Zippy6 said:
Yes the bigger question than the boosteroid/gfn deals etc is if the 100% revenue deal was for cloud streaming services like PS+ or if they made a deal with someone like Luna and it was still 100%. Considering "the third party" was likely PlayStation? Then it would seem they wanted 100% from in-app purchases on PS+. E.G Someone cloud streaming warzone. But perhaps not. |
Wouldn't Luna be the same? Just thinking about Ubisoft...Luna + Ubisoft allows you to Stream your "Ubisoft Connect" library so Amazon surely can't take any cut from Ubisoft transactions either and only make their money from the users subscribed to Luna?
So Microsoft in this case = Ubisoft and Luna wouldn't be entitled to 100% there either?
Honestly it was almost definitely PlayStation but the fact that they mention GeForce Now only (even though it's completely wrong to mention them as they take nothing either way) it makes me think it was just Sony trying to poison the well and confuse regulators, Lol.
