Banjo64
cumsessed
What a cop out there is no need to be upset bud, scrutiny of big businesses is a good thing.Both Nintendo and Sony release games almost every year with that potential. Good try though.
What a cop out there is no need to be upset bud, scrutiny of big businesses is a good thing.Both Nintendo and Sony release games almost every year with that potential. Good try though.
Can you name even one that sells every year like Duty does?
That's a weird way of saying you can't name one.The same title selling X copies every year shouldn't be an important issue. Sony and Nintendo have a stable of franchises with alternating release schedules, and many of these titles are very good sellers in the market.
@ Banjo64 your posts couldn't be any less upsetting to me. LOL
You shouldn’t make claims and then deflect from simple follow ups by saying the substance of your claim is not actually important. It’s discrediting my friend.The same title selling X copies every year shouldn't be an important issue. Sony and Nintendo have a stable of franchises with alternating release schedules, and many of these titles are very good sellers in the market.
@ Banjo64 your posts couldn't be any less upsetting to me. LOL
Are you sure? You sound upset pal.The same title selling X copies every year shouldn't be an important issue. Sony and Nintendo have a stable of franchises with alternating release schedules, and many of these titles are very good sellers in the market.
@ Banjo64 your posts couldn't be any less upsetting to me. LOL
I’m starting to hope this deal doesn’t go through just for the absolute melt downs it would cause on here
Well, that and because I think $70b on Activision is an obscene waste of money.
Which doesn't make sense when all of these services are walled gardens. MS can't compete with Sonys subscription service and Sony can't compete with MS's. A newcomer can only compete in the PC space where the incumbents already have massive advantages in popular IPs.It’s not just Sony they’re worried about. It’s gaming as a whole, almost certainly with an eye towards past practices MS employed. From the excerpts:
“After the Merger, Microsoft would gain control of this important input and could use it to harm the competitiveness of its rivals. As the multi-game subscription market is still in its infancy, the effect of the Merger could be to tip or significantly increase concentration in the market in Microsoft’s favour before future rivals have a chance to develop. The CMA therefore believes that the Merger gives rise to significant competition concerns in multi-game subscription services (including cloud gaming services, to the extent these are distributed through multi-game subscription services).”
They‘re clearly worried the merger could block rivals from even developing. They aren’t beholden to Sony staying competitive. They’re thinking about the entire audience having options In the future.
By strong which means xbox have the financial backing of a parent companies 100 times more powerful than the other two competitors
That's a weird way of saying you can't name one.
The ironic part is that Sony which used to have a strong first party development presence there, now its MS.And then they wonder what has happened to industry in the UK.
Sony and Nintendo already own and control properties that sell 20 and 30m copies, and they have full control of those properties. LOL Heaven forbid there be real competition in the space, Sony probably lobbying hard here.
I mean, that's fine and all but my honest opinion is that it's ultimately a little absurd.It’s not just Sony they’re worried about. It’s gaming as a whole, almost certainly with an eye towards past practices MS employed. From the excerpts:
“After the Merger, Microsoft would gain control of this important input and could use it to harm the competitiveness of its rivals. As the multi-game subscription market is still in its infancy, the effect of the Merger could be to tip or significantly increase concentration in the market in Microsoft’s favour before future rivals have a chance to develop. The CMA therefore believes that the Merger gives rise to significant competition concerns in multi-game subscription services (including cloud gaming services, to the extent these are distributed through multi-game subscription services).”
They‘re clearly worried the merger could block rivals from even developing. They aren’t beholden to Sony staying competitive. They’re thinking about the entire audience having options In the future.
Because the premise of needing to name one is so foolish to start with. Does Nintendo release Mario, or Zelda, or Pokemon, or Splatoon, or Mario Cart yearly? No they don't. Could they easily put together a release schedule that keeps them very near the top of the yearly sales threads, yes.
No, what you said was foolish to start with.Both Nintendo and Sony release games almost every year with that potential. Good try though.
No, what you said was foolish to start with.
Only if you aren't too bright to start with. It was obvious I was talking about their libraries as a whole, not any one particular title.
This is nothing it will go through fine.Think the CMA have read the situation perfectly, I am wondering what concessions Microsoft/Xbox are willing to make.
We already know that multiplatform access is one but I am actually wondering about inclusion of subscription services and how that looks now.
I am 100% in agreement about the cost of entry even today. But I still think an exclusive Duty is currently a game that could make things a lot harder for even the biggest companies to get into the game. just Look at how people responded to EGS because of loyalty to a launcher. Imagine if all the Duty players were told there’s only 1 platform they can play on?I mean, that's fine and all but my honest opinion is that it's ultimately a little absurd.
The barrier to entry in this market is astronomically high already. Amazon, Google, Sega cannot make competitive services because it takes a ton of experience. That's just consoles. Making a cloud gaming service is even harder to make because it's expensive and risky to the point that Sony claimed it wasn't even possible for years until they got pushed to compete, and now suddenly it's possible.
I don't think anyone is going to compete in this space with Sony, MS or Nintendo except a giant corporation like Google, Amazon or Tencent. I don't think MS having Call of Duty prevents any of these companies from competing; especially when they're multiplatform games.
I'm seeing anti-competitive concentration in the market already in the form of Sony's market dominance. As I said earlier, MS was barely even able to hang in the console space last gen. Having them in a strong position, imho, has already demonstrated positive effects for consumers. I think the regulators are misreading the market completely.
Imagine if MS was more competitive in Europe? Probably wouldn't see the PS5 get a price increase.
They're just making a public show of it. It will be approved.
Both Nintendo and Sony release games almost every year with that potential. Good try though.
That’s not how reality works. MS is many multiple times richer than Valve, but you’d be hard pressed to claim MS has a very strong position in PC gaming
Might as well claim Google Stadia has a strong position in gaming.
Are you sure? You sound upset pal.
At first I didn't care, but watching the mini meltdown already happening I Hope it doesn't go through either. That will be so much funI’m starting to hope this deal doesn’t go through just for the absolute melt downs it would cause on here
Well, that and because I think $70b on Activision is an obscene waste of money.
This is what delusion looks like, folks!
Do you really think Sony and Nintendo release games able to sell 20-30m units annually?!? Stay off the crack pipe, son.
Scale is probably the best word to explain why this should be evaluated carefully. And by people without console loyalties.That scale of acquisition money isn't coming from Xbox profits. That's Windows/Office/Cloud profits being invested in the Xbox business. Neither Sony nor Nintendo nor other potential entrants to the gaming market can boast access to multi-billion generating cash cow businesses whose profits they can further leverage for acquisition growth of their gaming business.
1 Zelda game has sold more than 9 millions copies.When they release a Zelda game, you don't think they have the potential to sell 20m?
# | Title | Platform(s) | Release Date | Sales (in millions) |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Breath of the Wild | Switch Wii U | March 3, 2017 | 25.80 |
2 | Twilight Princess | Wii GCN | Wii: November 19, 2006 GCN: December 2, 2006 | 8.70 |
3 | Ocarina of Time | N64 | November 21, 1998 | 7.60 |
4 | The Legend of Zelda | NES | February 21, 1986 | 6.51 |
5 | Ocarina of Time 3D | 3DS | June 16, 2011 | 6.02 |
6 | Phantom Hourglass | DS | June 23, 2007 | 4.76 |
7 | A Link to the Past | SNES | November 21, 1991 | 4.61 |
8 | The Wind Waker | GCN | December 13, 2002 | 4.43 |
9 | The Adventure of Link | NES | January 14, 1987 | 4.38 |
10 | A Link Between Worlds | 3DS | November 22, 2013 | 4.07 |
11 | Oracle of Seasonsand Oracle of Ages | GBC | February 27, 2001 | 3.99 |
12 | Link's Awakening | GB | June 6, 1993 | 3.83 |
13 | Skyward Sword | Wii | November 18, 2011 | 3.67 |
14 | Majora's Mask | N64 | April 27, 2000 | 3.40 |
15 | Majora's Mask 3D | 3DS | February 13, 2015 | 3.28 |
16 | Spirit Tracks | DS | December 7, 2009 | 2.96 |
17 | A Link to the Past & Four Swords | GBA | December 2, 2002 | 2.82 |
18 | The Wind Waker HD | Wii U | September 20, 2013 | 2.35 |
19 | Link's Awakening DX | GBC | December 12, 1998 | 2.22 |
20 | The Minish Cap | GBA | November 4, 2004 | 1.76 |
21 | Tri Force Heroes | 3DS | October 22, 2015 | 1.23 |
22 | Twilight Princess HD | Wii U | March 4, 2016 | 1.11 |
23 | Four Swords Adventures | GCN | March 18, 2004 | 0.94 |
I don’t think they release Mario games annually.When they follow that up later with a Mario release, you don't think they have the potential to sell 20m? What about when they release Pokemon?
You do you pal.
1 Zelda game has sold more than 9 millions copies.
# Title Platform(s) Release Date Sales (in millions) 1 Breath of the Wild Switch
Wii UMarch 3, 2017 25.80 2 Twilight Princess Wii
GCNWii: November 19, 2006
GCN: December 2, 20068.70 3 Ocarina of Time N64 November 21, 1998 7.60 4 The Legend of Zelda NES February 21, 1986 6.51 5 Ocarina of Time 3D 3DS June 16, 2011 6.02 6 Phantom Hourglass DS June 23, 2007 4.76 7 A Link to the Past SNES November 21, 1991 4.61 8 The Wind Waker GCN December 13, 2002 4.43 9 The Adventure of Link NES January 14, 1987 4.38 10 A Link Between Worlds 3DS November 22, 2013 4.07 11 Oracle of Seasonsand Oracle of Ages GBC February 27, 2001 3.99 12 Link's Awakening GB June 6, 1993 3.83 13 Skyward Sword Wii November 18, 2011 3.67 14 Majora's Mask N64 April 27, 2000 3.40 15 Majora's Mask 3D 3DS February 13, 2015 3.28 16 Spirit Tracks DS December 7, 2009 2.96 17 A Link to the Past & Four Swords GBA December 2, 2002 2.82 18 The Wind Waker HD Wii U September 20, 2013 2.35 19 Link's Awakening DX GBC December 12, 1998 2.22 20 The Minish Cap GBA November 4, 2004 1.76 21 Tri Force Heroes 3DS October 22, 2015 1.23 22 Twilight Princess HD Wii U March 4, 2016 1.11 23 Four Swords Adventures GCN March 18, 2004 0.94
I don’t think they release Mario games annually.
Yes, Pokémon is a behemoth. If Nintendo were buying Pokémon instead of having grown it themselves then that deal also would be subject to scrutiny.
Good. I hope the acquisition gets rejected and then MS has to compete with the competition by actually creating their own studios and Ips.
You just have a bad take mate, so people are disagreeing with you.I never said Nintendo released Mario games yearly, it would be foolish to think they need to. What I said is they release games with a sales potential of 10, 20, 30m every year.
[/URL]
There's the link of best selling Switch games again. This was a basic, common sense statement that is factual. I'm quite surprised by the attacks I received for it. tbh. LOL
Must be a slow day.
Now wheres those people who attacked/ mocked me and say those cod game will never comes to playstation
Airbus Jr vindicated
We want people to have more access to games, not less." - Brad Smith, Microsoft
Starfield / Elder Scrolls on PS5 confirmed
You just have a bad take mate, so people are disagreeing with you.
Microsoft are trying to purchase a game franchise that sells 10m copies a year on their rivals console. Pokémon, Zelda and Mario aren’t published on rival hardware.
We want people to have more access to games, not less. - Brad Smith, Microsoft
Starfield / Elder Scrolls on PS5 confirmed
The CMA believes the Merger could allow Microsoft to make ABK content, including Call of Duty, exclusive to Xbox or Game Pass, or otherwise degrade its rivals' access to ABK content, such as by delaying releases or imposing licensing price increases. This type of concern is known as 'input foreclosure', where a firm uses its control of an important input to harm its rivals.
UK government confirms Nintendo is for kids.The CMA believes that in the short- to medium-term, the main rival that could be affected by this conduct would be Sony. Evidence suggests that Microsoft and Sony compete closely with each other in terms of content, target audience, and console technology. Nintendo, on the other hand, competes less closely with either of Sony or Microsoft, generally offering games that focus more on ‘family fun’ and innovative ways of playing (eg the Wii Fit board) and does not currently offer any Call of Duty games on the Nintendo Switch.
The CoD games sell now around 20M copies (PS+XB+PC) and PS has over 100MAU. If we're generous and consider that half of these 20M PS+XB+PC copies are sold on PS, then it means that 90% of the PlayStation active users don't buy the yearly CoD games.Well, I guess a lot of people were right - nobody buys Sony for exclusives but only for COD
From a business stand point it's very clear that MS are trying to do that but from a consumer point of view is it such a bad thing if we end up with fewer games subscription services than we otherwise would? It's pretty awful in the TV streaming space where if you want to watch all the new content you have to have loads of separate subs and there are new ones popping up all the time.It’s not just Sony they’re worried about. It’s gaming as a whole, almost certainly with an eye towards past practices MS employed. From the excerpts:
“After the Merger, Microsoft would gain control of this important input and could use it to harm the competitiveness of its rivals. As the multi-game subscription market is still in its infancy, the effect of the Merger could be to tip or significantly increase concentration in the market in Microsoft’s favour before future rivals have a chance to develop. The CMA therefore believes that the Merger gives rise to significant competition concerns in multi-game subscription services (including cloud gaming services, to the extent these are distributed through multi-game subscription services).”
They‘re clearly worried the merger could block rivals from even developing. They aren’t beholden to Sony staying competitive. They’re thinking about the entire audience having options In the future.
What a silly argument. It's pretty much exactly how reality and MS in particular works. It's already been posted in this thread that MS has been in a firm 3rd place in the market since they entered it, and even now they aren't generating close to the profits of their closest competitors, and yet they're able to have spent tens of billions in gaming acquisitions and still want to spend another $70b more on buying Activision Blizzard.
That scale of acquisition money isn't coming from Xbox profits. That's Windows/Office/Cloud profits being invested in the Xbox business. Neither Sony nor Nintendo nor other potential entrants to the gaming market can boast access to multi-billion generating cash cow businesses whose profits they can further leverage for acquisition growth of their gaming business.
Hey guys, remember when Satya Nadella made some bullish claims about Microsoft not even needing to do any concessions to get regulatory approval?
UK government doesn't know what to waste money on next. How about sorting out the fucking electricity prices you cretins.
Only us Nintendo Switch big-brains will be able to afford food AND energy this winterI laugh emoji but inside I cry.....
..my electricity and gas used to be 140 a month.....this morning I had to put it up to 252 a month and I'm still tracking a negative....
Insanity
Cant imagine what its going to be like with my 13900k and a 4090....lmao
With respect to my Tasman neighbours, New Zealand’s economy and population of 6 million is enough to cancel the deal the world over? I just assumed you have to bow out of selling/competing in that specific territory.The deal has to be approved by all regulatory bodies for it to go through.