I feel like any government official should not be able to delete tweets.
Thats literally the image these companies set for themselves, it can't be by mistake or coincidence after all these decades. If Sony, nintendo and MS wanted to change that they can.
Sony moneyhatting things to keep people on PlayStation would ensure CoD needing to stay on PS to make financial sense tbh. I don't think they will use it as a bargaining chip in that sense, but who knows.
Microsoft wouldn't even need to bother with using it as leverage. Having it on GP day one, having perpetual marketing agreements for it (along with exclusive bonuses), and having CoD competitions using Xbox consoles would be more than enough. PS CoD would be the current Xbox CoD. All of the essentials and none of the bonuses. If Sony is pissed that they lose the ability to bid on the marketing agreement, then that's just the way it goes sometimes. Microsoft bid $68.7 billion for them.
Regardless COD, people overlook the main benefit from ABK (even outside all those basic things that Microsoft gets there - from mobile presence to esports, CG) - ABK deal heavily changes the market dynamics and position of Microsoft (and Xbox by extension) in the gaming market. With ABK deal, Sony stops being undisputed leader of the gaming market (due to their console market share). And it will have ramifications for Sony, because Microsoft will be the platform holder that has a strong presence in all three gaming markets.
Fantasy,
As long as those regulators don't violate their own laws, I think all this stuff just adds additional arguments in MSFT's favor. It is basically an ammo for lawyers.
that's unrealistic and Sony knows that, it's not like they would let Microsoft have the marketing for Destiny.
Sony's aggressive strategy is why Microsoft is buying publishers.
I could see that if their work was in videogames. It's legal work though. They should know that you shouldn't publicly air stuff that could influence proceedings or reveal a potential bias or pre-existing belief before the process plays out. Unless things are very different in Europe regarding the law and there's much less risk aversion it seems to me like a spectacularly dumb move for people working at a regulatory body to make.
For better or worse the regulatory bodies are being seen more closely in the media and all the things that go along with it
I doubt that, because Everwild is a service game, which is very much catering to current Microsoft's preferences. Moreover, if Microsoft put any value into Banjo platformers, they would have made one in 20 years of owning the IP. It's crazy that Microsoft is going to own:
capital.com
I do not quite get what that has to do with what I said? I merely said that
Right. Rare didn't want to make it and nobody else really wanted to pick it up.
Didn't Microsoft fund two Ori games? They obviously don't care what game Rare makes and it's been evident for a long time. Rare has said time and time again they don't want to work on their old IPs and I think you should just accept that.
I see this too. Even if it's only 6-12 month deals, I could see a "no competitor subscription" clause to keep things off GamePass.
Pay 10 billion $ to have CoD exclusive for the next 10 years.
Sony is going to throw the biggest fucking party to celebrate their win. I don't blame them I would too.
Dragon Age producer: Microsoft-Activision merger is probably bad in the long run
Dragon Age producer and ex-BioWare game developer Mark Darrah believes Microsoft buying Activision-Blizzard is 'probably a bad thing in the long run'www.tweaktown.com
They continue to push hard into mobile. To them and other pubs mobile is next big ticket for gaming. I dont see ms not doing what they need to do to make sure they have king, blizzard and cod mobile on their mobile platform. I think they would be silly to make this slip by just so they can have cod on gp on console.
I think AB already in the "control costs" "creativity goes down, risk-taking goes down" stage though lol.
