Kevw2006

@Romans12 You're right, there is a reason that Microsoft is a trillion dollar company and Sony is not but it has absolutely nothing to do with gaming. The Xbox gaming division is heavily subsidised by it's parent company (MS), whereas PlayStation is largely one of the divisions that keeps its parent company (Sony) afloat. Microsoft is only making the moves it is because of the money it makes elsewhere, and because of the infrastructure they have in place because of who they are.

@BBB You should perhaps clarify that to UK Xbox gamers as I can assure you that there are plenty of people in the UK that think the CMA have come to the correct decision.

@PsBoxSwitchOwner Exactly, the EU weren't afraid to stand up to Apple on charging ports so they wouldn't be afraid to stand up to MS either. Although I do think that they will approve the deal on this occasion.

Each additional one of these ten year deals convinces me more and more convinced that MS KNEW that cloud was always going to be a problem. It also makes me think that the fact MS feels that these deals are needed then the CMA decision isn't as ludicrous as people are saying.

@BAMozzy Blocking the deal doesn't stop anything. CoD could fine we'll be made available on the cloud if Activision wanted it to. It's only one route to it being made available on cloud that has been closed off. Everything that MS were offering, including bringing CoD to "Nintendo platforms", ABK could still do if they really wanted to.

@Sebatrox Excellent comeback, well played 🙂 I'll even confess to owning all but the PC version 😂

@Sebatrox Are you sure 1m people haven't just bought Skyrim 30 times each with the amount of releases it's had? 😂

@Sebatrox That sounds an awful lot like blackmail.

@Trmn8r You have way more faith in people than I do. I'm positive there are some people out there that would read the headline and think Redfall is only available on game pass. The rest of the article doesn't even mention it's available to purchase separately. A little bit of additional clarification would have done no harm.

@FenIsMightier That's true, it's something I find particularly annoying that it's a necessity for cross play and hopefully somewhere down the line a better solution is found. I was only mentioning Minecraft in response to a post that was highlighting the discrepancy in the number of PS and Xbox consoles out there compared to the number of active accounts that they report. I could be way off the mark though.

This seems like a prudent thing to do if the box does indeed mention 60fps and it isn't going to be ready for release. That is if the image is genuine and the box does indeed state that.

@Sebatrox The next sentence in that faq is the part I was speaking about - "With a Microsoft account, Minecraft players on PS4 can play with others on non-PlayStation devices such as iPadOS, iOS, Android, Xbox, Nintendo Switch, and Windows devices (via cross-play, Realms, or Servers).". If you want to play with people on other devices you need to have a Microsoft account.

@Sebatrox I could be wrong but I believe Minecraft may have something to do with those figures looking so weird. Even playing on PS you need to log in to an MS/Xbox account to use online functionality.

MS and Activision definitely aren't coming out of this looking good from their responses. They should just keep a dignified silence and follow due process for the appeal. These sort of statements aren't going to help their appeal.

@Trmn8r Fair point, although I did just say there would be less chance and not that it wouldn't happen at all. I was more referring to if the likes of CoD or GTA were acquired as you know that a significant portion of development time is solely going to be taken up by them. We all know that the Elder Scrolls 6 is coming and there will likely be a new Fallout too.

@Trmn8r I wouldn't want Sony to buy them either. I much prefer their current strategy towards acquisitions where they have largely bought developers that they had (mostly, Bungie being the exception) already had a long standing relationship and were semi-exclusive , or the newly created studios that they have bought recently. I wouldn't be in favour of them buying up Rockstar and making GTA VI exclusive, for example. Buying up existing publishers with a whole host of ip's bundled along with them doesn't help innovation as it means there's less chance they will create any new ones of their own as they will just milk the ones they have acquired. If the ABK deal is blocked then that reduces the need for Sony to have to respond with a significant acquisition of its own, and that can't be a bad thing for everyone.

@Moonglow Most of the time I saw people saying that Microsoft should invest in and grow their own studios it was in response to people saying that Sony should invest in their own studios to people that weren't happy about the ABK deal, clearly unable to see the irony in their statement.
No one is saying it would happen overnight but Microsoft already have some great studios in their portfolio that with some additional investment could already be producing a steady stream of great games and it would cost a fraction of the money they are willing to spend for ABK.

@Trmn8r I hope you include Microsoft in that statement as there's nothing to stop them from developing their own CoD competitor either if the deal doesn't go through. Although bearing in mind the development resources it takes for Activision to churm out a new CoD release every single year it would be a tall ask for anyone to match that.

@abe_hikura I don't see that being possible without having to put game pass prices up, or create an additional higher tier. As they would still be third party MS would need to compensate Activision for having their games on game pass and I don't see them being able to cover what they are paying EA for EA Play and Activision at current prices. Plus Activision would need to start offering their own streaming service that could be incorporated in to game pass and there doesn't seem to be much desire from them to have their own streaming service at the moment.

@Trmn8r I wouldn't dream of playing CoD multiplayer over the cloud at the moment, although at some point in the future it will quite likely become common practice and that may have been taken into consideration by the CMA.

@Widey85 Even though I still expect it to go through one way or another Xbox will be just fine without ABK. Bear in mind that the deal being blocked doesn't mean they are going to lose out on anything they currently have and it's highly unlikely ABK will be entering into any sort of deals with Sony off the back of everything that has happened during the saga so MS could still take advantage there.

So what happens now? I assume there will be an appeals process?

It sounds like they almost want people to treat game pass like a trial service if they are launching games into a subscription service but also expecting games to pull in reasonable sales figures.

@Banjo- Most of the comments I see saying the gap is bigger is from those in favour of the ABK deal, where the claim is that Sony 'dominates' the market share and MS needs ABK to be able to compete and close the gap. Those figures you posted paint a massively different picture

@Cikajovazmaj I think you may have hit the nail on the head there. MS may have created a problem for themselves with their focus on game pass that some devs may not feel it is worth releasing a game on Xbox if they can't/don't want to release on game pass for one of many reasons. Not every game can be added to game pass and MS need to pick the games they add carefully to ensure quality and a variety of content so it's quite possible that the devs will wait until it is possible, or just not bother with an Xbox version altogether.
I've seen recent articles where indie devs have said that their games generally favour releasing on Xbox as they are promoted better and generally sell better, despite the lower install base so I can't see it being because of the user base size.

@GuyinPA75 Sorry but you've totally lost me now. What does any of that have to do with companies contributing towards political campaigns? I'm quite deliberately avoiding the wider issue as it's already been discussed to death on many other articles already and it's largely just the same arguments being repeated over and over.

@Sebatrox I await the US government wanting an investigation raised into Xbox's domination of the Mexican market 😂

@GuyinPA75 So both of them may do it but it's wrong for one to do it but perfectly acceptable for the other to do the exact same thing? Seems fair. It's irrelevant who is the market leader in such instance, and it's not exactly like MS are some small struggling up and comer, they're one of the largest companies in the world.
That murder analogy literally makes no sense, I honestly have no idea what point you are even trying to make there. All I said that I'd be surprised if both weren't engaging in some form of contributions to political campaigns in some way. The only way you could take issue with that is if you believe Microsoft aren't.

@GuyinPA75 Are you saying Microsoft aren't? I'd be surprised if both weren't contributing in some way.

@Sebatrox I've already clarified that and it was an error in my original post where I meant to say console or hardware instead of just console. Kinect Adventures was included with every Kinect, not Xbox 360. It would be pointless to bundle a game that required an additional piece of hardware that wasn't also included in the package.

@Sebatrox No one said it was. If that was the case Kinect Adventures would be much further up that list.
I'm not getting what your point is, every console has had limited release bundles which have had a game or games included with the console. This is not a phenomenon that has only happened with PlayStation. These bundles aren't the only option that is available so people can decide to buy that bundle if they want the game included, or just buy the console and a different game separate. I'm talking about consoles/hardware (e.g. Kinect) where there was a specific game included with every console whether you wanted it or not.
Also, to further illustrate the point I am trying to make. If Sony had decided to bundle, say, Knack in with every PS4 it would have over 100m sales on the link you provided. Would that have instantly made Knack a great game? No, it would only be on the list because anyone that bought a PS4 got it whether they wanted it or not.

@Sebatrox Every Kinect, again I'm fairly sure you already knew that though

@Sebatrox I'm sure you already know this but the difference is that the ones I was referring to were included with EVERY console and not just a specific limited bundle that was made available when a game released that in most cases you could decide to buy that bundle if you wanted the game, or just buy the console on its own and buy any game you wanted.
I stand corrected on Minecraft, although it was still comfortably in the top 10 at the time and would likely have been higher had MS not had an exclusivity agreement for the console version which expired not long before MS acquired Mojang.

@Sebatrox Most of the non-Nintendo games on that list are all multiplatform, including Minecraft (which I'm sure was already top of that list when MS bought them so it's not like it's there because of MS). A lot of others, like Wii Sports were bundled in with consoles so have artificially inflated sales because people got them whether they wanted them or not. Kinect Adventures falls into this category too. Although I'm really not sure what relevance game sales has to a post about how a game performs on Xbox.

@UltimateOtaku91 The only way I could see MS being so confident of bringing CoD to Nintendo that they would sign a deal guaranteeing it is if it is in some form of cloud capacity. I know that they haven't specifically mentioned the Switch so it could be whatever the successor to the Switch is but you can't include theoretical users for a system that isn't even out yet as potential users in any PR or marketing. The next Nintendo console could be a WiiU style flop.
Although looking at the advert again it is possible that the 150 million users could be mobile and smart TV, which I agree that 150 million potential users would be a rather low estimate for those.

@UltimateOtaku91 I think the assumption is that it is made up of Switch users and those that are included as part of the various other 10 year deals that have been signed. Of course 150 million is just a theoretical figure as those 150 million 'extra' users could already have a PC, Xbox or PS that they could already play CoD on if they wanted to.

@Sebatrox To be fair Redfall looks like it could have released on Xbox One too. Outwith Flight Simulator I'm yet to see a current gen game that couldn't have run on the previous gen hardware.

@Sebatrox You do realise you just linked to a video where a log of people were commenting saying the gameplay felt that smooth they didn't even realise it wasn't 60fps there? But if anything it does show that 30fps can still be a perfectly enjoyable experience when it's done right.

They could always just release it as a beta or early access version until the 60fps patch is ready. That way those that are happy to play at 30fps can still enjoy it and those that want 60fps can wait until the 'full' release.

@Belkan But Forspoken is only a third party game, Redfall is first party. People expect first party games to perform better and ultimately it is up to MS/Sony/Nintendo to ensure that first party games are of a certain quality. Naughty Dog and Sony are rightfully getting criticised for the state of The Last of Us on PC at the moment.

@Belkan So let me get this right, MS chooses the best of the best, MS buys Bethesda thus making them a first party studio. Any subsequent issues with a Bethesda developed game are purely Bethesda's doing and MS have no blame, even though they only choose the best of the best.
Maybe they should be asking for their money back.
Also, the comments on that post I linked weren't just talking about Redfall, a lot were also talking about MS games in general.

@Belkan You'd be better trying to tell that to the people commenting on this post.
https://www.purexbox.com/news/2023/04/redfall-will-only-run-at-30fps-when-it-launches-on-xbox-series-x-and-s

@ZuneTattooGuy Microsoft would be absolutely delighted if someone that subscribes to game pass paid extra money to buy a game outright on top of that. It would be madness to think otherwise.

@Deshalu The difference there is that if Darkhorse were to buy Batman they would be buying it directly from the competitor that would lose out the most from them buying the character (DC). As such DC would make sure they were adequately compensated for their loss by getting the most money they possibly could from the sale.
Also, I'm fairly sure that any cut to production for PSVR2 was more likely a direct result of the pre-orders and sales being far lower than originally expected.

@Deshalu Isn't that Microsoft's own fault though? Surely they should be prioritising investing in and growing the studio's that they already have over simply going out and buying other, bigger ones? I know that doesn't happen overnight and takes time but if they have billions to spend on purchasing other devs and publisher's then they should be able to invest in building their existing studios too. It seems to show a bit of a lack of faith in the ones they already own.

@Sol4ris I play on PlayStation but I in no way have anything against Xbox. I prefer coming on here is I find it much more interesting engaging with people that have a difference of opinion rather than nodding dogs that agree with your perspective. There's never any offence intended 🙂

@Deshalu I agree that competition is good. Currently, Microsoft owns 23 developers and Sony owns less than that. Doesn't adding ABK on top of things stack things too far in Microsoft's favour?

@Sol4ris I'm not pretending anything to fit any narrative. Yes, those characters have appeared on other consoles in previous games by different developers but the insomniac games are quite clearly separate from any game that has gone before and in no way associated with any game that has been developed and released elsewhere. I mean if you're using that argument then Master Chief has appeared on both PS and Nintendo before so should Halo therefore release on those too?

@Sol4ris Well I'm fairly sure that Insomniac's Marvel's Spiderman has never appeared on anything other than PS and PC and their Wolverine series hasn't actually released any game on any platform so far but I'm happy to stand corrected if there is any evidence that suggests otherwise. Although a quick look on the wiki page for the series doesn't suggest there are any other releases I am unaware of.

@Deshalu You're confusing characters with IP, there has only been two Marvel's Spiderman games in the franchise and neither of those were ever multiplatform (other than a later pc release). Likewise there hasn't even been a Wolverine game released in that IP yet so it can't have been removed from any other platforms as it's never existed anywhere yet.
Also, what franchises has Sony bought and removed from other consoles that they were previously available on? Sunset Overdrive? The first one is still available and there has been no sequel to remove.