Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

donsanedrin t1_jd95p9n wrote

Reply to comment by riff-computer in Judge dismisses gamers’ claims that Microsoft/Activision merger will spoil gaming by Flawed_L0gic

> Not a single franchise that already existed on Playstation has yet to be removed from Sony’s platform

The Outer Worlds sequel definitely appears to be.

The first game was on Playstation.

This new patch that they are selling to upgrade to the new consoles, and by all accounts is the OPPOSITE of "high quality", are them still selling to Playstation consumers.

The Outer World 2 is only scheduled for Xbox and PC.

Try explaining that.

> Can you name me a title which was confirmed and announced for PS5 or PS4, from an acquired studio, which has since been cancelled on Sony’s platform?

Starfield was premiered at Bethesda's own independent E3 conference in 2018. All of their games at that conference were games that were expected on all major platforms at the time, Xbox, Playstation, and PC.

Therefore Starfield, from the very beginning, had a clear expectation that they were going to be available for all platforms that Bethesda/Zenimax had already been making games for.

You already know this. I really hope you don't start adopting Xbox marketing-speak to try and get around that one.

2

riff-computer t1_jd9e804 wrote

They now own both IP’s and are free to do with them as they wish. The Outer Worlds 1 still exists on PlayStation. The sequel did not enter production until later. Quite simple.

And I’m sorry but Starfield being expected to launch on PlayStation was not confirmation of anything. You can’t claim it was lost when marketing material never said it was coming to PS5. The business world does not run on expected to’s. This is the simple objective truth of it. I’m not saying it’s right, but that’s how it is. I expected Silent Hill 2, FF, and Octopath Traveller 2 on Xbox. Doesn’t mean anything.

While your cherry picking examples, explain why it’s any different that Final Fantasy, a franchise that has long existed on Xbox, is now not getting any new mainline entries thanks to Sony continuing to pay SE to keep it off the platform? Or does this behaviour not count when it comes from a market leader?

−1

donsanedrin t1_jd9l5dq wrote

> They now own both IP’s and are free to do with them as they wish

So you just immediately went and moved your goalposts.

Did you think I wasn't going to notice that you just did that?

You literally asked me "show me where they are changing the parameters"

I went and showed you.

And then you just casually responded ".........as it is their right to do so"

You just proved my point, as to why they shouldn't be allowed to buy out Activision.

> And I’m sorry but Starfield being expected to launch on PlayStation was not confirmation of anything. You can’t claim it was lost when marketing material never said it was coming to PS5.

It was clearly a multiplatform announcement, since they were a multiplatform developer/publisher having a press conference for all of their games, which were multiplatform.

You attempting this legalspeak isn't going to dismiss basic common sense. When Todd Howard is saying this is his next major IP, its meant to be alongside Elder Scrolls and Fallout.

Games and Franchises that are multiplatform, and HAVE BEEN multiplatform for a while now. The expectation is more than obvious.

5

riff-computer t1_jd9og0k wrote

Look, I’ve clearly struck a chord here. I’m not out here saying Microsoft is making the correct decisions, but the core of my position is that Sony did, and continues to acquire studios to boost their portfolio. They are not some bastion of building their entire business from the ground up, that’s my point.

I have owned every platform since the N64 and PS1 (and plan to continue to do so) I have watched this go down over the last 2 decades. I’m not trying to diminish whatever these studios have done post acquisition, but in another 2 decades it’s incredibly likely Microsoft will have fostered similar success. So what if you lose a couple games on your favourite plastic box? Buy both of its really an issue for you. The real issue here is exclusives are bad for everyone in general, and both have continued to push the divide further.

2

donsanedrin t1_jd9qk64 wrote

> Look, I’ve clearly struck a chord here.

No, that internet tactic doesn't work with me, either.

> I’m not out here saying Microsoft is making the correct decisions, but the core of my position is that Sony did, and continues to acquire studios to boost their portfolio

No, you are saying that it is okay for Microsoft to do a anti-consumer move because you CLAIM that Sony does such anti-consumer moves all the time.

You are trying to say that Sony has established this practice already.

You are wrong, dishonest, and greatly exaggerating this.

> I’m not trying to diminish whatever these studios have done post acquisition, but in another 2 decades it’s incredibly likely Microsoft will have fostered similar success.

Really? Take a look at the state of the Halo brand.

You are now claiming that Microsoft is buying Call of Duty, Diablo, Warcraft..............to IMPROVE upon them and take them to new heights in terms of success?

That's laughable.

Microsoft is trying to CORNER A MARKET. Anybody with half a brain can see this from a mile away.

They started by buying a $7.5 billion dollar publisher, which is more than twice as large as any gaming acquisition Sony has ever made. And then the very next year they announced they are spending ten times that amount to buy an even bigger publisher.

These are the very first and second moves that a corporation makes when they are trying to corner a market.

3