-
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.
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
GHG
Member
The login has everything to do with it. Just so that you can enlighten yourself, go and purchase Flight Simulator on Steam and see what happens. You can't even download the game unless you login to (or create) an Xbox account, nevermind actually play it.
You might be able to purchase their games on Steam in order to make use of the better features available via the steam ecosystm but it's pretty meaningless in the grand scheme of things.
This is due to the forced 3rd party (xbox) account link. Should we end up with another GFWL situation then all of their games people have purchased via Steam become inoperable.
Would it not be better for consumers to have the option of playing their purchased games via xcloud or any other cloud service? Why are you advocating for cloud customers people being locked into a particular subscription service without any other option?
Play anywhere is only available via their store. You can't purchase their games on Steam and "play anywhere" even despite being forced to log in to their crap.
You just described the definition of a closed platform, congratulations. Just because said closed platform gives you options, it doesn't make it open.
If people want to say "cloud is the future" then it's a pretty dark one if people are not even given the autonomy to decide where they are allowed to play their purchased games. If you live in an area where (as an example) GFN servers are available (because there are some areas that GFN support that Xcloud doesn't and vice versa) or in closer proximity and would give you a better playing experience then why should you be forced to use xcloud to play games you've purchased? If Xbox want to say they are letting people choose how they play their games then actually give them choice.
To demonstrate what I mean, if I want to purchase and play assassins creed valhalla, I have a choice of store on which I can purchase it on (steam, Ubisoft connect, epic), and then I have a choice how I want to play it (native vs cloud). If I decide cloud then I can decide whether I want to play via Ubisoft's cloud service (via luna), geforce now or any other cloud gaming service that supports purchased games.
Now if you compare that to what xbox does. Choice of purchase - xbox store or steam only. Cloud gaming provider - xcloud only.
"Choice" my arse.
I didn't ask for your life story, nor do I care. You've bought their PR, you've drunk the coolaid and you're exactly the type of customer they want and need. It is not possible to play any of their games without creating and signing into an Xbox account. That is a fact.
If you want to tell me I say "moo" then you unequivocally say "baaaa".
feynoob dont bother the people you are arguing with are too stubborn to see something without tinted glasses.
For the love of God please get your graphics card fixed or buy a new one. With each passing day you become more bitter and insular.
Yes. Next question please.
Last edited:
Just cause the gamer lawsuit is a bit more 'fun'
http://www.fosspatents.com/2023/02/sonys-jim-ryan-activision-blizzards.html?m=1
Lawyers want the following to testify or at least be available to testify
Documents that the Lawyers want to have access to
Microsoft's lawyers responses
http://www.fosspatents.com/2023/02/sonys-jim-ryan-activision-blizzards.html?m=1
Lawyers want the following to testify or at least be available to testify
Documents that the Lawyers want to have access to
Microsoft's lawyers responses
Would you be happier if he was a Tottenham fan?
What's this referring to? Someone's discovery?
Last edited:
Microsoft gave the FTC documents up to 9.5m pages long for the initial period of the FTC investigation and is offering to give it to the lawyers in the gamers case.
Last edited:
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
GHG
Member
Just wondering, have posts like this ever not backfired?
Flight sim is the most egregious example. For most other games they will actually let you download the game via steam but you will still need to login in order to play.
This applies to all games they publish, which is why them allowing Bethesda to continue to publish their own games was for the best from a PC perspective. There's no such login/download requirement for HiFi rush for example.
Last edited:
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Bro, this seems ludicrous to me. You are THIS angry that you are required to sign into a Microsoft account to play their games?
I have to sign into my Apex account on steam, my fortnite account on any platform to play, same for call of duty. I really dont understand where you are coming from.
Do you flip your shit when you have to sign into a Netflix account on your TV? Or DIsney Plus...Or whatever.
How are you going to handle signing into your PSN account on their gaas games on steam etc?
GHG
Member
Yes. I'd rather there's no additional DRM for games I've purchased other than the storefront DRM present on the store I've purchased said game on. It's an additional layer that only ever ends in tears later down the line. This has been proven many times and I'm not alone in this thinking. Go and look at the reviews on steam of any game that requires additional 3rd party DRM and logins.
Steam offer their own DRM, if you're going to sell your games on there then use it. There is zero benefit to the consumer when these additional layers are added. They only exist for control and data collection purposes.
Your TV streaming example doesn't fly, without logging in there is no content. The content does not reside on your TV or streaming device.
Last edited:
demigod
Member
Says the guy that thinks Starfield is bigger than Diablo, lol.
feynoob
Banned
Last edited:
Those logins are bullshit though wherever they are. Especially the ones that just do it for data collection and offer you NOTHING for it. At least if you are keeping a record of me use it to provide me with something like cross platform purchases.
Cheezewizz
Banned
Well first I would ask what's wrong with them channeling people through XCloud if it's their game. If you're against the acquisition, then that's all fine and merry. But to concoct this whole argument based around "Throwing Nvidia a bone" just doesn't equate.
Nvidia is somewhat of a psuedo platform owner. They have a streaming service, but unlike virtually every other platform owner, they produce absolutely zero games. Now I'm sure Nvidia would prefer CoD to be on their platform which makes it understandable that they'd be less than thrilled about CoD being acquired by Xbox. Ultimately though, Nvidia has little leverage to negotiate for it. If they produced games as an incentive to drive players to their platform instead of entirely relying on publishers to prop up their service then your argument would have more merit.
But they don't. This isn't even including the fact that Nvidia as a company has a long and well recorded history of being one of the (if not the most) greediest companiesin their industry. Their products and postion in their respective market allows them to charge higher prices. A fact that they take complete advantage of to the last cent. "Throwing anyone a bone" simpky isn't in their vocabulary. No bones were thrown when it comes to the rates they charge console manufacturers. The throwing of bones shall not be done to consumers buying their GPU's. In fact, when it does come to their core consumer base... The only "throwing" being done is to those core consumers themselves, as they've already proven when they neglected them in favor of crypto miners.
But even if we ignore all of that. It's important to remember that absolutely no platform is entitled to any game whatsoever aside from those made by the platform owner themselves. That goes for sequels or otherwise. That's not to say that platform owners don't often sign deals in order to associate a series or game with their platform because they most definitely do. But that's simply a marketing strategy to drive consumers to their platform. This notion that MS is breaking some unwritten code by making titles they pay for exclusive is nonsense. Every single CoD release has always been on Playstation? That's great, but it by no means guarantees the next one or any others will. Xbox isn't entitled to the next (or any for that matter) Final Fantasy game, but it's got nothing to do with brand association or anything of the sort. It's because it's Square's IP, and they can release it where they wish. Same goes for Street Fighter. This is all to say that regardless of what this platform holder wants, or that platform holder thinks. At the end of the day the owner of the IP gets to decide where the game goes. And just as some choose to go only with Playstation, others are free to go only with Xbox, or even Nintendo if that's what they want. Be it via an exclusivity deal, agreeing to be acquired, or even as was the case for Kojima with Metal Gear back in the day... because you just don't wanna.
Riky
$MSFT
There is a good reason for it, it means your save is consistent over Xbox and Steam, I play Halo Infinite on PC sometimes and it keeps one save as well as access to the battle pass etc.
Yeah, you need to offer value for basically your email address (true for games and advertising).
I do wonder if some people don't find value in cross platform progression/saves, purchases or achievements (personally Idgaf about achievements), should the producer/developer enable the game to have an opt out. Probably yes.
For games that are online only, slightly less concerned but maybe wish there was an industry standard for crossplatform play/progression/saves/purchases.
I'm not sure what you mean by "concoct this whole argument". The discussion started because of a new FTC court document with Nvidia as a respondent. Somebody then said something like "MS PR about being open is just that, call me when MS throws nvidia a bone and allows their games on GFN" yet instead we are deflected to discussing the different ways MS can get you into their ecosystem instead.
The "what's wrong with them channeling people through XCloud if it's their game" is a strange response because we are discussing whether regulators should allow it to become 'their game' and their decreased willingness to support competing platforms if it does.
Last edited:
GHG
Member
Last edited:
R3claimer117
Member
Lol it is related FTC lost its meta case in court handing Lina I think it’s 4th defeat in a row now. Then comes the supreme court one they’re going to be forced to settle with Microsoft soon or that be another case they lose.
feynoob
Banned
Letting Nvidia power the PC games on xcloud that they don't have a solution for is the quick win but there is quite a few things/partnerships that they could do.
30yearsofhurt
Member
Riky
$MSFT
I can't be debating him, I don't see his posts
IFireflyl
Gold Member
Up until this post I was convinced that you were unemployed.
GHG
Member
This is what you said:
What you describe is only the case with Halo Infinite's free to play multiplayer. This doesn't apply to any other games and doesn't even apply when going from the Microsoft store on PC to Steam and vice versa. It doesn't even apply to Halo Infinite itself as far as the singleplayer content is concerned.
You said "there's a good reason for it". So tell me, what exactly is the "good reason" that people who purchase (note the key word here) Microsoft games on Steam have to deal with an additional layer of DRM and logins when there is zero benefit to them as a player? Because it certainly isn't due to game saves.
The dunce (along with a couple of others) have me on ignore because they can't handle the truth and the fact that every single one of their lies gets shot down.
Last edited:
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
GHG
Member
Incredible. That will certainly be worth the trade-off if they GFWL us again.
Topher
Gold Member
Riky
$MSFT
You do, I've got the Steam achievements for Halo Infinite Campaign even though I own the single player game on Xbox not Steam.
GHG
Member
So data collection and tracking?
That's a benefit to them, not for the customer who has purchased that game.
Other games do this without the added layer of DRM and will always give you an option to opt in or out upon first boot of the game. It's not forced and they don't make you log in to any additional accounts (or download anything else) just to simply play the game.
gothmog
Gold Member
Who knows? It was a sealed decision and the acquisition is still blocked while the FTC weighs an appeal. When the details come out then we will know if it's important or not.
GHG
Member
Let him peek. He might actually learn something for once.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
FTC takes another massive L. Same law firm and legal team advising Meta in their win in federal court is also advising Microsoft.
Meta is far more dominant in the VR space than Microsoft is in gaming, and the FTC still lost. The best argument they have against Microsoft is the price tag of the deal and the facts it's Microsoft. Nto winning arguments at all. Call of Duty simply doesn't possess power to foreclose a competitor such as Sony.
Nintendo outsells both without it, and no credible claim can be made that Nintendo is somehow not in the same business as Xbox and Playstation or somehow not relevant when there exists so many crossover customers who own a combination of the three consoles.
Meta is far more dominant in the VR space than Microsoft is in gaming, and the FTC still lost. The best argument they have against Microsoft is the price tag of the deal and the facts it's Microsoft. Nto winning arguments at all. Call of Duty simply doesn't possess power to foreclose a competitor such as Sony.
Nintendo outsells both without it, and no credible claim can be made that Nintendo is somehow not in the same business as Xbox and Playstation or somehow not relevant when there exists so many crossover customers who own a combination of the three consoles.
Riky
$MSFT
Wonder if they might do a deal now to avoid further embarrassment.
feynoob
Banned
Let's not celebrate dude.
FTC were never the deciding factor for this deal.
Them blocking this deal caused MS enough headache with EU sending SO.
If CMA sends that too, it's dead as F.
Weird move, wonder what they are looking to surface.
May be just trying to be able to respond to Nvidia's appearance in court so not that weird.
Last edited:
Have you read the decision? Can you point to parts therein showing relevancy to the MS case? Dou have any data to showing that the VR market and console / gaming subscription markets will be analyzed even close to the same?
Or is your enthusiastic spike (before the ball even crossed half field, never mind goal line) premised solely on MS hiring the same lawyers? And if so, do you also think anyone who hired Casey Anthony or OJ's lawyer were guaranteed to win their murder cases too?
Pelta88
Member
Pure comedic gold.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked