340°

Xbox One Users Must Waive Right To Class Action Suits Against Microsoft; Experts Weigh In

Microsoft is requiring Xbox One owners to waive their legal right to a class action against the company, according to a disclaimer on the company's website.

US8F4380d ago (Edited 4380d ago )

Rightfully so. If you want your rights be taken away from you and ignoring all these warnings from others, don't complain when you get screwed at the end. YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW. Samething with Sony. I'm sorry but I just cant forget when they took away Linux. Shoot me

green4380d ago

Sony does the same thing and it is in their terms and agreements

"Sony sent an e-mail to all their PSN subscribers today announcing a terms of service change that will be implemented on September 15, 2011. You must agree to this new TOS to continue using the Playstation Network, but doing so completely absolves Sony of any new class action lawsuit you may choose to file against Sony."

http://www.gamestooge.com/2...

US8F4380d ago

Uhhhh did you read everything I wrote or just the first line?

Muffins12234380d ago

LOL Green trying to get away with his mistake XD

JokesOnYou4379d ago

yeah green this is standard practice for most companies when introducing new services to protect themselves from future legal action.

green4380d ago

I never disagreed with you did I ?

US8F4380d ago

Lol, haha yea you have a point. My bad

DragonKnight4380d ago

Oh please, no one used Linux and Sony put that in the EULA because of frivolous class action suits that cost them time and money that could be better spent elsewhere.

On Topic: You can't have your right to file a class action suit taken away from you even with agreeing to an EULA. The PS3 version states that you can't use PSN if you choose to file a class action suit against Sony, but you can if you file a personal suit against them. I'm sure the Microsoft one is similar, just as is Valve's.

Why should you be allowed to continue using the service of a company you are in the process of suing? It doesn't make sense. That's like suing someone for damaging your car due to reckless driving and then letting them drive your car to the court proceedings. It'd be ridiculous to believe otherwise.

Snookies124380d ago

I used the Linux OS. :\

So yes, I was sad that they took it out.

HammadTheBeast4379d ago (Edited 4379d ago )

All 12 of the people who used Linux got over it. About half of those only used it to try and get inside the firmware for custom games :/

I still miss it though sometimes, the browser was better than the current one.

DragonKnight4379d ago

Rephrase: Less than 1% used OtherOS. It's removal was no big loss for the system and did nothing to hamper it's functionality.

LeRise4379d ago

But PS3 Slim was jailbroken too, even without Linux support!

DragonKnight4379d ago

@LeRise: No it wasn't. Stolen keys =/= Jailbroken.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4379d ago
Dasteru4380d ago (Edited 4379d ago )

Fortunately the US is the only country that allows corporations to take away peoples legal rights. In Canada and most other countries, this ToS wouldn't hold up in court. And the attempt to have it would most likely provide legal grounds to sue MS/Sony for even more.

rainslacker4379d ago

A company can not compel someone to not proceed with legal action. These kinds of things are there to protect from frivolous lawsuits, which are plentiful in the US, and gives the courts the option to move the case to binding arbitration if they feel it's frivolous.

This type of policy is in almost every EULA written in the last 10 years, yet people still sue, class action or otherwise, because it isn't enforceable.

YNWA964379d ago

yeah, thought that was funny, he definitely only read the first line... I held out for a long time before signing that EULA with Sony, then one day just simply forgot what I was doing and did it..... This is standard for practically all companies now, within reason. But you can sue still but only as an individual, which against the big boys, takes some balls and lots of money.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4379d ago
BattleTorn4380d ago

Same with almost all ToS nowadays...

MontyQ4380d ago

its like selling ur soul to bill gates

dcbronco4379d ago

This is a consumer rights issue. All of the other nonsense Sony fans have been harping on were silly, this is different. But it is the way contracts are moving and the only way to stop it is with your wallet. But at the same time we only have ourselves to blame as Americans. We sue way too often for the most ridiculous things. Companies do have to protect themselves.

The best way to fight this is at the voting booth. We elect people that allow companies to put out either cheap crap or poisonous or harmful items. They know they will just lose a little money at most and if sales are enough it won't matter. If we started putting company heads in jail like the rest of the world there would be less need to sue because companies would be more careful. Right now there are carcinogens in American foods that no other country allows in their foods. But some chemical company has government protection and we allow those protectors to remain in office.

Most of the problem in the US, and maybe the world right now, could be solved if the American people would choose better leadership.

yugovega4379d ago

are you serious? you can't be serious.

YNWA964379d ago

Oh yeah, oh yeah, the world was a safer place under Dubya Bush... did you not know that? Ask Dick Cheney...

dcbronco4379d ago

There hasn't been a decent American president since Carter. Odd that he is considered the worse in recent history. That should tell you something about the way this country works. I don't know what it is that you are wondering if I'm serious about. But do a little research. Americans file far more suits than anyone else. The rest of the world will arrest a CEO that puts out a product that kills a bunch of people. Not in the US, we'd be lucky if the company gets fined. I believe Monsanto is an American company and they basically treat the world as lab rats. And this is a democracy with a congress with a 10% approval rating, but a 90%+ re-election history for incumbents. That alone shows how dumb a country we are. We have a list the president can pick and choose people to murder from. With no proof of any crime. Didn't we kill a 16 year old because, as the State Dept. official said,"He should have been born to better parents". His father was a terrorist so they killed his son too. And no not by accident. He was the target even though he had no affiliation with any terrorist organization. SO if you actually know a little recent US history I'm not sure what your issue is.

rainslacker4379d ago

Except the no suing thing isn't enforceable in the least. Your right to file legal action against a company can not be taken away due to a contract. That contract however can spell out the ramifications of suing, in this case not allowing the user to use the service for the duration of the suit...and possibly after...since the user no longer agrees with the TOS.

These things are there to limit the number of frivolous lawsuits that you criticize as the reason for their existance. They are a waste of time and money to the companies to have to deal with, and the relative ease in which someone can sue someone means that companies have to spend way too much on them.

If there is legal ground to sue though, the courts will hear a case regardless of an EULA.

dcbronco4379d ago (Edited 4379d ago )

It's not about denying the right to sue. It's about bringing a class-action suit. My problem with blocking that is that sometimes an individual doesn't have the means to bring the suit on their own and class-action is a way to get a firm to take it on. But the American people have done this to ourselves and the rest of the world with so many frivolous suits. Nobody sues like Americans.

There are too many people out there looking for a free ride and too many firms willing to use them to make a buck. They need to be quicker to get rid of attorneys that keep filing these suits, like they did with Jack Thompson. I have no problem with class-actions for things like RRoD or Ford Explorers. But for every quality suit there are a thousand stupid ones.

@Rainslacker

I'm sure this is just a way to discourage people. I admit to not always reading the TOS. But most people would read that clause and believe their rights are gone. So while it may not be binding, it may still succeed in it's purpose.

rainslacker4379d ago

Ah. Yeah that's a fair assessment. But at the same time, even this clause in the TOS doesn't prevent someone from filing a class action suit. It helps to mitigate the possibility. I've personally gotten letters from class action suits for things that have these clauses in the TOS.

Class action suits more often than not only provide relief for the lawyers handling the case. Sometimes it can resolve issues. I know the threats of a class action lawsuit drove MS to extend it's warranty for the 360 with the RROD.

I guess it's kind of a wash. Your rights are still there, you can still personally sue them or participate in a class action suit, but binding arbitration is more often than not a way to settle the case without the expense of court...for both parties.

strigoi8144379d ago

Every one who will purchase this must have a good lawyer bundle with it..

Show all comments (42)
210°

Activision Forces Adverts into Call of Duty Black Ops 6 and Warzone Loadouts

With the launch of Call of Duty Season 4, Activision quietly put adverts inside loadouts for Black Ops 6 and Warzone, sparking a backlash in the process.

14d ago
14d ago
lukasmain14d ago

Putting Ads in a pay-to-play Premium title? Well done Microsoft. Well done /s This is really scummy.

jjb198113d ago

This game will never change because these sweatlords love buying up all the skins and bundles that become obsolete the following year. They're the ones perpetuating Activision's greed.

VenomUK13d ago

If Microsoft introduces adverts into its other games I hope it can do them without disrupting the immersion of the game world. So for example in the new Fable game it would look out of place if there was a billboard advertising Cadillacs.

A far better way to do it would be to have a wizard conjure a 'dream cloud' in front of your character and then in the cloud you can see the Cadillac car and see the text with price and availability and hear a booming sales voice promoting the car. That would work so well as it wouldn't be a billboard and completely, 100%, fit in with your character's adventuring in Albion. Doesn't that sound so much better?!

crazyCoconuts13d ago

@venom, or how about our of 100 farts in Albion, 1 of them has a Cadillac pop out

VenomUK12d ago

@crazyCoconuts That’s undeniably off-beat - but it could really work!

13d ago
Show all comments (19)
410°

Xbox's first-party handheld has been sidelined

Xbox's handheld ambitions continue unabated, but the focus is shifting towards improving Windows 11 for third-party handhelds — for now. The Xbox Series X 'Melrose' successor is safe, with development continuing at full pace.

Read Full Story >>
windowscentral.com
16d ago
16d ago
16d ago
shadowT16d ago

Is there really a market for handhelds next to mobile?

Vits15d ago

If they run the same games as the main home console, then yeah, sure.
But if they need specially tailored games just for them? Probably not, unless there isn't a home console for comparison (see Switch).

RaidenBlack15d ago (Edited 15d ago )

I am kinda low-key happy this happened.
Dont want another Series S situation (games to be designed from 4 to 12TF scale and not 10 to 12TF).
Hope PS follows suit as well. Tablet SKU sharing with console for 10th gen, will just continue the cross gen -esque development/design phase/nature.
Want a proper 20+ only TF rasterized next-gen plz (+ frame-gen and the lot).
If anybody wants to continue the cross-gen, the Series S|X, PS5 will remain for that. And Switch 2, if you gotta go even lower in the TF range.

ABizzel115d ago

Yes and No. All of the PC handhelds combined have struggled to sell 7 million units, which would be a flop for any “console”. So the market is extremely niche because of price and target market (the informed hardcore gamer / casuals aren’t picking these up).

These handheld PCs are $500 or more, and offer at best Xbox Series S performance levels, so it’s best for MS specifically to just partner with ASUS, instead of investing millions if not billions.

Sony can make their own with custom AMD hardware due to their partnership, and stronger global brand for hardware. But even then it brings the question, of being a lower resolution PS5, and what does that mean for PS6 cross-gen (likely another generation where the first 3 - 4 years are just upgraded last-gen games).

Kosic15d ago

Imagine a Wii U style console, where the tablet doesn't rely on the console it's self, you download the game on the console under the TV and play in 4k glory, then you can remote play, get some unique game features if using both console and handheld in tandem. Then you can download the games in 720-1080p to play on the go, continue your progress, and continue on the TV when you get back.

Sony could get away with this due to exclusives, and that would be a reason for sales. Look at the portal.

I can picture seeing new hardware having some sort of GPU dock, where the handheld runs 1080p, and the dock has additional hardware to bring in 4k/60 specs.

I do think handheld gaming is going to be a strong future, imagine Nintendo release a new upgraded GPU dock for the Switch 3, every 2 years. More frames, sharper graphics on the same game for an extra £150 for a dock with a built in GPU chip. Console cycles doesn't have to be renewed, just the hardware can be improved by them reselling docks to us again and again with small/yearly upgrades like mobile phones.

GamerRN15d ago

Did you just imply that Sony can make a better stronger handheld than Microsoft? You do realize we are talking about Microsoft, the tech giant, right? If Microsoft can't make one that's cost effective, Sony definitely can't...

Brand and market share means nothing when you are a trillion dollar company

ABizzel114d ago

@GamerRN

It has nothing to do with what company can do it, or what company can spend.

For anyone taking a basic business class there is a term called ROI, and Xbox home consoles are selling at an all time low, meaning their ROI on a handheld is a risk that doesn’t make sense, even if they can afford it. Businesses are there to make money and it doesn’t make sene for MS to invest in a handheld that’s a companion device when their current home consoles they’ve spent 20 years working on are at an all time-low, when they can invest with little risk with what ASUS already has to offer.

This is why Sony can build a better device, because they have less risk involved, meaning they can invest more in their own product, and they already have an exclusive partnership with AMD on creating features and hardware. So in this specific case, YES Sony can built a better handheld, due to custom hardware, customer tools, low level APIs, compared to an off the shelf product running Windows or a Window Xbox kernel =.

TheEroica15d ago

I play steam deck primarily... Don't play consoles or mobile. The deck covers it all.

badz14915d ago

@shadowT

The Switch is a handheld, so will the Switch 2. what are you on about?

Cacabunga15d ago

To run native games offline? Anytime

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 14d ago
CrashMania16d ago

Funny to see the alt already damage controlling and having a meltdown with multiple accounts in the comments already.

Sad for MS if true, a dedicated handheld would go down a lot better than a rog ally 2 with an Xbox sticker on it I think.

crazyCoconuts15d ago

It couldn't have succeeded for a number of reasons. Now they've retreated to the Windows front and trying to keep that relevant for gaming. How long before Windows Central realizes there won't be a real console successor to Series X either?

Lightning7715d ago

Except there is. That project is reportedly full speed ahead.

Outside_ofthe_Box15d ago

@Lighting77

So was the handheld until today...

Lightning7715d ago

@outside obviously not since they sidelined it and they wanna see how the Asus does. Are you saying they're gonna cancel the next console?

crazyCoconuts15d ago

@lightning - I'm admittedly trying to box you in here - Do you think the next Xbox console will have Steam on it?

Outside_ofthe_Box15d ago (Edited 15d ago )

@Lightning

Here we go with having to spell everything out.

If I told you yesterday that Xbox was going to sideline the handheld console what would your response have been? Probably something along the lines of "I doubt that since Phil has been talking about it for some time now"

My point is just because they are "full speed" ahead now does not mean that will not change in future. As we have seen with the handheld. Do you understand what I'm trying to say now?

Lightning7715d ago (Edited 15d ago )

Box me in? No you said the same thing you've always been saying for years now. Those are the rumors to have Steam integration.

What about it

If you told me they were gonna cancel it tomorrow it would nothing more than fanboy talking points. I only wait for credible sources not what someone else says.

Also this is the handheld not a full blown new console. The Asus is yet to release and they're waiting to see how that thing does. Critical thinking is my strong suit you should try it some time if you can. But Ok cool well you hang your hat on that I guess. Main New console is gonna get cancelled even though the handheld is a different marketing device than the main the console itself.

__y2jb15d ago

I think there is a 75% chance there will not be another Xbox. There is zero reason to buy one now. No way it can possibly sell more than 10m units after Xbox went third party.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 15d ago
BLow15d ago

That's what they do. Goalposts shift like the wind.

I'm really confused on why they are making a "first party" device and also have a Rog Ally with their sticker on it. Make this make sense. How is their own device going to be any different?

Your console doesn't sell and they expect a handheld to?

RaidenBlack15d ago (Edited 15d ago )

The Rog Ally one is gen agnostic ... as you deciphered, it was to be the updated Rog Ally but just with Xbox branding. PC handheld with some Xbox features.
The handheld Xbox is/was supposed to be sharing the same gen/ecosystem with the next-gen (10th gen) Xbox. Think Series S but handheld ... it'll run the Xbox OS or whatever the next Xbox will run.
...
As for anybody wondering/confused why MS is doing another Xbox console ... coz mainly its the 10th gen of home consoles next, which started wayy back in 1972 for the 1st gen. And MS wanna be part in it, in the 10th anniversary gen of consoles. If they gotta bow out, they can't do that at 9th i.e just before 10th. They wanna stick around till the 10th or the X-th gen and check what the fuss happens.

Outside_ofthe_Box15d ago

Curious as to what excuses the spam was saying. Because prior to this news, the Xbox handheld was used as proof that Xbox is still committed to the hardware space. This handheld being scraped is not a good sign...

15d ago
Outside_ofthe_Box15d ago (Edited 15d ago )

@Spam
You can replace scrapped with pushed back if you like. It's not a good sign either way.

15d ago
1Victor15d ago

asq3= obscured: “ What’s your source on the handheld being scrapped? “
Read the article from Microsoft own website and one of your favorite quotations site when it’s something bad about Sony.
Oh BTW good luck with your next SPAM account.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 15d ago
Show all comments (77)
200°

FTC drops case against Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard deal

The FTC has officially dropped its case against Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard.

Read Full Story >>
theverge.com
slate9123d ago

The sweet smell of tax dollars burning

Killa7822d ago

From the unemployment this deal caused, no doubt.

Obscure_Observer22d ago

"The sweet smell of tax dollars burning"

They never stood a chance. It was a lost cause from the start. And yet, still, they´d decided to go ahead and double down on their bs to bleed the taxpayer even more.

dveio22d ago

The IRS demands 29bn USD in not paid taxes from Microsoft.

If we're talking bleeding.

1Victor22d ago (Edited 22d ago )

@slate: “ The sweet smell of tax dollars burning “

The smell of political donations endorsements under the table.
There I fixed it it for you
We all knew Microsoft plan of “10 years of all systems publishing “ and some of its supporters happy that after all the games would be “exclusive to Xbox “ now that things have changed and Microsoft got humbled by the lost of money from CoD going down from OVER A BILLI🤑N to
MILLI😩NS the sales failing of games that would released on PlayStation and be forced by INVESTORS asking for their M🤑NEY to grow faster than the next 10 years it is obvious that it would be a waste of money to continue this litigation.
Edit:@obscured: “ They never stood a chance. It was a lost cause from the start “

Same as your grievance stages.
Have you passed the bargaining stage yet ? Or are you still on the anger stage 🤣

slate9122d ago

I knew my singe bipartisan sentence would bring out the crazies. Thanks for the wall

Astrokis22d ago

Not sure if I’m disturbed or entertained but either way I hope you are alright

OtterX23d ago

I think they're convinced now that MS won't (and can't) withhold releases from conpeting platforms. MS on the street corner now like, "Who wants a taste?!"

PhillyDonJawn22d ago

I wont be too sure of that. Gotta wait and see till after these deals expire

OtterX22d ago

That's how it always starts, "I'll just work this street corner for a short while until I get caught up on my bills..."

Tacoboto22d ago

Oh yeah, they're totally gonna make Xbox exclusives again, with the hardware they're totally committed to selling and making available lol

raWfodog22d ago

As far as I'm aware, the only 'deal' that was discussed was for Call of Duty. Xbox had no obligation to make any of their other games multiplatform. They did that of their own accord.

OtterX22d ago (Edited 22d ago )

**btw, I'm talking about street food vendors, just in case there's any confusion!

https://external-content.du...

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 22d ago
Lightning7722d ago (Edited 22d ago )

I've seen videos and talk a online speculating MS long game. Some think that MS multiplat move is use to appease the FTC so they can buy more and is somehow a move that could get Sony to open up their platform. In other words them going third party and letting their games go everywhere. MS possible scheme and ulterior motives, speculated by Jeff Grubb is that putting Xbox store on PS via regulation Which would hurt PS buissness very badly because that 30% cut would be even less or not a cut at all. MS buys more because they're "playing nice" by opening up its platform to Epic store and steam which would force Apple and Sony to open up their ecosystem to other stores like MS.

If that's the case that'll mean as I said before, PS fans buying Cod on PS via MS store would give 100% maybe even 90% of the money being pocketed by MS while Sony's store front wanes when it comes to third party because guess what? MS is buying more third party and preying off the extreme ignorance of the FTC. Manipulation of the FTC and MS overtaking the PS store and customers

My thing is this. I know it's a opinion and speculation but why does Sony have to open up its store or force them to go multiplat? If they still believe in selling their freakin console then let them do it. If they want to provide the best games and the best content for its fans then let them do it!? Why because the competition is trash at selling games and consoles for 14 years now Sony has to change? MS using the ignorance of the FTC to overtake gaming as we know it?

Again it's just talk and opinion but man this seems very, very possible imo.

dveio22d ago

Well, at the time, I actually did think the FTC and CMA did a poor job in court. But also the judge.

Having said that - it is what it is.

If 75bn mergers in any industry ain't a threshold to deny them, then I don't know what is.

As far as your thoughts about other 3rd parties getting taken over in the future go:

I think publisher buyouts are off the list now. I think it would be reeeeally difficult for MS to win another trial try taking over any other publisher.

But smaller studios ... maybe.

However, right now I can't see studios out there advocating for a buyout from Microsoft.

That isn't to say an announcement of such couldn't drop on Monday already. Because we today know that Microsoft had approached a plethora of other studios in 2018 to 2021, such as IOI, CD Project, etc.

We'll see. And we can't do anything about it. It's up to trade commissions and then probably courts to decide.

Lightning7722d ago (Edited 22d ago )

"I think publisher buyouts are off the list now. I think it would be reeeeally difficult for MS to win another trial try taking over any other publisher."

That's the thing MS is ticking all the boxes by not have anything be exclusive so the CMA/FTC see that they're doing "fair practice" in games and content distribution. Which technically greenlits more aquisions or it makes it easier for acquisitions because MS is a mega publisher now.

"However, right now I can't see studios out there advocating for a buyout from Microsoft."

Hopefully not but them going multiplat could entice Studios to join MS because nothing is not longer exclusive which means more money for them, studio and teams.

We can't do nothing about it but Sony can. They can block xbox games on their console (lose that 30% cut) but Sony won't do that because that's money that will be lost and Sony runs a buissness. That's the only way to hurt or slow down Xbox.

I'm probably over thinking it as I do these things but it's something we shouldn't just ignore and be weary of MS motives here. I'm keeping an eye on them.

Rancegamerx22d ago

The idea that Microsoft is manipulating the FTC and forcing Sony to open its platform is silly and has no evidence to back it up. Microsoft’s multiplatform approach is 100% due to past failures and its laughable position in the gaming industry. Their best attempt was a fluke and a lie, brought on by Sony’s missteps and a poorly made machine that broke down too often.

Sony would never allow themselves to be "forced" to do anything; they control their platform and storefront perfectly fine without the need or desire to add an unnecessary Microsoft storefront. Even if, by some flaw on Sony’s part, Microsoft were able to introduce its store on PlayStation, Sony would adapt rather than collapse. Digital storefront competition already exists (Steam, Epic Games Store, Xbox Store), and PlayStation’s business won’t suddenly "wane."

Also, regulators like the FTC don’t operate on ignorance—they actively assess market behavior to prevent monopolies. Microsoft isn’t secretly overtaking gaming with some ultimate scheme. The industry might be changing or shifting (for the worse, in my opinion), but Sony will continue evolving based on market trends, not because of alleged schemes.

Gaming isn’t about one company "playing nice" or another being "forced" to change—it’s about making money with games, something Microsoft has yet to achieve in 25+ years.

Lightning7722d ago

"The idea that Microsoft is manipulating the FTC and forcing Sony to open its platform is silly and has no evidence to back it up."

That's why I said it was all speculation that's what Jeff Grubb opinion. I made that clear several times. You know what's funny? When Jim was in court ppl got mad at the FTC for protecting Jim Ryan instead of the consumer. Maybe he was right to worry about his business. Now look Releasing Xbox games on PS keeps MS studio an a float. Now Xbox games are all over PS now. Maybe Jim was onto something.

MS is still competing with Sony just in a very different way. The FTC back down mainly means they can buy more and MS next steps can proceed. We'll have to see what happens in the future but I wouldn't be so sure on your stance.

InUrFoxHole22d ago

@Lightning77
MS putting games everywhere is the most consumer friendly thing I've seen a game company do.

dveio22d ago

@InUrFox

What does "putting everywhere" actually mean?

This book has so many pages.

• Xbox was dying in revenue
• Regulators put a 10 year deal on CoD
• Microsoft had to give away the streaming
• Spencer himself only offered 3 yrs initially

And most importantly

• Again, Xbox was dying in revenue

Xbox have the benefit of their actual financial situation giving regulators and courts the impression they release games everywhere, what they actually do.

But for reasons they can't be proven guilty of anything in court.

I'm not judging, it's just what it is.

IF the Series generation would have developed differently and was much more successful, I don't hesitate any second to believe in what Spencer had originally planned to do:

• Make everything Xbox exclusive
• We today know that Spencer had also approached Sega, From Software, CD Project, Nintendo, and even Valve was on their list of buyouts.

MS are playing a card here everyone knows why they are doing it.

Putting Doom "everywhere", which even was it already before it got bought, ain't a MS thing.

It would had hurt them in many ways if they'd put it exclusively to Xbox.

But, no matter what - it is what it is.

Xbox bought themselves back into the game. And I think many people just don't have very fond feelings towards this behaviour, wether on corporate nor private levels.

Let's see how they'll run with it.

In 2030, but most importantly after regulations will have expired we will learn better.

Reaper22_22d ago (Edited 22d ago )

Seemed like a lost cause anyway. Microsoft gambled and it paid off big time. That's what you call a big boss move. Sony played a huge part in the success of that acquisition.

wesnytsfs22d ago

Bout time. Pointless from the start.

Show all comments (26)