@Witchcraft
1) Who told you that Sony does that? Microsoft? We've clearly seen the lies and double talk they've been doing recently surely they can be trusted./s
2) Sony isn't pushing for day ones on PS+ (not currently at least). Therefore are not looking to secure day ones exclusively on Plus and block them on Game pass, but Microsoft is as shown here. Sony blocking a game from releasing on GP is just their version of what MS is doing, but wi...
^^^ that spin is crazy 🤣
All you hear now is that it's "just business". It's no longer scummy.
You are definitely on the people that have called this practice dirty in the past. Now it's just business, huh?
Isn't this what you guys cried and moaned about being the most dirty and scummy practice ever in the history of gaming when MS/rumors claimed that Sony did this??? Now it's common business practice? LMAO!
I better see a certain someone talk about how 'hilarious' this is, or else he's full of it.
So far it's looking like Sony hasn't done ANYTHING that Microsoft themselves don't do. Sony just has more leverage because of cons...
They want to spend Sony out of business. Don't have to buy them all to do that, just until it does that.
Isn't FF16 timed for 6 months?
Wonder if it had anything to do with this? https://n4g.com/news/255721...
Or we can blame Sony's aggressive competitive business tactics that Microsoft themselves use too!
Phil says this about every purchase PRIOR to acquisition and then does whatever he wants after he owns them. His word is not bond.
But but underhanded "scummy business tactics" and "dirty tricks" from Sony! They said...
I'm waitng for that witchcraft of an excuse...
"Why does everyone seem so surprised by this?"
I'm not surprised. The moment they announced the intent to buy Activision, I knew they were trying buy up the industry one by one. Not everyone agreed on that though saying stuff like one purchase doesn't make a monopoly and saying that the purchase is the "only" way for Microsoft to compete against Sony.
So why do they need Activision? They should just continue doing the things you mentioned. Activision's games are already coming to their platform. They do not have to purchase them.
Just wanted to point out that this is yet another proof that Microsoft is just trying to buy up the industry and have a monopoly. Just a FYI for those that go "herp buying Activision doesn't make them a monopoly derp". While it doesn't, it puts them in a position to eventually get there as they buy more and more publishers in the future which you guys think won't happen for some reason, but at least this article is showing otherwise.
That's one way to interpret it...
... OR what I'm telling you is that making new iterations or reboots of old IPs doesn't guarantee the game will be good just because the originals were, but could still end up doing numbers because of the name on the box... probably a bit farfetched...
Whaaa? Microsoft are the good guys. They are simply trying to healthily compete with Sony. There's no way Phil and Booty want to put Sony out of business. It's Sony that's trying to make PlayStation grow by making Xbox smaller. Sony is using underhanded tactics such as using money they make from Xbox to further put out Xbox out of business! Honest Phil says so, he never tells a lie!
"You'd get a great backlog"
That's all Phil cares about. IPs that sell on name alone so that he doesn't have to worry about quality.
And this is why Acti deal should be blocked. They are trying to buy up the industry.
What are you talking about? Nobody ever thought that games already released on PS would get pulled. It was future releases (i.e. elder scrolls 6, next fallout, etc) that were guaranteed to release on PS (if acquisition didn't happen), if those would release on PS. Phil "Phib" Spencer said future games' exclusivity would be decided on a "case by case basis", which is CLEARLY a lie given the fact he decided to make all zanimax games exclusive going forward as shown h...