MinervaX76

@Banjo- Oh the whole "would you make cod exclusive" question was golden.... "i prefer not to say" before rewording to "dont have enough information"... that screamed "of course i would make it exclusive in a heartbeat!!"

@Banjo- I understood your point, I just went on a bit of a tangent and tried to expand on it not meaning to argue but because I know its the kind of point others will cling to nitpick why anything she decides today will be "wrong", unless she accepts to block.

BTW, I think we get her decision today... I was originally thinking she would grant the temporary block, since it allows for the legal procedure to go through its natural route, but after this clown show, I highly doubt it. Also, this whole week has felt like a real lawsuit. I don't know why, I get the impression usually these temporary block requests are not as active as this one, but then again, I usually just read about them after the fact and never follow them closely.

@SplooshDmg in addition to my Steamdeck, I also bought a Logitech G cloud on the cheap a while back, because it has the potential to dub as a Switch-like device, on games that don't require a lot of quick inputs (like RPGs, real ones, not FFXVI.) If only all my Xbox digital purchases were available for streaming.

I just wish Xbox had a proper handheld "client" with native support even if supporting it was optional to developers and not mandatory as it is with the Series S. Maybe they manage to miniaturize components enough, or create a compatible enough mobile chip, that we end up just getting a portable Series S at some point down the line.

I hear you on PC cloud saves, unfortunately it only seems to work with games that are "play anywhere", the ones that once bought entitle you with both, Xbox and windows stores versions of the game. Agree the xbox team should work on replicating across-the-board cloud saves for non-play-anywhere games.

@SplooshDmg @Banjo- I think its important for this case that the judge is not involved in gaming as that means no bias. I would not say "she does not know what they are talking about. They know the important parts: this is an entertainment media, and some of the content is available for multiple platforms, with multiple features and price points that the user can lever to make their choice of purchase.

Hell, I'm a gamer and I buy most rpgs on switch, not because I relate them with Nintendo more than Xbox, but because of the portability and me preferring to play such games on the move. Although tangent: I have started to shift that to Steam thanks to the Steamdeck. The combination of Steamdeck + Gaming PC result in even greater flexibility. I do hope a future iteration of the Steamdeck comes with its own dock, one that is more integrated into the design so it can actually just "land" on the dock instead of plugging a cable on the top.

Universal dislike, I tell you!!!

@Banjo- sadly the Nintendo testimony was shown bribing closed doors. Press didn’t get access to it.

@SplooshDmg she herself is a live witness that if she was in the market for a gaming system she might pick a Switch over the others over its portability features!

Would bet that projection is based on older Zenimax esrimates that also expected Starfield to launch in 2021.

@BeerIsAwesome fair enough... what we talking about again? oh wait I meant the Command and Conquer... that were actually good, yea that's what I meant!

@BeerIsAwesome There was a very... very bad remaster recently.

from the article:

The COO also reportedly mentioned that Microsoft values SEGA more than other platform operators.

Read between the lines.

Not surprising. ABK and 2K have been very well on the record about their opinions on Game Pass. 2K has been more vocal, at the same time they also think its a great marketing tool for short periods, as we seen some back catalog 2k titles show up for a few months.

Microsoft, just hire Playtonic Games to make a Banjo game that mixes up the crafting systems of Nuts and Bolts with the open-world platforming Nintendo made for Bowser's Fury!

@GeeEssEff its very hard to get younger friends to give anything made in the 80s the time of day (or night).

I covered this earlier, but almost all the "creativity" xbox showed during the 360 gen was outsourced. I posted this a while back, bit lazy to look it up, but almost every exclusive game during that gen was made by a third party. Some were financed and owned, others were simply timed exclusives. Even Gears and Project Gotham Racing were made by third parties.

The only games made in-house were Halo, Fable and the few games Rare made. As their third partners got acquired by bigger publishers, and as they lost market share in the next generation, it became harder and harder for them to be able to cut deals that didn't involve complete game financing, unless they found a struggling studio willing to sign a deal to get the money they needed to finish their titles.

Sony timed exclusivity is not always just a year. They been more aggressive all the time, and extremely secretive about the terms. As its been said plenty of times, look at FF7 remake. We did somehow find out Forspoken was a 2 year exclusivity deal (that by virtue of its failure, will likely never get ported to other consoles.) Sony was investing hard on big and promising new IPs, beyond the usual 1 year deals.

On the point of "gaming for everyone", its just a marketing pitch. Its never meant to imply they want everyone on every console playing every game. They have always followed those lines with very specific disclaimers about "platforms where game pass exists" and the like. They have been very clear on their extended communications they mean that you don't need an Xbox to play their games day on launch day, you can buy an affordable PC, or you can just stream it if that's what you want. But its still a self-relevance thing.

They also have stated they would bring their games to any platform that accepts Game Pass, and its not that crazy of an idea. It's not like bringing PSN to xbox, its more equivalent to allowing EA Play on PlayStation. Game Pass on PlayStation, for example, would certainly only include Xbox published games, no third parties.

And yes, I understand some would see it more positively if they simply worked their way "organically", but its not a realistic expectation. Nintendo has managed recoveries from stumbles before, but only because they already own some of the biggest IPs in the world: Mario, Pokemon, Zelda, among many others.

BTW, I am not saying Xbox should be allowed to buy anything indefinitely. I feel there is a spot where they should be prevented from further publisher acquisitions. What point that is, depends on the size of their next acquisition. If its Sega, I would draw the line there, and not allow them to pursue any acquisitions that are not for specific small studios. If its something smaller, like Devolver or NIS (just examples)? Yea that barely moves the needle.

@Baler Yes, Nintendo. I didnt make the statement, Sega's COO did.

I doubt they are as cranky at Nintendo as they are at Sony, though.

Don't forget: Nintendo also has Xbox owned games on their online service, and 2 characters in Smash Bros. The only company out there fighting it out with everyone is Sony.

@Banjo- Think its going on right now, no clue who is being a witness right now. I been following on and off via The Verge here:
https://www.theverge.com/23768244/ftc-microsoft-activision-blizzard-case-news-announcements

@mousieone If Nintendo states at any point, in any form, they see Sony as a competitor, that's basically the end of the FTC case, because it becomes obvious Sony insists to exclude them out of convenience (to make themselves look as leaders to investors, and to make MS look stronger than they are.)

@GeeEssEff I do realize you stated it was your knowledge, i was not meaning to be a smart ass. Basically the same way I would had said I would "rectify" if a friend told me he had not seen Back to the Future.

Yes, even when adjusted for inflation, Psygnosis acquisition would had not been as much money but that's because gaming was much smaller back then. The point is Sony needed to bully itself into the industry. Xbox has been trying to just inch itself in for multiple decades, and it could had worked had Don Mattrick not happened. But now they are in a position where they either have to bully themselves into a competitive position, or lag so far behind they can never consider themselves competitive. Sadly, as much as it can be "fine" to be a small player, in the gaming world, if you are small enough you generate a vicious cycle of abandonment by third party developers. The longer they are that far behind, the harder it is to organically become competitive, and the more expensive it becomes to "bully" yourself to a decent position.

At the end of the day, MS would had not approved the money be used for this acquisition of anyone could have thought of a more profitable investment, or an investment that would yield more growth. Finding such investments is harder than it might sound, though. That's how they ended up with that much money in hand, because they could not find what to invest the money on. And no, charity is sadly not an option.

@mousieone Sometimes even silence speaks volumes. I just hope we get to hear anything about their stance about the Switch not being seen as "competitor". I'm pretty sure Nintendo sees Sony as competition.

@mousieone Talking of Nintendo... think today is the last day of hearings and Nintendo will be there! That will be juicy! Hopefully not another pre-recorded questioning, though.

Impossible, Jim Ryan specifically told us publishers universally dislike Game Pass!!! Under oath!!! He would not lie under oath.... would he?

To be clear, it is possible he got such statements from every publisher he talked to years ago, during the Xbox One generation. It took years even for smaller titles to join the service, and it was only last year we started to finally see real triple A third party titles arrive day one at the service (although many will argue the definition of triple A when this comes up.)

I honestly dont get the vibe that Jimbo is someone that is in constant direct communication with all publishers. Given his emails to Xbox, his personal negotiation skills seem to be... not the best.

@Jenkinss Use:
[.quote] text

[/quote]

(remove the dot from the first quote, no spaces inside the brackets)

Edit:

You can also use:
[.quote=username]text

[/quote]

That results in something like

The usage of =username does not generate notifications. Thats a double edge sword. It wont spam users, thats good, but you will need to add @username in the text if you actually want them to notice and reply.

"No, not now."

Not surprised. Even if they were in active negotiations, this is the standard response. Saying otherwise can cause a lot of legal issues for a publicly traded company.

Lets not forget both Bungie and BluePoint denied acquisition rumors shortly before being acquired by Sony.

@Baler given Sega's own statement:

The COO also reportedly mentioned that Microsoft values SEGA more than other platform operators.

You might want to instead ask Sony and Sega to value SEGA a bit more? It sounds like both Nintendo and Sony have really been giving SEGA the shoulder. This is a BIG public call-out.

@GeeEssEff

[link] (your google-fu needs more work.)

The chart provided came from a Dec 2022 filing to the FTC by Microsoft, and as labels indicate, are based off 2021 sales data. Definitively not done with "limited" information. We all here are the ones with limited information, and really not in a position to be challenging the data provided by any of these companies, unless we happen to see contradictions between them.

@GeeEssEff

You will find Sony hasnt (at least to my knowledge) bought any publishers.

Lets rectify that: To be able to effectively compete with Nintendo at an international level at the start of their console ventures, Sony acquired the [at the time] largest European publisher, Psygnosis Limited. This was later renamed to SCE Studio Liverpool, and later Studio Liverpool. Mind you, for today's scale, Psygnosis was a tiny indie studio, but so was EA and Activision. In 95, Psygnosis games accounted for 40% of all video games sales in Europe. So, relatively speaking, they were gigantic. Find a publisher today that can claim that share of the market!

It's very likely without that publisher's acquisition, the PlayStation we know today would not exist. Sadly, on a trend that has just ramped up lately, Sony simply shut their development studios in 2012.

In feel a lot of people are forgetting a few things:

Sony didn’t start exclusives, but Natia was not involved with the industry until he became CEO of Microsoft. During his involvement in the industry, it is Sony that has pursued third party game lockdowns the most aggressively to anyone else.

@Kienda

Microsoft didn’t say they wanted to spend Sony out of business, one executive said that in an email.

They didnt even say they wanted to do it, they said they were in a position to do so, and then simply suggested to invest 2-3 billions on acquisitions for the following year. Thats not even suggesting an attempt at actually doing what they thought they could do.

If you listen to some, the only reason we get day one third party games on Game Pass is because someone at MS bribed someone at the government. Yea that somehow makes sense to some there.

There is a lot of overreacting to this quote. For one, it does not end with “we should actually do it”, instead he suggests spending 3 billion in acquisitions. I doubt he really thought 3 billions was going to drive Sony out of business.

Yea; they are now spending 69 billion acquiring ABK, but before doing it they sat with Sony’s President and with Jim Ryan reassuring them CoD (the only game that could hurt them if it became exclusive) would remain on the platform.

So, yea, they are not attempting to kill Sony with acquisitions.

Edit: this statement says something we all believe. Tell me who here, that is opposing the deal, has not been saying exactly the same, thad MS has the money to spend Sony out of business?

The fact that this is the only email used as evidence, despite the FTC having had access to the last 5 years of emails from MS, says that this was just that. They could not come up with any more emails on follow up, planning to actually do that, agreement, anything. If you can find this email and no follow up to bury MS, it’s likely because there is nothing there.

@EquiinoxGII My statement was not that there were no exclusives, there were quite a few, but that most exclusives were contracts, not internal games.

Of the stuff you listed, Only Conker, Halo, Forza were made by internal studios. Everything else were contracts and exclusivity agreements.

@eduscxbox

Ohhh noo, MS destroyed Rare. They allowed them to make a Pirate themed game with 30 million+ Players. Such a disaster.

It's kinda funny, I can understand wanting a new Banjo game, but Rare does not make more Banjo games for practically the same reasons Naughty Dog does not make Jack and Dexter games. They feel they "grew out" of that phase.

It is a bit sad that only Nintendo and Sega's Team Sonic seem to think that kind of game are not something to grow out of, but its what it is with most devs in the last few decades.

I figured I would post this here, just posted it on Push Square, but given the topic of "japan has laws against foreign company acquisitions", I figured I would clarify this myth:

Acquiring Japanese companies is entirely possible and not blocked by any regional laws, outside similar regulatory procedures as those we see in other countries.

The biggest roadblock is for hostile takeovers and not due to legal blocks, but due to cross-shareholding, a practice where banks hold stock in the companies they lend to, while borrowers end up also holding positions in the banks that lent money to them. This creates a complex relationship between the companies and the banks that stifle takeover activities. Even that barrier is slowly weakening.
[link with more info]

Despite the recency of these financial changes, there are quite a few Japanese companies owned by foreign ones. Nissan is, for example, owned by Renault, a French company. And Sharp is owned by Foxconn, a Taiwanese company.

You can actually find companies like this one that specialize in aiding international companies to navigate regional laws and regulations, or hunt for investment opportunities.

TLDR: Japan has no laws to block foreign acquisitions.

Damn, that sounds so low… maybe it’s because outside Hellblade they don’t really own any relevant established IP?

@Baler Phill has stated they don’t like to mandate any studio what they need to work on next.

If they want a very specific game done, and no internal studio is interested, they go out and seek a third party that can be contracted, and has the skills, to do such a project. Problem is there are not that many studios out there with a solid track record making 3D platformers outside of Nintendo. I would not be shocked if the few available, like the makers of Luckys Tales, might be too busy working on their own IP.

Both look interesting to me, just need to find the time.

@TheSimulator Ubisoft is quite big. If the ABK deal goes through, I cant see regulatory agencies allowing MS to get away with also acquiring Ubisoft. If the ABK falls through (unlikely) I would not be shocked if they do pursue Ubisoft next.

@EquiinoxGII

So many great internal games created.

They didn't have that many. What did they actually own? Bungie making Halo, Lion Head making Fable and later on Turn 10 making Forza. There was also Rare making games that didn't really land. Almost all other Xbox exclusives were contracts with third parties.

Alan Wake, contract.
Gears of War? Contract.
Crackdown? Contract.
Mass Effect 1? Contract.
Dead Rising? Contract.
Forza Horizon? Contract (until fairly recently.)

This continued to the launch of the XOne:
Ryse: Son of Rome? Contract
Killer Instinct? Contract
Quantum Break? Contract
Titanfall? Contract
ReCore? Contract
Scalebound (canceled)? Contract

The problem with Xbox is precisely they relied too much on third party contracts during their peak. When they lost ground (and 2 studios) they suddenly could no longer negotiate favorable third-party contracts and didn't have enough in-house force to keep them relevant.

@MattT3142 I heard that Moon Studios was offered an acquisition but they wanted to remain independent.

Asobo is one they should at least invest on, because it would be very bad if they happen to lose Flight Sim dev the way they lost Double Helix Games for Killer Instinct.

Stated this in PushSquare but I would not be shocked if this still can happen after the ABK deal goes through, but should they go through with it, I dare bet they would keep all existing IP multi-platform. All future persona, sonic, etc, all would be multi-platform, mostly because it would devastate Microsoft's reputation in Japan if they took over and made it all exclusive.

This is not to say they would not create new IP that are Xbox exclusive, or resurrect IPs like Jet Set Radio as Xbox exclusive.

Their relationship has gotten extremely close in recent years, they are basically in a dating period and they cant move anything forward due to the ABK deal.

@Reptilio This game was announced that far in advance not for our sake, but so they could start recruiting. Sure, they could had started recruiting without announcing the title, but it's a lot harder to convince people to submit resumes for a new game, than it is with a classic IP that many have fond memories of. Many devs will jump at a chance to work on an IP like Perfect Dark. Few are likely to jump at a chance to work on Microsoft's latest experimental new studio with zero track record.

This does not compute for me…. “Preproduction”, as far as I understand, means… they have not started production. This rumor, as I read it, implies that work is both, progressing, and not actually started….

@SplooshDmg I think every single Creation Engine game made so far has launched with its own mod-manager built in. I doubt they will leave that out on the PC release. I still bought the Constellation edition for PC that just comes with a Steam key, so I'll most likely will be playing it on Steam, still (there is a chance I just threw money at a watch I'll never wear and play the game on Game Pass PC..., yea I'm that dumb with money sometimes.)

Not done with Tears of the Kingdom, but taking a break to play a bit of Final Fantasy XIV on my PC.

Might finally sit down and play a little bit of Bookwalker on Game Pass, the concept behind that game has grabbed my attention.

Maybe, I am not sure yet.

I have a lot of time stacked up, got to go to my account to see how much I have left. I’m still debating if I should stack more time to “refresh” to the limit, or just wait until it expires and only renew whenever there is something of interest to me.

There is a chance at some point there will always be something of interest to me, and the price difference is not that high, but at the same time, I also plan already to some months be likely exclusively playing UBisoft games via UBisoft+ (mirage, avatar, Star Wars outlaws), were I also plan to just subscribe for the month.

So… not decided yet. I have come to a breaking point with subscriptions in general where I had to basically shut down all my streaming services because I was spending too much money a month in them and rarely using them, don’t want to keep doing that for services I don’t use absolutely all the time.

@NEStalgia 20fps, why waste resources in 30fps when you can invest on fidelity?

I would also be that specific after Sony threatened to withhold PS6 dev kits over trade secret concerns. He won't put himself or Microsoft in a position where Sony can force his under-oath statements to become a lie.

@SplooshDmg I can almost understand doubt on the platofrm's long term viability year one, but after that, the success of the Switch became unquestionable. Even ABK has decided it was worth it to port Overwatch and Diablo to the platform. Apex Legends and Fortnite seem to feel the platform is critical, but the Activision side of ABK seems to think if they cant have a sweetheart deal for CoD, then you cant have CoD.

I don't see anything saying they don't either, but after today's testimony, I think the reason CoD games are not on the Switch is because Nintendo told ABK to accept their standard rev share or go [bleep], and ABK [bleeped].

ABK bothered making Wii versions of Modern Warfare 3, if they really wanted to have a version on the Switch, they would have one. Hell, there was a Nintendo DS version of Modern Warfare 3!

@somnambulance I think part of the issue is that Todd is a bit of a control freak. He refuses to delegate IPs to other teams, if he is not deeply involved in the development of Elder Scrolls, Fallout or (now) Starfield, he won't let anyone do any work on it, and any one of these projects are absurd time commitments to be able to lead two of them in parallel.

It annoys me a lot more about Fallout, its not even a game he created, they just bought the rights to the IP. Let someone work on that one, at least!

@Belkan depends who's cloud. xCloud relies on Xbox hardware, it does not run on Windows or PCs, so xboxes would continue to be a thing.

Similarly with Sony's service, it simply runs on console hardware/OS.

Other services would likely result in consoles becoming irrelevant.

I do think both, MS and Sony expect consoles to eventually die off, reason both are working very hard on having a PC presence. Sooner or later, expect Sony to enter the PC market with a Steam competitor, similar to what Epic is doing.

I dont expect that game to release in 10 years. 😔