I'm not saying that this could be the biggest backlash in gaming history because there is zero chance that either company will choose for the game to be pulled. There is way too much money being made.
So your conclusion that if Sony isn't scared of the backlash of the game being pulled then why would they be scared of the smaller backlash of untethering the EG account doesn't really hold true, because the first isn't realistically an option.
Companies do care about there brand but they also care about money and so they have to weigh up the implications of any action on both. In this instance Sony has concluded that the amount of extra money they will make is worth the tarnishing of there brand. Or at least they did when setting out their terms to Epic. Perhaps they didn't foresee the backlash being as big as it is, which may lead them to rethink their position, or not...
No, my conclusions is: There is way too much money to be made, exactly as you are saying. Therefore both Sony and EG must have agreed to the terms, no problems and no questions asked because again, there is way too much money to be made. EG can apply pressure to Sony as Sony would TOTALLY be scared of losing Fortnite on their platform and Sony can apply pressure on EG cause there is a huge lot of players to be lost should EG NOT play ball. So both agreed to it and both are accomplices of the "crime".
That's what I have ALWAYS been saying since the beginning of this thread. That's pure logic and that makes total sense. It's OTHERS who try to say otherwise, to lay the blame on Sony ALONE. So to show how wrong they are I made my previous post where I demonstrate that their theory is NOT a "realistic option". Exactly as you put it. At that point all I'm saying is, should Sony not be scared of entirely losing Fortnite, the current backlash which is way smaller in proportion would then not scare them at all.
I don't know if logic should be taught in school or if it's a concept not many people actually can grasp but I wish people did cause this reply I'm typing right now is to explain what I have explained several times before and it seems I must explain it again and again.
I feel again, that you are complicating things with extranious points.
You can call Sony & EG accomplices but the only party in the agreement demanding the tethered account is Sony.
So unless you expect Epic to walk away from potentially hundreds of millions of dollars out of principal then I don't see how you can fairly libel them as a guilty party...
And let me just say this to finish - you absolutely have not been saying the same thing since the beginning of this thread, here are just a few quotes:
"At best it's Nintendo that should be blamed for not letting people on THEIR platform log on a game for whatever reason."
"Even if it's Sony's fault, Sony has NO POWER WHATSOEVER on what happens on a Switch or an Xbox so at best Sony asked Nintendo and Microsoft to block Fortnite accounts created on PS4 and both Nintendo and Microsoft are then accomplices to this."
"So to summarize, Sony is guilty of not wanting cross-platform or allowing it on Sony's machines. But whatever does not work on OTHER machines is primarily those machine's fault and problem."
"Yeah just as I'm amused to see how you guys get blocked by (in this case) the Switch and somehow accuse Sony of mysteriously having magic powers that allow Sony to block something on Switch. "
"Sony is indeed the one not wanting cross-platform, nobody is denying that. But what is blocked on Switch is blocked by Nintendo, what's blocked on Xbox is blocked by Microsoft and what's blocked on Playstation is blocked by Sony end of story."
And my personal favourite "Nope but I'm probably the only person in this thread that thinks before throwing wild accusations."
And that's just from the first 3 pages of this 39 page thread...
So I find your superior tone a bit misplaced tbh, when as far as I can see the majority of users on this thread grasped the fundamentals of this issue much quicker than yourself.
I'm not trying to be mean here, it's just that when you're inferring other users haven't been educated properly, you really need to be flawless & consistent in your own arguments - which as we can see above is far from the truth...