• 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.

JezC:EU may also force console companies to open up their platforms. Microsoft would be there day one. But Sony isn't just going to let them do that.

I can access gamepass and geforce now nativity through my TV. What do I gain as a consumer to have this on my ps5 as well? Its will make things worse than better for the consumer.
1) you could play the games natively on ps5, rather than cloud streaming
2) you don’t have to pay the GeForce now subscription ontop of the gamepass subscription
3) you could have all your games on one console, rather than having them spread across three.

More games, less services and less hardware cost. How on earth is this not good for the consumer?
 

graywolf323

Member
1) you could play the games natively on ps5, rather than cloud streaming
2) you don’t have to pay the GeForce now subscription ontop of the gamepass subscription
3) you could have all your games on one console, rather than having them spread across three.

More games, less services and less hardware cost. How on earth is this not good for the consumer?
that’s quite the assumption to make that hardware wouldn’t cost more if this happens
 

Deerock71

Member
It would also be the single thing that might make me buy and use consoles again.
Go Away GIF
 

HawarMiran

Banned
They should be more cautious about promising everything for steam but they are hyper-focused on beating ps.
They should just focus on their business like Nintendo. Nintendo doesn't give a fuck like an autistic kid in the corner living in their own world , but Xbox on the other hand is the bully in the schoolyard. Disgusting!!!!
 

N30RYU

Member
PC gamers can't have all the games in the same store and console gamers should have all games in one console? Yeah sure
 
that’s quite the assumption to make that hardware wouldn’t cost more if this happens

100% it will cost more. The yearly average spend of a consumer is taken into consideration when pricing. Consoles are sold at a loss or on a razor margin because they correctly assume they'll make money from games.
 

Billy Awesomo

Neo Member
Honestly I feel like neither Nintendo nor Sony really need the EU. The largest markets for video games for like the last few years has been been the US, China, Japan, South Kore and the UK (which last I checked is no longer part of the EU). I feel like PC gaming might be bigger in the EU (someone correct me if I am wrong here) than console gaming? At this point I feel like the importance of the EU to both Sony and Nintendo maybe overstated? I mean sure it’s an important market for them but they both companies can get by without them.
 
Not necessarily true. Why does MS want phone markets to open up? It is not to port games, it is to get Game Pass on them. There is no guarantee that MS would release games on PS/Switch other than Game Pass streaming.
I mean they just purchased King, so they could have native mobile games on their own mobile platform and not have to pay store fees to Apple or Google.

Going through the trouble of creating an Xbox bootable OS to a PS5 system, only for it to be streaming only? Nah man. If they did it, it would be native. Not much of a point otherwise.
 

Naz93

Neo Member
Not necessarily true. Why does MS want phone markets to open up? It is not to port games, it is to get Game Pass on them. There is no guarantee that MS would release games on PS/Switch other than Game Pass streaming.
They want the phone markets to open up because they, like Epic, don't want to share the revenue with Google and Apple.
 

coffinbirth

Member
I mean they just purchased King, so they could have native mobile games on their own mobile platform and not have to pay store fees to Apple or Google.

Going through the trouble of creating an Xbox bootable OS to a PS5 system, only for it to be streaming only? Nah man. If they did it, it would be native. Not much of a point otherwise.
That's not how it works. They would just need to get xCloud running on PS5, everything else is server side. You're actually arguing the opposite of reality.
 

reinking

Gold Member
They want the phone markets to open up because they, like Epic, don't want to share the revenue with Google and Apple.
You guys seem to think I am in this all or nothing. Of course, they don't want to pay fees on mobile apps but their big argument against Apple during all of that mess was Game Pass. Again, just because Sony/Nintendo would have to open their market, it does not necessarily mean MS has to release Xbox games native on the consoles. They could Game Pass it if they really feel Game Pass is their future. I am not saying they won't release games native (third-party here we come) but they would not be forced to.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
“[It] is something we’re just going to see less and less of,” when discussing the idea of specific games being exclusive to a single device. “Maybe you happen in your household to buy an Xbox, and I buy a PlayStation, and our kids want to play together, and they can’t because we bought the wrong piece of plastic to plug into our television.
“We really love being able to bring more players in reducing friction, making people feel safe, secure when they’re playing, allowing them to play with their friends, regardless of what device – I think in the long run that is good for this industry. And maybe in the short run, there’s some people in some companies that don’t love it. But I think as we get over the hump and see where this industry can continue to grow, it proves out to be true.”

Do you believe Spencer’s right? Is console exclusivity on its way out? Let us know in the comments below!
Bloomberg Aug 2022

Make no mistake Jez had marching orders his article is directly influenced by the Xbox team this is their ultimate goal and some eagle eyed twitter bros noticed Tim Dog retweeted the article less than a minute after Jez uploaded it...2am in the morning 😆 🤣 . At the end of the day Tim Stuart was talking to financial analysts while Phil did an interview for fanboys so one way or another they are expanding their first party offerings to Playstation and Nintendo no matter how much Phil wants to damage control it's happening they just want it to happen by lobbying the EU and changing business laws. I'm looking for another article from 2021 when Phil was complaining about "closed" platforms like consoles when it came to no being able to put gamepass everywhere I just can't find it.





ProfilesEngineServlet
Just shill things.
 
Sounds like a new narrative is being formed. Microsoft FUD machine is relentless.
The FTC trial revealed that Microsoft quite literally spends $1 billion a year on lobbying governments. They are basically a supernational power above sovereign governments because they control the world's computers through their control of Windows which is required for >90% of the world's computers to work.
 
That's not how it works. They would just need to get xCloud running on PS5, everything else is server side. You're actually arguing the opposite of reality.
We both are arguing the opposite of reality, this is conjecture right now. But if the marketplace was opened, and Microsoft could release their own marketplace on competing consoles in the same way they are gearing up for mobile, then you're kidding yourself if you think they won't try to do so with native games in addition of course to cloud access.

Anyway, there's no winning a hypothetical, if this does come to pass in the future, it'll be amusing to revisit this exchange.
 

Naz93

Neo Member
You guys seem to think I am in this all or nothing. Of course, they don't want to pay fees on mobile apps but their big argument against Apple during all of that mess was Game Pass.
Yeah and some games on game pass have microtransactions, and now you can also add King.
Again, just because Sony/Nintendo would have to open their market, it does not necessarily mean MS has to release Xbox games native on the consoles. They could Game Pass it if they really feel Game Pass is their future. I am not saying they won't release games native (third-party here we come) but they would not be forced to.
If they are selling it through their storefront, it wouldn't be considered third-party, as there isn't any third party involved.
 

coffinbirth

Member
We both are arguing the opposite of reality, this is conjecture right now. But if the marketplace was opened, and Microsoft could release their own marketplace on competing consoles in the same way they are gearing up for mobile, then you're kidding yourself if you think they won't try to do so with native games in addition of course to cloud access.

Anyway, there's no winning a hypothetical, if this does come to pass in the future, it'll be amusing to revisit this exchange.
Sure, but that doesn't change the reality is that porting one app over to have access to hundreds (however many) of games is vastly less work/money/resources than porting each of said games individually...or more importantly, that it would render the Xbox, as a console, utterly redundant.
 

Naz93

Neo Member
Maybe I should explain it like I'm talking to a 5yo since you can't use words. Who is the third party in the transaction if it's just between MS and the customer? Is Valve considered third party selling games on steam.

edit: BTW, I'm not supporting this cause it will probably entail more consolidation.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I should explain it like I'm talking to a 5yo since you can't use words. Who is the third party in the transaction if it's just between MS and the customer? Is Valve considered third party selling games on steam.

What hardware and software do you think these hypothetical storefronts run on?
 

Naz93

Neo Member
What hardware and software do you think these hypothetical storefronts run on?
The hardware or software doesn't matter anymore as they wouldn't be collecting on the people using it since it's not a closed ecosystem. Consoles will just become expensive prebuilt non-customizable PC's using a proprietary OS.
 
The hardware or software doesn't matter anymore as they wouldn't be collecting on the people using it since it's not a closed ecosystem. Consoles will just become expensive prebuilt non-customizable PC's using a proprietary OS.

Allowing third party storefronts doesn't turn the consoles into PCs. They all still have to go through Sony. This isn't the free rein you think it is.
 
He’s pretty predictable this fella. No doubt already drafted his megaton game awards piece regarding Call of Duty backwards compatibility on Gamepass.
 

Naz93

Neo Member
Because it doesn't make it an open platform

I mean, it's not going to be an 'open platform' in the sense of Linux – no shit I didn't mean that in the literal context. However, if a hypothetical bill passes, and it led to Steam or Microsoft opening a storefront app on PlayStation, Sony wouldn't have the authority that would allow them to stop them or impose any charges.
 
I mean, it's not going to be an 'open platform' in the sense of Linux – no shit I didn't mean that in the literal context. However, if a hypothetical bill passes, and it led to Steam or Microsoft opening a storefront app on PlayStation, Sony wouldn't have the authority that would allow them to stop them or impose any charges.

Lol yes it would. This hypothetic bill only forces them to open up for competition. How they actually implement that is up to them to decide, and if it's actually feasible ln the first place. Native applications still have to go through the certification process.
 
Last edited:

Naz93

Neo Member
Lol yes it would. This hypothetic bill only forces them to open up for competition. How they actually implement that is up to them to decide, and if it's actually feasible ln the first place. Native applications still have to go through the certification process.
Lol Perhaps you should review the legislation about to be employed in the EU. The hypothetical bill for consoles will likely have similar requirements, and all of these aspects are addressed.
 

Naz93

Neo Member
When losing just link a 66 page document that you haven't read

GG
lol I'm not losing, because you're wrong. I'm not going sit here and write a wall of text with someone who argues in circles.
GG

Start with paragraph 56, 57, 62, 63. Then you can read Article 3-8, which is less than 10 pages, but you would know that since you've read it.... Your only arguments would fall under suspending certain obligations.
Welcome back SoloKingRobert.
? This site is only 5 people with a bunch of alts.
 
Last edited:
lol I'm not losing, because you're wrong. I'm not going sit here and write a wall of text with someone who argues in circles.
GG

Start with paragraph 56, 57, 62, 63. Then you can read Article 3-8, which is less than 10 pages, but you would know that since you've read it.... Your only arguments would fall under suspending certain obligations.

? This site is only 5 people with a bunch of alts.

aoSSLq2.jpg


Here's a easy one for you, which is probably the route apple is going to go down

The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking measures to ensure that third-party providers of numberindependent interpersonal communications services requesting interoperability do not endanger the integrity, security andprivacy of its services, provided that such measures are strictly necessary and proportionate and are duly justified by thegatekeeper.

So yes, native applications are still going to need to go through the certification process. It is not free reign.
 

Naz93

Neo Member
aoSSLq2.jpg


Here's a easy one for you, which is probably the route apple is going to go down



So yes, native applications are still going to need to go through the certification process. It is not free reign.
aoSSLq2.jpg


OMG, you keep bringing up free rein.

provided that such measures are strictly necessary and proportionate and are duly justified
Even if they charge for certification it would still have to be reasonable or else it will kill small time developers. So good luck to Apple proving that a competing storefront, run by a multibillion-dollar company selling identical software, is going to compromise the device.

The gatekeepers should, therefore, be required to ensure, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision of its own complementary and supporting services and hardware.

If Steam, Epic, and Amazon decide to open their own storefronts, or even if PlayStation and Microsoft decide to do so on the others device, they will not be obligated to give a commission on each sale, which is where the real money lies.
 

BadBurger

Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
Is there a lawyer here who can explain how the EU could legally do this? These are entirely different platforms. This would be like forcing Valve to support Windows on the Steam Deck or something - right?
 
Top Bottom