General Gaming Phil Spencer: The way Sony grows is by making Xbox smaller

[Spork3245]

If Sony could afford Activision, they would have attempted to buy it too, and COD would’ve been announced as Sony exclusive the next day with PC releases delayed 4-6 months after console.
 

EDIT: to be clear, I’m not at all in favor of these large publishers/devs being bought up, but Sony is so up their own ass on this.

[Keyser_Soze]

Microsoft should just sell the IP rights of COD to Sony but they would have to develop it themselves. Then they could prove how important it is to have COD on Playstation.

[crispy4000]

5 hours ago, Spork3245 said:

If Sony could afford Activision, they would have attempted to buy it too, and COD would’ve been announced as Sony exclusive the next day with PC releases delayed 4-6 months after console.
 

EDIT: to be clear, I’m not at all in favor of these large publishers/devs being bought up, but Sony is so up their own ass on this.

There’s not as much assurance of that after Sony’s said they’re keeping Destiny multiplatform.  CoD rakes in so much money on every platform it would at least be tempting to keep it as is.  If CoD was a Bethesda-sized franchise, there’s no doubt that either company would be locking it off the other platform.

 

 

4 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

Microsoft should just sell the IP rights of COD to Sony but they would have to develop it themselves. Then they could prove how important it is to have COD on Playstation.

 

Similar situation as Halo in that scenario, however unlikely as it is to happen.  But as is, I could see Microsoft directing some of Actiblizzard’s CoD studios to work on new IP that doesn’t come to PS5, dropping annualized CoD releases. They can have their cake and eat it too that way.

 

I think Sony will go in a similar direction with Bungie at some point, in spite of what’s been said.  As will Microsoft with Blizzard, etc.  Things could get very messy after the ink is dry.

[Paperclyp]

5 hours ago, Spork3245 said:

If Sony could afford Activision, they would have attempted to buy it too, and COD would’ve been announced as Sony exclusive the next day with PC releases delayed 4-6 months after console.
 

EDIT: to be clear, I’m not at all in favor of these large publishers/devs being bought up, but Sony is so up their own ass on this.

Can’t remember who I was listening to, but I agreed with their sentiment: 

 

Sony’s opposition and reasoning to this specific deal is disingenuous, but overall consolidation is probably bad for the industry. 

[Keyser_Soze]

6 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

Can’t remember who I was listening to, but I agreed with their sentiment: 

 

Sony’s opposition and reasoning to this specific deal is disingenuous, but overall consolidation is probably bad for the industry. 

 

In the same vein how did you feel about Jess on game mess mornings commenting on this story saying, "Microsoft is bullying Sony" - She has obviously not been following this story.

[Paperclyp]

1 minute ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

In the same vein how did you feel about Jess on game mess mornings commenting on this story saying, "Microsoft is bullying Sony" - She has obviously not been following this story.

The idea of one massive company bullying another is kind of nonsense, but it’s the type of take that doesn’t surprise me from her haha.

 

I am like 5 bombcasts behind. That thing just brings be very little happiness to listen to. Even with the crews I like, it feels like they’re going through the motions of the Bombcast and not really bringing much to the table otherwise. 
 

Thank god for nextlander. 

[crispy4000]

28 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

In the same vein how did you feel about Jess on game mess mornings commenting on this story saying, "Microsoft is bullying Sony" - She has obviously not been following this story.

 

Don’t know her argument, but every multiplatform developer that’s scooped up by either company is shots fired at the other, IMO.  

 

That’s not bullying, it’s the nature of the buisness on some level.  But we’ve never seen this much capital thrown around in the games industry in such a short time frame.  Which is why the FTC feels triggered.

[Keyser_Soze]

Just now, crispy4000 said:

 

Don’t know her argument, but every multiplatform developer that’s scooped up by either company is shots fired at the other, IMO.

 

Its the nature of the buisness on some level.  But we’ve never seen this much capital thrown around before in such a short time frame.

 

It wasn't an argument it was Jeff reading the story to her and the recent one about talking about putting COD on Nintendo platforms and her reaction was Microsoft is bullying Sony.

 

 

7 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

The idea of one massive company bullying another is kind of nonsense, but it’s the type of take that doesn’t surprise me from her haha.

 

She makes it very clear she likes no corporations and they are bad, etc. She's said it before but she reiterated it again on this show. Then went with her games should cost more than 70 dollars because they are miracles and more nonsense like that.

[crispy4000]

26 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

It wasn't an argument it was Jeff reading the story to her and the recent one about talking about putting COD on Nintendo platforms and her reaction was Microsoft is bullying Sony.

 

Yeah that’s a dumb take.  Sony doesn’t want to give in the appearance that it’s not as bad as they say it could be.  Valve saw through it and remained neutral.  Nintendo wanted in on those royalties they’ve been missing.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

34 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

Don’t know her argument, but every multiplatform developer that’s scooped up by either company is shots fired at the other, IMO.  

 

That’s not bullying, it’s the nature of the buisness on some level.  But we’ve never seen this much capital thrown around in the games industry in such a short time frame.  Which is why the FTC feels triggered.

It’s also Microsoft. If Microsoft bought a toaster company there would be a federal investigation by the US government over anti-trust. 
 

it all feels disingenuous from everybody when they damn near rubber stamp every other purchase from one company buying up every local Tv market to telecom companies buying up media properties, right to Disney buying Fox. 
 

Where they draw the lines are so arbitrary. they’re not even looking at all the other studios and IP MS could lock behind exclusivity that have significant fan bases. It’s 1 game they’re all focused on. It comes across like a bunch of people who only have PlayStations in their homes worried the game they play the most might not be on their console of choice at some point. Rather than protecting the consumers and the industry. 

[Spork3245]

1 hour ago, crispy4000 said:

There’s not as much assurance of that after Sony’s said they’re keeping Destiny multiplatform.

 

Destiny 2. Which is already out (for over 5 years), so they'll continue to make updates/dlc/expansions multiplatform. Destiny 3? Kinda sorta doubt it.

[crispy4000]

13 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

 

Destiny 2. Which is already out (for over 5 years), so they'll continue to make updates/dlc/expansions multiplatform. Destiny 3? Kinda sorta doubt it.

 

Destiny 2 and future Bungie games will stay cross-platform after Sony purchase | GamesRadar+

WWW.GAMESRADAR.COM

---

"We are by no means done" purchasing studios, Sony's Jim Ryan says

They said they intend to keep Bungie multiplatform in future titles.

 

But I’m as skeptical as you are about it. They can just make up whatever reasoning they want to change course, so long as no contract is in place.

[Spork3245]

1 minute ago, crispy4000 said:

 

Destiny 2 and future Bungie games will stay cross-platform after Sony purchase | GamesRadar+

WWW.GAMESRADAR.COM

---

"We are by no means done" purchasing studios, Sony's Jim Ryan says

They said they intend to keep Bungie multiplatform in future titles.

 

But I’m as skeptical as you are about it.

 

This is the quote from Jim Ryan:

Quote

"The first thing to say unequivocally is that Bungie will stay an independent, multiplatform studio and publisher," Ryan said. "Pete [Parsons, Bungie CEO] and I have spoken about many things over recent months, and this was one of the first, and actually easiest and most straightforward, conclusions we reached together. 

 

I'm beyond skeptical that this means more than PC + Sony Consoles, but we'll certainly see  

[crispy4000]

Yep, I hear you.  I highly doubt Bungie has the final word on any of this.  Just like Bethesda doesn’t.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

1 hour ago, crispy4000 said:

I think Sony will go in a similar direction with Bungie at some point, in spite of what’s been said.  As will Microsoft with Blizzard, etc.  Things could get very messy after the ink is dry.

 

4 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

 

Destiny 2. Which is already out (for over 5 years), so they'll continue to make updates/dlc/expansions multiplatform. Destiny 3? Kinda sorta doubt it.

 

it also depends on the terms of the deal. Bungie talked a lot about keeping their autonomy, while Sony talked mostly about leveraging Bungie’s live service acumen and the media rights to Bungie IP. It could be everyone just saying what everyone wants to hear, or it could be Bungie had a “no exclusivity, ever” condition of their sale. There was a rumor MS was trying to buy Bungie back last year. Maybe it was indeed true and the season it didn’t happen, despite possibly an even bigger offer, was MS wouldn’t agree to the condition. 

[LazyPiranha]

I think it would be foolish to remove Destiny from multiple platforms, it isn’t a system mover in and of itself and you’re cutting off a huge portion of your revenue stream for no real reason.  Besides, removing Bungie from the flow of multiple console releases impacts one game every half decade as opposed to everything being put out by Activision/Blizzard.
 

The FTC also did recently stop the Random House merger so it’s not impossible to believe that this somehow could be stopped as well.  Pointing out that other, worse mergers have been allowed doesn’t mean we should collectively throw up our hands and say fuck it, it means those shouldn’t have been allowed in the first place and you have to stop the bleeding somewhere.  
 

They spoke about this recently on Waypoint, I don’t think the focus purely on CoD is warranted, and I think the acquisition is a larger symptom of Microsoft just not being able to land a solid hit in a good long while.  Much like Facebook cannot seem to innovate its way to relevance and just buys up and comers, Microsoft has been spinning its wheels a lot lately.  Forza has done well enough, Halo isn’t what it used to be, and then there’s what, Grounded?  State of Decay?  Another Gears eventually?  They seem to be unable to create a huge success of their own, so they just want to buy their way in to having one by default.  
 

 

[crispy4000]

11 minutes ago, LazyPiranha said:

They spoke about this recently on Waypoint, I don’t think the focus purely on CoD is warranted, and I think the acquisition is a larger symptom of Microsoft just not being able to land a solid hit in a good long while.  Much like Facebook cannot seem to innovate its way to relevance and just buys up and comers, Microsoft has been spinning its wheels a lot lately.  Forza has done well enough, Halo isn’t what it used to be, and then there’s what, Grounded?  State of Decay?  Another Gears eventually?  They seem to be unable to create a huge success of their own, so they just want to buy their way in to having one by default.  

It’s only a matter of time before they bounce back in a big way.  They own so much now, I don’t think content (or quality of it) will be a problem for much longer.

 

I think this would be true even without Activision Blizzard.  The new Microsoft shouldn’t be as dependent on Halo/Forza/Gears as they were in the past.

 

I think this E3 in particular will be stellar for them, and 2023 will be a good year for their studios.

[LazyPiranha]

2 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

It’s only a matter of time before they bounce back in a big way.  They own so much now, I don’t think content (or quality of it) will be a problem for much longer.  Things will start landing if they haven’t yet.

 

I think this would be true even without Activision Blizzard.  The new Microsoft shouldn’t be as dependent on Halo/Forza/Gears as they were in the past.

 

I think this E3 in particular will be stellar for them.

 

I’m not saying they can’t or won’t bounce back, in saying that they’ve been in a slump for a bit while their competitors largely haven’t.  Even if you consider Nintendo to be creatively bankrupt for churning out the same franchises endlessly, you can’t claim that they haven’t largely made extremely good versions of those things in a way Microsoft hasn’t been able to do.  Even if this E3 is big for Microsoft and even if those announcements are all big hits on release, that still means their big plays are a year or so from landing at best.  

[crispy4000]

21 minutes ago, LazyPiranha said:

I’m not saying they can’t or won’t bounce back, in saying that they’ve been in a slump for a bit while their competitors largely haven’t.  Even if you consider Nintendo to be creatively bankrupt for churning out the same franchises endlessly, you can’t claim that they haven’t largely made extremely good versions of those things in a way Microsoft hasn’t been able to do.  Even if this E3 is big for Microsoft and even if those announcements are all big hits on release, that still means their big plays are a year or so from landing at best.  

 

Starfield, Redfall and Forza Motorsport should be launching in the first half of the year.  I think we see Hellblade 2 at least by the holidays.  Probably something else like Fable, Avowed or Outer Worlds 2 to pair with it.  If that comes into fruition and the games deliver, that’s a damn good year.  Maybe their best ever, depending on your interests.

 

There’s at least a dozen other question marks too, many of of them small, a couple of them big (ie: Indiana Jones, Perfect Dark, Everwild, etc).  I really don’t see Microsoft on the outs anymore as a publisher.  They seem poised to take back the narrative this year, after building to it for the last couple.

[LazyPiranha]

Just now, crispy4000 said:

 

Starfield, Redfall and Forza Motorsport should be launching in the first half of the year.  I think we see Hellblade 2 at least by the holidays.  Probably something else like Fable, Avowed or Outer Worlds 2 to pair with it.  If that comes into fruition and the games deliver, that’s a damn good year.  Maybe their best ever.

 

There’s at least a dozen other question marks too, many of of them small, a couple of them big (ie: Indiana Jones, Perfect Dark, Everwild lol, etc).  So I really don’t see Microsoft on the outs anymore.  They seem poised to take back the narrative this year.

 

You’re kind of making my point for me…

 

Starfield and Redfall are games they’re buying instead of making, their entire contribution to those games is cutting a check.  There’s no information on Fable or Outer Worlds other than they exist so releasing before the end of 2023 is unlikely. Indy is another purchase, who knows how far off Perfect Dark is.  That basically leaves Hellblade 2 in a world where the acquisition doesn’t go through.  

[Paperclyp]

1 hour ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

It’s also Microsoft. If Microsoft bought a toaster company there would be a federal investigation by the US government over anti-trust. 
 

it all feels disingenuous from everybody when they damn near rubber stamp every other purchase from one company buying up every local Tv market to telecom companies buying up media properties, right to Disney buying Fox. 
 

Where they draw the lines are so arbitrary. they’re not even looking at all the other studios and IP MS could lock behind exclusivity that have significant fan bases. It’s 1 game they’re all focused on. It comes across like a bunch of people who only have PlayStations in their homes worried the game they play the most might not be on their console of choice at some point. Rather than protecting the consumers and the industry. 

Eh I feel like until Europe starting pushing back this was potentially gonna slide through without too much push back here. The federal government has been a little more active with this stuff the last few years but IMO they have been way too lax for years and frankly they should be looking at deals like this. 

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

5 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

Eh I feel like until Europe starting pushing back this was potentially gonna slide through without too much push back here. The federal government has been a little more active with this stuff the last few years but IMO they have been way too lax for years and frankly they should be looking at deals like this. 

I’m not saying they shouldn’t. More to the point they should be scrutinizing every deal like this. Most of these are bad for consumers and not good for the industry. Not just in gaming, but across all industries. I’m not saying MS is some victim to the US government, but between the FTC and the DOJ they look to get targeted more than most, while many are even in a blind spot not getting looked at at all. 
 

I just don’t buy it that “this time” anybody is challenging this for the greater good. And Sony can fuck right off about this being bad for gamers shit. I’m more than fine if the deal doesn’t go through, but I’d really like to see Sony popped in the face at the same time. 
 

what may be kind of funny about this is if we’ve been getting half truths. Phil and Xbox really don’t have a plan to remove COD from PlayStation. But they’ll make it Xbox and GamePass exclusive and offer GamePass as a service to be allowed on PlayStation. Sony knows this, because MS has probably already tried to get GamePass on PlayStation and Sony refuses. So Sony knows they could keep COD indefinitely, they just don’t like the terms, because the share of GamePass they’d get is less than the licensing fee per actual copy sold. 

[TwinIon]

As far as Sony and MS moaning about acquisitions, I think of it like penalties in soccer. Yeah, it looks terrible to see players clearly flopping in the World Cup, but the benefits are so vast and the downsides so small that you'd be wrong not to try. If complaining loudly is a detriment to their most direct competitor, then they should be doing it. It probably hardly costs them a thing, and if they're successful, it'll be much easier to bargain with a weakened Activision than a strengthened MS.

 

The bigger thing that this quote brings up is how these companies are setting themselves up for the future of the industry. With their recent PC releases and their purchase of Bungie, Sony is clearly starting to branch out their business model from the old "protect our platform at all costs" strategy. They're a long way behind Microsoft in that regard, but they've also been much more successful with their core platforms, so it makes sense that they've been hesitant to move away from it.

 

Still, as successful as they've been in creating great systems and system selling games, the gaming industry tends to show that success of that kind doesn't usually last. Rare made the best and most successful games, until they didn't. Bungie nearly single-handedly propped up an entire platform, until they couldn't. Bioware never missed, until they did. I'm optimistic about the continued success of Santa Monica Studios and Guerrilla and Naughty Dog, but even Pixar started putting out mediocre products after a while. Great studios have a very hard time staying great forever.

 

Perhaps even more worryingly is the possibility of a hardware failure. So far Sony has only suffered lasting hardware failures on the mobile side, but what if they make a Playstation 6 that is only as successful as the Wii U, Gamecube, or even the Xbox One? If they have a poor generation, it could devastate their gaming business. Sega gave up completely, Nintendo rebounded, but ended up having to do their own thing, and MS has found a way to be successful without being the top selling console. I think it's safe to say that Sony has put themselves in another great position with the PS5, but hedging their bets a little still makes a lot of sense to me.

[crispy4000]

2 hours ago, LazyPiranha said:

You’re kind of making my point for me…

 

Starfield and Redfall are games they’re buying instead of making, their entire contribution to those games is cutting a check.  There’s no information on Fable or Outer Worlds other than they exist so releasing before the end of 2023 is unlikely. Indy is another purchase, who knows how far off Perfect Dark is.  That basically leaves Hellblade 2 in a world where the acquisition doesn’t go through.  

As long as the ink is dry, those games are 1st party.  I don’t think games previously in production should count any less.  It’s a legit part of their lineup.  What they’re doing now is so far removed from the closure of Lionhead, Ensemble and FASA that Microsoft deserves credit for investing seriously in their ecosystem.

Sure, it’d be better for the industry overall if they started more new studios instead.  But I do think some acquisitions were in order to build themselves up quickly.  (Just maybe not $75+ billion worth…)

 

We can disagree about how the end of 2023 will look for Microsoft.  It’s all just predictions as of now.  I just don’t think Hellbalde 2 will be their only tentpole.  Q1 and Q2 should be strong, barring any mishaps.

[crispy4000]

1 hour ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

what may be kind of funny about this is if we’ve been getting half truths. Phil and Xbox really don’t have a plan to remove COD from PlayStation. But they’ll make it Xbox and GamePass exclusive and offer GamePass as a service to be allowed on PlayStation. Sony knows this, because MS has probably already tried to get GamePass on PlayStation and Sony refuses. So Sony knows they could keep COD indefinitely, they just don’t like the terms, because the share of GamePass they’d get is less than the licensing fee per actual copy sold. 

 

I doubt they’d ever sit down in a meeting with Microsoft to seriously discuss Games Pass on Playstation.  Even Nintendo wouldn’t go there.

 

Competitively, I don’t think Microsoft will need to leverage CoD any further than putting it on Games Pass.  That would be enough.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

1 minute ago, crispy4000 said:

 

I doubt they’d ever sit down in a meeting with Microsoft to discuss Games Pass on Playstation.  Even Nintendo wouldn’t go there.

 

Competitively, I don’t think Microsoft will need to leverage CoD any further than putting it on Games Pass.  That would be enough.

that’s the thing, I don’t think Xbox is the end game. GamePass and eventually Xcloud is. MS doesn’t need to invest money into HW if every gamer everywhere can access their service. 

[crispy4000]

43 minutes ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

that’s the thing, I don’t think Xbox is the end game. GamePass and eventually Xcloud is. MS doesn’t need to invest money into HW if every gamer everywhere can access their service. 

 

We'd need to see a paradigm shift in the way people enjoy games for cloud gaming to truly take off as such.  No doubt they want to be on the forefront of that when/if it happens.

 

They're not buying Activision-Blizzard and Besthesda strictly for a cloud future though.  If they desire to be the top selling platform, these acquisitions and Games Pass paired together are already a hyper aggressive step towards it.  Throw in Series S and they've got an unparalleled play for the mainstream console market.

[Paperclyp]

4 hours ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

I’m not saying they shouldn’t. More to the point they should be scrutinizing every deal like this. Most of these are bad for consumers and not good for the industry. Not just in gaming, but across all industries. I’m not saying MS is some victim to the US government, but between the FTC and the DOJ they look to get targeted more than most, while many are even in a blind spot not getting looked at at all. 
 

I just don’t buy it that “this time” anybody is challenging this for the greater good. And Sony can fuck right off about this being bad for gamers shit. I’m more than fine if the deal doesn’t go through, but I’d really like to see Sony popped in the face at the same time. 
 

what may be kind of funny about this is if we’ve been getting half truths. Phil and Xbox really don’t have a plan to remove COD from PlayStation. But they’ll make it Xbox and GamePass exclusive and offer GamePass as a service to be allowed on PlayStation. Sony knows this, because MS has probably already tried to get GamePass on PlayStation and Sony refuses. So Sony knows they could keep COD indefinitely, they just don’t like the terms, because the share of GamePass they’d get is less than the licensing fee per actual copy sold. 

I don’t get the “fuck off Sony” bit tho haha. Like MS is playing this absurd game where they’re arguing call of duty is a bad and aging series haha. They’re both acting insane to the interest of their own bottom line. 

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

30 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

I don’t get the “fuck off Sony” bit tho haha. Like MS is playing this absurd game where they’re arguing call of duty is a bad and aging series haha. They’re both acting insane to the interest of their own bottom line. 

Oh I’d say fuck off sony even without this. lol