By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
 

Do the announced changes at Halo Studios (prev. 343 Industries) have you optimistic for the future of the franchise?

Yes 16 50.00%
 
No 12 37.50%
 
Still need convincing (sp... 4 12.50%
 
Total:32

Christ, Microsoft's response to CMA has been made public too and it's 111 pages.

Microsoft_s_response_to_the_Issues_Statement.pdf



Around the Network

Sony blocks this deal, I'm smashing my PS5. Real tawk.



https://www.trueachievements.com/gamercards/SliferCynDelta.png%5B/IMG%5D">https://www.trueachievements.com/gamer/SliferCynDelta"><img src="https://www.trueachievements.com/gamercards/SliferCynDelta.png

Sony. (I'm going to have to tag them since both responses have come out, Lol).



Independent developers would be harmed. Independent developers today have two principal options: PlayStation/PlayStation Plus and Xbox/Game Pass. By making Call of Duty exclusive to Xbox/Game Pass, the Transaction would tip demand for multi-game subscription services towards Xbox/Game Pass. As Microsoft foreclosed PlayStation/PlayStation Plus, it would likely become a critical distribution channel for independent developers. In that weakened negotiating position, independent developers would likely receive worse terms for their content from Microsoft or even be required to promise exclusivity in return for distribution, thereby diminishing independent developers’ ability and incentive to invest in high-quality new games. This, in turn, would also harm consumers even further.

Lol at the logics of Sony here, if the CMA buys that, they're either corrupt or biased for Sony/against MS

Independent developers today have two principal options:PlayStation/PlayStation Plus and Xbox/Game Pass

Sony purposefully ignoring the PC market, mobile market and the Switch which have become an awesome place for indies 1 2 3 4

In that weakened negotiating position, independent developers would likely receive worse terms for their content from Microsoft

They won't be able to if you don't reduce your own offering

even be required to promise exclusivity in return for distribution

That's your way of doing business Sony.

thereby diminishing independent developers’ ability and incentive to invest in high-quality new games.

You know if MS offering become that great for Indies you just have to improve your own maybe by offering better payout which would force MS to do the same.





Microsoft

Why do I get the feeling that something is going to come out from all this drama that other publishers won't like, certain data for example, Lol.

It may if this ends up going to court.



Around the Network

"Microsoft would be able to: increase console and game prices for Xbox users; increase the price of Game Pass; and reduce innovation"

Looks up PS game prices... MS been innovating more than PS this whole gen. Not everyone wants 3rd person, overly cinematic, over the shoulder game.

Despite Halo and Gears being the same game, they have far more variety than PS. 



https://www.trueachievements.com/gamercards/SliferCynDelta.png%5B/IMG%5D">https://www.trueachievements.com/gamer/SliferCynDelta"><img src="https://www.trueachievements.com/gamercards/SliferCynDelta.png

Ryuu96 said:

Sony. (I'm going to have to tag them since both responses have come out, Lol).

This is obviously false. Battlefield was gaining on CoD, with the gap between Battlefield 3 and CoD MW3 being relatively small that year as I recall. Problem is, EA didn't invest into Battlefield in the way they needed to to keep gaining on CoD, and let the series fall by the wayside. You can't keep up with CoD, which has 3 main AAA studios and a bunch of assistance studios, with just DICE putting out a Battlefield game every 3 years. EA needed to invest and open more AAA Battlefield studios to better compete with CoD. On top of that, DICE never learned the lessons they needed to learn, their campaigns remained lackluster compared to CoD's, they focused too heavily on high end graphics (increasing their budgets too much) and on realism and not enough on fun gameplay, while CoD continued to be good arcadey fun in the multiplayer and over the top Hollywood action movie on the campaigns. Battlefield could have continued to be a CoD competitor, but both EA and DICE ruined their chances there. It doesn't mean that building a CoD competitor is impossible however. Meanwhile, EA's Respawn, built of many former CoD devs, has managed to remain relatively close to CoD Warzone in the Battle Royale genre with Apex Legends.

Last edited by shikamaru317 - on 23 November 2022

"The only way to preserve robust competition and protect consumers and independent developers is to ensure that Activision remains independently owned and controlled."

This makes no sense at all. MS buying ABK promotes "robust competition" and would likely improve working conditions for these developers under MS. MS has offered a 10-year agreement to Sony for CoD, and would likely expand that in the future as well once those 10 years go by.



The last part about "a commitment to equal treatment on PlayStation and Xbox is essential to maintain effective competition and ensure a level playing field" Interesting...Because they previously said to CMA that it doesn't matter if CoD stays multiplatform because Xbox will do exclusive content (like they do) which influences people's decisions in where they buy CoD.

Sony is playing a bit sly there adding "and PlayStation Plus" because Microsoft HAS committed to keeping CoD on PlayStation, just not PS Plus. I feel like Microsoft should say fine, we'll afford you the opportunity to put it onto PS Plus as long as you pay us what it's worth and see what Sony says...They probably expect it for free at this rate, Lol.

Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 23 November 2022

Microsoft.