Assuming they're not part of the concessions, they'll likely be on a case by case basis with most being Xbox exclusive just like with Bethesda.
Unless there's some other agreement they'd prolly be exclusive. It is an acquisition after all.
Cool. So it would be interesting to see the math that justified the decision.
Regulators are only concerned about COD the other IPs will be treated like Bethesda which basically means Microsoft would be able to do whatever they want with them.
Right, I was suggesting Bethesda didn't have that reason before being acquired. It's rather obvious that their games in general would have released on PS5.
So it's something nice for Twitter to get hot and bothered about, but really makes no difference at all.
The CMA was certainly under the impression that what MS said about the Bethesda purchase qualified as misleading.
It would've been timed exclusive for PS5 lol. Are people seriously arguing it wouldn't have released on PS5 otherwise?
Yes. Basically they just said it was never announced so there is no proof it was in development for ps5. Just more stupid console war arguing.
CMA was citing what third parties said to them.The CMA was certainly under the impression that what MS said about the Bethesda purchase qualified as misleading.
They even used the word "promise" (read the last sentence):
(I'm aware most of this forum disagrees so please don't argue with me lol)
This statement from Arcane could certainly be something that gets brought up by Sony, to remind the CMA that they felt MS was being misleading.
But it is an already addressed topic in this case; so it may not matter at all.
Still that Arcane guy shouldn't have said it, I really don't understand why in gaming it's so common for developers to basically say something kind of shit talk-y about the company they work for lol
Well there was no proof and now there is proof. So now circular arguments have a setpiece of substance going forward.
You know what else was planned and even started? Gears of War 3 on PS3.
Lol really?
Does anyone really take those arguments seriously? I only see console warriors spewing this and most people respond with how ridiculous that is.
The CMA was certainly under the impression that what MS said about the Bethesda purchase qualified as misleading.
They even used the word "promise" (read the last sentence):
edit: Correction, this is actually what a 3rd party said, but I still think it's relevant. Thanks Sheepinator
(I'm aware most of this forum disagrees so please don't argue with me lol)
This statement from Arcane could certainly be something that gets brought up by Sony, to remind the CMA that they felt MS was being misleading.
But it is an already addressed topic in this case; so it may not matter at all.
Still that Arcane guy shouldn't have said it, I really don't understand why in gaming it's so common for developers to basically say something kind of shit talk-y about the company they work for lol
Yup. No wonder Sony is fighting this so hard. Outside CoD they will lose a lot of franchises.
I'm pretty sure that means the CMA was using that as an example of what could happen...
then maybe sony should be arguing about more then just cod. sony doesnt appear to care anything that isnt cod
The point is that it's old news that MS has already responded to.
Sony doesn't care about Activision's(not BK) non COD IP.
Amazon Luna expands to Canada, Germany and the UK | Engadget
Starting today, Amazon's Luna cloud gaming service is available in Canada, Germany and United Kingdom..www.engadget.com
An Inquiry into Cloud Computing Business Practices: The Federal Trade Commission is seeking public comments
The FTC just released a Request for Information (RFI) on the business practices of Cloud Computing Providers.www.ftc.gov
My assumption is that anything already released by the time it closes will get parity of support (so Diablo 4 expansions etc). CoD will get parity with new releases for 10 years then vanish. Nothing else will go to PlayStation.
