• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Jim Ryan: "[Microsoft is] a tech giant with a long history of dominating industries, the choices gamers have today will disappear"

Status
Not open for further replies.

GHG

Gold Member
I said a game *like* Cyberpunk, not a verbatim clone.

But I'm not sure what you want them to take from it when it's actually one of the worst examples in the genre in terms of freedom? It trys hard to be an open world RPG/immersive sim hybrid but fails at both. The RPG elements are shallow, the "choices" are meaningless and then it takes all the worst bits from Deus Ex mankind divided and throws them all in an open world.

The open world visual design is brilliant (the sense of place is one of the best I've expeienced in an open world, it's dense and actually feels lived in) and it's got a pretty face when maxed out on PC but it's literally the definition of wide as an ocean but deep as a puddle.
 
"It hasn't happened yet." is the same thing that was said day one of the fist DLC. And all that hand waving got us some of the most atrocious GaaS models and Season Passes of today.

By the time it happens, it's already too late. So speak up now.
You realize you can't prove anything you say about the future, nor can I... right? That's why I said what I said, I don't have any interest in the convo going any further. I was trying to be nice about it.
 

Ozriel

M$FT
It's ignorant to think of it this way lol.
If GP and sub services are popular, this leads to death of physical gaming, devaluing of games and cheapening of games that are released... production value cheapening.

This is just scaremongering. Games will continue to be sold at retail and on digital platforms like Steam. There's also no supporting evidence behind the claim that in sub services, game quality will suffer.

Steam sales certainly didn't lead to games being 'devalued' on the platform.

Look at the movie industry? Everything is a tv show now and although many movies come out... these are subscription trash.

We just had big budget Black Adam and Black Panther 2. Avatar 2 shows up soon and will be one of the most expensive movies ever made. Lots of big theatrical releases too.
I don't seen how 'everything is a tv show'. There's tons of movies coming out.
 
Lots of crazy stuff in the thread, but for the record Sony had nothing to do with Sega, in 1996 alone Sega went from a growing first place in the US and Europe in the industry, to last and billion+ in the red. They also had $61 million in losses sue to unsold Genesis inventory in the US alone because they screwed up and failed to sustain the console while the SNES came back from behind and passed Sega in the US taking the number one spot wit the DKC games, Killer Instinct port, Starfox, and others. This all happened before the Sony 'stole Tomb Raider" stuff that some people complain about. By the end of 1996 there was already reports of Sega working on a new console and abandoning the Saturn.

Sega also opened a theme park, an arcade park, and entertainment center, invested a lot on TV internet when that fad was hot with Netlink for the Saturn instead of games, spend who knows how much on the Model 3 with lockheed martin, failed to prop up the game gear, launched the Nomad which failed quickly, and launched the PICO edutainment consoles which didn't do much for them in the end, gave 3 free games way for free, cut the price twice in the same month, and tried shifting to launching games to PC for more revenue. Most of this happened before Tomb Raider even came out.

So people blaming Sony for Sega is just laughable at best. Sure it didn't help, but Sega was already skydiving on to concrete, Sony just threw a rock in the landing zone. Wouldn't change if they survived.

Is he really that terrified of losing Call of Duty?

Depends on what his data says in regards to PS COD sales compared to amount of consoles sold. If a massive amount of sales came from COD then yes.

but none of those players are spending close to $100 billion dollars in a few years in order to acquire publishers that have multiple popular studios under their wing.

If anything MS is just catching up with Sony with expedited shipping. Their acquisitions over the years are around that number or more.
 

gothmog

Gold Member
Agree with everything else in this post but would like to see some numbers on this.
Even if it is true I was literally just talking about recent acquisition dollars. Who knows how many billions they spend on the Xbox division, acquisitions, and three generations of consoles before that.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: GHG

twilo99

Member
Sony could have put themselves on cruise control after the debacle that was the Xbox One but they didn't. If that is Sony when they are given a red carpet to victory, then I can't wait to see Sony when it actually has to earn hose sales less they lose them to a competitor.

They obviously do not welcome any competition...
 

GHG

Gold Member
Even if it is true I was literally just talking about recent acquisition dollars. Who knows how many billions they spend on the Xbox division, acquisitions, and three generations of consoles before that.

Well that's the thing, if you want to start talking about total spend over the years then you'd have to do the same for both, adjust for inflation and then divide by the number of years they've been active in order to get anywhere close to a fair assessment.
 
But I'm not sure what you want them to take from it when it's actually one of the worst examples in the genre in terms of freedom? It trys hard to be an open world RPG/immersive sim hybrid but fails at both. The RPG elements are shallow, the "choices" are meaningless and then it takes all the worst bits from Deus Ex mankind divided and throws them all in an open world.

The open world visual design is brilliant (the sense of place is one of the best I've experienced in an open world, it's dense and actually feels lived in) and it's got a pretty face when maxed out on PC but it's literally the definition of wide as an ocean but deep as a puddle.
I think that is a fair point tbh and I should have conveyed myself better.

I used Cyberpunk as an example because of the world that was built, which you yourself laud as brilliant. I would much rather see ND or Insomniac try their hand at a game like that versus yet another 3rd person game, because I firmly believe first-person rpg/action style games are a much better medium to tell a personal narrative than something like a game that pulls you into a cutscene like you'd have right out of a movie.

When you play a game like TLOU, you merely exist in the world for the duration of the game. In titles like Cyberpunk and Skyrim, you live and breath there, games really stretch their legs out draw you in. Clearly this is a personal preference here and I much prefer this style of game, and its a shame that Sony doesn't offer anything like that.
 

ChorizoPicozo

Gold Member
I think that is a fair point tbh and I should have conveyed myself better.

I used Cyberpunk as an example because of the world that was built, which you yourself laud as brilliant. I would much rather see ND or Insomniac try their hand at a game like that versus yet another 3rd person game, because I firmly believe first-person rpg/action style games are a much better medium to tell a personal narrative than something like a game that pulls you into a cutscene like you'd have right out of a movie.

When you play a game like TLOU, you merely exist in the world for the duration of the game. In titles like Cyberpunk and Skyrim, you live and breath there, games really stretch their legs out draw you in. Clearly this is a personal preference here and I much prefer this style of game, and its a shame that Sony doesn't offer anything like that.
Such bad takes all around.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
You realize you can't prove anything you say about the future, nor can I... right? That's why I said what I said, I don't have any interest in the convo going any further. I was trying to be nice about it.
You can predict the future by ignoring the mistakes of the past. And once again, we have other entertainment mediums to draw from.

And trying silence those who see a race to the bottom is one of those instances.
 

Drewpee

Banned
The wrong is the 'how' they have chosen to do that — buying big publishers to lock them down to their ecosystem. Simply putting games on Game Pass is not the issue and you know it.
Simply putting the games on Gamepass is the ENTIRE issue, and you know it.

Sony would not be able to compete with their version of Gamepass, and they know it.

Doesn't matter though because their fans will defend every choice they make no matter how anti consumer, and we know it.
 

GhostOfTsu

Banned
And regulation is VERY important. I fully support that. Competition benefits the consumer so monopolies cannot be allowed.

I just don't see how potential exclusivity for Crash Bandicoot or Spyro and Day One Call of Duty on Gamepass will lead to a 'nightmare dystopian future'.
You could say the same about Meta buying that fitness app or Amazon buying a robot vacuum. It's not just one thing.

In the end these megacompanies are big enough, they don't need to control even more. MS is bigger than them all already.

I also doubt you care that much about getting Crash or Spyro on GP. When Crash 4 was announced on PS+ it was barely talked about for an afternoon and that's it. And 50 millions people had access to that deal (vs 25 on GP).

No, this is all a power fantasy for the greens.
Lots of crazy stuff in the thread, but for the record Sony had nothing to do with Sega, in 1996 alone Sega went from a growing first place in the US and Europe in the industry, to last and billion+ in the red. They also had $61 million in losses sue to unsold Genesis inventory in the US alone because they screwed up and failed to sustain the console while the SNES came back from behind and passed Sega in the US taking the number one spot wit the DKC games, Killer Instinct port, Starfox, and others. This all happened before the Sony 'stole Tomb Raider" stuff that some people complain about. By the end of 1996 there was already reports of Sega working on a new console and abandoning the Saturn.

Sega also opened a theme park, an arcade park, and entertainment center, invested a lot on TV internet when that fad was hot with Netlink for the Saturn instead of games, spend who knows how much on the Model 3 with lockheed martin, failed to prop up the game gear, launched the Nomad which failed quickly, and launched the PICO edutainment consoles which didn't do much for them in the end, gave 3 free games way for free, cut the price twice in the same month, and tried shifting to launching games to PC for more revenue. Most of this happened before Tomb Raider even came out.

So people blaming Sony for Sega is just laughable at best. Sure it didn't help, but Sega was already skydiving on to concrete, Sony just threw a rock in the landing zone. Wouldn't change if they survived.
In Cold Blood In Cold Blood really need to read what a fellow green rat is saying. He's still crying about the Sony stuff did to Sega, all of it made up in his mind. Fake history to vilify Sony.
 
Agree with everything else in this post but would like to see some numbers on this.

To be fair those are based on estimates, but the fact Sony is hush hush about their acquisition costs does say something.

We only really know acquisition costs (some in part) for Psygnosis, Bungie, and Insomniac.

But they never published costs (unless they were leaked) for Naughty Dog, Eidentic(Syphon filter), Incog entertainment(Twisted Metal), Nixxes, part of Sigil, Firesprite, Guerilla (beat Eidos in bid), Zipper, Media molecule, Sucker Punch, Audiokinetic, House Marque, etc I know I'm missing several more.

Based on when they brought these studios and the costs of studios other pubs were buying around those times on average it wouldn't be surprising. Esepcially after you had inflation and Yen/Eur to USD conversation on the older ones.

That' not including acquisitions that aren't dev studios but were brought for gaming purposes that run into the same problem of Sony not disclosing numbers. It makes me wonder why they even bothered giving us Insomniacs.

But as I said, if anything Microsoft is catching up. From late 360 to those pre-zenimax acquisitions MS didn't buy a single studio. Actually it goes back further than that. Many of the studios MS could have brought they let go on the 360. I think this is just MS catching up.
 
You can predict the future by ignoring the mistakes of the past. And once again, we have other entertainment mediums to draw from.

And trying silence those who see a race to the bottom is one of those instances.
Really weird leap to accuse me of trying to silence you because I didn't find merit in the convo. Good one, will remember this moving forward, thank you.
 
Last edited:

8BiTw0LF

Banned
In Jim We Trust!

VWPVe88.gif
 

gothmog

Gold Member
Well that's the thing, if you want to start talking about total spend over the years then you'd have to do the same for both, adjust for inflation and then divide by the number of years they've been active in order to get anywhere close to a fair assessment.
Playstation is only 8 years older than Xbox so I'm not sure either inflation or number of active years is going to factor much into this.

Most of the Playstation acquisions were in the millions and not billions ranges with a few notable exceptions.
 

Gavon West

Spread's Cheeks for Intrusive Ads
We just went through an entire generation where MS did no such dominating.

On PC, a market nearly as big as console, MS puts their games on Steam day one.

Mobile streaming? theyve extended their entire Azure stack and infrastructure to any player willing to pay. Even competitors.

It’s so weird how these claims are made with zero supporting evidence.
Its not weird. Not. One. Bit.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Really weird leap to accuse me of trying to silence you because I didn't find merit in the convo. Good one, will remember this moving forward, thank you.
I didn’t say you were trying to silence me, I was referring to those who attempt to do so, or try to do so. Apologies if you felt it was for you,, that was not my intention.
 

gothmog

Gold Member
To be fair those are based on estimates, but the fact Sony is hush hush about their acquisition costs does say something.

We only really know acquisition costs (some in part) for Psygnosis, Bungie, and Insomniac.

But they never published costs (unless they were leaked) for Naughty Dog, Eidentic(Syphon filter), Incog entertainment(Twisted Metal), Nixxes, part of Sigil, Firesprite, Guerilla (beat Eidos in bid), Zipper, Media molecule, Sucker Punch, Audiokinetic, House Marque, etc I know I'm missing several more.

Based on when they brought these studios and the costs of studios other pubs were buying around those times on average it wouldn't be surprising. Esepcially after you had inflation and Yen/Eur to USD conversation on the older ones.

That' not including acquisitions that aren't dev studios but were brought for gaming purposes that run into the same problem of Sony not disclosing numbers. It makes me wonder why they even bothered giving us Insomniacs.

But as I said, if anything Microsoft is catching up. From late 360 to those pre-zenimax acquisitions MS didn't buy a single studio. Actually it goes back further than that. Many of the studios MS could have brought they let go on the 360. I think this is just MS catching up.
So now we're making up some kind of weird "Microsoft is just catching up" narrative? The Playstation is only 7 or so years older than the Xbox who just celebrated its 20th anniversary this year.
 

Kataploom

Gold Member
Are you comparing an exclusivity deal that in some cases is a timed release to spending $70billion on buying a publisher………..
I posted in a later response: How do we know the amount of money Sony paid across all 8th gen to make games and content skip Xbox? How do we know it's less than that? And again, as it must actually be true that is more than Sony paid to leave Xbox with important games and conten... Who sets the limit? Why would MS spend no more than Sony because it somehow seems "immoral"?
 
Last edited:

Ozriel

M$FT
I also doubt you care that much about getting Crash or Spyro on GP. When Crash 4 was announced on PS+ it was barely talked about for an afternoon and that's it. And 50 millions people had access to that deal (vs 25 on GP).

Tongue in cheek comment about Crash and Spyro since Activision's major IP is confirmed to remain multi-platform post purchase.

Perhaps it's WoW or Diablo that has you so incensed, then?
 
You could say the same about Meta buying that fitness app or Amazon buying a robot vacuum. It's not just one thing.

In the end these megacompanies are big enough, they don't need to control even more. MS is bigger than them all already.

I also doubt you care that much about getting Crash or Spyro on GP. When Crash 4 was announced on PS+ it was barely talked about for an afternoon and that's it. And 50 millions people had access to that deal (vs 25 on GP).

No, this is all a power fantasy for the greens.

In Cold Blood In Cold Blood really need to read what a fellow green rat is saying. He's still crying about the Sony stuff did to Sega, all of it made up in his mind. Fake history to vilify Sony.
Nah, I lives through the whole thing.
Sony did a deal with EA to get then to pull support for Sega consoles. EA had been one of the major contract partners with Sega for a long time.
Back in that era the biggest thing in gaming was EA Sports. Madden and Fifa were what brought people in mass to the consoles. A console without Madden or Fifa or NHL games was dead man walking.
Sony was a much wealthier company than Sega and could afford to buy up big publishers like Psygnosis while Sega relied on their own first party studios.
Sony signed up Namco as exclusive to the Playstation and did deals with Kanomi and Capcom as well for exclusive content.
Sony is shit scared of the potential MS can bring with its money position over Sony, because its the exact same thing they did to Sega.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Nah, I lives through the whole thing.
Sony did a deal with EA to get then to pull support for Sega consoles. EA had been one of the major contract partners with Sega for a long time.
Back in that era the biggest thing in gaming was EA Sports. Madden and Fifa were what brought people in mass to the consoles. A console without Madden or Fifa or NHL games was dead man walking.
Sony was a much wealthier company than Sega and could afford to buy up big publishers like Psygnosis while Sega relied on their own first party studios.
Sony signed up Namco as exclusive to the Playstation and did deals with Kanomi and Capcom as well for exclusive content.
Sony is shit scared of the potential MS can bring with its money position over Sony, because its the exact same thing they did to Sega.

So is Microsoft the "pure evil" company now?
 
With the purchase of destiny Sony has shown what should happen when a big multiplatform series is bought unlike Microsoft when they bought Bethesda.

Don't agree with this one mate. We know Sony money hatted exclusive strikes and more. Sony do not have a stellar track record with Bungie/Destiny but standard asshat business practices from all players is conceded, Sony being the "worst" offender.

Microsoft have opened their platform in terms of -
  • Ccrossplay.
  • Game releases near parity with console and PC games/activities/security/friends/achievements.
  • Device support.
  • ID@Xbox & Gamepass variety of dev contracts and royalties as well as games library.
  • xCloud support.
  • Diversity/equality policies and enforcement.
  • Aaccessibility improvements (hardware & software) e.g. Adaptive Controller or Xbox UI accessiblity features.
  • Also recently updated policies on third payment systems and nested stores in apps as best in industry since the recent court cases and regulatory ebb and flow.
  • Openly partner with Sony/PS for cloud infrastructure, these industries and players aren't pushing walled gardens as much these days. Sure some are e.g. Apple or Sony or Nintendo but it will bleed out further as time goes on.
  • Embracing of open standards e.g. Microsoft as a whole not just Xbox, Xbox is following Microsoft/Azure's mantra of an agnostic solution.
It's time to ditch this idea of old school ivy-league kill or be killed Microsoft from the 90s. It's not the same corporate animal anymore, hasn't been for a long time. In fact, objectively and reasonably one could argue Sony is now closer to that old school Microsoft playbook currently. I know which company I choose with respect to showing what should happen for the gaming industry. I'll take Microsoft over most any other major gaming players out there. Sony = nope. Nintendo = nope. Tencent? Laughable. EA? Pffft. You get the idea, you're barking up the wrong tree trying to say Sony has better working conditions, ethics and business morals than current day Microsoft or Xbox. Good luck.
 

FoxMcChief

Gold Member
It's ignorant to think of it this way lol.
If GP and sub services are popular, this leads to death of physical gaming, devaluing of games and cheapening of games that are released... production value cheapening.
The effects will hit me no matter if I sub or not.
Look at the movie industry? Everything is a tv show now and although many movies come out... these are subscription trash.
But not everyone sees it that way. There’s no right or wrong in this. You don’t want subs, while I do.

I think subs are the future, and I welcome them with open arms. I also only game on one main platform these days (Xbox, via Series X, work computer and phone), so only having one sub would be fantastic for me as it’s playable on most devices in my everyday life.
 
This is a joke post. Sega screwed themselves by making stupid decisions and getting caught with their pants down with the PSX. Sony made an amazing console. Sony came into the market to get one over Nintendo not Sega. Nntendo were equally responsible for the demise of Sega. You also forgot Sega had their own established IP. Sony didn't!
You also forget what IP Sony purchased.
There were two big Arcade game companies in Japan. Sega and Namco. Sony signed up Namco as an exclusive to the playstation.
In Japan, which was the predominat gaming country, titles like Ridge Racer, Tekken etc were the equal of Daytona and Virtua Fighter.
On top of that they purchased Psygonois which brought titles like Wipeout and Destruction Derby, both of which were big titles for PS.
They also bought up a number of other exclusives like Twisted Metal, which was a big hit.
Sony's strategy was exactly what they had to do. They didn't have the first party studios like AM2 etc that Sega had, so they had to buy the content from third parties. They knew if the PS was going to be a success it needed to have the best exclusive games on its console.
They did just that. It was an excellent buisness move and it worked.
But don't be naive and think that Sony didn't use its position to hurt the Sega consoles it was in opposition to. They did.
That's business. They owed Sega nothing. They wanted Segas console buisness. They got it. They won and the history books were written.
That's why Sony is so pathetic and crying victim over Activision.
Everyone with their ass pointing down knows that if Sony was in the financial position to buy Activision and have COD exclusive they would have done it in a heart beat.
 
Last edited:

Stooky

Member
I posted in a later response: How do we know the amount of money Sony paid across all 8th gen to make games and content skip Xbox? How do we know it's less than that? And again, as it must actually be true that is more than Sony paid to leave Xbox with important games and conten... Who sets the limit? Why would MS spend no more than Sony because it somehow seems "immoral"?
Sony paying a few mill for dev cost is one thing. Depending on the contract dosent mean Sony owns it, It definitely wasn’t 70 billion. In contrast Disney paid 71 billion for fox. What does that look like?
 
Last edited:
Are you still crying? 😂😂😂
After discussing it with Ken Kutragi and Kaz they assure me they only entered the console market to get one over Nintendo. So you can rest easy on that one.
How come you don't blame Nintendo? Who had many exclusives tied down in 16bit era onwards? Didn't Nintendo take marketshare from Sega?
Sure. In Sony's buisness strategy the name Sega would never have been mentioned. The equal biggest console gaming company was just not thought about or considered as a competitor.
Yawn.
 

Warablo

Member
Microsoft only had 5 studios at the start of the Xbox One generation. Can you imagine them trying to grow the number of those studios "organically" in this climate?
 
Last edited:
Jim is right and it is sad that people don't seem to understand the long game MS is playing. You will come to regret supporting this, big time!

Nah, when you consider behemoths like Tencent, EA, Epic/Fortnite, Sony, Nintendo, Apple, Google, Valve/Steam, PC gaming (amalgamated) and any of the current day major players your complaint is baseless, factually. The current gaming market has more players, more turnover, more devices, more games, more devs, more indies, more marketing and more exposure than ever before. Read that again and let it sink in.

Let me say it another way for effect. 2022 is tipped as gaming being $197Billion in gross turnover. A purchase as large as ActiBliz is considered at least a 10 year play, let us take approx. $200B and multiply for 10 years equating to $2 Trillion. Trillion. $67B from MS for the ActiBliz buyout does not compare nor does it monopolise the industry, period. MS spent approx. 3% of the total gaming for 10 years on this deal. In the same 10 years Sony likely will be spending too, probably more like 1% of the 10 year run.

What are you complaining about exactly? You approve Bungie but want to block ActiBliz. It doesn't add up mate.

Look at my post above. MS/Xbox are in fact helping expand what games gamers play and what games get developed through Gamepass and ID@Xbox, more so than the usual formula of loss lead a console, lock em in and sell em games. They are also enabling more people to play with each other across more devices. Xbox is far more than that, they have no interest in a walled garden anymore, just like Azure. You've learnt nothing about the transformation MS has been through in the last decade. Xbox started this path a few years ago and they're already bearing successful and profitable fruit from the long game. Pretty amazing for the company, devs, gamers and industry really. All major players are having the best years on record ever in gaming. Again, let that sink in.
 
Last edited:

Swift_Star

Banned
Call me crazy, but MS being more competitive in the industry and selling better is good for the industry from a consumer perspective. None of these machines and games approach on a price territory that is unobtainable for most gamers, and having two big consoles that compete for your attention and dollars is the most ideal situation. Jim is painting the outcome stark because he wants regulators to shut down the acquisition or impose sanctions that force MS to play ball with CoD and other titles they will own outright.

IF MS is strong then Sony will compete harder, and everyone wins IMO. In the end I am a consumer and largely only care about how these things affect me, so as an owner of both systems I win regardless.
They being competitive is fine, they buying their way into monopoly isn’t.
 

Swift_Star

Banned
What acquisition did they make that resulted in Windows being dominant? I must really be forgetting something there, as far as I'm remembering all the OS systems from back then are still around and not connected to Windows. Same with Office, when MS was becoming dominant the major rival of the day was Corel, last I checked MS never bought them. If you could be more specific that would be helpful. Possibly they acquired some technologies that were integrated into Windows/Office, but I just don't remember anything significant enough that you could point to a particular acquisition and say it swung the pendulum.
You’re so innocenf 😂 why do you think they bought Skype? And Nokia? They just failed at Nokia but please, don’t be naïve.
 

GhostOfTsu

Banned
Nah, I lives through the whole thing.
Sony did a deal with EA to get then to pull support for Sega consoles. EA had been one of the major contract partners with Sega for a long time.
Back in that era the biggest thing in gaming was EA Sports. Madden and Fifa were what brought people in mass to the consoles. A console without Madden or Fifa or NHL games was dead man walking.
Sega VS EA was a fight between Bernie Solar (Sega) and EA. Sony was NOT involved. This is well-known. Stop making shit up and do your research.

 
Don't agree with this one mate. We know Sony money hatted exclusive strikes and more. Sony do not have a stellar track record with Bungie/Destiny but standard asshat business practices from all players is conceded, Sony being the "worst" offender.

Microsoft have opened their platform in terms of -
  • Ccrossplay.
  • Game releases near parity with console and PC games/activities/security/friends/achievements.
  • Device support.
  • ID@Xbox & Gamepass variety of dev contracts and royalties as well as games library.
  • xCloud support.
  • Diversity/equality policies and enforcement.
  • Aaccessibility improvements (hardware & software) e.g. Adaptive Controller or Xbox UI accessiblity features.
  • Also recently updated policies on third payment systems and nested stores in apps as best in industry since the recent court cases and regulatory ebb and flow.
  • Openly partner with Sony/PS for cloud infrastructure, these industries and players aren't pushing walled gardens as much these days. Sure some are e.g. Apple or Sony or Nintendo but it will bleed out further as time goes on.
  • Embracing of open standards e.g. Microsoft as a whole not just Xbox, Xbox is following Microsoft/Azure's mantra of an agnostic solution.
It's time to ditch this idea of old school ivy-league kill or be killed Microsoft from the 90s. It's not the same corporate animal anymore, hasn't been for a long time. In fact, objectively and reasonably one could argue Sony is now closer to that old school Microsoft playbook currently. I know which company I choose with respect to showing what should happen for the gaming industry. I'll take Microsoft over most any other major gaming players out there. Sony = nope. Nintendo = nope. Tencent? Laughable. EA? Pffft. You get the idea, you're barking up the wrong tree trying to say Sony has better working conditions, ethics and business morals than current day Microsoft or Xbox. Good luck.
This will fall on deaf ears because once upon a time before most of GAF was born, MS was in court for anti-trust.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom