190°

First Wave of Developers Sign On to ID@Xbox

At ID@Xbox, we're as happy as anyone that Xbox One has shipped, but we still have our game faces on because there's still a lot for us to do. We've had thousands of developers express interest in ID@Xbox and we continue to make some big strides to lower the barriers for independent developers to self-publish on Xbox One.

Read Full Story >>
news.xbox.com
jimbobbeers4212d ago

The list is brilliant. Bring on early 2014.

P0werVR4212d ago

I want to see these guys utilize cloud computing for some really interesting gameplay.

Convas4212d ago (Edited 4212d ago )

I'm just waiting on Team Meat to give us some more details on Mew-Genics. Chris, the director of ID@Xbox, mentioned on Major Nelson's Podcast the other day the he may or may not have seen the game recently, so I suspect Team Meat will be joining ID@Xbox soon as well.

curtis924212d ago

Hard to buy into their enthusiasm when 6 months ago they couldn't have cared less about indie devs. Now suppose to believe they do? If they really have turned over a new leaf then great but I still feel like this is only because they were forced to do this. Maybe that's cynical to think but I just see them as disingenous.

curtis924212d ago

... Do I need an xbox one to have an opinion about the company? I don't have a hummer either but I think they're dumb.

thrust4212d ago

Just can not see why you are so bothered if that is the case :/

Software_Lover4212d ago

They did care about Indie devs. Main reason every xbox one is a dev unit. They just had to constantly answer questions about DRM and other things. Even now, when good news pops up every now and then we get the same comments over taking the comment section.

I applaud Sony's PR approach to Indies and capitalizing on every Microsoft mistake, but lets not act as if Indies are not and were not on Microsoft's mind.

curtis924212d ago

Did MS not drastically change their stance on indies after E3? Were they not still going to require a publisher for all games? You act like they just didn't talk about it. They made it a point to say their focus was on AAA games.

"Microsoft had repeatedly stated that independent game developers wouldn’t be welcome on Xbox One unless they had a publisher; in other words, they couldn’t self-publish."

Source: http://www.extremetech.com/...

And now all of the sudden indie games are near and dear to them? Again, if they truly changed then good for them. But because of how microsoft is, always trying to capitalize on the here and now and not truly focusing on one direction, I don't buy their enthusiasm.

MiloGarret4212d ago

You seem very upset curtis.

ThanatosDMC4212d ago

He probably supports indie titles. They make the weirdest/best games after all.

Grown Folks Talk4212d ago

So true curtis. They act as if they had an entire section dedicated to indies on the 360 or something.

Sm00thNinja4212d ago

I love this comment! ^^^ but I digress Microsoft's approach to indies may have been as open as Sony's in the past but great strides are being made to rectify that. So excited about the future of Xbox One!

gamer20134212d ago

I see what you did there. ;)

Naga4212d ago

You aren't very familiar with Microsoft's history of supporting indies, are you?

Are you familiar with what they did with the Xbox 360, or cognizant of the fact that they made every single Xbox One a serve as a dev kit for indies (thus decreasing cost and easing access)? I feel like if you had looked at their track record, and the present facts - as opposed to buying into the anti-indie narrative being advanced by certain corners of the community - then you wouldn't be quite so skeptical.

The fact of the matter is that 6 months ago, the Xbox One was not ready for indies. It wasn't a posture of Microsoft against indies - the tools simply weren't ready or available for them to get working due to the hardware and software not being finalized. I'd say that's why Microsoft is late to the party, but that wouldn't be accurate. They've been partying hard with the indie developers for years now.

darthv724212d ago

"And now all of the sudden indie games are near and dear to them?"

It would seem you are slightly confused in the MS/Indie situation. MS made indie development the least pricey when it came to creating games on the 360.

They made the dedicated indie section on the marketplace for games made. When indies were complaining about the exposure (placement of the games section), Ms moved it to be more proactive in promoting the section and the games.

The whole idea of trying to get indies to partner up with a publisher was for increased exposure and quality control. No doubt you are familiar with wiiware and the number of atrocious titles on that service. Well....it was happening with the indie marketplace as well.

Ms was trying to get these games into the system but wanted the devs to use an established pub to help with making sure the quality titles were getting the release and thus the exposure.

While self publishing has its rewards.....it also has its caveats. such as self publishing does not guarantee your game will sell if it is crap or if its good. all self publishing really gives is the dev the $$ for selling the game instead of a cut of the proceeds with a portion going to the pub.

Partnering with a pub is more like assurance that the game is of a particular quality that would garner more recognition. But with so many thinking it was a negative...MS had to change their position and just let it flow like it was doing on the 360.

Be that good or bad will be up to the gamers to decide. Hopefully i will expect these indie devs to have some pride in their work and release quality product to earn their rightful place on the market. But alas...we will likely still get the shovelware from time to time.

Volkama4212d ago (Edited 4212d ago )

You're wrong. Microsoft are too big, they aren't even capable of reacting to Sony's indie policy as quickly as this. This stuff was always planned, it just wasn't a focal point for the introduction of the console.

Frankly this time last year I would never have guessed indie games would become a point of heated discussion or interest, that came out of nowhere. And I still don't really get why. People round here need to browse the 360 indie store, get some perspective on what they're arguing about.

Convas4212d ago (Edited 4212d ago )

I can see where you're coming from, but at the same time, I can't help but disagree.

A couple of months ago, just after the Xbox One reveal, there was a pastebin entry that described a very divided Xbox division. There were different factions inside Redmond that wanted different things for the console.

Unfortunately, the executives, the "suits" like Don Mattrick, won out and we got the original vision of the Xbone in May. You can see some of their design-by-committee decisions still on the Xbox One today (Kinect-based UI navigation, lack of HDD management, party chat shenanigans, weaker GPU specs, Windows 8 lite UI [Ballmer's One Microsoft Vision no doubt]).

Now, don't you find it odd, that as soon as MS saw just how badly the web had taken to the XB1 reveal, that they gave the reins over to Spencer, who delivered on the promise of games, games, games @ E3 2013?

Isn't it odd to you that no sooner had the DRM been announced to be reversed, had the door JUST closed behind Mattrick that suddenly:

1) Mandatory Kinect was scrapped
2) Headset was announced to be included in every Xbox
3) ID@Xbox announced

These decisions didn't just materialize out of thin air. There were folks @ MS who were fighting for this stuff. When Mattrick's vision was sacked by gaming press at large, they got their grand "WE TOLD YOU FREAKING SO" moment and then everybody started scrambling to turn things around.

Just some things to think about. Indies on Xbox One program didn't just appear overnight. It was in the works, they just needed green lights from the right people. Don Mattrick and his committee were not the right people.

AngelicIceDiamond4212d ago

@Convas I remember reading about that somewhere. Apparently there was a power struggle within the MS. MS had way too many divisions working on X1. One person wanted this another wanted that.

Don Mattrick did have the final say before the reveal but lets rewind for a minute to exactly what happened prior to the announcement.

MS put out a timer in January teasing a huge reveal for E3 2013. And many speculated the "Xbox 720" reveal. Assuring the fans and gamers that MS was prepped and ready for E3

A month later In Feb Sony just announced the PS4 and got fantastic buzz from gamers, journalist's, tech enthusiast and gaming outlets all across the net.

Now with Sony being R* after the shocking PS4 reveal (earlier than expected) Meanwhile left MS more shocked and thrown off guard.

Now Xbox fans and other gamers were craving for a MS reveal for awhile. But MS internally was having a hard time than we could speculate. Leakes and leaks kept seeping through none stop.

The Adam Orth controversy was due to the tension of the rumor that MS's console was always online. At this point the internal MS team could not do anything to control the rumors that were going around. If they confirmed (or denied) the rumors the console would be unveiled forcefully.

Now at the same time this was going on what @Convas said there was power struggle internally and MS also had to worry about a reveal of the console as well. Which made things worse imo. One half said we should reveal it as a TV and entertainemt console. Or a Games console. Hence the possible delay of the reveal

Don Mattrick got the last word. And ultimately nearly tarnished everything that made the Xbox brand successful.

So I believe Jan through May it was developmental hell for MS internals and really bad environment. And it didn't stop there with the constant PR backflips Don Mattrick and others were stating.

At the end of the day gamers like us aren't a complicated market. We just want the games, that's what we're here for.

P0werVR4212d ago (Edited 4212d ago )

Actually, they NEVER stated they wouldn't have anything, it was just a lot of bad mouthing in the game media that Microsoft have nothing for indies in response to Sony's showing at E3. Very sad that people seen that as fact.

If anything they seemed more on the down low about it, because they had better things to emphasize more on (that backfired). Either way, it's Microsoft. They introduced indie gaming in all it's glory today, why wouldn't they have ID@Xbox already developed for. It's obvious how it's already hardware implemented into the console itself as a dev kit in every Xbox One. You cannot do that last minute. So Microsoft had this feature long ago and were ALWAYS developer friendly.

Just because Sony bought a lot of indie IPs and claim they are "more" indie friendly is what fanboys like you need to question than believe that Microsoft never were for indie developers when that is far from the truth.

Bigpappy4212d ago (Edited 4212d ago )

Who had a whole section of their market place jus dedicated to indie for close to 8 years? M$ has been supporting indies for years, but has always tried to minimize the junk ad support the best stuff. This is why I am fine with most o them moving over to PS4. Most of what thy produce is shovelware. Sometimes you find a diamond in the ruff, but not often.

People acting like M$ hates indies are either misinformed or stupid. I hope you are just misinformed.

M$ didn't change on thing about their indie policy since E3. The just hadn't announced a public policy.

christocolus4212d ago

Well said bro.. well said

XboxFun4212d ago

Don't worry Bigpappy, he's a sony drone. He was bred on this site to think that everything MS does is bad and everything Sony does is not only first but totally awesome.

He couldn't have known that 360 had a dedicated indie channel supported by the indie community that is still going on to this day. That MS supported that community with the lowest entry fee for any console and gave them easy to use tools to make whatever they wanted. They even gave them their own type of promotions which was like 360's Summer of Arcade.

It's because the more vocal posters on this site parrot each other with the same nonsense he can't help but think his statement is true.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 4212d ago
Gabenbrah4212d ago

Xbox has always had amazing Indie titles to play, so many amazing Indie titles for the Xbox 360, I'm confident we'll see some great tiles again on the Xbox One

mcstorm4212d ago

I agree it did and I missed a lot of them on the 360 but given the new gen has started im going to start taking note of the indie games on the Wiiu and xbox one. I will look at the ones on the ps4 too when I pick one up next year. Cant wait until the new gen gets into full swing as I think its going to be a good one.

IcicleTrepan4212d ago

also read elsewhere divekick is coming to XB1 at some point.

Show all comments (33)
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.

16d ago
16d ago
lukasmain16d ago

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

jjb198115d 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.

VenomUK14d 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?!

crazyCoconuts14d ago

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

VenomUK14d ago

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

15d 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
18d ago
18d ago
18d ago
shadowT18d ago

Is there really a market for handhelds next to mobile?

Vits17d 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).

RaidenBlack17d ago (Edited 17d 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.

ABizzel117d 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).

Kosic17d 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.

GamerRN17d 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

ABizzel116d 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 =.

TheEroica17d ago

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

badz14917d ago

@shadowT

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

Cacabunga16d ago

To run native games offline? Anytime

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 16d ago
CrashMania17d 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.

crazyCoconuts17d 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?

Lightning7717d ago

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

Outside_ofthe_Box17d ago

@Lighting77

So was the handheld until today...

Lightning7717d 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?

crazyCoconuts17d 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_Box17d ago (Edited 17d 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?

Lightning7717d ago (Edited 17d 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.

__y2jb16d 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 16d ago
BLow17d 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?

RaidenBlack17d ago (Edited 17d 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_Box17d 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...

17d ago
Outside_ofthe_Box17d ago (Edited 17d ago )

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

17d ago
1Victor17d 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 17d 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
slate9124d ago

The sweet smell of tax dollars burning

Killa7824d ago

From the unemployment this deal caused, no doubt.

Obscure_Observer24d 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.

dveio24d ago

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

If we're talking bleeding.

1Victor24d ago (Edited 24d 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 🤣

slate9124d ago

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

Astrokis24d ago

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

OtterX24d 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?!"

PhillyDonJawn24d ago

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

OtterX24d 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..."

Tacoboto24d ago

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

raWfodog24d 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.

OtterX24d ago (Edited 24d 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 24d ago
Lightning7724d ago (Edited 24d 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.

dveio24d 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.

Lightning7724d ago (Edited 24d 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.

Rancegamerx24d 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.

Lightning7724d 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.

InUrFoxHole24d ago

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

dveio24d 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_24d ago (Edited 24d 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.

wesnytsfs24d ago

Bout time. Pointless from the start.

Show all comments (26)