| The Fury said: Correct, never said it wasn't their money. But it's not the reason for all those not being able to be done now. They won't sack him, but should. ABK decide who gets the deal, not Sony, it's their decision to accept. Activision controls where their games go, not Sony, stop stretching. MS have no reason to add games anywhere but their platforms but the buy out is no reason why their (or Activisions) can't be on NVidia, considering MS are happy for their games to be on Steam already. MS could still do a deal with NVidia to bring their games to the streaming, considering the Nvidia Now does not care where you buy the games, only that you own them already. MS already has the money from the sale of the game. Activision accepted the deal. They can also not renew it when the terms ends or even end it early and pay Sony off with compensation if it's hindering their profitability so much. Maybe strike up a new deal with MS, seems to be what you are hinting right? Thanks, you too. |
You fail to see the logic behind this. Sony is the market leader, its where ABK make alot of their profits on. Sony has alot of pull behind these 3rd party contracts. Thats the power of being market leader.
MS are releasing their games on as many devices as possible. Cant say ABK will put CoD on Nintendo now due to whatever deals they have in place already are possibly stopping it from happening. MS would have pushed that if they had it their way.
ABK have to follow where the money is, they have to please shareholders, they cant just deny a deal that will lose them money.
