It seems somewhat contradictory that you were over in the VGC article going in over how you "never once heard anyone make a fuss about this game being great," only to defend this perfect score review from challenge and rally around it.
My comment was not a defense of any person or entity. It was a textually supported analysis of Microsoft's argument, whether you agree with that analysis or disagree. Look inward to resolve any confusion arising from your ignorance of the definition of a material word that you misused in a one sentence post.
Revenue?
Let's avoid for a moment that revenue ≠ profit, for sake of indulging this one word argument you gave in response to a question to Orchard.
They're cutting off a source of revenue by making games like Starfield exclusive.
PS pulls in more revenue than Xbox. Remember the reports about PSN alone pulling in more revenue than the entirety of Microsoft gaming?
Your answer is undermined by Microsoft's ...
@Domination
I linked to the original Ars Technica interview in my previous post. See for yourself whether he's being taken out of context or having his comments misconstrued.
@Orchard
Your arguments in your OP and in response to Christopher beg the question, if you're so certain MS buying up some of the biggest 3rd party publishers won't really hurt Sony or affect Sony's position as #1 in gaming, why does MS need to buy these publishers?
If purchasing both Bethesda and Activision Blizzard is still not enough to really hurt or threaten a company with a mere fraction of the wealth and resources at MS' disposal, w...
Connect the dots:
"Microsoft argued that bringing Activision Blizzard games to Game Pass, which is the company's big motivation behind the deal, would offer gamers more choice in how they access content."
Game Pass = More Choice is what they're saying there. Now...
"Should any consumers decide to switch from a gaming platform that does not give them a choice as to how to pay for new games (PlayStation) to one that...
Question:
Where are these numbers the article reports MS presented supposed to represent?
"It cites PlayStation's current market-leading position with a console install base of 150 million vs Xbox's install base of 63.7 million."
PS4 numbers aren't that high, and it's way too low to represent all time sales for every PS generation. It seems likely that's a sum of the PS consoles sold for the two currently ...
Isn't this about the UK regulator's position?
@Wintersun
LOL. Yeah. That same principle is why I went to find evidence before agreeing with you, which is when I found out it was quadruple. I had also remembered it as "only" triple.
@Wintersun616
Quadruple.
"A rule of thumb we like to use is that [for] every Xbox One available in your living room we’ll have three of those devices in the cloud available."
https://arstechnica.com/gam...
@Darth
Correct. Only one is expandable.
There are 2 internal slots. One is obviously occupied by the drive the PS5 comes with.
External drives can store your PS5 games or store and play your PS4 games.
"After the whole Tombraider exclustivety and everyone complained about 3rd party money hatting MS was doing. They had marketing rights to games but no more 3rd party games for the rest of the gen."
False.
Rise of the Tomb Raider released November 2015. This is Xbox's "everything you need to know" briefing on their 2016 E3.
1369d ago 3 agree0 disagreeView comment
@rlow1
The comment you replied to didn't make any claims about who started it. What it is arguing is that MS was so reliant on it that it had a detrimental effect on their 1st party products.
"You have to take into account ... the money that has to be paid out to publishers to keep the games on the service."
Which cannibalizes 3rd party licensing fee revenue Xbox receives when they take a cut of the sale for 3rd party games on their platform. It's simultaneously creating additional expense while reducing existing revenue. The cannibalization effect will be more significant for Day 1 releases.
SF stage music has been forgettable to me since Alpha 3. That's true for a lot of the older fighting game series I'm familiar with.
"Heck going forward all PS5 games will be on PC within a year from what Herman Hulst said ..."
Quote and source please.
Are you able to substantiate that it reviewed through the roof because it had Black protagonists? Which reviews were these, and how did they compare to other scores? It doesn't speak well of your motives if what you're saying is supported more by your feelings than facts.
This should help get you started:
https://www.metacritic.com/...
It's not required.
Aren't you the one who has posted the first comment on at least two other reviews that were higher scoring, saying things like "another good review," "let me guess, this review will get ignored, while the 2 from VGC will remain the hot topic," and countering someone who questioned giving a perfect score?