| EpicRandy said: |
You know Sony didn't make a deals with Tango Gameworks nor Arkane Lyon they made deals with Bethesda
Who cares about the parent company? the games/studios aren't relevant. Their rankings among Playstation software sales will decide their true worth, simple as that.
That's the weird part you argue people that are not arguing you right now and you don't quote them either.
They were and still are arguing this all the time. This thread tells a story about the congressmen trying to kill exclusivity deals in Japan like they're the cause of Sony's dominance there (omega LOL) while giving Microsoft a free pass to make industry shaking moves. More over, it's posted by Shikamaru who often blamed MS's acquisitions on Sony's moneyhatting. It's a standard opinion among Microsoft's fans, not just fanboys/haters. So it's very much relevant.
Xbox monumental Xbox one screw up sure is a major factor in the PS4 dominance. However, saying paid exclusive is only of marginal effects run very much against their widespread use. If Sony determined they had only marginal impact they would simply not be using these, but they do.
Exclulsives are generally a small but welcome addition to the console's value and brand power/sustainability, hence everyone including Microsoft does it. But they do not explain the ridiculous response from Microsoft. Microsoft's unprecedented acquisitions (and yes, they are obviously unprecedented) is the result of their incompetence vs intention to dominate gaming. Spin it all you want but it's the truth.
Sony does not have to pay for MS mismanagement nor is Microsoft trying to do that, MS is simply upping their game fueled by renewed faith in Xbox due to GamePass and perceived necessity to act fast and strong. It is in no way an attack on Sony nor is it an attack on Sony's fan, those are just console warring points of views.
Sony is factually paying for it! Xbox's weak position in the market is what's seemingly enabling these acquisitions to come to pass. The weak position is primarily the result of Micosoft's own choices and mismanagement, and yet Sony and their playerbase are paying for it because Mojang/Zenimax/ABK and god knows who else may all skip Playstation in the future.
By what metrics?
You're actually unironically asking this...
1. Hundreds of billions wasted on games you're getting anyways. They could have been spent on talents/developers that actually need it to create dozens of new experiences. A very few people stand to gain from an acquisition war between platform holders.
2. Reliance on massive established franchises could reduce Microsoft's incentive to innovate, and might damage their old flagship titles which may not be a priority anymore.
3. A huge increase in major exclusives mean a lot of people have to spend more to just gain access to titles they had accessed for years. We'll be spending more for little to no real gains. Only Game Pass subscribers stand to gain something from this. But Game Pass subscribers are a minority of gamers, and Microsoft could have easily paid to get any game they wanted on Game Pass day 1. With that said, acquisitions do make more business sense than the alternative with the long term benefit in mind.
If your arguments were accurate, then it make no sense such deals will still be used today at all.
All exclusives "matter", but not nearly as much as it's often suggested. 3rd party exclusives weren't major system sellers on PS4. 1st party exclusives are far bigger, and major multiplats are even bigger than those.
Sony's 1st party software sell many times more than their biggest paid exclusives. Microsoft's acquisition craze threatens to take away the multiplats that sell even better on Playstation than Sony's own games. Sony only paid for a bunch of exclusives the best of which would barely crack 1 or 2 million lifetime on Xbox. CoD alone sells well over 10 million annually on Playstation. So if someone wasn't happy about Sony's approach out of principle (as opposed to tribalism), then they shouldn't be happy with MS doing it worse.
If you think FF7R, Persona 5, and Forespoken being on Xbox on day 1 would have changed the marketshare by more than 0.1%, then you would be wrong. Aside from maybe Final Fantasy, their marketshare impact just isn't all that different from Cuphead or Tunic skipping Playstation for a period of time. And many of those exclusives have overlapping fanbases.
Are any other acquisition different? To my knowledge only one acquisition by one of the big 3 was counter to this rule and it was Mojang acquisition by Microsoft.
Platform holder acquisitions are generally not different. Hence why they should be opposed by gamers who consider themselves impartial. Bungie and Mojang continue to support Xbox and Playstation, but don't expect this to remain that way forever.
Smaller acquisitions are fine. No one complained about any acquisition MS made that wasn't Bethesda/ABK (Mojang warrants criticism but they kept Minecraft on PS so it's good "so far"). Smaller acquisitions will not harm several millions of gamers (especially not 2nd party acquisitions) and often help to increase the size, productivity, and quality of the studio. Countless small/mid sized developers would benefit from big publishers acquiring them, so I support this when it's done right (Done right = growth in popularity, quality, staff, etc).
We agree, I fully expect Sony to respond and fully support any of there acquisition initiative.
I find it sad that the situation has gotten bad to the point of making it acceptable to fully support such a response from Sony, which as you said could only escalate to even worse developments. MS could use that against them to justify another major acquisition. Sony needs better lawyers lol. I honestly think the best realistic scenario is for Amazon and Google to step in, because the odds are they'll keep the games multiplatform.
There's nothing unprecedented in this, the video game industry see acquisition every year and their have been wave of large swats of acquisitions before. ABK themselves is just a collection of acquisition and so are every other major player in the industry.
A platform holder spending well over $80 billion to acquire one major publisher after the other is an unprecedented development. The amounts of money they're spending is representative of the magnitude.
And that's only cause recent event run against what you view as the model the gaming industry should follow. What you view as worse is another neutral or best, what you view as well earned dominance might be viewed as other unethically achieved one, what you view as incompetence can be seen otherwise by others.
I criticized Sony's moneyhats long before MS went ham with acquisitions. And let's not spin undisputed facts as "views".
It's not my "view" that Xbox's 1st/2nd party growth is poor compared to Sony's.
It's not my view that Playstation's 3rd party exclusives represent a tiny portion of Playstation's best sellers, and don't rank high.
It's not my view that the underpowered Series S is selling poorly and Series X is in limited quantities.
Game Pass aside, Microsoft underdelivered and they're trying to remedy their mistakes and weaknesses using bruteforce. I rest my case.
