Started by Mmm_fish_tacos, Dec 08, 2022, 08:58 PM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The issue isn't Microsoft making those games exclusive, the issue is what Microsoft apparently told the EU regulators before the acquisition. They outright lied. So Microsoft can say they made a 10 year deal with Nintendo but that won't mean anything after.yeah thats the biggest red flag i've ever seen to not let this deal go through.
Like:i hear this argument but i saw a post that makes a lot of sense to me,... in summary:
It's so weird that they cite Redfall and Starfield as examples of games Xbox is "blocking" from PlayStation.— Jez (@JezCorden) December 8, 2022
If the FTC is establishing precedent, does Xbox now get God of War? That seems to be what they want to establish here. ???? ???? https://t.co/uutCeArmJ6
Microsoft didn't mislead EU over ZeniMax deal, watchdog says in response to US concernsEra thread
Microsoft didn't make any "commitments" to EU regulators not to release Xbox-exclusive content following its takeover of ZeniMax Media, the European Commission has said.
US enforcers yesterday suggested that the US tech giant had misled the regulator in 2021 and cited that as a reason to challenge its proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard.
"The commission cleared the Microsoft/ZeniMax transaction unconditionally as it concluded that the transaction would not raise competition concerns," the EU watchdog said in an emailed statement.
The absence of competition concerns "did not rely on any statements made by Microsoft about the future distribution strategy concerning ZeniMax's games," said the commission, which itself has opened an in-depth probe into the Activision Blizzard deal and appears keen to clarify what happened in the previous acquisition.
The EU agency found that even if Microsoft were to restrict access to ZeniMax titles, it wouldn't have a significant impact on competition because rivals wouldn't be denied access to an "essential input," and other consoles would still have a "large array" of attractive content.
porting this over from the era thread. seems relavant:Someone mentioned that the context for these snippets was that it doesn't make sense to remove already released games from the platform. It didn't make sense to remove Skyrim/Fallout from PS4.
Straight from the brief they submitted:
When asked about the importance of Call of Duty in the regulatory discussions, Spencer said "There's really only been one major opposer to the deal and that's Sony. Sony is trying to protect their dominance on console. The way they grow is by making Xbox smaller. They have a very different view of the industry than we do. They don't ship their games day and date on PC. They don't put their games in the subscription when they launch their games."The bottom part of the article is hilarious:
Spencer adds more thoughts, including promising Call of Duty on Playstation, why it doesn't make sense to remove Call of Duty from other platforms, and his confusion on why regulators are worrying so much about how this will impact Sony.
These comments by Spencer are very honest from his perspective and coincides with a Microsoft that is pulling all the stops to get this deal done. We will have to wait and see how regulators respond and if they buy Microsoft's point of view.
man what PR spin. I never cared much for Spencer before, but i can't stand him even more now. Everything they spew about this Acti deal just reeks of desperation.You can tell it's the biggest thing to happen in gaming in decades. I can't recal the last time Xbox and PlayStation had any public beef like this.
|VizionEck Cube Royale is releasing this year|
"I'm Mike Armbrust" -Me
not to mention Nintendo is just as dominant as sony. More so sort of handheld/console hybrid but still nintendo and sony are huge. MS really is just hurt that they haven't been able to replicate Nintendo and Sony's success.they haven't been able to replicate the success because they haven't been able to cultivate quality 1st party developers. hence their new focus to just deprive the industry of as many as they can to claim their own.
> The way they grow is by making Xbox smaller. They have a very different view of the industry than we do. They don't ship their games day and date on PC. They don't put their games in the subscription when they launch their games."...and would you care to comment on the list of competitors MS has put out of business via monopolistic tactics?
Bruh, you've been in the industry for 22 years now, and both of these things you started doing like 5 or 6 years ago. Which both is and isn't that long (some of their studios haven't put out a single game in 4+ years)
I can almost guarantee that people like Jim Ryan have a pretty long memory of Xbox behaving exactly how Phil is claiming that Sony is.
What exactly has Sony done to keep Xbox smaller?
And how does that compare to you know, acquiring two publishers?