I think this testimony may help swing this whole case in the favor of those that are against the deal. Logic would say that Microsoft isn’t going to to take the game away from anyone so why block it, but you can probably tell that if the Switch Too ends up being as successful as the Switch Won, then you can’t ignore them anymore. And when Kotick said eh Microsoft would be capable of making it in Switch. We probably wouldn’t be able to, my thing about that is… figure it out.
All of this is not a reason to block the deal but it did not help MS.
@ItsATM You make a good point. I have the first one on Steam. Is the first trilogy on the Switch? Im particularly interested in playing the first two games that follows the main characters of the Trails in the Sky games.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'm tired of anime aesthetic games lol. The only thing from NIS that interests me anymore is Ys, and even that peaked with Lacrimosa of Dana for me.
@WallyWest When I said "more of the same" I meant Horizon 2, Last of us part ii, Last of Us part i. God of War, Spider-Man Personally, Returnal was my favorite game from the first two years of the PS5's lifetime, as far as first parties go. You know, for as much as Sony fans used to rag on Xbox for relying on the same franchises, Sony does the same. God of War and Spider-Man, Horizon and Ratchet and Clank is all we've been hearing for the last few years. Glad we're getting a Wolverine game though... Wish they could have gotten a better character though, like Iron Man, because the combat will be largely the same, as in brawling, bet-em-up, etc.
Starfield I'll get and I'll hope it's good, but if it ain't, it ain't. In terms of being anti-consumer, this is more pro-consumer than anti-consumer. Now you don't need a console or a beefy rig to play Call of Duty. My brother's kids were playing games on their iPad that if this was 10 years ago, you'd need the latest graphics card to play. You can play on your phone. The vast majority of people have those. You don't even have to be on the Xbox ecosystem. You can play on Steam if you like. You can play on Nintendo, or one of the various cloud platforms.
You say it's anti-consumer when it isn't. It may and likely will be anti-Sony in the long run, but that's not who this acquisition is supposed to benefit. Sony's problems are not ours, even if we have their console.
With this line of reasoning, no acquisition is pro-consumer. When Sony bought Insomniac, it was anti-consumer because now they won't make Spider-Man on Xbox, or a Sunset Overdrive 2 on Xbox.
And don't even get me started on how anti-consumer Nintendo is. Just because they have a lot of "cute" characters and "cozy" (ugh) games does not mean they like us even a bit.
Every company is scum. Sony is scum as well. But among all the trillion and billion dollar companies, I'd rather Xbox own a company like Activision because it will open their games to more avenues rather than closing it off in a walled garden. Imagine a Bethesda title not on PC. Just because a game is exclusive to Xbox does not mean it is "anti-consumer." As a matter of fact, the vast majority of consumers want this. Or have you not noticed? You need to take a break from Push Square. That place rots the mind. And there are a certain few people who just live there and on pX. They are lames. And you know darn well who I'm talking about. Don't be like them, man.
@WallyWest Call me what you want, I don't care. Oh, thanks for bringing up days gone. Sony crushed all hope for that game becoming a franchise because it was only a 7 out of 10 to the media. That's pretty harsh, huh? Guess what we got in its stead? More of the same. Before you call others names, a baseline requirement is to have a modicrum of self-awareness. I have seen your other comments, and the last thing you have the authority to call anyone is a fanboy.
Bro, what are you going to do with the knowledge that Microsoft will be profiting off of the largest player base in the console gaming market? I hope you don't have a nervous breakdown. You might, with how ravenous you've been on these forums. Just be careful.
I do hate Sony though, that much is true. But I still play on their console because I like games like Ys, Lapis Labyrinth and other smaller JP titles.
I'd probably get them on the Switch if mine wasn't broken to the effect of not being usable in handheld mode anymore lol.
If people don't understand the fact that Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft go to the same people (the devs/pubs), bargain for their products, and try to sell them to the same people (the end user), they're freaking crazy.
That is what it is meant when they say they all compete. If the Switch 2 is as strong as the Rog Ally, it should be capable of even playing Starfield. Then this argument of them not being competitors evaporates. I mean, the logic is highly flawed anyway. I bought Gunvolt 1 and 2 on Switch, when I bought 3, it was because the whole trilogy finally made their way to Xbox. I decided to get it there, but if I want to play the first two, I'll play them on my Switch. I made my choice with those games. They competed for my money on a product, and I made my choice. Just like I made my choice to play games like Ys, Lapis and Cotton, games that exist on PS and Switch, on my PlayStation. They competed for my bucks, and I chose Sony.
You know what's crazy? At one point, each of the Big Three had a proprietary shooter out in the market at the same time, being Halo, Killzone and Splatoon. The one with the early advantage in that generation quickly made deals with companies they didn't own when it became apparent that their efforts were not bearing fruit.
So in that sense, they stopped competing in the arena of first-party shooters. The other two kept chugging along and innovating. Halo Infinite had a great release and fell off, Splatoon is still good and making content. The point is that they all competed to win over the same audience of people that like competitive team based death match games, until Sony decided it was better for someone else to do it for them.
They closed down their Japan studio and paid Japanese companies to keep their games off other platforms. Now, half a decade later, they're realizing that "hmm... maybe we should make a live-service game" so now they're making so many games and trying to see what will stick. The problem with that is that most times, you can't intentionally catch lightning in a bottle. It has to be unique Something that is novel in concept.
Sony is so one note that I could not give less of a crap about their games. But that one kind of game is all they have been putting out for the last decade an a half and they got caught with their pants down with this acquisition. Actually, they poked the bear, who pantsed them. This situation is their own making, because they did not need to be as overly aggressive as they have been in the market.
Oh, and guess what? In response to Splatoon's success, a competitor has been born, and guess what again? Sony paid for it to be exclusive to them. Yet they have the gall to say that Nintendo does not compete with them? Sony is arrogant beyond belief, and I hope after this acquisition, they lose all the leverage they had in the industry.
I honestly want them to be investigated for their exclusivity practices like the US Government warned the JP Government about, but we know that's not going to happen. Just take your loss and sign the damn deal, you crybabies. There's no legal or logical recourse for stopping the deal.
It was okay. Not going to buy anything that was shown though. My Switch is a Splatoon machine until they stop updating Splatoon 3. Then I'll feed it to one of those machines that shreds electronics.
Comments 9
Re: Activision CEO Made 'A Bad Judgement' In Not Supporting The Nintendo Switch More
I think this testimony may help swing this whole case in the favor of those that are against the deal. Logic would say that Microsoft isn’t going to to take the game away from anyone so why block it, but you can probably tell that if the Switch Too ends up being as successful as the Switch Won, then you can’t ignore them anymore. And when Kotick said eh Microsoft would be capable of making it in Switch. We probably wouldn’t be able to, my thing about that is… figure it out.
All of this is not a reason to block the deal but it did not help MS.
Re: Action RPG CryMachina Looks Stunning, And It's Launching This October
@ItsATM You make a good point. I have the first one on Steam. Is the first trilogy on the Switch? Im particularly interested in playing the first two games that follows the main characters of the Trails in the Sky games.
Re: Microsoft CEO Says He Would "Love To Get Rid Of" Exclusives On Consoles
I wonder what monopoly Microsoft would have by buying Activision...
Re: Action RPG CryMachina Looks Stunning, And It's Launching This October
Eh...
I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'm tired of anime aesthetic games lol. The only thing from NIS that interests me anymore is Ys, and even that peaked with Lacrimosa of Dana for me.
Re: The FTC Doesn't Seem To Think Switch Is A Serious PlayStation & Xbox Competitor
@WallyWest When I said "more of the same" I meant Horizon 2, Last of us part ii, Last of Us part i. God of War, Spider-Man Personally, Returnal was my favorite game from the first two years of the PS5's lifetime, as far as first parties go. You know, for as much as Sony fans used to rag on Xbox for relying on the same franchises, Sony does the same. God of War and Spider-Man, Horizon and Ratchet and Clank is all we've been hearing for the last few years. Glad we're getting a Wolverine game though... Wish they could have gotten a better character though, like Iron Man, because the combat will be largely the same, as in brawling, bet-em-up, etc.
Starfield I'll get and I'll hope it's good, but if it ain't, it ain't. In terms of being anti-consumer, this is more pro-consumer than anti-consumer. Now you don't need a console or a beefy rig to play Call of Duty. My brother's kids were playing games on their iPad that if this was 10 years ago, you'd need the latest graphics card to play. You can play on your phone. The vast majority of people have those. You don't even have to be on the Xbox ecosystem. You can play on Steam if you like. You can play on Nintendo, or one of the various cloud platforms.
You say it's anti-consumer when it isn't. It may and likely will be anti-Sony in the long run, but that's not who this acquisition is supposed to benefit. Sony's problems are not ours, even if we have their console.
With this line of reasoning, no acquisition is pro-consumer. When Sony bought Insomniac, it was anti-consumer because now they won't make Spider-Man on Xbox, or a Sunset Overdrive 2 on Xbox.
And don't even get me started on how anti-consumer Nintendo is. Just because they have a lot of "cute" characters and "cozy" (ugh) games does not mean they like us even a bit.
Every company is scum. Sony is scum as well. But among all the trillion and billion dollar companies, I'd rather Xbox own a company like Activision because it will open their games to more avenues rather than closing it off in a walled garden. Imagine a Bethesda title not on PC. Just because a game is exclusive to Xbox does not mean it is "anti-consumer." As a matter of fact, the vast majority of consumers want this. Or have you not noticed? You need to take a break from Push Square. That place rots the mind. And there are a certain few people who just live there and on pX. They are lames. And you know darn well who I'm talking about. Don't be like them, man.
Re: The FTC Doesn't Seem To Think Switch Is A Serious PlayStation & Xbox Competitor
@WallyWest Call me what you want, I don't care. Oh, thanks for bringing up days gone. Sony crushed all hope for that game becoming a franchise because it was only a 7 out of 10 to the media. That's pretty harsh, huh? Guess what we got in its stead? More of the same. Before you call others names, a baseline requirement is to have a modicrum of self-awareness. I have seen your other comments, and the last thing you have the authority to call anyone is a fanboy.
Bro, what are you going to do with the knowledge that Microsoft will be profiting off of the largest player base in the console gaming market? I hope you don't have a nervous breakdown. You might, with how ravenous you've been on these forums. Just be careful.
I do hate Sony though, that much is true. But I still play on their console because I like games like Ys, Lapis Labyrinth and other smaller JP titles.
I'd probably get them on the Switch if mine wasn't broken to the effect of not being usable in handheld mode anymore lol.
If people don't understand the fact that Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft go to the same people (the devs/pubs), bargain for their products, and try to sell them to the same people (the end user), they're freaking crazy.
That is what it is meant when they say they all compete. If the Switch 2 is as strong as the Rog Ally, it should be capable of even playing Starfield. Then this argument of them not being competitors evaporates. I mean, the logic is highly flawed anyway. I bought Gunvolt 1 and 2 on Switch, when I bought 3, it was because the whole trilogy finally made their way to Xbox. I decided to get it there, but if I want to play the first two, I'll play them on my Switch. I made my choice with those games. They competed for my money on a product, and I made my choice. Just like I made my choice to play games like Ys, Lapis and Cotton, games that exist on PS and Switch, on my PlayStation. They competed for my bucks, and I chose Sony.
Re: The FTC Doesn't Seem To Think Switch Is A Serious PlayStation & Xbox Competitor
You know what's crazy? At one point, each of the Big Three had a proprietary shooter out in the market at the same time, being Halo, Killzone and Splatoon. The one with the early advantage in that generation quickly made deals with companies they didn't own when it became apparent that their efforts were not bearing fruit.
So in that sense, they stopped competing in the arena of first-party shooters. The other two kept chugging along and innovating. Halo Infinite had a great release and fell off, Splatoon is still good and making content. The point is that they all competed to win over the same audience of people that like competitive team based death match games, until Sony decided it was better for someone else to do it for them.
They closed down their Japan studio and paid Japanese companies to keep their games off other platforms. Now, half a decade later, they're realizing that "hmm... maybe we should make a live-service game" so now they're making so many games and trying to see what will stick. The problem with that is that most times, you can't intentionally catch lightning in a bottle. It has to be unique Something that is novel in concept.
Sony is so one note that I could not give less of a crap about their games. But that one kind of game is all they have been putting out for the last decade an a half and they got caught with their pants down with this acquisition. Actually, they poked the bear, who pantsed them. This situation is their own making, because they did not need to be as overly aggressive as they have been in the market.
Oh, and guess what? In response to Splatoon's success, a competitor has been born, and guess what again? Sony paid for it to be exclusive to them. Yet they have the gall to say that Nintendo does not compete with them? Sony is arrogant beyond belief, and I hope after this acquisition, they lose all the leverage they had in the industry.
I honestly want them to be investigated for their exclusivity practices like the US Government warned the JP Government about, but we know that's not going to happen. Just take your loss and sign the damn deal, you crybabies. There's no legal or logical recourse for stopping the deal.
Re: Poll: What Did You Think Of Today's Nintendo Direct?
It was okay. Not going to buy anything that was shown though. My Switch is a Splatoon machine until they stop updating Splatoon 3. Then I'll feed it to one of those machines that shreds electronics.
Re: This Side-Scrolling Shmup Has Intriguing Gameplay, But A Terrible Name
All hail the fairer sex. Women with double X chromosomes must be worshipped.