cragis0001

@RonnieL the only silver lining is that Bleeding Edge was a low budget passion project like Grounded & Pentiment. Sony's will be AAA budget titles but like I said before there is gonna be hits & misses.

@GodofCapcom why should Xbox users shut there mouth. For all your moaning about games like Sea of Thieves, Grounded, Bleeding Edge & Redfall is that there all popular genres that Sony is now trying to adopt. Like Microsoft there is gonna be hits & misses. What should worry Sony fans is that even though Sony are doing well sale wise they could be slipping down the same path Microsoft did. Closing Studios, canceling games, releasing broken games (PC ports) & if there online service gamble fails they've tarnished there franchises which could take years for them to recover. Another problem is if the cancellation kills Deviation Games then Sony will start getting a reputation like the one you claim Microsoft has that it ruins everything it touches.

@JayJ with words like Monopoly (still smaller than Tencent) & buying a publisher up is bad. (Psygnosis & Bungie come to mind) being thrown about it sounds like there worried of competition. If it fails I'd expect smaller acquisitions & Microsoft to get aggressive with 3rd party exclusives. Which would be worse.

I was loving Horizon: Zero Dawn when Forbidden West first launched. So jumped into Forbidden West once I finished Zero Dawn & was instantly disappointed to the point I stopped playing. I pre ordered Burning Shores so plan to have another go.

I'm sure they'd have seen success maybe launching there new games day one on PS+ like Stray.

All I've heard this year is. Sony is better at managing there first party studios as they invest in them rather than ruin them & close them. It's a shame as Stray & HiFi Rush popularity have shown there is a market for smaller AA titles in which to thrive. The PlayStation community pride themselves on there great games, so this should worry them.

@Art_Vandelay an Xbox console is only one way in which to play there games though. Unlike PlayStation. The PS5 is still the best place to play there's until later this year & next when newer titles hit PC also. So it's understandable PlayStations sales are skyrocketing unlike Xbox's 30% decline year over year.
First party day 1 is Games Pass's main selling point & last year was slim pickings hence a 3% increase in subscriptions which could have been a lot worse. Still nearly $1 billion last quarter though.
As for Xbox users not buying games. There are plenty that do. Add the games being sold on PC with some on Switch, PS5. There recent 10 year deals on other platforms bringing in money. As for 3rd party games they get plenty of choice. Normal sales via retailer/ Xbox store or do a deal with Microsoft that works for them to be put on Games Pass or all the above.
I understand why Microsoft wants ABK but can see positives if it doesn't go through as it forces them to improve & invest across the board, management being badly needed to get games out the door.

Aye the PlayStation showcase will be interesting to see what these 10 services are gameplay wise. I'm interested in the Last of Us & Horizon. Do these studios have enough staff to keep pumping out content once it's live to keep gamers engaged? & If the game fails then what?

the UK government are corrupt to the core. Would only take a few threats from US Politicians to get the government to put pressure on the CMA to change there mind.

@Art_Vandelay how have Microsoft made a mistake with there current strategy. They went from 40million active users in 2016 before Games Pass to 120 million now. From a company that PlayStation users laugh at for having no games that's not a bad figure of active users.

@Suur how is it sadly that some only buy a PlayStation & Xbox only for subscriptions? There still contributing. It may not be for you or I to rely solely on. But if it means these people continuesly pay monthly we all benefit.

@Jaz007 you say it's unsustainable. But thats why Microsoft is doing deals with everyone under the sun as they'll get money off licencing, sales on there platforms & others, battle passes, dlc etc. Microsoft has deals with comic firms like Dark Horse for Sea of Thieves etc. Paramount TV has Halo.

Even with little to no first party titles last year from Microsoft. Content & services grew 3% year over year which was due to Games Pass growth.

@JaxxDuffer Games Pass came after PlayStation Now though 😵

It also makes owning more than one console more manageable also. As you can buy games for your preferred main console & take out a subscription for the other. So if your main console is a PlayStation you could buy a series S & Games Pass for the bulk of Xbox exclusives while giving you more money to spend on PlayStation games.

@TommyNL Microsoft just announced they made nearly $1billion in a quarter on subscriptions alone. Add additional sales on top, Battle Pass's, skins, etc.

In gamings current form I can understand why people are debating it. Just like people thought that iTunes & Netflix wouldn't take off. Only time will tell if it's the future. But one advantage of subscription & cloud gaming is in the future it will make gaming more accessible like music & movies currently are. Look how mobile gaming sky rocketed when you lower the barrier. Microsoft celebrated at having 120 million active users up from 40 million in 2016 also.

@RonnieL Sony was game streaming before Microsoft. They could easily shrink the 60% percentage if they wanted to but like Nintendo they don't want to.

@Balosi of course the CMA are clueless as they stated the Switch couldn't run Call of Duty as an excuse to dismiss it. As for Cloud. If both Sony & Nintendo showed more interest they'd be successful rivals just to name two. Plus there is nothing stopping others like Amazon's Luna from taking off as Microsoft may have a lead in Cloud which makes up 2% of the overall gaming industry footprint in the UK.

@Balosi it doesn't look good for us though as one minute Rishi is wanting tech companies from all over the world to flock here then our regulators show there are a bit clueless in the topic. So we have blacklisted Russia, China is next on the hit list & US companies will be reluctant to invest.

@lacerz I recon Microsoft will get offered deals on Activision Blizzard franchises including COD & Microsoft will ramp up smaller studio acquisitions, expand its already owned teams & be aggressively going after 3rd party exclusives.

@KaijuKaiser they could buy a Japanese Dev if they wished. As the Japanese takeover laws are based on UK/EU law. It's more the point do any Japanese devs/publishers want to be bought. Square Enix said they'd be happy to get more investment from a 3rd party. Platinum Games said they'd be happy if they'd get full control like Bungie gets from Sony.

@gingerfrog not denying that as a lot of people probably had the money sitting about for a PS5 considering how hard it was at first to get one. I live in the UK where a lot of goods have increased between 40-75%.

I've never seen anything that said Psygnosis was on its knees before Sony purchased them? But ok.
I'd also wouldn't use Psygnosis as an indorsement for Sony's long history of managing studios as they wanted to sell it at one point, gutted it, renamed it. All before closing most of it years later. Psygnosis hey day under Sony was when it was still multiplatform.
Sony was on fire in the 90's. But there still doing the same tactics today mostly 3rd party exclusivity which was key it early & current popularity.
It may not be the same comparison. But it still proves that an established publisher & a good strategy can tople the scales & that's what Sony is fearing.

Sounds like the economic down turn hasn't hit hard enough yet that Sony is getting upto 300%+ sales in the likes of Europe. If it had I'd have expected sales of full priced games to decline & subscriptions to possibly rise. But like others have said let's see what happens when Microsoft & Sony put more first party software on there services.

@MattBoothDev aye but they bought Psygnosis in 1993 to beef up there first party lineup for the EU/US PlayStation launch's in 1994. But by 1995/96 was shifting 40% of all games sold in the EU. Even though some came to other platforms. it ultimately helped Sony tackle both Sega & Nintendo in the early days. I think that's why Sony doesn't want the Activision Blizzard deal to go through as history could repeat itself.

@Allfather they did though as Psygnosis was a publisher. But hey because it was back at the beginning of PlayStation & gaming was a smaller business then I guess it doesn't count. But it does count as Psygnosis sold 40% of all games sold in Europe in 1995/96 which is a big deal. Plus it proves if Sony could buy a power house now they would.
Don't see why people should treat buying a smaller studio any different to a publisher? As it explains why many Chinese companies like Tencent have risen from nothing as no one cares if they buy or invest into small studios. But if someone buys a publisher to get many studio's all at once that's a big....NO 🤣🤣. Consolidation is bad full stop.

@MattBoothDev no I agree lobbying should be banned specially if it's financially beneficial to who ever is involved.

@MattBoothDev Sony bought Psygnosis which sold 40% of all games sold in Europe in 1995/96.

For some reason it's cheaper on the PlayStation store at £54.99 where on Xbox store it's £57.98 for the standard edition.

@KaijuKaiser you do understand Microsoft is buying up parts of the industry because others including Sony are buying up parts of the industry 😆😆😆.

@MattBoothDev the Irony is that Sony lobbyed also with 10 senators. But your happy to ignore that.

@Bingoboyop PlayStation was in development when Sony purchased Psygnosis in 1993 & were seeking developer support throughout the year for the launch in late 1994 in Japan, 1995 in EU/US. Xbox has created 343 industries, The Coalition, The Initiative, World's Edge & Xbox Studios Publishing in 20 years. So what's your point as both sides have created talented studios & bought up many more also.

@Bingoboyop people underestimate Psygnosis's importance. As the company accounted to 40% all video games sold in Europe in 1995/96 compared to Activision Blizzard's 66% in 2017. So yes Psygnosis was a big player. Sony had little to no first party titles either before they bought Psygnosis 😆😆 it's why Sony bought them to boost there catalogue in the EU/US. Just like why Microsoft is buying Activision Blizzard & the others.

@Lonejester I said the same the last time they wrote an article claiming it's misleading. It's either the writer hasn't been keeping up with the acquisition or it's to stir up a reaction.

@Bingoboyop not deluded. Microsoft is doing the same as Sony did from the beginning. They purchased UK publisher Psygnosis to bolster the original PlayStation & have been buying developers ever since. Going by a Wiki search Sony has purchased a grand total 24 companies to bolster PlayStation. Yes the costs have risen as a result of the popularity of gaming but Sony seems to do well buying small studio's & grow them over time. But don't be nieve. If Sony could afford it they would be doing the same as Microsoft.

@JayJ exactly but it's ignored because it's a title from a small studio rather than from Bethesda. Sony fans forget that they bought UK publisher Psygnosis to bolster the original PlayStation. It has Bungie that self publishes it's own titles & they'd would cheer from the rafters if Sony purchased Square Enix.

You gotta love the reporting on most sites lately. If you have been following the Activision Blizzard deal you'd be aware it's the that regulators aren't interested in Nintendo, PC, Mobile etc. It was also the regulators that segregated them into categories not Microsoft. So why would Microsoft present figures to regulators that there gonna dismiss. It's a waste of time & money. Topic of contention is the high end console market PS Vs Xbox & cloud gaming.

@JayJ very true. But if there was any game that they should be complaining about not getting on PS5 to be fair it's The Outer Worlds 2. As thats more a better example than Redfall & Starfield.

@Breekhead I agree with you 100% but Microsoft aren't gonna argue about Nintendo's influence if the regulators are just gonna dismiss it like they did before. So they used the regulators definition of high end consoles being a two horse race to paint a similar theme that they are the underdog hence the figures ignoring Nintendo, PC etc. As this way the regulators can't dismiss it.

@FenIsMightier the regulators aren't interested in Nintendo. If they did care there Call of Duty importance falls apart as Switch has flourished without COD. They even dismissed the 10 year deal saying Switch can't run COD.

It was the regulators that ignored Nintendo's importance & came up with the term of high end consoles which Microsoft based there figures on.

@thefourfoldroot1 well you should worry about Tencent & Embracer then rather than Microsoft.

@JayJ exactly what would happen if Tencent or Embracer desided to launch there own console.

@thefourfoldroot1 doesn't matter what the scale it is though. Sony have been buying up studios & aggressively buying up third party titles. So of course your rival Microsoft is gonna respond by doing the same.

@Deoxyr1bose sounds like your defending one but not happy at the other. If Sony, Tencent, Embracer & others didn't buy studios all over the place then Microsoft probably wouldn't be doing the same.

@TommyNL it's ok I agree. I understand why they both don't disclose as people would wait for it to release on there favoured platform which beats the purpose of them buying it to be exclusive. But if a game is fully exclusive or isn't going to be available to your rivals for anything over 12 months it should be disclosed.

I just read that Valheim is 6 months exclusive.

@uptownsoul your correct as it wasn't Microsoft who announced the three month exclusivity deal. But a Reddit user that noticed the info that Microsoft provided as evidence in the Epic Vs Apple trial.

@thefourfoldroot1 times are changing 👍

@uptownsoul https://www.ign.com/articles/stalker-2-will-be-exclusive-to-xbox-for-three-months