Ashamam
Member
Oh my bad, yeah I see the distinction.
Eurogamer: It’s been 12 months since Microsoft purchased Activision-Blizzard, so what’s changed?
- Thread starter RetroGamingUK
- Start date
RetroGamingUK
Member
Yeah I thought that was obvious.
We've gone from (in the space of a year) potentially losing all Activision games on PlayStation to gaining all of Microsoft's games.
My wife's quite looking forward to the prospect of trying the new Fable without the need to buy an Xbox (not that we were planning to get one anyway).
Last edited:
Shake Your Rump
Banned
Ask Microsoft. They are the ones who only agreed to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation until 2027.
Undoubtedly they have changed their tune now.
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
It takes YEARS to integrate companies of this size after M&A... anyone who thought there would be significant change after 12 months is delusional and ignorant.
This is true in industries far less complex than gaming, but in gaming where it can take YEARS to develop a product... it's even more true.
In a year ABK games are coming to GamePass, that's already a pretty big accomplishment.
You add the fact that Xbox is somewhat in turmoil due to the changing nature of its business, and it makes integration that much more difficult.
This is true in industries far less complex than gaming, but in gaming where it can take YEARS to develop a product... it's even more true.
In a year ABK games are coming to GamePass, that's already a pretty big accomplishment.
You add the fact that Xbox is somewhat in turmoil due to the changing nature of its business, and it makes integration that much more difficult.
BlackTron
Gold Member
And this here is precisely why they did it.
Stu_Hart
Banned
They acquired activision blizzard at the wrong time. If they had done it during the xbox 360 era when sony was fumbling with the ps3, it would have benefited them more, maybe could have even made cod an exclusive to xbox. It would have made the xbox one more competitive and compelling to get as a result.
Radical_3d
Member
This is why your platform sucks and why MS has no clue.
Sony releases TLoU2 and 90% of the player base goes: "boooooooo! This game sucked!"
Sony closes any studio and the player base goes: "booooooo! That studio rocked!"
Sony announces a 700$ console and everybody, including no Sony customers goes: "boooooooo! Your pricing sucks!"
Sony releases Concord and their fanboys go: "booooooo! Just… BOOOOOOO! And don't come back with Fairgames!!!"
You lost a feature in a tier of GamePass (small feature tho, day 1 releases) and go: "yaaaaaaaaayyyyyyy! GP rulz!!"
Spencer: "Greenberg, how are the fans doing?"
Greenberg: *checks twitter…. "They be happy!"
"Then… why nobody is buyin'?"
vaibhavpisal
Member
I don't wanna come across as entitled by asking MS to fund all my gaming needs.This is why your platform sucks and why MS has no clue.
Sony releases TLoU2 and 90% of the player base goes: "boooooooo! This game sucked!"
Sony closes any studio and the player base goes: "booooooo! That studio rocked!"
Sony announces a 700$ console and everybody, including no Sony customers goes: "boooooooo! Your pricing sucks!"
Sony releases Concord and their fanboys go: "booooooo! Just… BOOOOOOO! And don't come back with Fairgames!!!"
You lost a feature in a tier of GamePass (small feature tho, day 1 releases) and go: "yaaaaaaaaayyyyyyy! GP rulz!!"
Spencer: "Greenberg, how are the fans doing?"
Greenberg: *checks twitter…. "They be happy!"
"Then… why nobody is buyin'?"
While GP price increase sucks, I don't think I wanna ask them to keep giving it away for perpetuity.
Radical_3d
Member
Well, I agree with you there. GP being so cheap was not healthy for the industry nor MS. This is more reasonable and sustainable model.
RetroGamingUK
Member
It certainly set expectation among their customers regarding game prices.
They've, for the most part, been conditioned to not buy games (both physically and digitally), while also waiting for games to come to GamePass that never arrive.
Terrible idea with seemingly disastrous unforeseen consequences.
Radical_3d
Member
Kiya's Guard
Member
Microsoft wanted King, that juicy mobile market. Production cost is ridicule, public outrage is minimal and revenue tends to be colossaly higher (compared to classic games for consoles and pcs). If I recall they stated they wanted the mobile market
Wildebeest
Member
Nothing to see. The Titanic just got even bigger and even more unsinkable.
mayham2199
Member
They do care though Spencer has specifically stated he doesn't like MS games going to Sony because they use the 30% they make from every sales to keep games off the Xbox platform which Sony continues to do.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
You mean more "sinkable"?