Top
580°

Microsoft Admits Its Games Are Worse Than Sony's

Microsoft's outrageously large bid to purchase Activision Blizzard has resulted in a protracted, painful period of negotiations. Without getting too into the weeds with all this, the short version is Sony is trying to prevent the deal from going through, and the Xbox firm is of course pushing for regulators to let it happen. The latest round of statements have been made public, and in Microsoft's take, it claims Sony's first-party output is better than its own.

The company's point is that Sony has more exclusive games, and so it doesn't necessarily need the likes of Call of Duty to succeed. However, Microsoft's statement says "many of [Sony's first-party games] are of better quality" than its own output. To put it another way, the firm has officially documented an admission that its own titles are inferior to Sony's.

Read Full Story >>
pushsquare.com
The story is too old to be commented.
lodossrage11d ago (Edited 11d ago )

Ok, if they admit Sony's games are better than their own, who is at fault there?

It's not Sony's fault Microsoft doesn't cultivate talent well enough. Being incompetent isn't an excuse for trying to buy up the industry with Betheda, King, Activision, etc.

Microsoft waits for things to get big, popular, or well-established and THEN they buy them. Which literally goes against the "we're trying to grow the industry" narrative they try to push.

When Sony bought Naughty Dog, they were an indie they cultivated.
When Sony bought Media Molecule, they had no games under their belt
Housemarque, Bluepoint, and Insomniac are developers they cultivated for many years before purchasing them.
Haven, like Media Molecule have nothing under their belt, yet they purchased them.

I can go on and on

My point is you grow the industry by one, cultivating and two, giving start ups a chance, not by buying up everyone the moment they become big

ApocalypseShadow11d ago (Edited 11d ago )

Too much fact. Too much truth. Microsoft is a low effort company but does marketing and advertises heavily for high profits. Yet, we're told that 2 TRILLION worth, spending almost 80 billion, isn't enough to compete. That they should be allowed to buy up major portions of the industry to compensate for lower quality and output.

That Sony should now start competing against properties they were already getting. Where royalty money from these 3rd party franchises, that were successful on PlayStation, were/are being used to create these amazing single player 1st party titles, risks on new IPs and VR. Where do these gamers think some of the money comes from to make single player games?

We can clearly see Microsoft trying to lock up the Western market in their publisher purchases. Some of these gamers can't see that by Microsoft buying up successful 3rd party franchises, Sony will possibly have to reduce the amount of 1st party games they make, the amount of risk taking they do on new IPs and things like VR. 1st party game success is fueled by the money they make overall in royalties. Less money made means less games being made. Is that what gamers want for the game industry and Sony? For Sony to produce less, only make the most successful games like some 3rd parties do that becomes dry and dull and drop their risk taking?

XiNatsuDragnel11d ago

Truth so much truth here. Especially reducing risk taking and making new innovative games.

Bathyj11d ago

With Game pass and acquisitions Microsoft is basically trying to starve everyone else out of the industry beans so they can be the sole player. I don't care how much it cost to achieve this because well they're Microsoft.

LucasRuinedChildhood11d ago (Edited 11d ago )

These statements are going to haunt MS. Jesus.

"Underdog Trillionaire" would be a good name for a documentary covering this acquisition.

They say that PlayStation as a publisher is "equivalent in size to Activision". It's hard to portray yourself as an underdog while trying to buy up a company equivalent to the entire size of your competitor ... with more acquisitions said to come after already becoming over 1.5 times PlayStation's size as a game publisher (MS's own official admissions).

MS thought that regulators would be weak. It's understandable given the Disney-Fox merger ($71.3 billion) which shouldn't have been allowed. Well, let's hope that the concessions are extensive and Phil gets his stated wish of more players playing these games, not less. lol. The main focus is supposedly games like Candy Crush after all.

shinoff218311d ago

Another dope take from shadow.

He's absolutely right. I see people say stuff about the console wars. Well they are right sony don't pay me or ms don't pay me but in the end my console of choice is Sony. I've always said the better they do the more and better quality games we get. The console wars are real and have ramifications.

In all seriousness. Ms is just trying to strong arm. Loddoss is correct that people talk about Sony buying studios. Those studios mostly messed with Sony to begin with exclusively. Studios mind you Ms is going after publishers. Publishers whose games sold better on their direct competition. They can bs and say their after candy crush all they want but it's trash he's spewing. They want cod period.

P.s. I don't even like cod but I get how big it is

derek11d ago

Low effort is unsurprising when xbox's balance sheet means nothing to Microsoft as a whole. It means so little that Microsoft can hide and obfuscate xbox's number with little concern from investors. Microsoft doesn't need xbox to be successful like Sony and Nintendo need to be successful. That's why they essentially took a decade off without seriously investing in their 1st party studios.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 11d ago
Zhipp11d ago

Well, if Sony is so good at cultivating talent they should have no issues cultivating a franchise bigger and better than COD.

lodossrage11d ago

That's the point of this entire issue, COD (and a few of Activision's games) are irreplaceable.

And just because they are good at it doesn't mean they're perfect and can do anything.

EA and Ubisoft have tried for years and shown it's not easy to match COD. Still doesn't give a trillion-dollar company the excuse to buy up the industry.

Zhipp11d ago (Edited 11d ago )

@lodoss
It's still a double standard, don't you think? Sony is untouchable when it comes to single player narrrative-driven epics. There's really no replacement for the likes of Uncharted and GoW, and everyone who has tried to imitate that success has failed financially. The reality is: MS has to buy studios to compete. It doesn't matter how much money they have, in order to reach any similar footing with Sony at this point in the game they have to purchase some mature / semi-mature studios and grow them from there.

We've seen what's happened with the studios they've created from thin air. 343, The Initiative, it's been rocky, to say the least. And that was WITH poaching senior devs from other studios. It's just not a viable strategy if they want to be competitive. Coalition being the big exception of course. They can't spend 20 years "cultivating" some studio to reach the level sony's studios are at today, cause then they'd still be 20 years behind.

Binarycode11d ago

I don't doubt they could and I actually wish they would put a top team to develop a true FPS.

Storm2311d ago

I want a Sony First Party fps so bad. In need of a great fps game.

nommers11d ago

It's not about quality. It's about brand name appeal. Microsoft wants AKB for their brand names that have proven sales records over very long periods of time. See pokemon as another example: Sells like hot cakes, but it has nothing to do with the quality of the games. Pokemon and COD got very lucky being at the right place at the right time.

shinoff218311d ago

Another simple minded Xbox comment

shinoff218311d ago

Zhipp

Ms is what 8 to 10 years behind Sony. If that ps1 came out 94 95 or so. Ms came out in 01 02. They've got no excuse. Ms has done it to themselves.

Godmars29011d ago (Edited 11d ago )

The issue there, as will always be the case tying to one-up an established IP, is history.

COD's been around from the beginning of modern consoles. That's too much history to simply "make a better game" against.

Still, if MS follows habit, rest what they've bought on their laurels while Sony - somehow - manages to make several fresh entries into their "COD-Killer" it'll be another story.

Though of course, Killzone 2 sends its regards...

@Zhipp:

Only a "double standard" because Sony makes better games.

Zhipp11d ago

@shinoff
You're not wrong. M$ has had a slew of poor management decisions and misteps that put them in the position they're in now. So, knowing that we're in agreement on that fact, will you address my actual argument? Considering that M$ has decided to remain in the industry despite all that, is buying studios, and lots of them, not the most realistic option to make up for their past screwups?

Or do you suggest that they just accept their position and conceed the market to Sony?

tay870111d ago

doesn't matter how much talent sony has, cod has undeniable brand regcognition. i am certain sony could build a better game than cod, but it wont ever be as big. cod has been the best selling game for MANY, MANY yrs now. not sonys fault MS is incompetent and now they just want to buy up all the publishers to try and compete.

Chevalier11d ago (Edited 11d ago )

"It's still a double standard, don't you think? Sony is untouchable when it comes to single player narrrative-driven epics. There's really no replacement for the likes of Uncharted and GoW, and everyone who has tried to imitate that success has failed financially. "

Sorry your take on this being a double standard is absolutely 💯 idiotic. Playstation built up Uncharted from nothing. You do realize the first game 1st month sales were like 50,000 right?! They built it up from literally nothing to what it was then instead of riding it out like Xbox does with Halo/Gears they actually allowed Naughty Dog to move to TLOU and build another franchise from scratch.

Same with allowing Suckerpunch to move from Infamous to Ghost of Tsushima and Guerilla with Killzone to Horizon. They let their developers take risk and nurture series.

Which Xbox series got built up from scratch that wasn't outright bought?! Halo, Gears, Hellblade, Bethesda series were all bought IPs not built up from the ground by Xbox.

sinspirit11d ago

@Zhipp

Like he said. Irreplaceable. It's like trying to make something to rival Coca-Cola. However difficult that is. However better another cola could be. It isn't Coca-Cola or as recognizeable. Except for gaming, recognition and familiar systems are a much bigger imprint than taste buds and brand reach. They could make a game as good or better than CoD, but it doesn't even matter because it still wouldn't sell like CoD. People buy CoD because it's CoD.

Well.. Sony focused strictly on the single player story driven games, whereas Microsoft and Phil said single player games are dead/dying and turned away from it towards online/GaaS model. Just another drop of wisdom of how well they supposedly know the market despite being wrong again and again and in last place because of poor decision making.

ufo8mycat10d ago

Talent has nothing to do with COD. Its not like COD is made by talented developers. As far as quality, COD is average at best, Sadly, COD attracts the certain type of gamer (particularly the casuals), which is why its so big & successful, not because of quality. It's the perfect casual game. Sit down at anytime and enjoy some "quality' mulitplayet" rather then enjoying something that has quality and substance a.k.a. Sonys 1st Party games.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 10d ago
gangsta_red11d ago (Edited 11d ago )

So what should MS do? Not buy any developers while Sony themselves are in the process of buying multiple devs? It's always fun to read the excuses of why it's okay when Sony buys devs but it's never okay when MS does it.

MS created 343, The Coalition, they allowed Rare to still make the games they wanted to and they have been more profitable under MS then they were under Nintendo, Playground continues to be an excellent developer and MS has allowed them to make something other than a racing game, and Turn 10 another developer created continues to make fantastic entries with Forza, not to mention Ensemble studios, Undead Labs, etc etc...but yeah the lame take is MS isn't growing the industry because they bought some big studios.

"Microsoft waits for things to get big, popular, or well-established and THEN they buy them"

Sony is literally doing this right now, by not only buying Bungie but now making a focus on MP, Live service games and supporting PC players. This is exactly why they are so concerned with CoD out of every other IP Activision has, they are late to the MP Live service party and playing catch up and now claiming a good sizable chunk of their player base will leave PS to go to Xbox if they think this will be the only place to play CoD.

"My point is you grow the industry by one, cultivating and two, giving start ups a chance, not by buying up everyone the moment they become big"

Sure, it was all fun and games when MS had no first party studios and "Xbox has no games" for a lot of you to continue to complain about. I remember the a lot of the "concerns" was for MS to get more first party studios...but now MS is doing too much and hurting the industry buy purchasing studios and adding to their first party developers to make games for their console and PC. Now a lot of you are setting unwritten rules that MS has to only buy small indie devs or they have to create all their devs from the ground up, then we're using buzz terms like "cultivate" and 'nurturing the industry' when in reality Sony bought those studios you mentioned and took them off the market when they were also making multiplat games, but here we are complaining about MS is doing it now.

Let's not kid ourselves and pretend Sony is a poor victim in all of this, they have the power to do the exact same thing MS is doing, but their focus seems to lie in not only buying timed exclusives, timed DLC and marketing rights, but also a focus on an over expensive VR peripheral.

If Sony is good at cultivating their talent they should have no problem making games to compete and over take CoD, right?

lodossrage11d ago

@Gansta_Red

Just like I stated, everyone Sony bought into were either companies they cultivated or are start ups. Microsoft is waiting for devs to get big, take chunks of the industry marketshare, THEN purchase them. Purchasing someone you cultivated or is a start up is VERY DIFFERENT than buying someone well established with market share. And if I recall, Microsoft bought a good 10 studios even before Bethesda, most of which were also multiplatform. A good portion of the ones Sony bought worked with them exclusively or mostly. It's not the same thing and YOU know it.

And even with that Bungie purchase you mention. What's one of the stipulations in it? I'll tell you. Sony has to allow Bungie to continue to work with whoever they worked with prior. Meaning they can still work on Nintendo and MS projects if they want. I didn't see that in ANY of the Bethesda or Activision deals. So again, not the same,

343 and the Coaltion? Dude please, the same Coaltion fans say are ruining Gears of war? The same 343 fans say ruined Halo? Playground I will give you because even thought they worked with other companies, MS DID cultivate them.

Nobody is pretending Sony is "the victim" the problem is people are TRYING to pretend Microsoft is. You bring up marketing deals, timed exclusives, etc. You act like Microsoft doesn't do THE EXACT SAME THING. Everyone brings up exclusives like Street Fighter 5 but fail to bring up Splinter Cell Conviction. Everyone brings up timed DLC but forget things like the GTA4 Liberty Stories DLC.

Gangsta, I've seen your posts here. So I KNOW you know better.

gangsta_red11d ago

@Lodossrage

"Just like I stated, everyone Sony bought into were either companies they cultivated or are start ups."

And this was a time when the industry was young and not nearly as big as it is now. So comparing what Sony did back then and what MS should do now is unfair and pointless.

"Microsoft is waiting for devs to get big, take chunks of the industry marketshare, THEN purchase them"

Not true, besides Zenimax and Activision, MS purchased studios that were small and were on the verge of closing their doors forever. Obsidian, Double Fine and Ninja Theory have all stated that the last few projects were public funded Kickstarter projects and that they were still struggling to keep the lights on. MS came and bought them and are now "cultivating" them and allowing them to make bigger games as well as smaller games of their choosing.

"A good portion of the ones Sony bought worked with them exclusively or mostly."

Again, more excuses for why it's okay when Sony buys studios. The studios they purchased did work on multiplat games, doesn't matter if a couple of them worked with Sony on few exclusives, you guys complain about MS taking games out of the hands of gamers, apply that to Sony also with their purchases.

"Sony has to allow Bungie to continue to work with whoever they worked with prior."

Sony has to allow it? No, that's BS, Bungie said they can if they want to and it's up to them or so they say...it's the same PR speak everyone is claiming MS is doing when they said they will still support CoD on PS. For some reason no believes that, but they believe it when Sony says Bungie will still support other platforms. Let's not forget that MS also allowed Rare to make games for Nintendo and MS continues to support Minecraft on every single platform.

"343 and the Coaltion? Dude please, the same Coaltion fans say are ruining Gears of war?"

You mean studios that MS built from the ground up that supposedly they never or haven't done as mentioned by most here? Yes 343 dropped the ball on MP for Halo but it still remains at an 87, Gears 5 is at an 84, no one but a specific few is saying Coalition ruined gears. Unless we're going to say how game rating don't mean anything.

"You act like Microsoft doesn't do THE EXACT SAME THING."

Where did I even say or mention they didn't?? And this is a good point, a lot of people are downing MS for doing the EXACT SAME THING Sony has and been doing throughout many years in the gaming industry, but to excuse Sony we like to add little caveats for them, it's okay because Sony "cultivates", it's okay because they worked closely, it's okay because Sony said they have to work with others. this is the problem with many of these arguments and debates you point the finger at MS for doing exactly the same thing Sony is doing. You complain MS isn't doing enough for Xbox but then complain they're doing too much for Xbox, it's hilarious to see the contradictions and hypocrisies a lot of you create for yourselves.

"Everyone brings up exclusives like Street Fighter 5 but fail to bring up Splinter Cell Conviction. Everyone brings up timed DLC but forget things like the GTA4 Liberty Stories DLC."

And everyone seems to forget how MS was shitted on when they did it and I also KNOW you've been on this site long enough to know exactly what I mean by that.

dumahim11d ago

"So what should MS do? Not buy any developers while Sony themselves are in the process of buying multiple devs?"

Publishers vs developers. If this deal goes through, it's 18 developers with just Bethesda and AB compared to lile 10 for Sony since Insomniac, half of which I've never heard of and don't even warrant a wikipedia page. That's not even counting all the other studios that MS has bought outside of that in the last few years. It's not exactly an even comparison.

Godmars29011d ago

"So what should MS do?"

For one if rumor is true, abort plans making bulk, rank and file, devs fixed timed contract workers. Stop insisting online multi needs to be a thing as they've been doing since Halo 2 and COD saved the 360.

derek11d ago

@gangsta Sony worked hard and focused on development to make ips like god of war as successful as they are today. Look at how some of the franchises like uncharted sold on the ps3 to see how far they've come. Microsoft was never that invested in creating games that would attract people to their console, all their most popular franchises were produced and made big by other developers. They just don't have the financial incentive to as the other 2 platform holders do.

11d ago
Chevalier11d ago (Edited 11d ago )

@Gangsta

Cool which publishers did Playstation and Nintendo buy again?! Or right neither have. It's absolutely 💯 idiotic that Nintendo and Playstation in recent years have bought studios and you think that should allow Xbox to buy like 30 studios at once as if they're the same. Your logic sucks. Take off your fan giggles makes it easier to see.

You make it seem like Playstation unfairly made their series popular. Just look at Uncharted first month sales when the game came out? 50,000. Not millions. They let the series grow and supported the building of the franchise. Then instead of sitting on sequels they allow Naughty Dog to take a risk with TLOU. Xbox could have built up their own franchises and its Playstations fault?!! Lol. No Xbox studios themselves are to blame. This while woe is me attitude that Xbox has that you think is a thing is dumb. Literally grasping at straws.

Plus none of those studios were on the verge of closing. Obsidian, Ninja Theory, Inxile, Double Fine and Bethesda all didn't need to be purchased at all.

jBlakeeper11d ago

If you looked at the technology inside PSVR2 you would realize it’s actually priced very decently. Just wanted to point that out.

gangsta_red11d ago

@Chevalier

"Plus none of those studios were on the verge of closing. Obsidian, Ninja Theory, Inxile, Double Fine and Bethesda all didn't need to be purchased at all."

obsidian - https://gamerant.com/obsidi...
Ninja Theory - https://www.polygon.com/e3/...

Inxile and Double Fine were both using kickstarter/crowdfunding to make their games with Pychonauts 2 being helped by MS after the purchase.

https://www.eurogamer.net/i...
https://www.destructoid.com...
https://gamerant.com/double...

So yeah chev, those studios needed to be purchased. And hasn't bethesda worked closely with MS in the past? according to the unofficial N4G rule book for buying studios, it is okay for MS to buy bethesda.

I love how there's these set of rules from some you of what MS can or can't purchase. Which brings me to the next hilarious line...

"Cool which publishers did Playstation and Nintendo buy again?! Or right neither have"

So does this mean no one can do it because Sony and Nintendo hasn't? Where do you guys come up with this? MS is providing more first party studios to their portfolio, something everyone complained about years back. Now that they are buying studios we get the same people who complained of them not having any now complaining they shouldn't buy any.

Like I said before, if Sony has such amazing studios that have been cultivated and nurtured then they should have no problems competing against CoD or any other publisher MS buys.

lellkay10d ago

This argument is so one sided it hurts. Take the L Red

Chevalier9d ago (Edited 9d ago )

@Gangsta

Ouch looks like you have problems with reading comprehension.

Obsidian didn't need to be bought at all. Look from the article you posted no less. Lol.

"Obsidian Entertainment, developer of 'Fallout: New Vegas', almost shut its doors, but the successful 'Pillars of Eternity' Kickstarter campaign saved them."

Successful kickstarters already saved them and gave the studio freedom to do the games they wanted. Plus all the other links show that all those studios survived off of Kickstarter. None of the articles said any of the studios were in fear of closing or needed to be bought to survive either.

Also again the main point was if Sony can nurture Uncharted from 50,000 in sales to becoming a juggernaught series then no reason Xbox couldn't either. Xbox just never managed their own properties well or tried to build up franchises into successes. But go ahead name me 5 series that Xbox nurtured from scratch to be popular franchises?! Oh right you can't because there are none. They only buy IPs that are already popular.

gangsta_red9d ago (Edited 9d ago )

@Chev

Tell me, what successful developer needs Kickstarter to make their games? Which development team is reliant on public funding and doesn't eventually get picked up by a developer or closes down?

And ouch indeed, I like how you tried to call me out on Obsidian but was quiet on the rest you claimed "didn't need to be bought".

And that's another point, if they didn't need to be bought then WHY DID THEY SELL?

You believe Obsidian was forced at gunpoint to sell their company to MS? You believe that Obsidian tried their hardest not to be bought out by MS or did they also need the extra help to make their games better and more polished.

https://www.google.com/amp/...

Sounds like MS is nurturing and cultivating these newly acquired studios eh?

"Xbox just never managed their own properties well or tried to build up franchises into successes"

No, just stop, that wasn't the point, this is just more deflection when proven wrong again.

Halo isn't a successful franchise, Gears isn't? Pretty sure we always get articles of Sony trying to make Halo and Gears killers. Forza continues to be a premier racing sim along with Forza Horizon. Sea of Thieves continues to break records with players and is supported years after it's release. Age of Empires just released to PC acclaim and Grounded has a high meta and continued support.

But yeah, MS isn't nurturing their studios, lol. I guess that's the new talking head for a lot of you here, to just spit this claim out without actually knowing what it means.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 9d ago
Petebloodyonion11d ago (Edited 11d ago )

Sony movies are not on the level of Disney movies
who is at fault there?
Should Sony stop doing movies? Should Sony stop doing more obscure and risky movies compared to Disney's big AAA movies?

Your allusion to Sony cultivating studios before buying them is pointless and without merit.
Should I call Bungie an Xbox studio cultivated studio for 15 years + of only Xbox games?
Remedy? they did only Xbox and PC Until Control.
Let's see Supermassive games isn't Sony cultivated now?
Quantic Dream?

That's the point of NOT being a 1st party studio is to establish your own company philosophy instead of the parent company one.

Heck if you say is true then Bethesda is a sure MS-cultivated company since the OG Xbox days, and one of the few big publishers that stayed on PC when nobody cared about PC.

AmUnRa10d ago

That reaching beyound the horizon, thats a load of b*s.
I dont even take time to come with counter argument cous i dont need to give arguments about this drivel.

badz14911d ago

OUCH! Such a huge slap in the face to all their in-house devs and publisher they already bought! For MS to go this low as to belittle and crap on their own devs truly shows thier desperation.

At least in their defense, Sony didn't crap on their FPS devs like GG and Insomniac.

ChiefofLoliPolice11d ago (Edited 11d ago )

Bingo! You hit the nail on the fucking head.

Chevalier11d ago

"It's still a double standard, don't you think? Sony is untouchable when it comes to single player narrrative-driven epics. There's really no replacement for the likes of Uncharted and GoW, and everyone who has tried to imitate that success has failed financially. "

You do realize that Uncharted 1st month sales wasn't in the millions right?! The 1st games sales in the 1st month was only 50,000 or so. If that was Xbox/Microsoft they would have canceled the series. Did Sony? Nope they built the series from ground up to go from 50,000 1st month sales to millions later in the series.

Then while popular Sony could have done like Xbox with Gears/Halo etc and just told Naughty Dog keep making Uncharted they instead allowed them to make TLOU, same with Killzone and Guerilla being allowed to make Horizon, Suckerpunch to move from Infamous to Ghost of Tsushima. Sony actually takes risk. Can you say the same about Xbox? They either buy series IPs or continue what they have done with low risk projects.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 9d ago
sparky7711d ago

Sony admits without COD the Playstation brand will die even with it's great first party games.

Both are going to extremes to prove their point for this deal.

SullysCigar11d ago

Can you provide a quote for that claim? You sure say it a lot, so I assume you can share it here.

Bathyj11d ago

I doubt it. It's a mathematical statistic that people that tend to defend Microsoft a lot talk out of their arse alot

sparky7711d ago

"The Transaction threatens the gaming ecosystem at a critical moment. It would take an irreplaceable gaming franchise, Call of Duty, out of independent hands and combine it with Microsoft’s highly-successful gaming system (Xbox), leading multi-game subscription service (Game Pass), dominant PC OS (Windows), and leading cloud platform(Azure). The only way to preserve robust competition and protect consumers and independent developers is to ensure that Activision remains independently owned and controlled"

Sony's words not mine.

SullysCigar11d ago

^ @sparky77, oh, so that's a no then. Just as I thought. Thanks for confirming you're making crap up.

Bathyj10d ago (Edited 10d ago )

Still didn't see the bit where it said PlayStation will die.

It's all moot anyway. It's not going exclusive. Call of duty would suffer too much. It will stay on the highest earning platform and the only difference will be Activision wont be paying Sony 30% Microsoft will.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 10d ago
FPS_D3TH11d ago

It’s nothing new that call of duty has been a major factor in propping up the gaming industry when it comes to console game sales. There’s been plenty of articles on such long before anyone caught wind of this purchase. What Sony is claiming isn’t inherently false. Lots of people will buy only call of duty and maybe a sports title a year and that’s it

BehindTheRows11d ago

Sony has never said anything close to that.

curtain_swoosh11d ago

never have they said that.

stop pulling things out of your arse.
its about fair competition and not survival of a console.

raWfodog9d ago

That was a god-tier reinterpretation of what they actually said. Good job!

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 9d ago
Hofstaderman11d ago

Microsoft admits water is wet.

Ninver11d ago

Microsoft admits the sky is blue

MrBeatdown11d ago

"Welp, they got us there!"

-Jim Ryan

11d ago Replies(2)
SullysCigar11d ago

Well duh. Maybe they should acknowledge they're lacking in quantity too.