Halo and Mario are awful straw men to bring into this.
You are saying Indiana Jones should be on playstation.
I am saying spiderman should be on Xbox.
They are both both Disney properties, if one isn’t allowed to be exclusive because it’s unfair, why should the other?
Disney agreed to both deals. Your point of “making a cross platform game exclusive” is arbitrary. It’s not like they made a game, released it, and then took it away. They had plans and they changed. Like every software project ever.
This is all missing the point, this is a case against Microsoft building a monopoly in the gaming industry. It doesn’t matter if Nintendo or Sony have exclusive games, if Microsoft is allowed to just keep gobbling up studios & IP, they can simply choke out the competition.
Additionally, Microsoft made a big hoopla about how they’re not going to make AB games like CoD exclusive specifically to shield themselves from antitrust lawsuits, but this goes to show that behind the scenes they’re going to do as much as possible to consolidate power.
It absolutely matters because this specific article isn’t about IP that Microsoft owns or is trying to acquire.
It’s about a property Disney owns and is exclusively licensing. And if that’s bad in this case, it should be consistently bad when Sony did it.
I’m not sure why other consoles get a pass, exclusivity is a short term tactic that screws over consumers in the long run. I don’t think we disagree on direction, I’m saying that this hasn’t gone far enough. Nowhere in my post about getting content on more devices was I promoting exclusives…
Sony had exclusive rights to major parts of Destiny, meaning players in an already cross platform game couldn’t even access game modes and maps only available to PS users. That was awful for gamers. Yet Sony had no problem acquiring Bungie when they’ve literally shown that’s what they’re playbook has been.
Just because you disagree with my point of view doesn’t mean it’s a “strawman” or “arbitrary”. I think your opinion is fair, but I don’t agree with it for the reasons I already stated.
Halo and Mario are awful straw men to bring into this.
You are saying Indiana Jones should be on playstation. I am saying spiderman should be on Xbox.
They are both both Disney properties, if one isn’t allowed to be exclusive because it’s unfair, why should the other?
Disney agreed to both deals. Your point of “making a cross platform game exclusive” is arbitrary. It’s not like they made a game, released it, and then took it away. They had plans and they changed. Like every software project ever.
This is all missing the point, this is a case against Microsoft building a monopoly in the gaming industry. It doesn’t matter if Nintendo or Sony have exclusive games, if Microsoft is allowed to just keep gobbling up studios & IP, they can simply choke out the competition.
Additionally, Microsoft made a big hoopla about how they’re not going to make AB games like CoD exclusive specifically to shield themselves from antitrust lawsuits, but this goes to show that behind the scenes they’re going to do as much as possible to consolidate power.
It absolutely matters because this specific article isn’t about IP that Microsoft owns or is trying to acquire.
It’s about a property Disney owns and is exclusively licensing. And if that’s bad in this case, it should be consistently bad when Sony did it.
I’m not sure why other consoles get a pass, exclusivity is a short term tactic that screws over consumers in the long run. I don’t think we disagree on direction, I’m saying that this hasn’t gone far enough. Nowhere in my post about getting content on more devices was I promoting exclusives…
Sony had exclusive rights to major parts of Destiny, meaning players in an already cross platform game couldn’t even access game modes and maps only available to PS users. That was awful for gamers. Yet Sony had no problem acquiring Bungie when they’ve literally shown that’s what they’re playbook has been.
I’m just asking for consistency here.
Just because you disagree with my point of view doesn’t mean it’s a “strawman” or “arbitrary”. I think your opinion is fair, but I don’t agree with it for the reasons I already stated.