While the juiciest details haven't come out, due to the situation with, for example, Final Fantasy, they might have got Sony to shoot themselves in the foot.
They asked for too much rope, and Sony did the stupid and gave them just enough.
There's a LOT of developers, especially in Japan, who aren't seeming to be giving XBOX a fighting chance.
Nippon Ichi did a poorly optimized Windows-only build of Disgaea 4 Complete, where the online just did not work for most of it's Game Pass run, and otherwise, every single game they've developed is Windows/Switch/Playstation.
It's almost like some strange thing is going on, despite Microsoft's TGS claims of approaching Japanese developers, where someone's getting there first and asking them to politely exclude Microsoft.
The fact that Microsoft found a partial exclusion clause in the paperwork for Call Of Duty... and Sony are trying to keep some of their documents secret... makes me think Sony's done similar to with FF7 Remake with practically every single game they can out of the country.
The CMA's offer would be like if, when Disney acquired Marvel, the FTC went up to them and suggested they either:
A) Sold the Avengers to DC or IDW. B) Allowed the Marvel Comics imprint to spin off on it's own. C) Allowed the Marvel Comics imprint and any Marvel movie rights to go to the highest bidder.
Option A would cripple their early financial gains from the deal, since they just gave up their biggest asset. Option B would sound better, but the rights would be a nightmare for a long time. Option C... So what exactly do they buy then?!
@Kaloudz The point isn't that they're considering the 10 year offer 'at the next stage', it's that their ideal offer is to literally give Sony the keys to the kingdom, with no other choice.
If the CMA's offer was 'Sell Activision' or 'Sell Blizzard' or 'Sell King' or any combination of the above, that would be pro-consumer. That the offer is 'You sell Call Of Duty OR you sell Activision OR you only buy King at a ridiculous price', says that the current offer is that they give Sony a perfect way to acquire control of CoD for the foreseeable for little financial gain.
That the ten year deal and everything else is to be considered AFTER pushing for this completely unworkable divesting deal, well, Microsoft need to persuade them that they're listening to the wrong people.
Let's look at the remedies the CMA are suggesting...
1. Microsoft and ABK put Call Of Duty up for sale for anyone to buy. Now, even if Sony aren't allowed to put a offer in, you can guarantee they'll put the usual pressure whatever company does, and it becomes 100% Playstation Exclusive. Sony win.
2. Microsoft spins Activision back off as it's own company. Again, Sony could easily approach New Activision and claim excessive control over Call Of Duty behind the CMA's back, due to their way of doing exclusivity, which doesn't trip their checks.
3. Microsoft buys King. Sony laugh their head off at how much Microsoft paid for a mobile platform.
All the offered remedies are not going to help Microsoft one bit, and will only benefit Sony in the long run. This judgement by the CMA is a massive success for Sony.
Hell, It's blindingly obvious WHO is really the one controlling the investigation due to the 'suggestion' that 'removing Call Of Duty' would be a good remedy, or Microsoft just taking Blizzard.
That reads more like 'Just give Sony everything they want and more and we'll allow it to go through'.
Something I will say is that I think that Strive's launch of XBOX is a case of Sooner rather than Later, due to the fact they're doing it as an Open Beta Test. If the game was releasing in a few months, they'd be doing at least one CBT, then opening it up when they're close to launch.
One thing that does need some getting used to is seeing 2023 in the copyrights, the XBOX controller where the N64 one was...
That there's a lot of screen tearing and other artefacts, well, as said in the article, this is Goldeneye N64, warts and all. We just didn't notice all these things until the resolution was pin-sharp 1080p or higher.
@EliJapan Input lag is not something exclusive to cloud gaming. It's why most rhythm games test your input lag before letting you do anything in the game proper. The combo tutorials also act as a stealth lag check, and the timing window, especially on Easy, is much kinder than Necrodancer.
Pretty much the problem with cancel culture is simple.
Rick and Morty, along with High On Life, are full of low brow humour that is a hallmark of Justin Roiland's roles. I don't give a ***** if three years ago he was slapped with a restraining order about a former girlfriend, or if he did indecent acts with kids when he was younger.
It doesn't matter in the present day... until it does. They could cast Christopher Lloyd as Rick Sanchez, and find a soundalike for Morty, but it wouldn't quite be the same.
The anarchist has been forced to quit the business because the business didn't want him.
@Jenkinss It's not like World in that you have to head towards your base camp in Solo/Offline mode, but you do have to specifically turn Online mode on after finishing the tutorials.
It's no 'conspiracy'. Activision were in trouble due to Brian Kotick trashing the company's monetary and public values, funnelling everything in Activision into fuelling the great maw of Call Of Duty, due to how much he was making off it, with multiple lawsuits from staff upcoming.
Microsoft offered him a golden parachute as part of the sale, and to value it at above market value, so everyone who lost their job would make a nice sum, and they were eyeing up King as a way to start a proper mobile gaming division.
Microsoft don't care about the gargantuan monstrosity that is Call Of Duty, they'd give Sony a exclusivity deal until the PS6 to get them to shut up about it, if Sony actually answered their calls.
Blizzard and King are the big ticket items, and the fact they own two massive licenses in (World Of) Warcraft and Overwatch. If Microsoft got Blizzard to develop a WoW client for consoles, with Game Pass owners getting a basic subscription for free, well, similar thing to when they transitioned Minecraft to Bedrock.
Even Sony accepted the deal after a while of grumbling.
Under Sony, ABK would have all development shuffled to either Call Of Duty or Overwatch, and anything else would get much less support. Why? Because both of those are on console, and Sony only cares about what you play on Playstation.
That's exactly it, NES. Sony would love to buy Activision outright, and own Call Of Duty for the rest of time immaterial, while Tencent consumes Blizzard and King to recover their own losses.
And what would it mean for the rest of the market?
Tencent would have complete control over the Riot Games and Blizzard catalogues, and Sony could very easily make a lot more of Call Of Duty exclusive to Sony for as long as they want.
Sony's whole argument, that caused this, is that Microsoft bought a franchise Sony have over-exploited to ridiculous levels, and that they know the golden goose is cooked if the deal goes through. They even put a clause into the contract with ABK to block it releasing on Game Pass for an indeterminate period.
So, If Microsoft fail to close the deal, Activision will be in trouble financially, and Sony and Tencent carve up the corpse, with Sony knowing, if they didn't give Tencent a nice big chunk, they'd be in front of the FTC and CMA over market manipulation since it was THEIR arguments which spearheaded the investigations.
@teknium_ That something can be installed using the app means nothing. 99% of games can be installed using the app.
No-one except some very dubious leaker thinks either of those games are coming to Game Pass at the moment. I'm already making plans to buy SF30th, I believe their 'announcement' so much.
It's like Hot Wheels, except that WAS announced by Microsoft for Game Pass. Never guarantee anything until it drops.
If the CMA and FTC reject, and are successful in blocking it, and Sony 'swoops in' and rescues the 'beleaguered' Activision Blizzard at fire sale prices...
If no-one blocks that, it won't just be Microsoft's supporters who'll call foul.
OK, Three days to persuade me to give the game a shot. Three days to persuade me that Saints Row needed a total reboot. Three days to persuade me to part with my money...
@antstephenson This is actually a good idea. Another possible thing they could do is allow someone to select, from the one or two periods where game departures happen in a month, ONE game which DOESN'T leave their library. It is one or their free games for the month.
No more situations where you get some terrible game that you're not going to play, instead, YOU pick that one game you're still playing from a year or two ago.
What ABK and Microsoft's filing was, mostly, was picking apart the case the FTC filed and going through it, paragraph-by-paragraph and going 'Not relevant to us', 'We refute it' or 'Refer to source'...
And while it's immensely frakking boring, it points out how the FTC are in la-la land trying to say that the ABK deal is a Bad Thing, since their whole case relies on vague details and fear-mongering.
Now, I already know Street Fighter 5 was an exclusion agreement. Sony bankroll some of the development costs, and it ends up exclusive to Playstation or Windows platforms, and the fact Monster Hunter Rise is coming to XBOX next month shoots down arguments from a few weeks back over Nintendo doing similar 'exclusion' deals.
So, yes, FF7R having both the EGS and Steam release windows pass but no sign of it on Nintendo or XBOX... Now, I'd understand Nintendo, since games need a lot more work to run on the system, but XBOX? Was sus from the start.
What makes me think these are Sony sockpuppets is the language of their major complaint, and the mention of 'foreclosing' rivals.
The entire complaint is far too eloquent for most gamers, but the term 'foreclosing rivals' is ALL OVER Sony's filing from a few weeks back. They use the term 'foreclosure' constantly, and it's only really used in that context by Sony.
Their whole rhetoric is acting like Microsoft Corporation and Microsoft XBOX are the same company, and some monolithic company who wants to own the PC and console market, and are gobbling up companies like Pac-Man.
That would be like saying DC Comics buying IDW is trying to topple Marvel but writing WB Discovery on the lawsuit. They're not the same thing.
Let's ignore the numbers for a moment and consider what this means for the FTC's case. The FTC want to present a case of that big, mean Microsoft is planning to screw the entire industry by hoarding game after game after game to ensure that everyone buys Windows, buys XBOX and buys... Oh wait, Do they still do Windows Mobile? Where was I? Oh yes, A consumer buys only Microsoft products on Microsoft-backed systems and Microsoft uses its considerable PC market share and unparalleled buying power to shut down Sony (and Tencent) and be a monopoly on the gaming market.
Deals like the one they rejected don't fit that storyline. Microsoft are openly negotiating to make a deal that would offer more people the games they want to play on the system they want to play. Microsoft are on good terms with Nintendo and Valve...
I could see the FTC, or a Sony handler, putting forward the 'kind' offer to end the lawsuit entirely of Microsoft making a reduced bid for Blizzard and King, with Sony itself being allowed to make a bid on the Activision portion.
There we are, everyone's happy, Sony's bigger, Microsoft's bigger, and that poison clause in the Sony contract with Activision doesn't need to get brought up in court.
So what if it means Microsoft may well lose Call of Duty entirely? They managed to negotiate a way for the merger to go ahead that is going to avoid that nasty monopoly Sony told them about.
Sony just needed to leave it alone, maybe, behind closed doors, negotiated a better deal, not spent a lot of time and money trying to force Microsoft into a worse deal, Jim Ryan thinking that, if Microsoft fail to get the merger, he'll be able to get it for much less, letting Tencent walk off with Blizzard and King, while he makes a billion dollar deal for Activision itself.
But as @Nestalgia points out, Sony's whole situation hinges on ABK and Tencent not being furious and the FTC not twigging that they're engaging ALREADY in market manipulation on a grand scale.
Back when SEGA collapsed, it was a tragedy that didn't need Sony to spend much at all to help along. With Microsoft, they need to find some huge way to force Microsoft to have billions of dollars wiped off their value, and Jimbo hopes ABK's acquisition collapsing will do just that.
When actually, it could be Sony who end up in a hole they'll never dig their way out of.
It's a good bluff, and it puts Sony in a pinch. Microsoft produces a 'draft agreement' offering Sony a generous deal for Call of Duty, and they have to give a good reason to the court why they're not accepting it, when it covers the core part of their complaint.
Add to that an 'earlier agreement' was discussed on the day, and Sony's situation becomes even more shaky. Microsoft could take over the courtroom by stating that Sony is actively sabotaging the deal by requiring Microsoft make anti-competitive concessions to them, citing the agreements Sony felt were inadequate.
Microsoft could have Valve, Nintendo and ABK itself standing with them, all declaring the deal is good for consumers, good for business, and bad for only one person, who is trying to use the FTC and similar to keep their market share intact, if not expand it.
They pretty much bought a piece here and a piece there. Tencent are equivalent to some kid sneaking around and grabbing a piece here and a piece there of the buffet and getting a pretty damn good meal out of it.
The reason they don't get noticed is that they don't trumpet their ownerships that much. You don't see on Wild Rift 'Copyright Riot Games, a division of Tencent', it's solely 'Riot Games'. It's like some games were developed by Dimps completely uncredited for YEARS.
Sony like to pretend they're still No. 1, and that China, through Tencent, doesn't practically own most of the games market, and probably even has a stake in all three companies under it.
Nintendo doesn't care if they're Number 2 or Number 3, preferring to coast on the fact that they could churn out handheld devices until hell freezes over and still make their shareholders happy.
If Sony stop the ABK deal, and get Activision for its fire sale price after the company value drops even lower, and the same people who helped them block the deal keep the FTC and similar busy, Microsoft drops back to third, and Sony become an even more unassailable first.
Call Of Duty exclusive content becomes the norm, Crash, Spyro etc get less and less development allowance, and eventually even Blizzard finds its teams moved to develop Call Of Duty, until World Of Warcraft is slowly wound down and Overwatch 2 is either sold off or shut down as 'no longer profitable'.
The current deal with Riot Games is pretty much a testbed for the kind of thing I expect from King going forward. Riot are willing to allow XBOX players to have a 'free trial' of every single character in their games, which is a massive incentive for XBOX players to play the games. vis a vis huge profits for Riot and a very convincing offer for you to have XGP on your phone.
I recently met a Sony fanboy who hates the current XBOX consoles due to overheating issues. I borrowed their phone, showed them xCloud and, a few minutes later, they were looking at subscribing to Game Pass. That guy is unlikely to touch an XBOX for a long time, but he's a customer, because Microsoft are trying to get customers that DON'T own their consoles. And it's that which terrifies Sony.
Yes, it would be nice for them if, in 2030, Sony have managed to 'persuade' Nintendo into something similar to what SNK tried to do with the Dreamcast, where the successor to the Switch is a second screen for the Playstation 6, with the 'console wars' ending with Sony the clear and only real winner.
But for the consumers? It would mean that Sony could sell the Playstation 6 for $2000, and we would HAVE to pay it.
I know exactly why Sony are whining about Microsoft. They took on Nintendo, it was called the PSP and Vita lines. The Vita even was a card-based system... And Sony nowadays don't want to talk about the Vita, which died against the GBA and Nintendo DS lines. The only thing that can defeat a Nintendo portable is a Nintendo portable... and Nintendo right now only have a portable system.
So they're not going to lose their entire market trying to stop the Switch. Instead they're going to try to ensure Microsoft remains a minnow.
How I see this is that Microsoft want Sony to accept a deal, ANY deal, that will stop them whining about the ABK deal being 'bad for consumers', which for the past couple of months has transparently read as 'bad for Sony'.
Microsoft: We're offering the same deal to Valve, Nintendo and Sony, A guaranteed decade of Call of Duty support, extensions on request. Sony: Not enough, and it was three years (without mentioning what the ActiBlizz deal they had in place was).
With this: Microsoft: We're willing to offer Playstation Plus and XBOX Game Pass get the same version at launch. Sony: We'll accept the deal... if Game Pass is excluded for... six months and doesn't get any exclusive perks.
As mentioned, Sony are trying their best to make Microsoft the next SEGA. Forcing them into developing games for them (and maybe Nintendo) to bolster their market share, while their console division shuts down.
Any EQUAL deal that Microsoft offers, Sony will refuse since it will tip it back to feature parity and other terms Sony seems to have a problem listening to. If Microsoft offered to let Sony keep their perks, stopped the plans to release on Nintendo and also delayed Game Pass rollout on Call Of Duty for 'a few months' with each release, they'd accept the deal, despite how the only person who profits in that case is Sony.
Sony have pretty much told the entire industry 'I am the biggest company on the planet, what I say goes, you will do what I say, when I say it. I can buy any one of you if you step out of line'.
While Microsoft is building bridges by just sitting there and going 'We made the offer, they refused.'
Playstation's stance over the ABK deal is that they seem to want Microsoft to be 'smaller' while they remain as is. Things like how Playstation owners are the only ones who can take advantage of a perk to get one of the SF2 versions on the in-game arcade completely free in Street Fighter 6, And the ongoing exclusivity of numerous titles, with no end in sight over other systems. Microsoft want to erase Sony's stack o' perks in CoD, and make all versions equal on all platforms, even if CoD Modern Warfare III is using Azure to stream to the Switch.
Sony promote inequality in the market, with most of their E3 and State Of Play presentations trumpeting about 'Only On Playstation' or 'Timed Exclusive' while failing to commit to future expansion to other systems. Microsoft meanwhile want a more open gaming ecosystem, where you can get a phone or tablet, go to a website and play games as if you're on the latest console, and feature parity is a required part of multi-platform releases, and total transparency is also used over exclusivity periods.
Microsoft? Want you to play the games you enjoy, whatever system you own. Sony? Just want you to buy a Playstation 4, 5, 6, 7, 8...
Microsoft are offering more than generous concessions to everyone, with really good plans.
Sony meanwhile are calling them vipers and declaring that they'll upend the market with this deal.
I could see Sony asking for the same weighted deal to remain in place for the foreseeable future, no 3 years, 7 years, 10 years or whatever Microsoft simply agrees to continue to give Sony overly generous perks and get nothing for itself with CoD, and any plans to put Crash, Spyro and Overwatch 2 perks on Game Pass are cancelled forthwith unless equivalent perks are offered to Playstation owners.
They want to effectively squeeze every perk possible out of ABK before they'll let the ink dry, and watch the value spiral lower and lower as they continue to make it so Microsoft will end up unable to make much of a profit if any off the sale.
Sony: "Have they spun off Call Of Duty for peanuts so we can buy it and keep our exclusives? No, OK, Continue the rhetoric..."
Google: "There's some compatibility issues with Chromium-based browsers we're discussing, and some of the board think they might have helped the Stadia fail."
At least Google has apparently got some genuine problems, unlike Sony, who are using big words and complex rhetoric to hide that they're just trying to ask that Microsoft is denied the use of a sling before it takes on Goliath next time.
OK, Just read through both filings, and notice something immediately, even without getting more than a quarter into them.
Sony: "If Microsoft go through with this merger, it will unbalance the gaming industry to such a degree that it will allow them to foreclose on the market, having unprecedented control over both the players and what they play..."
Microsoft: "Not even close. Our market share wouldn't even scratch Sony's even after the merger, their position is unassailable without acquisitions like this, and allowing [Sony] to dictate terms is what WILL cause foreclosure."
And I see Microsoft's viewpoint to be right. My most played game on XBOX is Star Trek Online, I also play a ton of Fortnite for the collaboration content more than anything else, and I mostly play puzzle, strategy, racing and RPG titles.
At a 'arcade' I visit, where they have all the systems set up, they're not doing a massive Call Of Duty match, most of the systems are running sport games, Minecraft or Fortnite.
Sony claim Call Of Duty's position in the market will decide who wins this generation. I say that Call Of Duty barely warrants a mention. Sony could foreclose the console market tomorrow, just by making every AAA game coming out in 2023 a timed exclusive. Just 'six months' of exclusivity.
Now, why do I see Sony's filing to the CMA to be blatant and outright hypocrisy?
@Would_you_kindly Oh, I know full well Sony funded Street Fighter 5. I also know Dead Rising 4 got a Playstation version with all the DLC after the exclusivity window expired.
What do you really want me to say? Tell me what huge revelation there is that makes Sony innocent and Microsoft guilty here.
@Would_you_kindly I will point out Dead Rising 3 was a first party title. If you check, it was published BY Microsoft. Monster Hunter... Not for this debate.
Meanwhile, Street Fighter 5 was developed and published by Capcom. It is not published by Sony, but it's still effectively owned, lock, stock and barrel, by Sony.
@Would_you_kindly Two years and counting for Final Fantasy 7 Remake, and Capcom openly admitting that there will NEVER be a XBOX version of Street Fighter V tell me exactly what the difference is between the two.
Do Sony own Square Enix? Do they own Capcom? No, but they throw enough money behind the big ticket games to force companies into very narrow publishing deals that can blow up in their faces.
One day, I'd love to compare the sales figures between (Super) Street Fighter 4 and Street Fighter 5. If they're higher, Sony did a good thing. If they're not, well...
Edit: Just did.
Street Fighter IV - 9,409,113 sales (earning 693.2 million before inflation)
Street Fighter V - 5,800,000 sales (earning only 270 million before inflation)
Now, why did Capcom refuse to let Sony buy another game outright?
@Would_you_kindly Oh right, Starfield...
The same game Sony were eyeing up a Timed Exclusivity option for if Microsoft hadn't got there first? Yes, it didn't come to PS5, but if it had, Microsoft were willing to give them the world.
Deathloop is a perfect example of how Microsoft are willing to do themselves a disservice to keep contracts as-is. They honoured the exclusivity deal Sony put in place, and then, once it was over, it was THEN added to Game Pass.
Starfield only shows what Sony and Microsoft's stances are, and Sony pretty much looked bad when their strategy came out.
If they'd blocked Bethesda, I'd believe their rhetoric, since they snapped up the seminal first person shooter, and two of the most played first person role playing franchises on the market.
But they didn't. Instead, they're crying that specifically the Activision games catalogue is going to Microsoft. It's DEFINITELY not competition that's why they're hurt. It's that they didn't buy CoD first.
Sony is one of the few companies who are declaring that Phil Spencer and his team are laughing behind everyone's backs and going 'Soon, SOON we will have all the greatest games on Microsoft, and then we take them off Nintendo and Sony, then we will be the greatest platform ever, and we'll sell our next console for $1000, and they WILL buy it!'.
Jim, Stop reading your own playbook and saying Microsoft is using it more than you already have!
Hell, I'll give you that over their console releases up until the PS5. And yes, Playstation Plus was a better draw than GwG, and still is...
If it wasn't for how Sony dropped the ball terribly outside that. Game Pass renders both PS+ and GwG obsolete, and Sony's attempts to defeat it have been lethargic and inadequate.
When Microsoft released the XBOX One S, they began to find a way to cut deeply into Sony's market share, by offering the same games on a budget system, with the System S being the cheapest console in the current generation.
Sony should really invent a time machine and make Playstation Now into a Game Pass style offering, and not leverage streaming first. If they did that, they'd be the one with the unstoppable offering.
Name me one thing both Sony and Microsoft have released where Sony's offering has been cheaper, more user friendly and functional, and has lasted better.
For example, while the Playstation Eye was 'successful', it was less capable than the Kinect, and both of them were relegated to the gimmick bin, and both of them were, at that time, trying to beat the unstoppable Wiimote concept.
Comments 381
Re: Microsoft Granted Access To Certain Sony Docs As FTC Continues To Scrutinise ActiBlizz Deal
While the juiciest details haven't come out, due to the situation with, for example, Final Fantasy, they might have got Sony to shoot themselves in the foot.
They asked for too much rope, and Sony did the stupid and gave them just enough.
Re: Two Games Are Available Today With Xbox Game Pass (February 28)
PSA over Merge & Blade...
If you find your game is in Korean, select the Gear icon on the menu, then select the third option, and push left twice to get English.
Re: These 20+ Games Are Coming To Xbox Next Week (February 27 - March 3)
Umm, someone poke the writers of the article about Soul Hackers 2.
Re: Octopath Traveler 2's Glowing Reviews Make The Xbox Situation Even More Painful
There's a LOT of developers, especially in Japan, who aren't seeming to be giving XBOX a fighting chance.
Nippon Ichi did a poorly optimized Windows-only build of Disgaea 4 Complete, where the online just did not work for most of it's Game Pass run, and otherwise, every single game they've developed is Windows/Switch/Playstation.
It's almost like some strange thing is going on, despite Microsoft's TGS claims of approaching Japanese developers, where someone's getting there first and asking them to politely exclude Microsoft.
The fact that Microsoft found a partial exclusion clause in the paperwork for Call Of Duty... and Sony are trying to keep some of their documents secret... makes me think Sony's done similar to with FF7 Remake with practically every single game they can out of the country.
Well, they don't see Nintendo as a threat.
Re: Xbox's Activision Blizzard Deal Could Be 'Harmful' To The Industry, Claims UK Regulator
For Pushsquare, They're interested intently in every stumble Microsoft does, looking forward to CoD Exclusivitiy in 2123 for Sony.
For Purexbox, they're actually reporting on something that will affect Xbox's output for 2023.
Re: Xbox's Activision Blizzard Deal Could Be 'Harmful' To The Industry, Claims UK Regulator
The CMA's offer would be like if, when Disney acquired Marvel, the FTC went up to them and suggested they either:
A) Sold the Avengers to DC or IDW.
B) Allowed the Marvel Comics imprint to spin off on it's own.
C) Allowed the Marvel Comics imprint and any Marvel movie rights to go to the highest bidder.
Option A would cripple their early financial gains from the deal, since they just gave up their biggest asset.
Option B would sound better, but the rights would be a nightmare for a long time.
Option C... So what exactly do they buy then?!
Re: Xbox's Activision Blizzard Deal Could Be 'Harmful' To The Industry, Claims UK Regulator
@Kaloudz The point isn't that they're considering the 10 year offer 'at the next stage', it's that their ideal offer is to literally give Sony the keys to the kingdom, with no other choice.
If the CMA's offer was 'Sell Activision' or 'Sell Blizzard' or 'Sell King' or any combination of the above, that would be pro-consumer. That the offer is 'You sell Call Of Duty OR you sell Activision OR you only buy King at a ridiculous price', says that the current offer is that they give Sony a perfect way to acquire control of CoD for the foreseeable for little financial gain.
That the ten year deal and everything else is to be considered AFTER pushing for this completely unworkable divesting deal, well, Microsoft need to persuade them that they're listening to the wrong people.
Re: Xbox's Activision Blizzard Deal Could Be 'Harmful' To The Industry, Claims UK Regulator
Let's look at the remedies the CMA are suggesting...
1. Microsoft and ABK put Call Of Duty up for sale for anyone to buy. Now, even if Sony aren't allowed to put a offer in, you can guarantee they'll put the usual pressure whatever company does, and it becomes 100% Playstation Exclusive. Sony win.
2. Microsoft spins Activision back off as it's own company. Again, Sony could easily approach New Activision and claim excessive control over Call Of Duty behind the CMA's back, due to their way of doing exclusivity, which doesn't trip their checks.
3. Microsoft buys King. Sony laugh their head off at how much Microsoft paid for a mobile platform.
All the offered remedies are not going to help Microsoft one bit, and will only benefit Sony in the long run. This judgement by the CMA is a massive success for Sony.
Re: Xbox's Activision Blizzard Deal Could Be 'Harmful' To The Industry, Claims UK Regulator
Hell, It's blindingly obvious WHO is really the one controlling the investigation due to the 'suggestion' that 'removing Call Of Duty' would be a good remedy, or Microsoft just taking Blizzard.
That reads more like 'Just give Sony everything they want and more and we'll allow it to go through'.
Re: Video: Fascinating Hogwarts Legacy Comparison Shows Several Film Vs. Game Scenes
The open world Harry Potter game we wanted for years. All we needed to do was stop being Harry Potter.
Re: 'Guilty Gear Strive' Beta Is Free This Weekend Ahead Of Xbox Game Pass Launch
Something I will say is that I think that Strive's launch of XBOX is a case of Sooner rather than Later, due to the fact they're doing it as an Open Beta Test. If the game was releasing in a few months, they'd be doing at least one CBT, then opening it up when they're close to launch.
Open Beta Tests happen weeks before not months.
Re: GoldenEye 007 Dev Responds To Lack Of 60FPS And Online Multiplayer In Xbox Version
Not our place...
Not our call...
The amount of blame-shifting Code Mystics is doing is terrible in this day and age.
And @Nintendo4Sonic if you check Rare Replay's store page, you'll find it's listed.
Re: Age Of Empires 2 Release Date, Release Times & Preload Details On Xbox Game Pass
I see the usual conflict coming up. Controller vs KB/M, especially with cross play in the mix. PC Master Race and all that.
Thankfully, AoE seems to have learned from the same thing EA did with Red Alert 3 on XBOX 360. Action wheels can be a lot faster than hot buttons.
Re: Hands On: Our First Impressions Of GoldenEye 007 On Xbox Game Pass
One thing that does need some getting used to is seeing 2023 in the copyrights, the XBOX controller where the N64 one was...
That there's a lot of screen tearing and other artefacts, well, as said in the article, this is Goldeneye N64, warts and all. We just didn't notice all these things until the resolution was pin-sharp 1080p or higher.
Re: 'Hi-Fi RUSH' Has Us Mega Excited For More Xbox Shadow Drops In Future
@EliJapan Input lag is not something exclusive to cloud gaming. It's why most rhythm games test your input lag before letting you do anything in the game proper.
The combo tutorials also act as a stealth lag check, and the timing window, especially on Easy, is much kinder than Necrodancer.
Re: Justin Roiland Resigns From High On Life Developer Squanch Games
Pretty much the problem with cancel culture is simple.
Rick and Morty, along with High On Life, are full of low brow humour that is a hallmark of Justin Roiland's roles. I don't give a ***** if three years ago he was slapped with a restraining order about a former girlfriend, or if he did indecent acts with kids when he was younger.
It doesn't matter in the present day... until it does. They could cast Christopher Lloyd as Rick Sanchez, and find a soundalike for Morty, but it wouldn't quite be the same.
The anarchist has been forced to quit the business because the business didn't want him.
Re: These Nine Games Are Coming To Xbox Game Pass (January 25 - February 7)
OK, Right, waiting on February 7th for Hot Wheels to be... pulled yet again since they abruptly decided 'No, not this week either'.
Re: Justin Roiland Resigns From High On Life Developer Squanch Games
Removed
Re: Xbox Game Pass Players Are 'Moving To New Zealand' To Play Monster Hunter Rise
@Jenkinss It's not like World in that you have to head towards your base camp in Solo/Offline mode, but you do have to specifically turn Online mode on after finishing the tutorials.
Re: UK CMA Extends Deadline For Its Investigation Into Xbox Activision Blizzard Deal
It's no 'conspiracy'. Activision were in trouble due to Brian Kotick trashing the company's monetary and public values, funnelling everything in Activision into fuelling the great maw of Call Of Duty, due to how much he was making off it, with multiple lawsuits from staff upcoming.
Microsoft offered him a golden parachute as part of the sale, and to value it at above market value, so everyone who lost their job would make a nice sum, and they were eyeing up King as a way to start a proper mobile gaming division.
Microsoft don't care about the gargantuan monstrosity that is Call Of Duty, they'd give Sony a exclusivity deal until the PS6 to get them to shut up about it, if Sony actually answered their calls.
Blizzard and King are the big ticket items, and the fact they own two massive licenses in (World Of) Warcraft and Overwatch. If Microsoft got Blizzard to develop a WoW client for consoles, with Game Pass owners getting a basic subscription for free, well, similar thing to when they transitioned Minecraft to Bedrock.
Even Sony accepted the deal after a while of grumbling.
Under Sony, ABK would have all development shuffled to either Call Of Duty or Overwatch, and anything else would get much less support. Why? Because both of those are on console, and Sony only cares about what you play on Playstation.
Re: UK CMA Extends Deadline For Its Investigation Into Xbox Activision Blizzard Deal
@Rmg0731 @Nestalgia
That's exactly it, NES. Sony would love to buy Activision outright, and own Call Of Duty for the rest of time immaterial, while Tencent consumes Blizzard and King to recover their own losses.
And what would it mean for the rest of the market?
Tencent would have complete control over the Riot Games and Blizzard catalogues, and Sony could very easily make a lot more of Call Of Duty exclusive to Sony for as long as they want.
Sony's whole argument, that caused this, is that Microsoft bought a franchise Sony have over-exploited to ridiculous levels, and that they know the golden goose is cooked if the deal goes through. They even put a clause into the contract with ABK to block it releasing on Game Pass for an indeterminate period.
So, If Microsoft fail to close the deal, Activision will be in trouble financially, and Sony and Tencent carve up the corpse, with Sony knowing, if they didn't give Tencent a nice big chunk, they'd be in front of the FTC and CMA over market manipulation since it was THEIR arguments which spearheaded the investigations.
Re: One Of November 2022's Leavers Rejoins Xbox Game Pass Today (January 5)
@teknium_ That something can be installed using the app means nothing. 99% of games can be installed using the app.
No-one except some very dubious leaker thinks either of those games are coming to Game Pass at the moment. I'm already making plans to buy SF30th, I believe their 'announcement' so much.
It's like Hot Wheels, except that WAS announced by Microsoft for Game Pass. Never guarantee anything until it drops.
Re: UK CMA Extends Deadline For Its Investigation Into Xbox Activision Blizzard Deal
If the CMA and FTC reject, and are successful in blocking it, and Sony 'swoops in' and rescues the 'beleaguered' Activision Blizzard at fire sale prices...
If no-one blocks that, it won't just be Microsoft's supporters who'll call foul.
Re: Free Play Days: Try These Xbox Games For Free (January 5-8)
OK, Three days to persuade me to give the game a shot. Three days to persuade me that Saints Row needed a total reboot. Three days to persuade me to part with my money...
I don't see it happening, but miracles happen.
Re: Talking Point: Is It Time For Xbox To Sunset The 'Games With Gold' Program?
@antstephenson This is actually a good idea. Another possible thing they could do is allow someone to select, from the one or two periods where game departures happen in a month, ONE game which DOESN'T leave their library. It is one or their free games for the month.
No more situations where you get some terrible game that you're not going to play, instead, YOU pick that one game you're still playing from a year or two ago.
Re: Activision Blizzard Says FTC Has 'Lost Sight Of Realities' In Highly Critical Response To Lawsuit
What ABK and Microsoft's filing was, mostly, was picking apart the case the FTC filed and going through it, paragraph-by-paragraph and going 'Not relevant to us', 'We refute it' or 'Refer to source'...
And while it's immensely frakking boring, it points out how the FTC are in la-la land trying to say that the ABK deal is a Bad Thing, since their whole case relies on vague details and fear-mongering.
Re: TMNT: Shredder's Revenge Brings Retro-Inspired Free Update To Xbox Game Pass
Hope a character pack comes next.
Re: Microsoft Causes Confusion With Statement About Sony 'Excluding' Games From Xbox
Now, I already know Street Fighter 5 was an exclusion agreement. Sony bankroll some of the development costs, and it ends up exclusive to Playstation or Windows platforms, and the fact Monster Hunter Rise is coming to XBOX next month shoots down arguments from a few weeks back over Nintendo doing similar 'exclusion' deals.
So, yes, FF7R having both the EGS and Steam release windows pass but no sign of it on Nintendo or XBOX...
Now, I'd understand Nintendo, since games need a lot more work to run on the system, but XBOX?
Was sus from the start.
Re: 10 Random 'Gamers' Are Suing Microsoft Over The Activision Blizzard Deal
What makes me think these are Sony sockpuppets is the language of their major complaint, and the mention of 'foreclosing' rivals.
The entire complaint is far too eloquent for most gamers, but the term 'foreclosing rivals' is ALL OVER Sony's filing from a few weeks back. They use the term 'foreclosure' constantly, and it's only really used in that context by Sony.
Their whole rhetoric is acting like Microsoft Corporation and Microsoft XBOX are the same company, and some monolithic company who wants to own the PC and console market, and are gobbling up companies like Pac-Man.
That would be like saying DC Comics buying IDW is trying to topple Marvel but writing WB Discovery on the lawsuit. They're not the same thing.
Re: Microsoft President Talks 'Disappointment' With FTC Over Call Of Duty Proposal
Let's ignore the numbers for a moment and consider what this means for the FTC's case. The FTC want to present a case of that big, mean Microsoft is planning to screw the entire industry by hoarding game after game after game to ensure that everyone buys Windows, buys XBOX and buys... Oh wait, Do they still do Windows Mobile?
Where was I? Oh yes, A consumer buys only Microsoft products on Microsoft-backed systems and Microsoft uses its considerable PC market share and unparalleled buying power to shut down Sony (and Tencent) and be a monopoly on the gaming market.
Deals like the one they rejected don't fit that storyline. Microsoft are openly negotiating to make a deal that would offer more people the games they want to play on the system they want to play. Microsoft are on good terms with Nintendo and Valve...
I could see the FTC, or a Sony handler, putting forward the 'kind' offer to end the lawsuit entirely of Microsoft making a reduced bid for Blizzard and King, with Sony itself being allowed to make a bid on the Activision portion.
There we are, everyone's happy, Sony's bigger, Microsoft's bigger, and that poison clause in the Sony contract with Activision doesn't need to get brought up in court.
So what if it means Microsoft may well lose Call of Duty entirely? They managed to negotiate a way for the merger to go ahead that is going to avoid that nasty monopoly Sony told them about.
Re: Report: Microsoft Offers Sony The 'Right' To Include Call Of Duty On PlayStation Plus
Sony just needed to leave it alone, maybe, behind closed doors, negotiated a better deal, not spent a lot of time and money trying to force Microsoft into a worse deal, Jim Ryan thinking that, if Microsoft fail to get the merger, he'll be able to get it for much less, letting Tencent walk off with Blizzard and King, while he makes a billion dollar deal for Activision itself.
But as @Nestalgia points out, Sony's whole situation hinges on ABK and Tencent not being furious and the FTC not twigging that they're engaging ALREADY in market manipulation on a grand scale.
Back when SEGA collapsed, it was a tragedy that didn't need Sony to spend much at all to help along. With Microsoft, they need to find some huge way to force Microsoft to have billions of dollars wiped off their value, and Jimbo hopes ABK's acquisition collapsing will do just that.
When actually, it could be Sony who end up in a hole they'll never dig their way out of.
Re: Report: Microsoft Offers Sony The 'Right' To Include Call Of Duty On PlayStation Plus
It's a good bluff, and it puts Sony in a pinch. Microsoft produces a 'draft agreement' offering Sony a generous deal for Call of Duty, and they have to give a good reason to the court why they're not accepting it, when it covers the core part of their complaint.
Add to that an 'earlier agreement' was discussed on the day, and Sony's situation becomes even more shaky. Microsoft could take over the courtroom by stating that Sony is actively sabotaging the deal by requiring Microsoft make anti-competitive concessions to them, citing the agreements Sony felt were inadequate.
Microsoft could have Valve, Nintendo and ABK itself standing with them, all declaring the deal is good for consumers, good for business, and bad for only one person, who is trying to use the FTC and similar to keep their market share intact, if not expand it.
Re: Report: Microsoft Offers Sony The 'Right' To Include Call Of Duty On PlayStation Plus
How Tencent got so large?
They pretty much bought a piece here and a piece there. Tencent are equivalent to some kid sneaking around and grabbing a piece here and a piece there of the buffet and getting a pretty damn good meal out of it.
The reason they don't get noticed is that they don't trumpet their ownerships that much. You don't see on Wild Rift 'Copyright Riot Games, a division of Tencent', it's solely 'Riot Games'. It's like some games were developed by Dimps completely uncredited for YEARS.
Sony like to pretend they're still No. 1, and that China, through Tencent, doesn't practically own most of the games market, and probably even has a stake in all three companies under it.
Nintendo doesn't care if they're Number 2 or Number 3, preferring to coast on the fact that they could churn out handheld devices until hell freezes over and still make their shareholders happy.
If Sony stop the ABK deal, and get Activision for its fire sale price after the company value drops even lower, and the same people who helped them block the deal keep the FTC and similar busy, Microsoft drops back to third, and Sony become an even more unassailable first.
Call Of Duty exclusive content becomes the norm, Crash, Spyro etc get less and less development allowance, and eventually even Blizzard finds its teams moved to develop Call Of Duty, until World Of Warcraft is slowly wound down and Overwatch 2 is either sold off or shut down as 'no longer profitable'.
Why? Because Sony only want CoD.
Re: Report: Microsoft Offers Sony The 'Right' To Include Call Of Duty On PlayStation Plus
@Tharsman
The current deal with Riot Games is pretty much a testbed for the kind of thing I expect from King going forward. Riot are willing to allow XBOX players to have a 'free trial' of every single character in their games, which is a massive incentive for XBOX players to play the games. vis a vis huge profits for Riot and a very convincing offer for you to have XGP on your phone.
I recently met a Sony fanboy who hates the current XBOX consoles due to overheating issues. I borrowed their phone, showed them xCloud and, a few minutes later, they were looking at subscribing to Game Pass. That guy is unlikely to touch an XBOX for a long time, but he's a customer, because Microsoft are trying to get customers that DON'T own their consoles. And it's that which terrifies Sony.
Yes, it would be nice for them if, in 2030, Sony have managed to 'persuade' Nintendo into something similar to what SNK tried to do with the Dreamcast, where the successor to the Switch is a second screen for the Playstation 6, with the 'console wars' ending with Sony the clear and only real winner.
But for the consumers? It would mean that Sony could sell the Playstation 6 for $2000, and we would HAVE to pay it.
Re: Report: Microsoft Offers Sony The 'Right' To Include Call Of Duty On PlayStation Plus
Something I will say...
I know exactly why Sony are whining about Microsoft. They took on Nintendo, it was called the PSP and Vita lines. The Vita even was a card-based system...
And Sony nowadays don't want to talk about the Vita, which died against the GBA and Nintendo DS lines. The only thing that can defeat a Nintendo portable is a Nintendo portable... and Nintendo right now only have a portable system.
So they're not going to lose their entire market trying to stop the Switch. Instead they're going to try to ensure Microsoft remains a minnow.
Re: Report: Microsoft Offers Sony The 'Right' To Include Call Of Duty On PlayStation Plus
How I see this is that Microsoft want Sony to accept a deal, ANY deal, that will stop them whining about the ABK deal being 'bad for consumers', which for the past couple of months has transparently read as 'bad for Sony'.
Microsoft: We're offering the same deal to Valve, Nintendo and Sony, A guaranteed decade of Call of Duty support, extensions on request.
Sony: Not enough, and it was three years (without mentioning what the ActiBlizz deal they had in place was).
With this:
Microsoft: We're willing to offer Playstation Plus and XBOX Game Pass get the same version at launch.
Sony: We'll accept the deal... if Game Pass is excluded for... six months and doesn't get any exclusive perks.
As mentioned, Sony are trying their best to make Microsoft the next SEGA. Forcing them into developing games for them (and maybe Nintendo) to bolster their market share, while their console division shuts down.
Any EQUAL deal that Microsoft offers, Sony will refuse since it will tip it back to feature parity and other terms Sony seems to have a problem listening to.
If Microsoft offered to let Sony keep their perks, stopped the plans to release on Nintendo and also delayed Game Pass rollout on Call Of Duty for 'a few months' with each release, they'd accept the deal, despite how the only person who profits in that case is Sony.
Re: Xbox Game Pass Is Adding A Bunch Of Riot Games Content Today (December 12)
If all but Wild Rift released on XBOX, there would be the wrong kind of riot.
Re: Phil Spencer: Sony Wants To 'Make Xbox Smaller' To Protect PlayStation's Dominance
Sony have pretty much told the entire industry 'I am the biggest company on the planet, what I say goes, you will do what I say, when I say it. I can buy any one of you if you step out of line'.
While Microsoft is building bridges by just sitting there and going 'We made the offer, they refused.'
Re: Phil Spencer: Sony Wants To 'Make Xbox Smaller' To Protect PlayStation's Dominance
Playstation's stance over the ABK deal is that they seem to want Microsoft to be 'smaller' while they remain as is. Things like how Playstation owners are the only ones who can take advantage of a perk to get one of the SF2 versions on the in-game arcade completely free in Street Fighter 6,
And the ongoing exclusivity of numerous titles, with no end in sight over other systems.
Microsoft want to erase Sony's stack o' perks in CoD, and make all versions equal on all platforms, even if CoD Modern Warfare III is using Azure to stream to the Switch.
Sony promote inequality in the market, with most of their E3 and State Of Play presentations trumpeting about 'Only On Playstation' or 'Timed Exclusive' while failing to commit to future expansion to other systems.
Microsoft meanwhile want a more open gaming ecosystem, where you can get a phone or tablet, go to a website and play games as if you're on the latest console, and feature parity is a required part of multi-platform releases, and total transparency is also used over exclusivity periods.
Microsoft? Want you to play the games you enjoy, whatever system you own.
Sony? Just want you to buy a Playstation 4, 5, 6, 7, 8...
Re: Microsoft 'Likely' To Offer Remedies Soon For Activision Blizzard Deal In Europe, Claims Report
Microsoft are offering more than generous concessions to everyone, with really good plans.
Sony meanwhile are calling them vipers and declaring that they'll upend the market with this deal.
I could see Sony asking for the same weighted deal to remain in place for the foreseeable future, no 3 years, 7 years, 10 years or whatever Microsoft simply agrees to continue to give Sony overly generous perks and get nothing for itself with CoD, and any plans to put Crash, Spyro and Overwatch 2 perks on Game Pass are cancelled forthwith unless equivalent perks are offered to Playstation owners.
They want to effectively squeeze every perk possible out of ABK before they'll let the ink dry, and watch the value spiral lower and lower as they continue to make it so Microsoft will end up unable to make much of a profit if any off the sale.
Re: Report Suggests Google Isn't Keen On Xbox's Attempt To Buy Activision Blizzard
Sony: "Have they spun off Call Of Duty for peanuts so we can buy it and keep our exclusives? No, OK, Continue the rhetoric..."
Google: "There's some compatibility issues with Chromium-based browsers we're discussing, and some of the board think they might have helped the Stadia fail."
At least Google has apparently got some genuine problems, unlike Sony, who are using big words and complex rhetoric to hide that they're just trying to ask that Microsoft is denied the use of a sling before it takes on Goliath next time.
Re: 'Microsoft Wants PlayStation To Become Like Nintendo', Claims Sony
OK, Just read through both filings, and notice something immediately, even without getting more than a quarter into them.
Sony: "If Microsoft go through with this merger, it will unbalance the gaming industry to such a degree that it will allow them to foreclose on the market, having unprecedented control over both the players and what they play..."
Microsoft: "Not even close. Our market share wouldn't even scratch Sony's even after the merger, their position is unassailable without acquisitions like this, and allowing [Sony] to dictate terms is what WILL cause foreclosure."
And I see Microsoft's viewpoint to be right. My most played game on XBOX is Star Trek Online, I also play a ton of Fortnite for the collaboration content more than anything else, and I mostly play puzzle, strategy, racing and RPG titles.
At a 'arcade' I visit, where they have all the systems set up, they're not doing a massive Call Of Duty match, most of the systems are running sport games, Minecraft or Fortnite.
Sony claim Call Of Duty's position in the market will decide who wins this generation. I say that Call Of Duty barely warrants a mention. Sony could foreclose the console market tomorrow, just by making every AAA game coming out in 2023 a timed exclusive. Just 'six months' of exclusivity.
Now, why do I see Sony's filing to the CMA to be blatant and outright hypocrisy?
Re: 'Microsoft Wants PlayStation To Become Like Nintendo', Claims Sony
@Would_you_kindly Oh, I know full well Sony funded Street Fighter 5. I also know Dead Rising 4 got a Playstation version with all the DLC after the exclusivity window expired.
What do you really want me to say? Tell me what huge revelation there is that makes Sony innocent and Microsoft guilty here.
Re: 'Microsoft Wants PlayStation To Become Like Nintendo', Claims Sony
@Would_you_kindly
I will point out Dead Rising 3 was a first party title. If you check, it was published BY Microsoft. Monster Hunter... Not for this debate.
Meanwhile, Street Fighter 5 was developed and published by Capcom. It is not published by Sony, but it's still effectively owned, lock, stock and barrel, by Sony.
Re: 'Microsoft Wants PlayStation To Become Like Nintendo', Claims Sony
@Would_you_kindly Two years and counting for Final Fantasy 7 Remake, and Capcom openly admitting that there will NEVER be a XBOX version of Street Fighter V tell me exactly what the difference is between the two.
Do Sony own Square Enix? Do they own Capcom? No, but they throw enough money behind the big ticket games to force companies into very narrow publishing deals that can blow up in their faces.
One day, I'd love to compare the sales figures between (Super) Street Fighter 4 and Street Fighter 5. If they're higher, Sony did a good thing. If they're not, well...
Edit: Just did.
Street Fighter IV - 9,409,113 sales (earning 693.2 million before inflation)
Street Fighter V - 5,800,000 sales (earning only 270 million before inflation)
Now, why did Capcom refuse to let Sony buy another game outright?
Re: 'Microsoft Wants PlayStation To Become Like Nintendo', Claims Sony
@Would_you_kindly Oh right, Starfield...
The same game Sony were eyeing up a Timed Exclusivity option for if Microsoft hadn't got there first? Yes, it didn't come to PS5, but if it had, Microsoft were willing to give them the world.
Deathloop is a perfect example of how Microsoft are willing to do themselves a disservice to keep contracts as-is. They honoured the exclusivity deal Sony put in place, and then, once it was over, it was THEN added to Game Pass.
Starfield only shows what Sony and Microsoft's stances are, and Sony pretty much looked bad when their strategy came out.
Re: 'Microsoft Wants PlayStation To Become Like Nintendo', Claims Sony
If they'd blocked Bethesda, I'd believe their rhetoric, since they snapped up the seminal first person shooter, and two of the most played first person role playing franchises on the market.
But they didn't. Instead, they're crying that specifically the Activision games catalogue is going to Microsoft. It's DEFINITELY not competition that's why they're hurt. It's that they didn't buy CoD first.
Re: 'Microsoft Wants PlayStation To Become Like Nintendo', Claims Sony
Sony is one of the few companies who are declaring that Phil Spencer and his team are laughing behind everyone's backs and going 'Soon, SOON we will have all the greatest games on Microsoft, and then we take them off Nintendo and Sony, then we will be the greatest platform ever, and we'll sell our next console for $1000, and they WILL buy it!'.
Jim, Stop reading your own playbook and saying Microsoft is using it more than you already have!
Re: Sony Reveals Xbox Game Pass Has 29 Million Subscribers, Admits New PS Plus Tiers 'Substantially' Behind
Hell, I'll give you that over their console releases up until the PS5. And yes, Playstation Plus was a better draw than GwG, and still is...
If it wasn't for how Sony dropped the ball terribly outside that. Game Pass renders both PS+ and GwG obsolete, and Sony's attempts to defeat it have been lethargic and inadequate.
When Microsoft released the XBOX One S, they began to find a way to cut deeply into Sony's market share, by offering the same games on a budget system, with the System S being the cheapest console in the current generation.
Sony should really invent a time machine and make Playstation Now into a Game Pass style offering, and not leverage streaming first. If they did that, they'd be the one with the unstoppable offering.
Re: Sony Reveals Xbox Game Pass Has 29 Million Subscribers, Admits New PS Plus Tiers 'Substantially' Behind
Name me one thing both Sony and Microsoft have released where Sony's offering has been cheaper, more user friendly and functional, and has lasted better.
For example, while the Playstation Eye was 'successful', it was less capable than the Kinect, and both of them were relegated to the gimmick bin, and both of them were, at that time, trying to beat the unstoppable Wiimote concept.