Support NeoGAF

[Rubim]

You know what it will be funny? Maybe on future COD releases we see a Microsoft studio logo, similar to marvel.

That’s not cutting off content from Xbox. That’s just cancelling dinner in advance.

Depends. Did one I'd you brought the whole restaurant?

 

[Rykan]

Anybody thinking Bungie's next 3rd person (fucking lol) game they have cooking is coming to Xbox is deluding themselves. IDGAF whatever PR bullshit Jimbo was spinning last year.

Frankly I'm kind of surprised Destiny hasn't been pulled.

You're surprised because you don't know what you're talking about.

Bungie wanted out of large Publishers like MS and Activision because they want to remain in control. You can bet that the contract they have signed specifically mentions that they get full control over development and publishing.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Bungie wanted out of large Publishers like MS and Activision because they want to remain in control. You can bet that the contract they have signed specifically mentions that they get full control over development and publishing.

Who gets full control over development and publishing

 

[feynoob]

MS doesn't care, they already make $200 billion in revenue a year. It's the equivalent of thinking you and I care about if we make an extra $0.05 a year.

Their goal is conquest and monopoly and they have the resources to do it without actually trying to make money from gaming or Xbox division itself.

I am sorry, but companies dont run charity. MS has to make a profit at some point.

 

[Rykan]

Who gets full control over development and publishing

Bungie in this context.

 

[poppabk]

Whoever goes after EPIC doesn't have to prevent the sale of their engine or block it from others, nor do they have to stop work on it, so I don't understand why that would be a problem if it were to happen?

Because it opens up too many avenues for unfair competition. If MS takes away CoD from PlayStation then playstation just doesn't have CoD same as they don't have a bunch of other first party games. Having control of Unreal engine gives a platform holder the ability to artificially manipulate the market - we have already seen this with Epic using it to bolster the Epic Games Store.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Bungie in this context.

But who specifically within Bungie

 

[Rykan]

But who specifically within Bungie

Whoever is in charge at that particular moment. Just like every other publisher.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

But who specifically within Bungie

Bungie is publishing, not Sony.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Whoever is in charge at that particular moment. Just like every other publisher.

So, current head of Bungie leaves and Sony replaces them with a new one, and somehow this new person holds the cards over Sony?

That's how you think this works?

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Bungie is publishing, not Sony.

Doesn't really matter who's publishing. Doesn't stop Sony from dictating platforms.

 

[Rykan]

So, current head of Bungie leaves and Sony replaces them with a new one, and somehow this new person holds the cards over Sony?

That's how you think this works?

You have no idea how any of this works, do you?

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

You have no idea how any of this works, do you?

Do you want to try to explain the scenario i've just given you?

You're free to cop out if you'd like though

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Doesn't really matter who's publishing. Doesn't stop Sony from dictating platforms.

While true, the executive leadership of Bungie could jump ship, start their own company after their stock options vest, and then Sony is left with a shell of a company.

It's not in the best interest of Sony to renege on an agreement and dictate control like that.

 

[mansoor1980]

it would be best if bungie focus only on ps5 console , it is good for optimization and stuff
todd howard said the same thing about starfield and single console platform developement

 

[Rykan]

Do you want to try to explain the scenario i've just given you?

You're free to cop out if you'd like though

Bungie remains an independent studio and publisher. That means they are also in control over whoever they hire and whoever they promote.

The first thing to say unequivocally is that Bungie will stay an independent, multiplatform studio and publisher.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

While true, the executive leadership of Bungie could jump ship, start their own company after their stock options vest, and then Sony is left with a shell of a company.

It's not in the best interest of Sony to renege on an agreement and dictate control like that.

Sure they could and Sony clearly wants to avoid that hence the incentives they're paying to keep them on board. I'm strictly speaking in terms of legality.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Bungie remains in full control as a publisher and developer. That means they are also in control over whoever they hire and whoever they promote.

No, they don't have full control. Sony purchased the shares from the ones who were previously in control. That puts them in control.

 

[quest]

Whoever goes after EPIC doesn't have to prevent the sale of their engine or block it from others, nor do they have to stop work on it, so I don't understand why that would be a problem if it were to happen?

Sure just like Nvidia buying arm was not going to happen. Everyone not named softbank and Nvidia was against the deal. The same would happen with Sony trying to get the default next generation engine. They could foreclose on not just Microsoft but 3rd party developers especially smaller studios who use it. Only Google out of spite and sony was against the abk deal. Hell everyone else was in favor of it after Nvidia was bought off.

 

[Yoboman]

You're surprised because you don't know what you're talking about.

Bungie wanted out of large Publishers like MS and Activision because they want to remain in control. You can bet that the contract they have signed specifically mentions that they get full control over development and publishing.

No they left MS because they didn't want to be in the loop of making Halo, and they also sold to MS way too early. Breaking out gave them an opportunity to start a new IP and eventually sell for a value more commensurate with their real value

They didn't leave Activision, they signed a 10 year publishing arrangement and started self publishing when that contract ended and they had built up that capability to self publish

You have no idea what their arrangements with Sony are

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Sure they could and Sony clearly wants to avoid that hence the incentives they're paying to keep them on board. I'm strictly speaking in terms of legality.

That's correct, legally Sony owns Bungie and can do whatever they want, unless there was some exceptionally rare clause that somehow allowed Bungie leadership to retain full autonomy, which I'm not sure would be legally binding in court.

But, based on statements from both Bungie and Sony it's not looking like their products are at risk on Xbox at all. To compete on GaaS you tend to need to support tons of platforms.

 

[Rykan]

No, they don't have full control. Sony purchased the shares from the ones who were previously in control. That puts them in control

Sony and Bungie have signed a contract. If the contract says that Bungie remains independent and gets full decision making, then that absolutely includes staff. Bungie is not a publicly traded company that you can just buy shares into and get control over it.

 

[wolffy71]

"Gamepass subscribers always get the current battlepass and a 1000 warzone bux allowance per month"

That's the kind of leverage owning COD gives Microsoft. Gamepass already gives you all heros in LoL, mobile legends, and valorant.

But they have always offered benefits for certain games without buying the company.

And they more than likely could have done something like that for OW or WZ.

They opted for buying and thats for the revenue from monthly battle passes imo.

Basically now they can get money from both.

I'm sure they will offer something on battlepasses when ur already a gamepass member but they won't be free.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Sony and Bungie have signed a contract. If the contract says that Bungie remains independent and gets full decision making, then that absolutely includes staff. Bungie is not a publicly traded company that you can just buy shares into and get control over it.

Private companies have shares too, and yes Sony purchased 100% of them, hence how they become a wholly owned subsidary. They are not independent. That's PR speak for "Sony is letting us do what we want"

 

[Rykan]

Private companies have shares too, and yes Sony purchased 100% of them, hence how they become a wholly owned subsidary. They are not independent. That's PR speak for "Sony is letting us do what we want"

They do, but the difference is that you can't just buy into them like you can with a publically traded company. In other words: They can set legal terms and conditions for allowing Sony to purchase their shares.

They are a part of a LLC and the only way to become part of the LLC is through direct approval of the LLC manager

 

[Yoboman]

While true, the executive leadership of Bungie could jump ship, start their own company after their stock options vest, and then Sony is left with a shell of a company.

It's not in the best interest of Sony to renege on an agreement and dictate control like that.

Or Sony in 10 years has a frank conversation with Bungie that the market conditions have changed and COD is going exclusive so they need to respond with Destiny 4 and New IP 2. Oh by the way, for this we've also just increased the bonus payments to your senior leadership team, increased your funding and greenlit that HBO pilot you pitched.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Or Sony in 10 years has a frank conversation with Bungie that the market conditions have changed and COD is going exclusive so they need to respond with Destiny 4 and New IP 2. Oh by the way, for this we've also just increased the bonus payments to your senior leadership team, increased your funding and greenlit that HBO pilot you pitched.

It's possible. I do think the Bungie acquisition was also to do with Sony having something in their back pocket to respond to, should Microsoft decide to foreclose CoD on Playstation.

Best situation is that neither Microsoft nor Sony decide to get antsy on their Activision/Bungie acquisitions and they remain available to all players. Their titles are certainly big enough and social enough to where this is the likely reality.

It's kind of a "mutually assured destruction" scenario, and Sony got Bungie to prevent Microsoft from launching their Activision nuke.

 

[Rykan]

No they left MS because they didn't want to be in the loop of making Halo, and they also sold to MS way too early. Breaking out gave them an opportunity to start a new IP and eventually sell for a value more commensurate with their real value

They didn't leave Activision, they signed a 10 year publishing arrangement and started self publishing when that contract ended and they had built up that capability to self publish

You have no idea what their arrangements with Sony are

1: That's quite literally what I've said.

2: The fact remains is that they didn't extend their contract and acquired the Destiny IP. This clearly shows they don't want to deal with a publisher if they don't have to.

3: Correct, nobody has access to the contract besides Bungie and Sony themselves. However, judging by the fact that Bungie has now left two publishers and the following statements from Sony:

"The first thing to say unequivocally is that Bungie will stay an independent, multiplatform studio and publisher.

It is completely reasonable to assume that it's in their arrangements.

 

[RickMasters]

I they had close ties before yeah you're right , I've personally been enjoying the Amazon prime drops for eso I guess that will change in the future when Amazon contact runs out ..... Yeah but they didn't give Sony/Nintendo a second thought .

I actually imagine it will be the opposite when we are talking GAAS games. makes sense to keep these things going. games like ESO are crossplay so the whole shared universe across multiple platforms works for games like ESO and fallout.



What I expect to see at some point is a next tier of GPU that includes the games with monthly subs bundled with them.... Imagine a 17 dollar GPU 'hunters guild' tier (I ripped the name from their series S bundle that comes with a bunch of GAAS game related items) this new tier would include monthly subs for ESO online, fall out, warcraft, starcraft, constant battle passes for overwatch, COD and halo etc..


Id imagine the exclusive ABK stuff will come in the form of new tony hawk games, crash spyro etc...maybe revisit long dormant IP like pitfall..... resurrect the idea of single player starcraft games (starcraft:ghost) single player spin off games set in the warcraft universe alongside updated versions of starcraft and WoW. Thats a lot of exclusive new content for xbox without rocking the boat for people who play currently supported games like ESO on other platforms.


Id like to see COD de-annualised with just IW, treyarch and sledgehammer being the COD devs. warzone being the constant update game should have its own full team of devs full time committed to it while integrating it with the mainlines CODs. maybe shift some of the studios like Beenox and high moon back to working on non COD games.



I know COD has been the main thing but im hoping there some nostalgic and enthusiastic people at xbox who have the vision and desire to explore what else they can do with ABKs catalog of IP to make new games.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

They do, but the difference is that you can't just buy into them like you can with a publically traded company. In other words: They can set legal terms and conditions for allowing Sony to purchase their shares.

They are a part of a LLC and the only way to become part of the LLC is through direct approval of the LLC manager

Yes, Sony signed a contract to purchase the shares for Bungie

Microsoft is doing the same thing with ActiBliz.

You have no idea what you're talking about lmao

 

[Lasha]

But they have always offered benefits for certain games without buying the company.

And they more than likely could have done something like that for OW or WZ.

They opted for buying and thats for the revenue from monthly battle passes imo.

Basically now they can get money from both.

I'm sure they will offer something on battlepasses when ur already a gamepass member but they won't be free.

Marginal cost of a battlepass is zero. If the battlepass in gamepass convinces somebody to pay 15$ instead of 10$ for the battlepass alone Microsoft wins. It's the same reason why Fortnite crew doesn't care that people use the system to get two months of cosmetics for the price of one month sub.

 

[Yoboman]

They do, but the difference is that you can't just buy into them like you can with a publically traded company. In other words: They can set legal terms and conditions for allowing Sony to purchase their shares.

They are a part of a LLC and the only way to become part of the LLC is through direct approval of the LLC manager

 

[Rykan]

Yes, Sony signed a contract to purchase the shares for Bungie

Microsoft is doing the same thing with ActiBliz.

You have no idea what you're talking about lmao

You genuinely seem to think that anyone can just walk into a development studio, drop a bag of cash to acquire shares and the studio has no choice but to accept and then lose all control and decision-making prowess.

I'm baffled you feel the need to have and share your opinion on this, considering your understanding of this subject is at the level of a playground argument.

Activision Blizzard is a Publically traded company. Bungie is a Private Company. So no, it's not "The same thing".

Yoboman
What point are you trying to make by posting that?

 

[In Cold Blood]

Thing Is what can Sony offer with subscription and streaming ? Most of their games are one and done affairs they don't have an elder Scrolls or a cod or the cash to bankroll a subscription model that could counter gamepass no one can , those gaas games they are developing need to be on as many platforms as possible to be successful I just don't see a way they can compete with gamepass with the backing of ms 's unlimited dollar.

Sony has a pretty big back catalogue, so if they have all those PS1, PS2, PS3 and PS4 games available, and then add in an EA or Ubi like MS did, they would have a decent service.
Long term it's going to be hard to compete with amount of games MS will be putting in GP.
Buying a Square or Sega would give them a ton of titles to add.
Point is they would want to be working on it now and not when the horse has already bolted.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

You genuinely seem to think that anyone can just walk into a development studio, drop a bag of cash to acquire shares and the studio has no choice but to accept and then lose all control and decision-making prowess.

I'm baffled you feel the need to have and share your opinion on this, considering your understanding of this subject is at the level of a playground argument.

Sony walked into Bungie, with a bag of cash to purchase 100% of their shares, and they agreed.

The stipulation of you giving up your shares within a company is that you give up your control over it. Yes, that's what happens.

No one has said this was by force. Maybe read a bit more carefully next time?

 

[Three]

Because it opens up too many avenues for unfair competition. If MS takes away CoD from PlayStation then playstation just doesn't have CoD same as they don't have a bunch of other first party games. Having control of Unreal engine gives a platform holder the ability to artificially manipulate the market - we have already seen this with Epic using it to bolster the Epic Games Store.

But again this would be no different to Havok or even CoD. How would they be able to manipulate the market any more than Havok or COD? Anybody who buys them would have to just make concessions to licence the engine. Say they would licence it like MS does Havok and CoD. The possible manipulation of the market isn't different.

 

[Rykan]

Sony walked into Bungie, with a bag of cash to purchase 100% of their shares, and they agreed.

The stipulation of you giving up your shares within a company is that you give up your control over it.

No one has said this was by force. Maybe read a bit more carefully next time?

They agreed, but most likely they agreed under specific conditions which, by the way, are legally binding.

Bungie's track record and the statements made by Sony imply that one of these conditions was independent development and publishing. You suggested that Sony can just assign one of their own when the CEO leaves to bend Bungie to their will, which is downright absurd. Obviously such a clear loophole is covered in the contract Bungie has signed with Sony. If they're independent, then Bungie decides who becomes CEO/remains in control of Bungie.

 

[C2brixx]

Sony walked into Bungie, with a bag of cash to purchase 100% of their shares, and they agreed.

The stipulation of you giving up your shares within a company is that you give up your control over it. Yes, that's what happens.

No one has said this was by force. Maybe read a bit more carefully next time?

I think the most important part is that Sony made assurances to Bungie employees about their independence. Ultimately Bungie is its people. I highly doubt Sony wants to lose that talent.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

They agreed, but most likely they agreed under specific conditions which, by the way, are legally binding.

Bungie's track record and the statements made by Sony imply that one of these conditions was independent development and publishing. You suggested that Sony can just assign one of their own when the CEO leaves to bend Bungie to their will, which is downright absurd. Obviously such a clear loophole is covered in the contract Bungie has signed with Sony.

Do you want to provide this contract you've pulled out of your ass that somehow lets employees who don't own a company hold more control over it over the ones who do?

In case you still don't understand how stupid you sound

 

[RickMasters]

Why would MS acquire CDPR? They already have the WRPG gender covered and CDPR don`t come with any revelant IP, both the Witcher and CyberPunk are Liscensed ones.

same reasons they acquired bathesda and should have acquired bioware back in the day... its one of those companies they have a legit working relationship with.... witcher 2 was an x360 console exclusive, Cyberpunk xbox as its marketing partner. ...they make great western RPGs..xbox gamers love western RPGs..... why wouldnt they buy CDPR?



"CDPR don`t come with any revelant IP, both the Witcher and CyberPunk are Liscensed ones"

Two valuable things to MS if you really think about it


1) CDPRs ability to create solid RPG games based around licensed IP is a pretty neat skill to have.... sony have spiderman and wolverine as licenced exclusives...it would seem MS have indiana jones to themselves but why not grab 'another' licence and hand it to DCPR to make an RPG set in that licenece universe

or....and....

2) CDPRs expertise in making RPGs coupled with a larger budget afforded by xbox, to create their own IP. they can even give the guys at obsidian( whom I think along with tango and arkane will be delivering some of the biggest sleeper hits on xbox) a call if they need tips. they could even make one of those single player RPGs set in the starcraft or WOW universes. that would be pretty awesome, come to think of it. or tap into some other IP owned by MS, if they dont want to create their own IP....


A lot of potential if they buy CDPR. same could be said of crystal dynamics and IOI. those three devs would be good fits for Xbox.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

I think the most important part is that Sony made assurances to Bungie employees about their independence. Ultimately Bungie is its people. I highly doubt Sony wants to lose that talent.

Again, i'm aware of the formality. I'm talking on a legal basis

 

[Yoboman]

1: That's quite literally what I've said.

2: The fact remains is that they didn't extend their contract and acquired the Destiny IP. This clearly shows they don't want to deal with a publisher if they don't have to.

3: Correct, nobody has access to the contract besides Bungie and Sony themselves. However, judging by the fact that Bungie has now left two publishers and the following statements from Sony:
It is completely reasonable to assume that it's in their arrangements.

1. No you said they left Microsoft because they want to remain in control. However it's always been specifically stated by Bungie to be creative control they wanted, and through rumours that they were unhappy with what they originally sold themselves for after Halo blew up. Nothing to do with platform choice limits creative control

2. They didn't acquire the Destiny IP, it always belonged to Bungie. What they acquired was the right to terminate the contract 8 years into the 10 year arrangement. It was always a temporary publishing arrangement

3. Sony have $3.7 billion dollars invested in Bungie. There is no buy back scenario, nobody at Bungie had that type of capital. What is realistic is that Bungie agreed to be bought buy a platform holder and that while the arrangement at the outset may be for them to remain multiplatform, that there is also a high probability at some point that they are required to be focused on that platform holders console

 

[Yoboman]

You genuinely seem to think that anyone can just walk into a development studio, drop a bag of cash to acquire shares and the studio has no choice but to accept and then lose all control and decision-making prowess.

I'm baffled you feel the need to have and share your opinion on this, considering your understanding of this subject is at the level of a playground argument.

Activision Blizzard is a Publically traded company. Bungie is a Private Company. So no, it's not "The same thing".

Yoboman
What point are you trying to make by posting that?

Bungie Inc now operates under the Sony LLC. They are an wholly owned independent subsidiary of Sony, their board reports to the SIE board. In practical terms that means Sony has 100% voting stock to make decisions on Bungie if SIE choose to exercise that option. Sony have given the Bungie board to manage their own affairs, but have complete veto power on everything Bungie does.

I'm not sure why you are trying to make it out to be something it's not?

 

[poppabk]

1: That's quite literally what I've said.

2: The fact remains is that they didn't extend their contract and acquired the Destiny IP. This clearly shows they don't want to deal with a publisher if they don't have to.

3: Correct, nobody has access to the contract besides Bungie and Sony themselves. However, judging by the fact that Bungie has now left two publishers and the following statements from Sony:
It is completely reasonable to assume that it's in their arrangements.

Sony own them outright. I am sure that them being a wholly owned independant subsidiary and having the Bungie team as the board suits everyone just fine right now. But if Bungie decided to release a game as an Xbox exclusive or take out a $20 billion loan for example, you can guarantee that the Board of Directors would be changed to all Sony people as fast as possible.

 

[wolffy71]

Marginal cost of a battlepass is zero. If the battlepass in gamepass convinces somebody to pay 15$ instead of 10$ for the battlepass alone Microsoft wins. It's the same reason why Fortnite crew doesn't care that people use the system to get two months of cosmetics for the price of one month sub.

I don't think we're gonna see people be able to avoid the battle pass price just because they have gamepass. It will probably be both you have to pay for.

Or am I missing what ur saying?

 

[Alex Scott]

No, they don't have full control. Sony purchased the shares from the ones who were previously in control. That puts them in control.

Only thing Sony get is the money that Bungie makes and their expertise in multiplayer game.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Only thing Sony get is the money that Bungie makes and their expertise in multiplayer game.

They get everything.

 

[Varteras]

Again, i'm aware of the formality. I'm talking on a legal basis

Bungie Inc now operates under the Sony LLC. They are an wholly owned independent subsidiary of Sony, their board reports to the SIE board. In practical terms that means Sony has 100% voting stock to make decisions on Bungie if SIE choose to exercise that option. Sony have given the Bungie board to manage their own affairs, but have complete veto power on everything Bungie does.

I'm not sure why you are trying to make it out to be something it's not?

Sony own them outright. I am sure that them being a wholly owned independant subsidiary and having the Bungie team as the board suits everyone just fine right now. But if Bungie decided to release a game as an Xbox exclusive or take out a $20 billion loan for example, you can guarantee that the Board of Directors would be changed to all Sony people as fast as possible.

I do believe that any contract signed in order to allow Sony ownership of Bungie legally binds them to allow Bungie to operate independent of Sony's desires. But we don't have the details of the deal. We don't know if there is an agreed upon time period where this obligation is fulfilled and then no longer applicable. We don't know what clauses are in place. Sony almost certainly ensured that they are protected in the deal and established what Bungie has to do in order to maintain the obligations, just as Bungie had their own demands. If Bungie fails to meet those obligations then the contract is either void or certain penalties are agreed upon. There is no way on God's blue and green Earth that Sony just bought them for some of their profits and some knowhow on live service games that will eventually run dry of its usefulness. I guarantee you there are things Bungie must do for Sony long-term in order to keep the legal binding in place.

 

[Rykan]

Do you want to provide this contract you've pulled out of your ass that somehow lets people who don't own a company hold more control over it over the ones who do?

In case you still don't understand how stupid you sound

That's rich, coming from someone who claimed that the acquisition of a publically traded company and private company is "the same".

We don't have access to the contract. We don't know under what conditions Bungie joined Sony exact. My assumption is based on Bungie's track record and official statements from Sony, which in particular and very specifically mention that Bungie will continue to operate as an independent developer and publisher. Sony has absolutely no benefits from announcing Bungie as independent.

1. No you said they left Microsoft because they want to remain in control. However it's always been specifically stated by Bungie to be creative control they wanted, and through rumours that they were unhappy with what they originally sold themselves for after Halo blew up. Nothing to do with platform choice limits creative control

2. They didn't acquire the Destiny IP, it always belonged to Bungie. What they acquired was the right to terminate the contract 8 years into the 10 year arrangement. It was always a temporary publishing arrangement


3. Sony have $3.7 billion dollars invested in Bungie. There is no buy back scenario, nobody at Bungie had that type of capital. What is realistic is that Bungie agreed to be bought buy a platform holder and that while the arrangement at the outset may be for them to remain multiplatform, that there is also a high probability at some point that they are required to be focused on that platform holders console

1: I never said platform choice control, I simply never specified what kind of control I was talking about. This doesn't change anything to my argument whatsoever which is that Bungie likes to remain in control. Whether that is creative control or platform control doesn't really matter to the essence of the argument.

2: Fair

Bungie Inc now operates under the Sony LLC. They are an wholly owned independent subsidiary of Sony, their board reports to the SIE board. In practical terms that means Sony has 100% voting stock to make decisions on Bungie if SIE choose to exercise that option. Sony have given the Bungie board to manage their own affairs, but have complete veto power on everything Bungie does.

I'm not sure why you are trying to make it out to be something it's not?

Going to address this with point 3 because it's essentially the same thing. Bungie is private company. It is not a publically traded company like, say, AB is.
This means that Sony can't just barge in there and buy up their shares. Bungie can negotiate its own conditions for selling shares and one of those conditions is, considering Bungie's recent track record and the fact that Sony has publically and very specifically said that Bungie will operate as an independent developer/publisher, most likely that Bungie remains full control on how it operates and what/how/where it publishes its games. These conditions are legally binding.

That does not mean that Sony can't negotiate a deal with Bungie for exclusivity in the future. What it does mean is that Bungie will get the final say in it.

My initial response that started this discussion was to another poster that said he was surprised Sony didn't pull Destiny 2 from Xbox yet when, in actuality, they probably can't.

 

[In Cold Blood]

Market leader =/= monopoly

No.
Market leader + ABK/Ubi/T2 = Monopoly