...a lot. some would argue they have leveraged their other business in order to get special treatment (exclusivity). I remember that being a sticking point during the HDDVD/Bluray wars. I'm certain MS has done the same.
Nothing. Except if questions about their business procedures were allowed by the judge, that may disclose how Sony run their gaming division so effectively. MS could learn a lot from Sony if those types of questions were allowed in.
But this is how subpoena’s work. You HAVE to provide your responses to other side’s questions. The only time you don't is when they are abusing the process (as MS was doing in their prior attempt).
What does Sony have to hide? lol Maybe how they money hat games to keep them off other platforms.,or how they get exclusive content only on playstation. And possibly how they cut deals to keep games out of gamepass just for starters.
I like how all the responses on what do they have to hide are things we already know about.
What they want to hide are the exact details of these agreements. The only way this is fair is if Sony gets Microsoft to do the exact same (such as details on how they get game pass day one deals and how much it costs them). Otherwise it's just one company having its secrets revealed and not both.
We had no idea Sony was charging a cross play tax until it came out in court. I wonder if Sony has forced parity clauses the make devs spend extra time on Sony version and neglecting PC and Xbox.
Read the article Microsoft was asking asking documentation from PlayStation creator that might contain trade secrets and it got denied 🤦🏿 ,Microsoft was asking for employees performance evaluation and information about deals with 3rd party along all paperwork from the first PlayStation in the 90’s to present 😱. Just the translation and copy of all that paperwork would cost Sony in the upward of 10 millions compared to the over 2 millions from 2019 to present. Regardless of Microsoft winning or not now they have access to Sony pass business strategies they can attempt to copy to be “successful” 🤦🏿
paying millions not to add games to ps plus but to block games from coming to GP ...microsoft openly accused Sony and sony never commented or go to court ...so mostly this (which is anasty dirty practice) and also they get to know how much sony pays for 3rd party exclusivity and maybe other stuff they can use
@S2Killinit No microsoft wants evidence of sonys shady business practices like making developers not make games look better on xbox because it has more power, making them sign agreements not to appear on gamepass, and all the exclusive content deals to keep content and games off xbox then shove that in the regulators faces that are protecting sony.
@anubusgold "No microsoft wants evidence of sonys shady business practices like making developers not make games look better on xbox because it has more power"
I personally do not believe this is a practice by any developer. I remember hearing this statement back in the PS3 days, that MS was paying devs to make PS3 versions of their games buggy or not run as well despite PS3 being a more powerful system. If this was something happening in real life this sort of thing would have been exposed.
But for the rest of your points, I agree. MS is trying to show regulators how Sony with all their complaints about this deal how it would hurt them and games and despite being the market leader, is actively keeping multiple games off the Xbox console and Game Pass allegedly.
What I love best about this whole conversation is the people who say "buying out publishers to withhold games from a platform is just business" don't think the same when it's "Sony stops games from going to an optional subscription service but not a platform."
Why can't we just admit these two are competing at the same level and we shouldn't be trying to cheerlead for one to gain more info over the other? Honestly, some people seem to want one of these companies to just disappear when we get what we get because they continue to compete against one another.
Neither company are in this for the best interest of gamers. They are in this for themselves and the shareholders and to think otherwise is naive at best.
You obviously do not own a business nor have a clue how to protect one if you had it if you think it is about “hiding” something. There is a very long list of shady practices from Microsoft when it comes to competitors… So I would say what does a business have to protect vs what one has to hide.
@1Victor - SONY are trying to block a 69 billion USD deal by arguing that the biggest player will be hurt extremely even though they have been offered a 10 year deal to keep COD which in itself is unpresedented in the gaming industry. NOW they have to show how this would hurt their business.
We all know that SONY has become big by money hatting games and ending up taking over these developers - it happend from 1990 and forward. Now they are so big that they can leverage their marketshare which they do to push games off other platforms, buy first access, demand parity etc,
@anubus. Without a clause like that in a contract outside parties (ms, Nintendo etc) can pay developers can purposefully downgrade the PlayStation version with no repercussions. While yes it could be seen as underhanded from your point of view from Sony's it would be to ensure the quality of what is put out on their product.
Scummy? it’s a legal battle and it’s allowed. This is a good thing for Xbox it can show how Sony pays for third party exclusivity, content and how it pay developers to keep games off game pass that’s anti competitive.
Paying developers to keep games off competing platforms is anti competitive and it should really be looked into whether it’s Sony or Microsoft doing it. They should get fined if the giver enemy really wants to make things good for consumers that’s what they should be looking into. That’s scummy right there.
@LOGICWINS ''Sony played with fire and now they're getting burnt. I love it!'' You can keep loving it all you want but nothing will change or do you really believe that if this deal goes thru MS will suddenly become the market leader and the platform with most hardware and software sales. MS needs way, way, way more than activision/Bethesda for that dream of yours to become a reality. Keep hoping and loving it tho;)
I stated both Sony and Microsoft paying to keep games off each others platform or any other, get exclusive content, or keep games off game pass or such should be deemed anti competitive and be fined. It’s not just business it’s anti competitive. By your same logic no one should have a problem with the activision purchase but there is a problem. All I’m saying is the e same scrutiny should be applied to actual issues that are actually anti competitive. Those practices harm consumers big time.
If the government really wants to protect consumers this should be priority number one. Hopefully the subpoena opens up scrutiny to this issue. Sony can’t cry that without call of duty they can’t fund their first party games yet still have money to pay for exclusivity or to make sure games stay off competing platforms. That practice needs to be scrutinized by the government no matter who does it.
Ms pays for 3rd party exclusives to lifexline. Why do you guys just say Sony does and act like their the only one. Ms is just as guilty if you wanna say that. They paid to keep tales of vespiria of ps3 in the west. That's why it released on ps3 in Japan and nowhere else except 360. Sounds kinda along the same lines your crying about if Sony really even pays to keep games off gamepass. If so why would you want your competition giving a game a game away for free your trying to sell. Makes sense. Buy some games cheapskates
He literally said both. Paying a dev just to keep a game you don't own off another platform or service is absolutely anti competitive. That goes for both Sony and Microsoft. It's one thing to do it with indie games where the devs need funding, tools, resources, etc. But to do it with AAA games is scummy.
@shinoff do you little kids not know how to read??? I name both Sony and Microsoft as doing those practices being anti competitive and shouldn’t be allowed.
Also I can tell youre a little kid because any adult knows that it’s always good to get a good value and knows the value of money. If I can save by subscribing to game pass why not more money in my pocket. Everyone who is smart and an adult tries to save money. Do you really think billionaires who try to evade taxes do it just for fun. No they want more money in their pocket. Any adult wants that which is why I call you a kid you think like one. Cheapskate no it’s called being an adult and knowing the value of money and not worrying about billion dollar companies having more money as oppose to yourself.
We'll I mean if this is being allowed it should go both ways if I'm not mistaken. So that'll mean ms would also have to share every contract from the being onward as well. That would mean we may find out if the rumored contracts with Bethesda to downgrade their games on ps are real for example
Sony claimed the acquisition would do great harm to them. All the judge did was tell them that they have to provide documentation to back up that claim. How is that scummy?
Admittedly I did not feel like reading this article. But I’ll say this, the fact that the title says Sony must “mostly” comply is basically read the opposite way by anyone who knows about subpoenas. Its actually rare that a judge tells someone to comply MOSTLY. You HAVE to comply with subpoenas fully unless there is reason to believe the requests are reaching and unreasonable. Which the judge ruled recently was the case with MS’s demands.
People on these threads are reading “mostly” as a good thing for MS. Its the opposite.
The FTC is doing its do diligence as a governing body.if sony doesn't want sensitive info getting out they should pull theyre complaints.
Sony has so much in the pipeline that I wish they just let it happen, the quality of COD will go down and the mtx and gamepass price will go up and all the Xbox fans who thought this was a good deal will see for themselves and I'll be right their saying I told you so and so many others.
It's not scummy. Sony is the main opposition to the acquisition and they've made a lot of claims regarding the deal. You can't just make claims in court. You have to provide documents and such to prove what you're saying. If Sony has been honest then they'll have nothing to hide.
Wrong. The main opponent to the acquisition is the FTC. Sony is just their biggest competitor at the moment and thus a key player for both sides of the trial (the US government and MS). This trial is about the entire industry. Making it about MS vs. Sony is the worst kind of fanboy stupidity.
The FTC isn't an "opponent". It's a governing body that is literally there to investigate and ensure any acquisition doesn't harm consumer choice or competition. They govern solely for one country in the world so no they are not the "main opponent".
Sony is formally opposing the deal and is the main voice against it. They have been from the start. They've formally opposed the deal in every major region and have made many claims about the damage the deal would cause. They are indeed the main opposition. That's not fanboy talk it's literally just a fact. That's exactly why the whole thing focuses on how important COD is to Sony.
"Sony is just their biggest competitor at the moment and thus a key player for both sides of the trial (the US government and MS)"
They're not on trial. They're currently figuring out if it still needs to go to trial in August or if the FTC will let the deal go through instead with concessions. The whole point of Sony handing over documents and proving their claims is so the FTC and MS can understand what actual effect the deal would really have on Sony's business.
"This trial is about the entire industry. Making it about MS vs. Sony is the worst kind of fanboy stupidity."
Sony is literally the only one in the industry at this point that is opposed to the deal. The main point of contention is about how this acquisition would affect Sony's business, not anyone else's. It's not fanboy talk, it's literally what is going on. If you don't understand what's actually happening then why are you even commenting?
Just approve this or deny and move on. This deal either way will have big domino affects. Those celebrating this deal today don't seem to understand the ramifications long term
Before this generation is over Ubisoft, square enix, Capcom and Sega won't be 3rd party. They will be bought out and in case of square and Capcom both will be acquired soon after Activision deal is through. Square already doesn't release many games elsewhere but Capcom under Sony means Xbox gamers won't get any of their games. So once again try to understand that we as gamers will have less options not more. The only reason acquisitions talk has cooled down is because everyone is waiting on Activision acquisition outcome. Don't be surprised if within days of Activision deal doing through we get multiple announcements of other major acquisitions
"Sony must also provide information about its exclusivity agreements that were made with third-party publishers." So Xbox will get in the end Activision Blizzard, ZeniMax / Bethesda and all Playstaton business secrets. Sounds like a good deal for Xbox.
It'll cost Sony 2mil just to gather all the stuff. Also Nintendo, valve, Google and take two got subpoenaed. Should mention that in the title but anyway MS gonna know everybody business.
FTC wont just drop the issue unless Sony withdraws their complaint. That is what got them into this mess in the first place. The FTC would still have investigated the deal regardless because it is standard practice when you have mergers and acquisitions. Yet when you have a formal complaint to the matter... it then becomes more involved.
Sony has been so vocal about how this would hurt them, that it is taken as a formal complaint. If they want to keep their secrets, they'd need to withdraw.
Not necessarily... FTC basically said let's see what the EU does. If MS makes concessions to appease the EU then that most likely will be good enough for them as well.
Won't hurt them.... They will just show all the documents about activision... This show that the deal is far from being approved. That's the reality. Otherwise they wouldn't ask this. The genius here didn't understand that... They see Sony much show documents....
This deal is making too much waves... That's why the words of car salesmen about Xbox being alive even without this deal..
This won't change nothing. Sony knows that it would need to show what activision represent. Only the blind followers here don't understand that. By doing this, it will drag for more time all this deal.
You can't say that activision represent billions for Sony and hide the documents showing that. Courts want proofs that.
I think some here don't understand that Sony also got lawyers.... What this shows is that the ftc is really analyzing the deal.
Well Sony needs to find better lawyers because MS is wiping the floor with them. It's now being reported the EU won't require concessions from MS for the deal to pass. Either way the deal goes through.
Well, at least we will all learn an answer to the important debate about why main Final Fantasy games are not on Xbox. And does Sony really pay companies to prevent games from appearing on Gamepass.
We already know they have exclusive marketing contracts that prevent gamepass releases. That was the case for RE village that was revealed during the Google vs apple case.
But that doesn't mean it would have released day 1 or at all on gamepass if they didn't take the deal. For example DMCV was announced at Xbox conference so it didn't have a Sony marketing block but it wasn't on gamepass day one.
And final fantasy is not on xbox for the same reason scorn, high on life,etc aren't on playstation.
There's no proof of Sony's blocking fees, how much, and how many took that deal. MS said that they are pretty sure but it has never been confirmed.
Related to Final Fantasy, one of the arguments I hear all the time here is that it's not on Xbox because games don't sell on Xbox, well, we're about to find out if common sense (exclusive deal) will win versus N4G Fanboyism (Xbox game don't sell).
Ninja Gaiden back in the day , bioshock, dead rising, tales of vespiria on ps3 in the west, last remnant, blue dragon(would've sold better to) , infinite undiscovery, lost planet,
Fact is they both do deals like this, ms advertised cod so hard back in the day you would've thought it was a 360 exclusive. it's a game played by both sides, people.
@shinoff2183 Alot of games were exclusive during the xbox 360 days because the ps3 was a pain in the ass to program for. The cell processor is a pain to this day thats why some games from the ps3 cant be emulated to this day without a lot of work that console has a graphics module that doesnt match AMD or Nvidia designs and developers was confused.
All ff13 games released on xbox. Ff15 was. They sold poorly. Sold really bad on xbox. I seen yesterday in the uk ff15 sold 80perce t on ps and 20 percent on xbox. Yall wonder why square took sonys offer or he'll maybe square went to Sony with the deal. YOU GUYS AINT BUYING THEM
@Shinof It's logical the game would sell more on PlayStation since it's always been on Playstation and there are twice more Playstation users versus Xbox users. Add these 2 factors and it's pretty representative of what you see here.
Also if the game is not selling well on Xbox why release spinoffs and obscure titles like Crisis Core or Final Fantasy type 0 but not the main games that are more popular?
Sigh FTC, imo this is scummy.
"Sony must also provide information about its exclusivity agreements that were made with third-party publishers." So Xbox will get in the end Activision Blizzard, ZeniMax / Bethesda and all Playstaton business secrets. Sounds like a good deal for Xbox.
It'll cost Sony 2mil just to gather all the stuff. Also Nintendo, valve, Google and take two got subpoenaed. Should mention that in the title but anyway MS gonna know everybody business.
Importantly only if this goes to court. If the FTC decide to drop the case then I don't think Sony has to provide the documents.