880°

Sony Calls CMA’s Revised Decision “Surprising, Unprecedented, and Irrational”

Sony calls the CMA's revised decision about the Microsoft-Activision deal's console gaming SLC "surprising, unprecedented, and irrational."

sparky77378d ago

Sony is correct about one thing it is unprecedented. Only one other time in the history of the CMA have they revised their findings and that is also the only example in the history of the CMA where they have accepted behavioural remedies.

CMA has egg on their face right now so it will be very hard for from them not to approve.

ElendilsSorrow378d ago

I feel like the very explicit legal terms MS has been repeatedly offering somewhat guarantee in the short term that COD on PS won't be affected. Obviously can't discount any shadier means MS chooses to employ (and it's very much capable of that), but the whole transaction is being treated with unnecessary vitriol at present

darthv72378d ago

If we look at this objectively... MS has no reason to jeopardize their relationships with any 3rd parties or other platforms. Their whole intention is to be a service provider. it's what they have done with Windows. Being the biggest PC OS in the world allows for them to make $$ off the plethora of users and content creators that release their wares for Windows. It should be no surprise they are doing the same with the Xbox platform. I fully feel they will be a 3rd party by the end of the decade. Now that doesnt mean they wont still have their own platform... it just means they will cater to anyone who is wanting what they offer.

Anyone familiar with SNK knows they had their own Arcade/Home platform but also released games for other platforms through licensing. Sega had their own platform as well but due to mismanagement, they had no choice but to go 3rd party. MS will do the best of both. they will continue to have their own platform(s) while also offering up support to others who are interested. No way would they want to jeopardize the all mighty $$ by sabotaging one version over another.

sinspirit378d ago

@darthv72

Why do you repeatedly ignore concrete counter arguments and still spam the same attempts to sway people's opinions? This is trolling.

darthv72378d ago

@sin... concrete counter arguments...? You mean the same FUD people have been spreading, like spam. THAT is trolling.

This is just stating an objective opinion.

sinspirit378d ago

@darthv72

What is FUD about people stating the obvious counter argument to your statement above? You state they wouldn't jeapardize 3rd party relationships.. Yet, they just did this with Bethesda after they stated their aim was not to take games away from other platforms. They directly removed games from potentially coming to Sony platforms that obviously without any doubt would be on their platforms if not for any intervention.

Are you going to respond and say they can't remove games that never were in development/announced for PS5? This is an extremely shady and disingeniuous argument I've seen on here, like with StarField, and with future Elder Scrolls and FallOut titles that were never technically *in development*, according to public knowledge, for PS5, so they must not have been removed.

378d ago
+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 378d ago
agnosticgamer378d ago

You realize the job of the CMA isn’t to protect the market leader in the industry right?

Extermin8or3_377d ago

No it's to protect the market in general and it just so happens ehat NS wants is a monopoly where everyone has to use their services in some form - that is bad for the industry.

agnosticgamer376d ago (Edited 376d ago )

@Extermin8or3_

So if the market share between Sony and Microsoft flips as a result of this purchase. Is it then a monopoly? And if it is considered a monopoly why is it not considered one now? Why do Jim Ryan and Sony fans think Gaming Hell Freezes over if they aren't in the number #1 spot or dominating? Sony has plenty of a market share lead at this point and it will make things tighter and spur greater competition, even if that means Sony responds with a big purchase of their own. COD at a minimum will still be available not only on the PlayStation but Nintendo and a host of cloud streaming sites including Steam for the next decade after the deal goes through. And Ryan running around saying Activision will purposely make an "inferior" version on PlayStation just makes him look like a lunatic.

It's not like everyone is all of a sudden going to have to buy an Xbox to play Call of Duty. I just think Sony and Microsoft are being ridiculous in trying to make themselves seem so hopeless and weak. Especially Sony trying to pretend they don't have an OVER 50% market share of the gaming sector between PlayStation V. Xbox

Bobertt378d ago

They got that Microsoft money that's why they changed their minds.

King_Noctis378d ago

If it is that easy then why didn’t MS just bribe them in the first place and get this deal done a long time ago?

sinspirit377d ago

@King_Noctis

Not to fuel any conspiracies of shadiness, but if it went through with no trouble it would be even more suspicious

Dreisdest377d ago

All of you Sony kids care far too much about this acquisition.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 376d ago
XiNatsuDragnel378d ago

I think Sony is right where Activision games can be and will be taken away from playstation gamers with this deal being approved easily.

Lifexline378d ago (Edited 378d ago )

Is that not supposed to happen? MS did spend 70 billion dollars what are they supposed to do make activision games PlayStation exclusive? Obviously there will be activision games that will be exclusive with the exception of call of duty and maybe a couple others. That’s what I don’t get of Sony they seem to only care about call of duty which is understandable but what about the other big games.

That’s why they are buying them thought it was obvious guess not. Sony needs to get over it. All signs seem to point to it being approved they need to focus on making sure call of duty releases on parity with the Xbox version at this point.

Rude-ro378d ago

Cod is part of the argument but not the entirety of concern…
Due to the install base of said game, it serves as the catalyst to

378d ago
__SteakDeck__378d ago

@Lifexline They did say “When we all play, we all win”

Lifexline378d ago

@gamereal isn’t that what business is trying to always get more customers??? By taking it away from the competition which is why most businesses offer better services, deals, that sort of thing to persuade customers to come to their business

are they really going to be harmed thought is anyone literally going to die? I feel all these buying sprees they are going on is more about positioning for next gen. So when consumers do decide to buy a co sole they choose Xbox. It’s pretty smart at least that’s what I feel Phil Spencer is trying to do.

blacktiger378d ago

Activision is a public company, I don't think you know what that mean

Extermin8or3_377d ago

Due to the instal base of COD its easiest one to argue but its the example rather than the rule. I've seen them refer to activision owned IP repeatedly in their arguments and not just COD COD is the one the media has discussed most.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 377d ago
DarXyde378d ago

At this point, it's up to Sony.

Sony would likely be required to allow XGP on PlayStation which I do not think Sony should do. They only really seem concerned with Call of Duty, so the way I see it, Sony needs to refocus their efforts: make your own. It's far easier to compete with a single, very profitable franchise than it is to compete with everything.

Microsoft told PlayStation to make their own. Okay, go for it. Make a better game. Not as hard as it looks because Call of Duty is popular, but I think you can find plenty of objections to it being "the best". When Halo or Destiny drops, you don't really hear much about Call of Duty. It's an afterthought and people seem to rely on it to fill holes.

So Sony has a choice here. They have very talented devs and they can make a far better game than Call of Duty. That's the one thing Microsoft has said in all of this that's believable, so I would say take them up on that. Make a better game, and keep Call of Duty on your platform (outside of XGP) for now. Eventually, Microsoft is going to do what Microsoft does and pull the rug out. Unquestionably and I would put money on that.

So.... Give them what they want. Got no choice, really.

BandarHub378d ago

Cannot wait to see the Irrational ways in which Sony blocks off Japanese games on the Xbox.

Jin_Sakai378d ago

Xbox gamers don’t buy Japanese games anyways hence low sales being one of the reason Square isn’t releasing games on Xbox as of late.

On top of that I keep reading Xbox games saying they can keep their games so there’s another reason you’re not getting more Japanese games.

BandarHub378d ago (Edited 378d ago )

Don't give me that rubbish...PlayStation gamers don't buy games either

Like a Dragon: Ishin!, 35,897 copies sold on PlayStation 4 and 31,439 copies on PlayStation 5, total of 67,336 copies sold.
Octopath Traveler II, 14,422 sales on PlayStation 5 for a total of 68,417 copies sold
Valkyrie Elysium, with over 40,000 units sold in total, over 23,000 of which came on the PS4, and 17,000 on the PS5.
Star Ocean must have been in the 40k range as well.

Those are really bad numbers for a console that claims to have a lot of gamers who play Japanese games.

Back in the day when publishers had to print off disk, there could be a cased made for a reason since they cost money but now since digital games have taken more of the market share of game sales, there are zero reasons why they don't port the games at least digitally. Porting a game cost nothing nowadays and out of the 30 Million Xbox gamers out there they could easily make additional 10k-100k sales
It's funny because Japanese developers in the last few years have been comfortable porting games to Xbox, persona 5, ni no kuni, yakuza, final fantasy, and tales.
But since the FF remake exclusivity deal with Square, they have been reluctant to release any of there games.

With Sony making shady deals with Capcom involving Resident evil Village and not allowing it to be on gamepass. I am positive that the same thing is happening at Square.

Obscure_Observer378d ago (Edited 378d ago )

"Xbox gamers don’t buy Japanese games anyways hence low sales being one of the reason Square isn’t releasing games on Xbox as of late."

SE never said that. It´s just PS fanboy narrative to justify Sony´s dirty shady practices in Japan. If japanese games don´t sell on Xbox, then why pay millions to make it exclusive to PS5 like Sony is doing? Doesn´t make any sense and you know it.

As the investigations advance, more and more global regulators comes to realize that Sony has been doing for a long time, the exact same thing they´re accusing Microsoft of.

This deal will pass thru and Sony will be the only one left begging MS to allow COD to continue on Playstation thanks to their arrogance and dishonesty at the top of an high level of stupidity!

343_Guilty_Spark378d ago

Well that’s not true. They do just not as much as PlayStation but that could be partially explained by Sony being a Japanese console developer and their longer term history/partnerships with Japanese developers such as Namco, Altus, Capcom, Konami, Square Enix etc etc.

Jin_Sakai378d ago

@BandarHub
@Obscure_Observer
@343_Gulity_Spark

You guys can come up with all the excuses you want but the reality is Xbox are the ones losing out on Japanese games.

378d ago
TOTSUKO378d ago

@Bandarhub

FF7 remake? It sold faster than God of war and Spider man it’s first 3 days.

1)The games you listed are multi platform and aren’t blue chip titles even Congress is arguing.

2) The games you listed that are ported to Xbox are. In which you just made an argument for Sony.

3) MS is bad with Japanese developers in general. Their Japanese exclusive with Platinum gets canceled and Shinji Mikami leaves Tango Gameworks like wtf? MS needs to work on themselves

378d ago
King_Noctis378d ago

Games don’t release on Xbox.

N4G: That because Xbox don’t buy gaems

Games don’t release on PS.

N4G: whaaaaattt? What a stupid anti consumer move.

Lmao N4G. Never change.

derek377d ago

@Bandar don't be ridiculous this not a matter for debate. Playstation sells the most 3rd party games, western, Japanese, Asian, of the big 3 by far. It's only gotten worse with the introduction of gamepass.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 377d ago
MadLad378d ago

The same way they're doing it now lol. Money. Just like how Microsoft is in turn; money.

onisama378d ago

Me who bought ps4 not for gow or horizon or spiderman but for persona 5.... Ok

378d ago
shinoff2183378d ago

Sometimes I think you guys over estimate sonys blocking Japanese games , meanwhile maybe Japanese devs aren't developing for xbox because you guys don't spend money and expect everything on gamepass. Not all of you but clearly the lot of you

378d ago
Sonic1881378d ago

That's one of the major reason's I didn't buy Xbox. 1.They don't have enough Japanese games 2. I already have a high end PC. What's the reason to get an Xbox when I can play their games anyway?

gold_drake377d ago

u mean like xbox wants to do it with Activision?

before u talk, u need to make sure ppl cant correct you. you clearly dont think when u say stuff.

FinalFantasyFanatic377d ago (Edited 377d ago )

Such as???

You're going to need a good logical explanation for that comment, because Xbox owners have proven time and time again that they don't buy those games. Hence why the majority of Japanese devs don't bother creating or porting to the Xbox consoles.

You guys need to stop creating these wild alternate realities.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 377d ago
MadLad378d ago

Just keep digging that hole lol

neutralgamer1992378d ago

It's ok Sony those of us who understand this know your point and those celebrating this for Ms will soon realize that every action has an equal or great reaction

Zenimax and Activision along with many independent studios like double fine, obsidian etc

Ramifications

Square enix and capcom. Also Sony funding many of these the projects for Konami also means Sony will have major say in Konami franchises

FTC
CMA
Europe

No one can deny Sony's moves now because a very precedent has been set. I guess Xbox gamers like me will be ok with never getting

MGS
Resident evil
Silent hill
Final fantasy
Dragon quest
Street fighter
Etc

Book mark this comment

The week Activision deal is approved Sony themselves will announce their own acquisitions

DEEHULK88378d ago

They also have to go through the regulators and now they are in the US news for their practices, so not so fast.

neutralgamer1992378d ago

Yes and on what basis will they stop Sony? The same logic applies that was being used by Xbox fanboys

FTC will lose in court so again now flood gates are opened. If a multi trillion dollar company can buy the biggest publisher than surely a company worth fraction of that buying the 10 billion dollar Capcom is also fair

In law precedent is a huge thing and with zenimax and now with Activision precedents have been set

Crows90378d ago (Edited 378d ago )

Except if they allow these deals to go through for Xbox they will also have to allow them to go through with Sony. The zenimax acquisition was already huge. This one is just the icing on the cake. In fact I'm more bothered by the zenimax acquisition than this one potentially

DEEHULK88377d ago

Neutralgamer92 Sony is the market leader, so the EU and CMA might not approve and that is the difference.

kingnick378d ago

Unless Capcom royally screw up I don't see them agreeing to be bought by Sony, Sony would not attempt a hostile takeover of Capcom for fear of it failing and Capcom becoming hostile.

neutralgamer1992378d ago

King

Believe it or not Capcom would happily sell. Even in their recent survey they asked would you buy a console for RE being exclusive

378d ago Replies(5)
MadLad378d ago

Capcom has no reason to sell, and I've been hearing how Sony is going to acquire Square Enix for a decade now.
I still say it makes no sense to do so AFTER they sold off most of their big Western IP.
Even so, what would be the difference? Sony already makes sure their big titles don't come to Xbox as is.

derek377d ago (Edited 377d ago )

@Madlad, no reason to sell? Sure. Lol. Sony will do what is necessary to survive and thrive including buying Capcom. If they do, the can pull all if it's games off xbox just like Microsoft is doing with Bethesda and there would be zero argument against them doing so.

Gravesinger_378d ago

As someone who doesn't mind this deal going through, I say to Sony....do your thing lol

378d ago
Asplundh378d ago

It would be fair game. But I don't think Sony would be willing to spend the money for both, those developers together are worth around 10% of Sonys total net worth.

rlow1378d ago

Keep drinking the koolaid.

Tacoboto378d ago

Sony has every right to react how they want and how they've been getting away with. It would be foolish of them to do nothing.

I take issue with your comment suggesting that Xbox gamers don't already know what it's like not getting certain games. Aside from a no-show first party for certain years, Xbox already isn't getting several of those franchises. SF5 was absent the entire last gen. Square Enix is obviously avoiding putting titles people would like to play on Xbox after being very supportive of Game Pass just 2-3 years ago. MGS4 was and remains PS3 exclusive.

I'd rather Sony *not* purchase Square or Capcom (who actually does still actively support Xbox + GP), because that would likely result in them shutting out Nintendo and PC just to retaliate against Microsoft, but it would be fair in the war of business, and the developers can really focus on one set of hardware as games are already insane to make in any reasonable time.

Sonic1881378d ago (Edited 378d ago )

I do agree with you announces their own acquisitions but it won't be publishers. I'm 100% sure it will be just developers

jeromeface377d ago

Sony makes great studios... they don't have to buy them.

Tacoboto377d ago (Edited 377d ago )

Sony purchased Naughty Dog, Insomniac, and Guerilla. Media Molecule another. Bend changed its name and was purchased after the first Syphon Filter way back in 1999/2000

It's all on Wikipedia very easily found, many more than the ones I mentioned - time has certainly grown and polished them under Sony but it's only about a third of their studios that is actually internal/internally-built

TheKingKratos377d ago

Yeah, i agree it's only a matter of time now till we find those studios belong to Sony ... I have this feeling that they already bought a few but they are waiting for this to be over before saying the announcement

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 377d ago
Show all comments (139)
120°

Pocketpair Studio Boss Calls Out Tencent For Developing A Palworld Clone

The game in question appears to be dubbed Auroria on Steam, which shares a plethora of similarities with Palworld.

Inverno10h ago

No offense but Palworld isn't that original either, with that said… ew Tencent no thank you. I love the survival genre but all these half baked early access games have ruined the genre for me.

70°

Tomb Raider is coming to Evercade!

The first three Tomb Raider games are coming to an Evercade Cartridge!

Read Full Story >>
evercade.co.uk
darthv721d 12h ago

Their newer giga cart tech should make for even bigger games coming to the platform. I'm hoping for a Resident Evil collection with the first 3 games.

140°

With Larian Out Of The Picture, Will The Baldur's Gate IP Be In Safe Hands?

Huzaifah from eXputer: "With Larian Studios washing their hands of the IP, what is the ultimate fate of the legendary Baldur's Gate series?"

RaidenBlack13h ago

If anybody's gonna mention BioWare, then look at Archetype Entertainment, they're the new BioWare
or else
Obsidian is still a good choice but not independent anymore.

anast13h ago(Edited 13h ago)

No, WoTC is pivoting to mobile. They can use Larian's work to justify DnD Go and everyone will accept it.

RiseNShine12h ago

Short answer, nope. Long answer, f*ck nope.

Christopher12h ago

Honestly, we're talking completely new engine and none of Larian's built-in stuff with regard to environments and the like that they had from their past divinity game. No one is going to have that just ready to go. So, they need to shop for a dev studio that has a past game that shows what they want.

Obsidian doesn't have that, maybe the closest being Dungeon Siege 3 or Pillars of Eternity, but those are very basic, not as open, very little environment related and altering capabilities. So, we're talking a step way back on what Larian delivered. Zero scene experience to line up with what was done in BG3. Okay conversation tree designs, but still needs more complexity.

inXile has Wasteland 3 as a base model engine, and I think that's better than Pillars of Eternity from Obsidian. But, still needs to be more open world, more environmental effects, and a much heavier rules set adaptation. But, not a bad overall engine as a base, but still a ton of work. Zero scene experience to line up with what was done in BG3. Needs a ton of work on that entirely.

Tactical Adventure did the Solasta game. Really good and more accurate as far as 5e rules than BG3. But, again, if the expectation is similar to what made BG3 a big hit, engine isn't designed for moving the camera, is a bit outdated in graphics, doesn't have in-game scene elements, and needs much better writers/voice actors.

Owlcat of pathfinder games is another choice, even though they've recently moved on to WH40k licensed games. Again, though, the engine is the biggest issue here to match up, but it's a much better option overall than Tactical Adventure. Another question is writers/story telling, as much of their overall story telling bits are very limited with a lot of random worldbuilding elements that are just +\- of some attributes.

TBH, no matter who takes over, it's just not going to be like BG3 much like how BG3 isn't at all like BG1/2. And BG3 was so successful because of how much Larian was able to put in with their engine and how focused they were on players having ridiculous control over the story being told. I just don't see the next BG being the same and depending on what it is, it might be good but I'm not as big of a reach as BG3. It's way more likely players are going to go into BG4 (or its spiritual successor if it moves away from Baldur's Gate and into Neverwinter or something like Plansescape) expecting much of what is in BG3 with more options, new and older characters, and the same level of control over what they're doing. If it doesn't have that, regardless of who makes it, it won't be as successful, IMHO.

CrimsonWing6911h ago

Probably not, but maybe… just maybe…

Show all comments (6)