Unknown?
Member
Huh, what's being pushed?
-
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.
Ctrl+Alt+Deceive: All The Dirt, Info, Lies, and LOLs We Found During FTC vs. Microsoft
- Thread starter Heisenberg007
- Start date
graywolf323
Member
your first post in 3+ months only to say this and get permabanned, I hope it was worth it?
we’ve had people pushing the “oh they’ll handle COD like Minecraft” again among other things despite as clearly outlined in the OP the only reason Minecraft isn’t exclusive is thanks to Notch having it in a legally binding document
given Microsoft hasn’t been willing to say they’ll actually handle COD the same way it doesn’t seem like their agreement with ABK is any different than the one they had with Zenimax, instead they’ve been out there with carefully worded PR and the so called “10-year deals”
3liteDragon
Member
Lmao you dunce
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Wonder if all this information will be used in a restructure submission?
Chronicle
Member
First off: Wow great thread! Great read. Great info. Thank you.
There's a lot of dirt out there but in this game buying everything doesn't mean you'll make great games. Microsoft has obviously had enough. This is their third gen and last place again. They're pissed and out of options. Game Pass is not working. It'only appears successful because of the nut huggers. It's not a good model.
Also, a game that rakes in billions WILL NOT BE ON GAMEPASS day one. Come at me.
Starfield though.... that's a huge win for MS to me. But I'll never buy an Xbox just to play one game unfortunately. I guess pc someday but I'm a console guy.
There's a lot of dirt out there but in this game buying everything doesn't mean you'll make great games. Microsoft has obviously had enough. This is their third gen and last place again. They're pissed and out of options. Game Pass is not working. It'only appears successful because of the nut huggers. It's not a good model.
Also, a game that rakes in billions WILL NOT BE ON GAMEPASS day one. Come at me.
Starfield though.... that's a huge win for MS to me. But I'll never buy an Xbox just to play one game unfortunately. I guess pc someday but I'm a console guy.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
People will call me a planted CMA agent
FrankWza
Member
Timed it perfectly and let out years of frustration. It's therapeutic. Im sure he's still around after the new adds.
HundredThousandTrillion
Member
Dial back baiting into console wars. Your time will be short here.
Start a GoFundMe or a petition for Sony Stans
HundredThousandTrillion
Member
You mean corporate interests aren’t always aligned with consumer interests?
Wow. Tell us about how the Sun works now.
0neAnd0nly
Member
Sad we’ve reached the point of supporting mega corps that purposefully do anti-consumer stuff.
But you do you.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Emails are one thing. Execution is another. Not everything said in an email is carried through to the end. Things change.
A multi million dollar offer can come my way at work. I respond back denying approval. Does this mean it's a dead deal and it cant be done? Nope. Because I could change my mind in an MS Teams meeting where I give the approval verbally.
FrankWza
Member
What does a go fund me have to do with what he wrote about?
You must have missed the hundred thousand trillion comments about "good guy" phil and arrogant sony.
Hudo
Member
This whole thing is one of the most over-dramatized shitshows of recent times. Most of the "info" that "leaked" is nothing more than typical internal stuff that can be found in every bigger corporation. But Reddit and Twitter are making this huge fucking deal out of it. As if both Phil Spencer and Jim Ryan are both running intelligence agencies that fight each other or something.
FrankWza
Member
Didn't stop people from defending it when it was suspected before the leaks came out. That's the point. We all knew... Now we KNOW
Hudo
Member
People defending big corporations are usually teenagers who have yet to develop a personality of their own an substitute brand tribalism in its place in the meantime. Most usually grow out of that in their mid-twenties. People older than that who still defend big-ass corpos are either shareholders or retards (or both).
I mean, you're right, now "we know". But what to do with that knowledge?
FrankWza
Member
I've defended Sony plenty because I want them to continue to make the games they do. Just because they're all mega corps doesn't mean we should want or wish for consolidation without question or concern. These games from zeni and Activision were all going to be available across all consoles. Only one fan base is rooting for them to be taken away. I've never seen anyone root against or question xbox creating new IPs.
I guess we'll see if or how this can be used when there's another merger attempt.
saintjules
Member
Edit: I was under the wrong impression.
Last edited:
Hudo
Member
Fair enough.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
saintjules
Member
Ah, outside of the case, some of them the way Tom advertised looked like some of them were screen captured.
Last edited:
Mr Moose
Member
JackMcGunns
Member
The complaint about Sony blocking games from coming to Game Pass predates this finding, so how can we know that MS was "Also doing it" as opposed to "They started doing it" after Sony kept blocking games?
ulantan
Member
Have game pass games on ps plus day one. Or has Microsoft had marketing rights for a game coming day one on PS plus.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
JackMcGunns
Member
Well thought out reply
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
I don't think the timing matters because Microsoft was complaining publicly about this.
- If they were doing it before but still complained, they acted like hypocrites.
- If they were complaining about it because they thought it's a bad practice but still ended up doing the same thing, they acted like hypocrites.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Your asinine comment wasn't worthy of anything further. Just more goalpost shifting for Saint Microsoft, the perpetual victim.
JackMcGunns
Member
So the goalpost shifting for Saint Sony is being called goalpost shift for Saint Microsoft? makes sense. Microsoft was first to make the complaint of Sony blocking games from coming to Game Pass, the complaint pre-dates the finding, so there's no telling if it was a Tit-for-tat, this is a true example of projecting.
JackMcGunns
Member
The bolded is what I was implying, a possible retaliation. They're not going to be holy knights in light of dirty competition. Turning around and saying, oh look, they're doing it too is the same complaint by Sony fans when they make fun of "Sony too" comments. That's hypocrisy
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
More mental gymnastics. It just pains some true believers that their favorite brand's dirty laundry was aired. And you're straw manning, I never called Sony a saint.
JackMcGunns
Member
More mental gymnastics. It just pains some true believers that their favorite brand's dirty laundry was aired. And you're straw manning, I never called Sony a saint.
Your Gif says it all
Once again projecting, I didn't call you out personally. "Sony Too" is a common theme of complaints, now being used for MS, thus the hypocrisy, now it's a case of "MS Too"Where's the Gif MS MS MS lol, that's what it sounds to me from your end.
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Your Gif says it all
Where's the Gif MS MS MS lol, that's what it sounds to me from your end.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
But why complain about something publicly and throw mud at another company when you also end up doing the same thing?
Anyway, we kind of already know that it was not in retaliation.
Sony submitted to courts that they don't usually prevent companies from putting their games (that are on PS Plus) on Game Pass. But Microsoft does it. So based on that submission, it was Microsoft who started it.
Sony prevents games from going on subs that they are marketing, which makes a lot more sense to me. If they are spending millions of dollars to market a product, it doesn't make sense to have that game launch on a competitor subscription service (e.g., Resident Evil, Hogwart's Legacy, etc.). However, Microsoft's practice is to simply prevent devs from putting games, which are on Game Pass, also on PS+.
If a game, which is already on Game Pass, also joins PS+, it does not really hurt Microsoft at all. But they still do it.
Last edited:
JackMcGunns
Member
We don’t know the timeline, it’s like Phil proposing there should be an end to exclusive games, that games should be on all platforms, a utopian view that people just scoffed off and complained there’s no point for an Xbox then, and now Starfield is exclusive to Xbox and they’re looking to acquire Activision. So yes, the timeline of when things are said is important.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
But we do know. I explained this in second part of my comment. It is Sony's document that they submitted in courts.
Dice
Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
Looking at this I am convinced MS is trying to create a context where it is safe to exit console. Phil obviously wants it, the fact he says he "doesn't know what the platforms will be" is not just about specific SKUs but that maybe MS won't even have a SKU. He's obviously in a fight with others at MS to make the pivot and has to prove a more hopeful launchpad for them to shift into Cloud in order for it to be approved. This would also explain their close partnership with Sega. They are learning lessons from Sega on how they did it while in turn offering Sega insights and opportunities on how to pursue the future with the shift toward Mobile and Cloud.
They are super confident when cutting big deals because they don't plan on even having a console to compete in the same market, so those deals represent an initial vision of what their base sales are going to be before getting into projections about new markets they haven't yet made full moves on, but of course if they are able to secure what they want to secure and actually make the pivot, the whole field will be different with more desirable (for all) deals to be made. This is why after dragging their feet for ages they have kicked in with bringing PC up to speed with their console infrastructure and with a lot more crossplay and cross-progression and even things like the platform deal with Riot.
They want out but they don't want it to be quitting, they want it to be transforming into something that has a lead in the new market to not get their asses beat again. MS has never been a good hardware company they have always been an ecosystem-exploiting software monopoly company. Sony is a hardware company and they beat the competition when they are leveraging that. When they win and get arrogant about their position and lean into whatever they want for their software ecosystem is when they are weakest/most-disliked. MS to the contrary is a software monopoly company who has learned the art of making people docile to it and they succeed when they lean into that. That is the aspect of Xbox that has been succeeding, one that has been held back in some ways by being attached to a failing console line.
They are super confident when cutting big deals because they don't plan on even having a console to compete in the same market, so those deals represent an initial vision of what their base sales are going to be before getting into projections about new markets they haven't yet made full moves on, but of course if they are able to secure what they want to secure and actually make the pivot, the whole field will be different with more desirable (for all) deals to be made. This is why after dragging their feet for ages they have kicked in with bringing PC up to speed with their console infrastructure and with a lot more crossplay and cross-progression and even things like the platform deal with Riot.
They want out but they don't want it to be quitting, they want it to be transforming into something that has a lead in the new market to not get their asses beat again. MS has never been a good hardware company they have always been an ecosystem-exploiting software monopoly company. Sony is a hardware company and they beat the competition when they are leveraging that. When they win and get arrogant about their position and lean into whatever they want for their software ecosystem is when they are weakest/most-disliked. MS to the contrary is a software monopoly company who has learned the art of making people docile to it and they succeed when they lean into that. That is the aspect of Xbox that has been succeeding, one that has been held back in some ways by being attached to a failing console line.
Roronoa Zoro
Gold Member
Phil literally told his boss he had no plans to compete? Geez
Roronoa Zoro
Gold Member
What are the repurcussions for MS if they go back on it later though? Like they can't separate the companies again if they've been integrated at that point. Say MS gets some big monopoly and takes over and makes all the games exclusive. Would the ftc go back and rifle through old documents and statements and can they reverse a previous decision when the companies could have both changed by then?
bender
What time is it?
Stop with the facts, he has a narrative and persecution complex to weave.
MasterCornholio
Member
The leak means more stuff will be added to this right?
Roronoa Zoro
Gold Member
How dare you sir. Ultimate soldiers are a thing
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
I'm too busy (and lazy) to work on Patch 2.0
Can someone else step up, and I can outsource development?
Similar threads
- Locked