loop holes. Anyway, clearly MS is interested in using Activision and Blizzard for the xbox brand against the competition. In particular since Activision makes most of its money on PS it clearly is a move against PS.
Concerning MS investments in their studios and whether ABK needs such investments: it seems that MS invested in ninja theory indeed. On the other hand MS did not grow their other studios into something truly amazing e.g. rare, or their AAAA studio that mostly moved the perfect dark project to crystal dynamics it seems. So, it is absolutely not clear which way the remnants of ABK will go: downhill or uphill? I would guess rather downhill. At least in the past 20 years MS has not demonstrated that they grow their acquired studios. I also don't think that lack of resources has been the main problem at ABK. Isn't the main problem the workplace atmosphere? Does an improvement here really requires MS? Wouldn't it not be better to get some help from some outsiders i.e. consultants ? Another problem could be the lack of innovations. But will MS inject new ideas ??
I'll probably always have a PC, so for me, I don't know why I'd ever have an XBOX. And if I was a more casual/patient gamer, I might not even have a Playstation and just wait for the exclusives to be ported. (although PC hardware is in a prohibitively expensive place at the moment)
@gaston so i mostly agree with everything you said. ABK decided to sell instead of fix their problems from within. ABK don’t need the money and tech MS has to offer like a Ninja theory or inexile did. I agree MS has to get all these studios together and build a good work chemistry on their releases. Rare is the one i kind of give MS a free pass with, and the reason i say that is, Rare is always trying to be more creative then i think they have the talent for. They aim big and want to be unique in the marketplace. That is hard to do all the time. MS from my understanding let’s rare cook and doesn’t get in their way. Now something i kind of have a different view on, ABK is more about the K at least in the short term so MS can get into mobile and Phil even said that. As for the A: Activison doesn’t have anything big outside of COD, which is coming to Sony. So not sure that hurts anyone. Then there’s one of my favorite studios of all time. B: Blizzard. I think we see Diablo and what not’s stay on PC/Xbox/PS. Diablo 4 is selling the fastest ever, and without PS that don’t happen. Plus it’s a big franchise that has a big install base there. Now this rumored survival game at blizzard could be a Xbox/PC exclusive cause it’s a new IP. So again most of that seems fair to me. I have all 3 consoles, so i am fine either way, but i try my best to think of it from someone with only 1 or 2 consoles. I don’t see much being lost to anyone in this deal. You certainly made some great points tho. Not just being a hater on one brand. So I appreciate that and look forward to more of your posts.
This article is a load of rubbish. Underdog? A trillion dollar company? Was this article indorsed by Phil spinster?
Removed - inappropriate language
@HonestHick I think I already mentioned it, but if MS was saying the truth and really would be just after K and take A and B as a bonus to bolster their game pass portfolio. They could just leave AB (similar to Bungie on the PS side) as a kind of independent multi platform developer which only has to provide the games day one to GP if MS desires that. But they did not do that. Instead MS tries to please regulators by doing these deals with some companies (nobody knows what is actually written in the contracts). They also could have proclaim that everybody who wants a deal to get AB games on their platform will get it, but instead they just offer such deals to a limited number of companies in a now-or-never fashion. In my opinion they clearly know about the huge leverage they get with AB on the console market and they also show that they will use it by offering some (not all) companies deals.
@HonestHick concerning non COD games, there is no reason to believe that any of the games not explicitly mentioned in contracts with the few individual companies will not be MS platform exclusives. So, unless MS is forced to earn some money with their xbox division before they out-bought every competitor from the market, they will make every future game a platform exclusive. There is no reason for them to do otherwise, unless they are really forced to earn money with the xbox division soon.
@gaston well Sony used Sony money to start and fund PS in the beginning. Not to mention the PS3 tore through the PS1-PS2 money. So i am ok with MS using MS money as Xbox is a part of Microsoft the same as PlayStation is part of Sony. Sony as a company is just more divided and so it’s not as easy to use the money they have. I think AB games will continue to see PS consoles. Those have a history there and it helps make back the 69 Billion quicker and keeps the courts happy for when they want to add someone else down the line. Can’t burn the bridge for just ABK. But for sure King is a huge play here. Not the only play, but it opens up a mobile division and that is where the real money is and will pay this deal back and make lots of profits. K just opens doors that don’t exist at the moment. I was proud of Jim Ryan for doing his IGN interview and sounding a lot more ok with the deal for Bethesda. Not liking it, but agreeing it’s not anti competitive. Looks like we will have competition in the high end console market, and i hope Sony makes some great moves with the PS5 now and they keep fighting to earn our money and time 😊
@HonestHick Bethesda games had a huge history on playstation. Nevertheless MS seems not to care about Bethesda fans on ps and the possible money they could have made to recoup the cost for the acquisition. So, no matter what MS claims now, there is absolutely no reason for MS not doing exactly the same thing after the ABK deal goes through.
It is presumably correct that MS also wants to get access to the mobile market. They also may see the 150-950 million GP subscriptions they are missing But, the actions do not show that that is the only goal. If that was the case the just would clearly say all future titles will of course come to ps, because we do not want to alienate the fans of ABK titles.
Exclusive deals and acquiring studios are not automatically harming competition, but if one company buys one publisher after the other (including publishers which have the size of its competitors) and this company has an order of magnitude more money than any competitor than this shifts the market in a way which isl likely not good for consumers. Apple would have the money for such a deal but not Sony or Nintendo. In that sense it is an anti competitive move because non of the competitors would have the possibility to pull of something similar. If this goes through what will MS acquire next? EA? ubisoft ? Will companies like SE, Sega, FromSoftware be more open for being acquired by MS because they see themselves cornered by a giant? This will likely only stop until there is only MS and tencent left. But, I guess that is capitalism ...
@gaston i see your points, i just think with MS having 16% of the global market, they need to keep some exclusives to gain more traction in markets they don’t do well in. PS and Xbox in America are very close in sales and normally are and that’s with Xbox not even having big exclusives. So Xbox has a chance to take America or be neck and neck with Sony. Jim Ryan talked about that. But in other markers MS needs big games to get market share. I find it odd everyone say’s they don’t want MS to be a monopoly, but numbers wise Sony is closer to that 100% market than MS is. Or the people that say they want MS to quit consoles well then that just hands Sony a monopoly. We a hungry Sony to compete with MS. These deals won’t over night make MS catch up to PS. But it won’t make them fall further behind. I agree i see MS buying more companies the size of Fromsoft or I/O but not a EA or Ubisoft. The courts wouldn’t go for another ABK size deal anytime soon. But smaller teams i could see MS get a few more. I mean MS should have been doing this in the 360 era. Sony had a email that showed when the OG Xbox came into the market to buy timed deals and knock MS out cause they knew that wasn’t Sega or Nintendo money, they didn’t want to compete with MS. MS tried to sign deals with the 360 in response but then wiped all their gains away with Xbox one and still only had 4-5 studios and Sony was shopping. Xbox is now showing they are not leaving gaming and would like to be a leader not monopoly in the space. So they opened their wallet and i am mostly ok with it. I love my Xbox and PS like i loved my Sega and Nintendo back in the day. I am happy to see more competition coming to the space and am even happy to see PC players getting day titles. I get the concerns and i think you make some really good points. You seem very smart and passionate in a good way about the business side of the industry. I think this one just needs to finish up with the FTC and see where it goes. 😊
@HonestHick the point is MS has the money to buy pretty much the entire gaming market, sony does not. While sony ciurrently dominates on the platform side, sony does not dominate in terms of software sales. Sony still depends very much on third parties to provide software.
@gaston not to sound like a jerk but that’s a Sony problem. They lost their TV sales to Samsung and wouldn’t lower their prices on their TV’s, then launched TV’s without HDMI 2.1 and VRR, so i bought 2 LG oled’s that would have been Sony TV’s. They went super proprietary media format vs Apple with the ipod and portable MP3 player. Sony Viao laptop division shut down. Sony retail stores shut down, and the list of shut down’s and sell off’s goes on and on and on. So they are pretty reliant on PS business and the console market isn’t growing, it’s shrinking in dollars made and is around the same unit sales as 10-15 years ago. More kids are on tablets, Phones and PC’s. My little girl (10) does not care about consoles, and i have all 3 of them. I even have some upstairs and downstairs, meaning we have 2 PS5’s, 2 Series X’s and 2 switches and she games on iPad. The market isn’t going to be kind to Sony in the future. It will be good enough for them to stay there for sure. But it is going to get tighter with profits as the numbers over the last 10 years have shown. Younger kids simply don’t console in the same numbers. They are fine with weaker version’s of Fortnite on non consoles. Single player games with high production values are insanely expensive, those will only go up in the future, hence Sony trying to land a cash cow live service game. MS has the money to allow the industry to come to them, but first they must fix the Xbox one gen that lost them a lot of customers, their own doing. Sony will have plenty of 3rd party support, as for the foreseeable future they be in the lead hardware unit wise. But Xbox will close the gap on profits with a smaller Xbox unit base compared to PS5. That seems to be the play here as well as not having to outbid Sony for exclusives and of course having day 1 GP. Sony isn’t going to overnight become a trillion dollar company, as i have given examples of they have been a shut down business for years now. But they have plenty to invest into PS and make it a great platform for years and years to come.
@HonestHick I agree that MS clearly has an interest in getting their feet into the mobile market. Otherwise they won't get "the billion" subscribers for GP MS was talking about. But, if they truly would only see cloud providers (amazon, google) and mobile stores (apple, google) as the competition MS would not ride so heavily on the console war train as they do (they rally with console warriors rather than distancing them from such crowds for example, and besides fan boys it is only MS who talks about a console war). They also do not seem to develop mobile versions of forza, gears and other inhouse titles etc or do they ? Also, why not continue to publish bethesda games on PS and rake in some extra cash if PS is not the real competitor and wll be left in distance soon ? Anyway I agree MS thinks big and they want to dominate the mobile market, but first they want to extinguish the competition in the home console sector.
It is possible that the general public loses interest in immersive games (cinematic games on big screens and VR) and if that becomes the only place to make money. I personally would not be very interested in games dumped down to be playable on tiny screens with touch controls. So, I would not really care if Sony misses to steer heavily in that direction and drowns. I would not play those games anyways.
@gaston i agree 100%, i am not interested in playing games on my iPhone or iPad. I even have Apple TV and you can use the controller’s on it and it’s not bad. I have dipped into it a few times to see what it is all about. But at the moment only a handful of titles on there are good. Well i see your point, but i think MS wants Xbox Consoles to be very successful, they just dug a hole there they need to work on. But i think it’s smart to build an ecosystem of Console, PC and mobile/Cloud. That can make money like crazy and give them reach all with the Xbox name. I see Sony getting into that same strategy over time. They can’t and didn’t build that infrastructure like MS has to distribute across all those devices. I would love to see Sony team up with an Apple or Google to help with the tech side of delivery service. Not sure that’s the direction they want to go or if it’s possible. Overall the industry has loads of money flowing in it. Billions of gamers worldwide. MS is smart for casting a larger net to get to them, but i don’t think Sony will be far behind. PS name and consoles have great reach within the industry and they will for sure be a leader for years to come. However and i own all 3, but i get tired of seeing Sony sign deals for Deathloop, Ghostwire, wanted Starfield. Has FF16, Silent Hill, KOTOR, exclusive content and marketing to Hogwarts, the list goes on and on. So yeah MS is saying ok we either stay in 3rd and get forgotten or we start to spend. Now wether i or we or anyone agree how they choose to spend, that’s subjective. But what is true is they are proving with their wallet they want to be in this space and not just hanging around but leading with big titles. Right or wrong thats my take on it and i don’t benefit from any of it, cause i have a PS5 and Series X both upstairs in my Media room and soon to add one of each downstairs in the living room. So i am more than invested into both and won’t be left out for any games. But the point is Sony was seeing blood in the water and wanted to secure all the games and Xbox finally said we will spend money but it’s not a year timed deal we are looking for. That won’t help us long term is what i think they had vision on. Again be that right or wrong, Sony went into a bidding war and MS changed the rules is my take.
@HonestHick I agree it makes sense for ms to also succeed in the console space. But MS claims the console space is not their real interest they are after mobile, but their actions show the opposite they are very much after improving their position in the console space. MS has not shown very big moves in the mobile space besides cloud streaming.
It is hard to say whether sony is far behind in game streaming or whether they just did not update their ps3 streaming infrastructure in the last 10years (or how old it is). Anyway the biggest challenge is latency which can only be overcome by having data centers close to the player (unless one uses predictive input technology and convincingly fools the player that she/he is actually controlling the game). So, I think many data centers are needed all over the world. Given that the gaming hardware is very special it is presumably difficult to find a good use case for the kit outside of the typical gaming hours, so I suppose it will be units dedicated to gaming. MS already has data centers all over the world, they still have to equip those with the dedicated gaming units. Sony is not in the cloud service business so they rely on partners for the basic infrastructure. Given that there are only AWS, MS and to lesser extent google which have data centers all over the world (maybe also cloudfront / cloudflare?) there is not much choice for Sony to partner up. Likely it will be more expensive for Sony.
@HonestHick At first glance gaming everywhere (TV, PC, pad, cell-phone) sounds great. For some games this may work out well. But, do I really want to continue elden ring on a phone while waiting for the bus, rather than enjoying a cinematic view on a big screen surrounded by audio from a nice set of speakers ? Or do I want to play candy crush on a 4k TV with THX sound ? Anyway the play anywhere strategy means that content has to scale from big screen, good controller down to small screen with flimsy controls. So, games will be graphically less detailed, since the detail would likely not look good on small screens or cannot be deciphered and the control scheme has to be simplified.
Concerning cloud gaming, I am quite skeptical. For movie streaming at least latency is not a problem so content can also be streamed from data centers further away. For game streaming content cannot be distributed so much since it has to be close to the player. Also compression is likely less efficient since frames have to be sent as quickly as possible and cannot be compressed in bunches. More computing power is needed than for movie streaming. But who knows maybe it will work greate in the future.
@HonestHick Concerning exclusivity deals. I have no idea how the exclusivity deals come about, but I am pretty sure that it is not Sony looking at about-to-be released content and pressures publishers in releasing exclusively on their platform. I think in most case the publishers want to share the risk and ask for money upfront. They will pitch games to the platform holders. which decides which games to "fund" for the benefit of some kind of exclusivity. Nothing stops MS from doing the same. It is only more expensive for MS since they have to compensate for a larger number of sales the publisher will miss if the content is exclusive to one platform. Anyway MS also had timed and permanent exclusive content. Not sure why MS seemingly had worse such deals. Is it just that their market position is too bad and publishers are just not interested or maybe MS does not offer as good payment as Sony ? Who knows. Anyway MS apparently can buy the biggest publishers so they could also pay more than Sony if they wanted to. For me this argument "Sony gets all the exclusive content and we poor MS don't have a chance to get similar deals. The only chance for us is to buy the entire publisher" does not sound convincing. But what do I know of the cut throat negotiations behind closed doors. Typically it is about money and MS has more. So MS should be able to get good deals.
I am personally mostly interested in VR and I see VR as one big area of innovation. It is a shame that MS removed one of the biggest VR content produces, Bethesda, from the free market One extra reason not to like MS for me. Also in my view VR is an innovation in the gaming space which is rather sabotaged by MS than boosted. But one can of course also see cloud streaming as a big innovation, which is likely faster driven forward by MS. Though, with cloud streaming one still plays exactly the same games just with compression artifacts and with input latency or fake inputs. Which does not sound like innovation to me.
Anyway, I enjoyed the conversation.
@gaston i really enjoyed the conversation. You make some excellent points. Kept it fair and in the lines. Really appreciated your time. I will just say i have a LG 65 inch oled tv with a full Sonos surround system so in the media room, i have no interest in going from that to a phone screen for any game either. I like how you worded that and scale is everything. Some games just don’t work on 2, 3, 4 devices. They work well on console and PC, or in candy crush’s or angry birds case mobile. Downstairs i have a LG 55 inch oled and two HomePods and it gives me a great experience. Those are how i prefer to game and don’t have time to cloud game anywhere. If i am away from my TV’s i don’t need to be gaming. I am visiting friends or family and doing live stuff. I have outdoor hobbies i do and i don’t need video games when i am doing those. So again cloud does nothing for me there. Like the way you worded it. Again thank you so much for talking industry talk with me. It’s a wild ride, but it can help to learn from others and see how some of this stuff benefits them vs how it does or doesn’t for me. Chat with me anytime 😊
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...