• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Microsoft—now trying to get its $75 billion deal for Activision approved—has taken a friendly role with regulators. (WSJ)

Lognor

Banned
That's fine, but you were talking about games "outside of bungie".
Yes, as a comparison. MasterCornholio MasterCornholio was claiming Sony wanted to keep Bungie multiplatform due to their live service games. But we know Sony is working on at least one other live service game and I think we can all confidently say that that game (or those games) will NOT be available on Xbox. He said it didn't make sense for Sony to eliminate revenue from a live service game by not releasing it on Xbox. If that's the case then Sony's next live service games should surely be on Xbox. Right? RIGHT??? Nah.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Yes, as a comparison. MasterCornholio MasterCornholio was claiming Sony wanted to keep Bungie multiplatform due to their live service games. But we know Sony is working on at least one other live service game and I think we can all confidently say that that game (or those games) will NOT be available on Xbox. He said it didn't make sense for Sony to eliminate revenue from a live service game by not releasing it on Xbox. If that's the case then Sony's next live service games should surely be on Xbox. Right? RIGHT??? Nah.

He is talking about an existing revenue stream that is already in place with Bungie. You can't eliminate something that doesn't exist yet. There is a distinction there that you are not getting.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
Bringing PS games to PC makes the games multiplatform. PlayStation and PC are two different platforms. Not one. Thus, plural, not singular.

Xbox and Switch do not have to be included for that to be true.

Basically that's the point. Sure the games are not coming to Xbox at the moment but they still are considered multiplatform titles.

That's what I meant by Sony becoming more open to the idea of producing multiplatform titles. In the past it was inconceivable to see a PlayStation published game on something other than a PlayStation. Now that isn't the case any more.

With Bungie it seems like they are going beyond just PC so Xbox and Switch will benefit from. I know it looks weird for some people but Sony is looking at live service games differently with Bungie.

"He is talking about an existing revenue stream that is already in place with Bungie. You can't eliminate something that doesn't exist yet. There is a distinction there that you are not getting."

Yes don't know why it's difficult for some to see that.
 
Last edited:

Infamy v1

Member
Of course Sony could do anything technically speaking. Sony could quit the gaming business altogether, and start making sombreros instead if they really wanted to. Context matters, and you're ignoring a lot of it to make your argument.

These things are not public, and you are "guessing them". Unless you care to post a copy of the share purchase agreement in your reply, don't even bother arguing this point. No goalposts will be moved, no sidestepping will be allowed. Provide a copy of the share purchase agreement, or you're wrong. It really is that simple.

It's good that you point this out, and place such emphasis on it. It really does a good job of highlighting the hypocrisy you display here on a regular basis. It's important to note that in this deal, Sony is going to great lengths, and much expense in order to retain the talent at Bungie. Again, you're missing the context completely. In your example, if the workers at Bungie didn't do what Ryan told them, they'd simply be fired. Of course you didn't mention how that scenario plays out beyond that. Once fired those employees would immediately be pursued by any and every game developer that had an opening. How long those fired employees remained unemployed would most likely depend entirely on how long a vacation they wanted to take before going to work at some other studio. Meanwhile Sony would be stuck having none of the talent that they just paid billions to obtain. The IP that they acquired in Destiny would immediately begin to die on the vine, as that's how live service games work.

This is your take as to the reasons for the acquisition, and in my opinion... a good one.

Most people tend to be biased one way or another, and at times it can be hard not to wander into fanboy territory. Of course there's a lot of toxicity that resides in that territory, which can ultimately negatively affect a forum such as this one. I imagine it takes a monumental effort by the mods here to allow open discussion, while also trying to minimize the amount of toxicity that often comes along with it. Due to the sheer amount of posts and users, it's almost impossible to keep track of every bad faith actor. I point this out not to personally offend or insult you, but because at this point... I feel it's obvious that you are one of those bad faith actors.

I say this because I see you posting completely opposing narratives from thread to thread. You go to great lengths in multiple posts to explain just how illegal it would be if MS didn't make not just the contractually obligated future titles, but ALL future CoD titles available on all platforms, especially Playstation. Due to what MS stated was their intentions. Of course you're also in this thread speaking with such certainty that none of those same "laws" apply to Sony. Simply explaining that Sony owns Bungie so Sony can do whatever they want.

You take hypocrisy to a whole different level my guy.

Amazing post. These shills pretend like we are fucking stupid and don't recognize their hypocrisy in other threads.

Sony/Bungie will still support the "current" established Destiny 2 that has millions on formats besides PS and has already planned future content.
Sony owns Bungie.
Sony doesn't put its games on Xbox.

You already got ratio'd out of the topic by other people, but I can't help myself. Both Sony AND Bungie literally said that, unequivocally, they will remain a multiplatform studio and continue to publish future games on competitor platforms.

Sit down and hold that fat L.

You're right, Sony is boss.

"The first thing to say unequivocally is that Bungie will stay an independent, multiplatform studio and publisher." "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."

Do you know who wrote that? 🧐



I get it, it's hard for you to cope w/ the fact that Bungie wouldn't have agreed to the deal without those stipulations in place, but you can't argue facts.

This is almost as bad as your "quality" argument in the other thread 🥱

Notice he doesn't respond to you because he cannot spin facts 😂

The denial phase is strong with that one.
Yes. As outlined in the share purchase agreement that both companies sign at the time of purchase.

No. You can stick your bullshit where the sun don't shine for all I care. I don't want press releases, blog posts, or interviews. I SAID POST THE CONTRACT OR A LINK TO IT. If you can't, then you're guessing. Look, this isn't that hard. Provide the requested proof or stfu about it.

It's hypocritical due to your post history. I don't even have to debate your point regarding how companies work. You've laid out how companies work here in this thread in order to claim that Ryan can make Bungie employees do whatever he pleases, and work on whatever game he wants. Of course in other threads as well as here to a lesser extent, you claim the exact opposite for MS regarding Activision, and I'm not even talking about the contracts from before the acquisition that MS will honor either.

As we've already established. You have no idea what Bungie can or can't do because as we've already covered previously. You haven't seen any legal purchase agreement contract. What info we do have actually suggests the opposite of what you believe though. Even your precious "press release" clearly states that Bungie is free to release it's games where it sees fit, as it wants it's games played by people anywhere. While you think that somehow can only result in Playstation recieving some sort of small exclusive deal. It could technically be any platform holder. Furthermore, while you curiously failed to mention it. Bungie will not simply be a subsidiary "just like their other studios", and it's actually not as simple as "And SIE/Jim Ryan is now the owner and boss of Bungie." either. The only FACT the we know without doubt is that "Bungie will be an independent subsidiary of SIE and run by its board of directors chaired by Pete Parsons and Bungie’s current management team."


Of course. That was literally one of my points. You seem to be on the side of 'if the employees want those bonuses, they can't leave the company, so they'd better do what Ryan says.' While I'm saying 'Why would Sony offer such large sums of money to retain employees, if they plan on firing them if they don't make the games Ryan wants.' Sony obviously values Bungies talent, and is willing to fork over significant sums of money to incentivize them to stay. Again, even according to your precious "Press Release", they explicitly state that their main interest was to gain Bungie's expertise.

Yeah, pretty sure most people are familiar with non-competitive clauses, and what they are. Of course there's no "big fine". At most the former employer would sue you in civil court. In most places, non-compete agreements are almost impossible to enforce. In some states, they're even banned outright.


Regarding MS and Activision. I'm not sure what you have or haven't shown, but I've seen you claim on more than one occasion that... MS is legally bound to release future CoD games on Playstation based on their "SEC filings, interviews, and twitter posts". I'd also like to point out that your quip of "we don't have a similar one from Sony & Bungie" kind of puts a hole in your earlier argument of "bullshit, it's public" spiel.

I believe you act in bad faith not for highlighting public quotes, but due to your interpretation of not just public quotes, but by what I can figure is your imagination. You make absolutely baseless claims, and push a narrative of Sony being the only one capable of insisting on conditions, and having leverage. The burden of proof isn't solely on me here either. I don't have to actually prove anything because I'm not the one here making hard claims. You are, and you're making them with no source at that. You're the one who needs to produce a copy/link of contract Sony and Bungie signed when they made the deal. And despite being asked twice now, has still failed to do so. Toxic would be making baseless claims that are at best your opinion, and passing them off as fact. Yeah, I'm pretty sure you're posting habits are a bit toxic.

I have no issues with nor get butthurt about anything they say. What I do have an issue with is you pretending people said things they didn't, pretending your subjective opinion is fact, and continuing to argue something is public, but for "reasons" is unable to produce it. Don't really have an issue with your lowkey fanboy behavior. It's annoying, and at times makes me wonder what would cause such behavior. But it's often funny enough that it at least provides some level of entertainment.

As much as you dismantle his bullshit, this particular shill has developed the uncanny technique of obsfucating your facts in a word vomit sea of fanfiction, hypocrisy and unrelated tangents. Probably in hopes that you disengage due to confusion. I said something similar to him a few weeks ago when he started randomly talking about things that MS follows Sony on (while conveniently ignoring the fact that Sony has copied and continues to copy way more from MS even today, but anyway, who fucking cares in the first place).
 

Lognor

Banned
He is talking about an existing revenue stream that is already in place with Bungie. You can't eliminate something that doesn't exist yet. There is a distinction there that you are not getting.
An existing revenue stream that is in place with Destiny 1 and 2. What about Destiny 3? Or whatever game Bungie decides to work on next? On those future games, there is no existing revenue stream. And yet Bungie will make those future games for Xbox.
 

Topher

Gold Member
An existing revenue stream that is in place with Destiny 1 and 2. What about Destiny 3? Or whatever game Bungie decides to work on next? On those future games, there is no existing revenue stream. And yet Bungie will make those future games for Xbox.

That is a continuation of the existing revenue stream. That has nothing to do with what Sony does with other live services from other studios in PlayStation. Just as Minecraft Dungeons continued the revenue stream on PlayStation but had no bearing on Starfield only being on Xbox and PC.
 
Last edited:

Lognor

Banned
That is a continuation of the existing revenue stream. That has nothing to do with what Sony does with other live services from other studios in PlayStation. Just as Minecraft Dungeons continued the revenue stream on PlayStation but had no bearing on Starfield being only on Xbox and PC.
Well then if that's your argument the next Elder Scrolls game should be on Playstation, right? In your definition it's a "continuation of the existing revenue stream."

And what about Bungie's next game that is NOT Destiny? Are you saying that will only be on Playstation since it's not a continuation of the existing revenue stream?

It's as simple as Bungie wanted to stay multiplatform (and likely not what Sony wanted), but Sony agreed in order to get the deal done.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Well then if that's your argument the next Elder Scrolls game should be on Playstation, right? In your definition it's a "continuation of the existing revenue stream."

And what about Bungie's next game that is NOT Destiny? Are you saying that will only be on Playstation since it's not a continuation of the existing revenue stream?

It's as simple as Bungie wanted to stay multiplatform (and likely not what Sony wanted), but Sony agreed in order to get the deal done.

I'm saying one business decision has no bearing on the other. You can try to put this into a logical equation all you want, but ultimately these companies make decisions that are not determined by some kind of hard rules of precedence. The fact that Microsoft didn't follow the same path as Minecraft with Bethesda tells us there is no pattern to be followed here.

You are right that Bungie expressed a desire to continue making games for Xbox. Sony didn't have a problem with that. So what point are you trying to make here?
 

Lognor

Banned
I'm saying one business decision has no bearing on the other. You can try to put this into a logical equation all you want, but ultimately these companies make decisions that are not determined by some kind of hard rules of precedence. The fact that Microsoft didn't follow the same path as Minecraft with Bethesda tells us there is no pattern to be followed here.

You are right that Bungie expressed a desire to continue making games for Xbox. Sony didn't have a problem with that. So what point are you trying to make here?
The point I was making that it was Bungie's desire to continue to make games for Xbox. That it was not Sony who came to Bungie and said hey we want to buy you and we want you to make games for Xbox. It was Bungie's demand, not Sony's. This is counter to what the other poster said:

And your still not providing any proof that Bungie forced Sony to make them a publisher and to allow them to keep their games multiplatform.

You’re really underestimating Sony.
I'm underestimating Sony. LOL. He is claiming that it was Sony that wanted Bungie to continue making games for Xbox. That doesn't hold water.

None of us have any proof (that I'm aware of), but the likely scenario was that Sony made an offer to acquire Bungie which included a stipulation that Sony got to decide where their games released and Bungie countered that they would need to remain multiplatform and continue to release games for Xbox. Sony was clearly fine with that because the acquisition went through, but to claim that it was part of Sony's offer rings hollow based on what we've seen Sony do with past acquisitions.
 

Topher

Gold Member
The point I was making that it was Bungie's desire to continue to make games for Xbox. That it was not Sony who came to Bungie and said hey we want to buy you and we want you to make games for Xbox. It was Bungie's demand, not Sony's. This is counter to what the other poster said:

It doesn't matter. Sony could have said no. They were fine with it. Again, what is your point?
 

Lognor

Banned
It doesn't matter. Sony could have said no. They were fine with it. Again, what is your point?
I just told you my point. It doesn't matter. Little of what we talk about here matters. Why are you judging what one can and cannot talk about? You think all your posts matter? Come off it.
 

Topher

Gold Member
I just told you my point. It doesn't matter. Little of what we talk about here matters. Why are you judging what one can and cannot talk about? You think all your posts matter? Come off it.

What are you even talking about? No, I have no idea what your point is. That's why I'm asking. How that translates into me "judging" what you can talk about.....I have no idea. Also no idea what your problem is.
 
Last edited:

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
You are right that Bungie expressed a desire to continue making games for Xbox. Sony didn't have a problem with that. So what point are you trying to make here?

Well maybe Sony didn't have an issue with it because it fit their plans for live service games. One of the best ways to increase revenue for them is to have a massive install base. What better way to do that than by releasing them on as many platforms as possible?

Sony has become more open to releasing games on multiple platforms so this was the next logical step for them.

In no way does this mean that Sony is weak or made a bad deal. They obviously see value in doing this.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Well maybe Sony didn't have an issue with it because it fit their plans for live service games. One of the best ways to increase revenue for them is to have a massive install base. What better way to do that than by releasing them on as many platforms as possible?

Sony has become more open to releasing games on multiple platforms so this was the next logical step for them.

In no way does this mean that Sony is weak or made a bad deal. They obviously see value in doing this.

I agree. They pretty much said expanding live service was a big reason for the acquisition. I doubt taking Destiny off of Xbox was ever even a consideration. Like you said, no one to shut down that revenue stream if it coincides with your larger plans which were obviously not about making Destiny exclusive.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
I agree. They pretty much said expanding live service was a big reason for the acquisition. I doubt taking Destiny off of Xbox was ever even a consideration. Like you said, no one to shut down that revenue stream if it coincides with your larger plans which were obviously not about making Destiny exclusive.

I agree with the sentiment that Destiny was one of the reasons behind the purchase but a bigger one is the teams ability to make successful live service games. It's why Sony probably paid that premium just to keep people at the company. The way I'm seeing this is that Sony wants to own the next Fornite. Which is why it makes sense to keep Bungies titles on as many platforms as possible. Obviously this is different than their stance with PlayStation Studio games which is probably why Bungie is a separate division.

We have to wait and see if this pays out but I'm struggling to see how this is a bad deal at the moment.
 
I have gone back and forth on the MS purchase thingy.

First was that I hated it cause at the time(early) I thought they’d take COD games to be of other platforms.

But then they said they’d keep it multiplatform and I thought about all the amazing studios that would be released from the COD mines coupled with studios workers being treated better. This made me very positive to the news.

But now after the reports of MS studios being crap places for workers I’m back to the middle.

I do think it would benefit them if they kept a lot of flag shit ABK games multiplat, through pure good will. At least for me.
 

Lognor

Banned
I agree. They pretty much said expanding live service was a big reason for the acquisition. I doubt taking Destiny off of Xbox was ever even a consideration. Like you said, no one to shut down that revenue stream if it coincides with your larger plans which were obviously not about making Destiny exclusive.
There is a difference between taking Destiny off Xbox and releasing future Bungie games on Xbox. Microsoft did not take Elder Scrolls Online, Fallout 76, etc off Playstation when they made the Bethesda acquisition. But future Bethesda games will not be on Playstation. There is a difference here.

Future Bungie games will be on Xbox.
 

Topher

Gold Member
There is a difference between taking Destiny off Xbox and releasing future Bungie games on Xbox. Microsoft did not take Elder Scrolls Online, Fallout 76, etc off Playstation when they made the Bethesda acquisition. But future Bethesda games will not be on Playstation. There is a difference here.

Future Bungie games will be on Xbox.

When I said take Destiny off of Xbox I talking about future Destiny games. You cannot remove Destiny from Xbox after the fact. There are contracts in place and people have already purchased the game. So obviously, what I was saying to MasterCornholio MasterCornholio was about the franchise going forward.

Yes, Destiny will continue on Xbox just as Minecraft has continued on PlayStation. I think we've covered this.
 

Lognor

Banned
When I said take Destiny off of Xbox I talking about future Destiny games. You cannot remove Destiny from Xbox after the fact. There are contracts in place and people have already purchased the game. So obviously, what I was saying to MasterCornholio MasterCornholio was about the franchise going forward.

Yes, Destiny will continue on Xbox just as Minecraft has continued on PlayStation. I think we've covered this.
When you say they cannot remove Destiny from Xbox, you mean future Destiny games? That's not really removing it though, is it? I don't play the Destiny games, but they're all standalone, right? Destiny 2 is not tied to Destiny 1. And neither will the sequel.

But couldn't you say the same about Elder Scrolls if your argument is that the publisher cannot remove future games? Skyrim was on Playstation. So based on your argument, the next Elder Scrolls game should be on Playstation. Unless we are only talking about live service games.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
When I said take Destiny off of Xbox I talking about future Destiny games. You cannot remove Destiny from Xbox after the fact. There are contracts in place and people have already purchased the game. So obviously, what I was saying to MasterCornholio MasterCornholio was about the franchise going forward.

Yes, Destiny will continue on Xbox just as Minecraft has continued on PlayStation. I think we've covered this.

I also expect Destiny to continue forward on Xbox as well as other live service games as well. Bungie didn't claim that everything will be available on all platforms so there's definitely a possibility that some things might remain console exclusive. Like for example if Sony loans Bungie the Killzone IP I don't see it appearing on Xbox but that's just my opinion.
 

yurinka

Member
No. You can stick your bullshit where the sun don't shine for all I care. I don't want press releases, blog posts, or interviews. I SAID POST THE CONTRACT OR A LINK TO IT. If you can't, then you're guessing. Look, this isn't that hard. Provide the requested proof or stfu about it.
You must be crazy if you think that a company is lying on a press release where they say they bought a 100% shares of another company, or that they lie on a SEC filing. I don't have to provide you anything and obviously less a confidential document, it's another nonsensical thing to ask me this.

You're simply desperate because don't have anyhing to back your claims, so his is why you insult and ask for nonsensical things.

It's hypocritical due to your post history. I don't even have to debate your point regarding how companies work. You've laid out how companies work here in this thread in order to claim that Ryan can make Bungie employees do whatever he pleases, and work on whatever game he wants. Of course in other threads as well as here to a lesser extent, you claim the exact opposite for MS regarding Activision, and I'm not even talking about the contracts from before the acquisition that MS will honor either.
Bullshit, stop lying and insulting me.

It's common sense that CEO can fire his employees, and that employees won't go rogue against the interests, strategy and orders of the company that owns them, to do something that would hurt their own company and doing it against the will and orders of their boss and owner would be a suicide. First they wouldn't be allowed to do it and second if they do something big against the orders of their boss they would be fired. And the CEO and top staff doesn't need the approval of their employees to define or change their strategy. This is goes in this way for Sony, MS and any other big company in the world. It's just common sense.

A separate topic is to lie to their investors and regulators. MS, Sony or any other company can't do it. If they say that will do something, and just after the acquisition they do the opposite, they can get in serious trouble with (current and potential future) investors and regulators. What it would be ok would be to say something to the investors and regulators and to do what they promised. And then after several years, let's say 10 years or something like that, after releasing 2 or 3 games of this acquired company, they can say their investors that they changed their mind and reviewed their strategy because these games and strategy underperformed and failed. That would be ok. For Sony, for MS and for any company.

I never said the opposite.
As we've already established. You have no idea what Bungie can or can't do because as we've already covered previously. You haven't seen any legal purchase agreement contract.
The press release I posted said Sony bought 100% of Bungie, which means Sony totally controls Bungie. This is a fact and don't need any legal purchase agreement to know it. If something, you are the one who has no idea.

What info we do have actually suggests the opposite of what you believe though.
No, it's a fact that Sony owns the 100% of Bungie, so has full control over it. Absolutely nothing suggest this is wrong.

Even your precious "press release" clearly states that Bungie is free to release it's games where it sees fit, as it wants it's games played by people anywhere. While you think that somehow can only result in Playstation recieving some sort of small exclusive deal. It could technically be any platform holder. Furthermore, while you curiously failed to mention it. Bungie will not simply be a subsidiary "just like their other studios", and it's actually not as simple as "And SIE/Jim Ryan is now the owner and boss of Bungie." either. The only FACT the we know without doubt is that "Bungie will be an independent subsidiary of SIE and run by its board of directors chaired by Pete Parsons and Bungie’s current management team."
You're lying again.

I mentioned a gazillion times that they agreed that Bungie will now be under SIE (so yes, they are just like any other SIE subsidiaries) but to continue publishing using their own Bungie publishing label as a multiplatform publisher including in rival consoles for their current and future games, instead of being included inside the PS Studios where the are focused on PS exclusive games (and later port some of them to PC).

And as happens with their other teams (multiple 1st and 2nd party teams publicly praised Sony for this), Bungie will have creative freedom to do the games they want. I also explained why Jim Ryan is fine with them going multiplatform since it fits with their SIE and Sony plans and strategy they -and even himself specifically- explained before the acquiisition: SIE wants to grow to reach new fans outside outside PS hardware, bringing their games to other platforms and to cinema or tv. I think that if they ever have some kind of exclusive would be limited to console bundles, beta/demos or to the inclusion in game subs because they didn't say anything about these topics and I assume Sony will want to get something of this.

And I obviously tthink Sony won't make exclusive stuff for Nintendo or Microsoft, it doesn't make sense at all. I don't see why SIE, who are now the only owners of Bungie, would want to do that. I get they keep Bungie as a multiplatform publisher to don't leave money on the table, to secure they continue making games for them, to don't piss off their fans and to differentiate with a different publishing brand the games thtey will publish on other consoles, to make easier to understand that PS Studios will remain console exclusive. But doesn't make sense to see Sony making exclusive stuff for MS.

I think it will work well and that they will continue publishing Bungie's games as total multiplatform, I don't expect this to change. But I think that if somewhere in the future (not soon, I'm talking maybe 10 or so in the future) Jim Ryan/SIE change their mind -let's say in an unrealistic case where the next 2 or 3 Bungie games are crap and tank hard in sales- and decide it' better to change their strategy, they'll do it. Sony owns Bungie so can fire and replace people or to change their strategy, publishing label and the games they are greenlighted to do.

Of course. That was literally one of my points. You seem to be on the side of 'if the employees want those bonuses, they can't leave the company, so they'd better do what Ryan says.' While I'm saying 'Why would Sony offer such large sums of money to retain employees, if they plan on firing them if they don't make the games Ryan wants.' Sony obviously values Bungies talent, and is willing to fork over significant sums of money to incentivize them to stay. Again, even according to your precious "Press Release", they explicitly state that their main interest was to gain Bungie's expertise.
I didn't say they can't leave the company. They are employees, not slaves. What I said is that in many cases -I didn't say it's the specific one for this particular case- key (not all) staff of the acquired sttudio sign as part of the acquisition that will stay there for at least X amount of years after the acquisition and if they personally decide to leave before, they have to pay a penalty to the company.

In other cases it's also signed that during X years you can't be hired by direct competition and if you do so they can ask you to pay a penalty (which for many cases for many reason isn't paid or even asked). In other cases (which are compatible wtth the previous two), they pay you a bonus if you stay for X years after the acquisition on top of the typical seniority bonus that any employee has for having worked during X years in the company. In other cases they get stock options: give you stocks for a very cheap price and sign that after X years if you continue in the company they will buy it to you at a minimum of certain price which is way higher than thte current one. In some other cases, also compatible with being on top of all or any of the other ones, for the employees who also owned stocks of the owned studio, part of the payment of these stocks is paid after staying for X years in the acquired company, and if they leave before they aren't paid.

These are called retention bonuses and they said in the public documents I mentioned -specifically in a Sony IR report to their investors, so again they aren't lying here even if you don't like it- that $1.2B of the $3.6B will be paid in following years because they are linked -at least partly- to retention bonuses. So we know that, as usual in this type of acquisitions, Bungie employees signed some of these things or something similar. We also know that at least some Bungie employees were stock holders (and now SIE is the only stock holder since they bough 100% of the stocks), so pretty likely they signed at least the last one I mentioned.

There is nothing in any press release, public IR document or interview I provided (plus in the other ones) that goes against what I'm saying or that would prove me wrong in anything I said.

And yes, one of the main reasons of why they bought them is due to their knowledge, expertise, data and tools in GaaS (and I'd add MP and FPS) and to share it with their PS Studios. So in addition to he obvious reasons of why when a company buys another wants to retain at least most of the key staff duing at least during a few years (to continue doing great stuff), in this case Sony specifically wants the GaaS related key staff to remain there to share this knowledge/data/tools with their PS Studios.

Regarding MS and Activision. I'm not sure what you have or haven't shown, but I've seen you claim on more than one occasion that... MS is legally bound to release future CoD games on Playstation based on their "SEC filings, interviews, and twitter posts". I'd also like to point out that your quip of "we don't have a similar one from Sony & Bungie" kind of puts a hole in your earlier argument of "bullshit, it's public" spiel.
MS and Activision said things like this in the SEC filling, a legally binding document for regulators and investors:


Later Phil specifically said that they desire to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation, the MS president said on CNBC that CoD will not only continue on PS, but that they will also release it on Switch too. MS also said on their blog this:


So yes, I expect them to keep being multiplatform with "CoD and other popular Activision Blizzard titles" not limited to pre-acquisition agreements, as they did with Minecraft (all post acquisition games and DLCs of this IP were full multiplatform, none of them is Xbox exclusive) because it's what they said.

For the Bungie acquisition both Sony and Bungie also said clearly that Bungie's current and future games won't be PS exclusive but that instead will continue being multiplatform including rival consoles. Bungie said they will also bring Destiny 2 to Switch. We don't have any legally binding document like the SEC filling stating that, but I believe them and I think they will go full multiplatform unless they change their mind somewhere in the somewhat distant future, something I think won't happen because something Sony/Ryan said they want is to reach players who are outside PS. Which makes sense with AAA costs rising every generation, so companies have to find new revenue sources.

I expect Sony and MS to don't be lying to their investors, and to do what they said at least during many years, specially MS because of what they said in the SEC. After that, both Sony and MS may change their mind. And their Bungie/Zenimax/Activision Blizzard employees will do what their bosses and owners will tell them to do, even if they keep having their own publishing label and creative freedom to do the games they want.

I believe you act in bad faith not for highlighting public quotes, but due to your interpretation of not just public quotes, but by what I can figure is your imagination.

You make absolutely baseless claims, and push a narrative of Sony being the only one capable of insisting on conditions, and having leverage. The burden of proof isn't solely on me here either. I don't have to actually prove anything because I'm not the one here making hard claims. You are, and you're making them with no source at that. You're the one who needs to produce a copy/link of contract Sony and Bungie signed when they made the deal. And despite being asked twice now, has still failed to do so. Toxic would be making baseless claims that are at best your opinion, and passing them off as fact. Yeah, I'm pretty sure you're posting habits are a bit toxic.

I have no issues with nor get butthurt about anything they say. What I do have an issue with is you pretending people said things they didn't, pretending your subjective opinion is fact, and continuing to argue something is public, but for "reasons" is unable to produce it. Don't really have an issue with your lowkey fanboy behavior. It's annoying, and at times makes me wonder what would cause such behavior. But it's often funny enough that it at least provides some level of entertainment.

Bullshit. I frequently provide quotes and link to sources again and again to back my claims and did it about this topic several times, also in many other threads. You didn't prove me wrong or baseless in a single claim I made. If there is here a toxic fanboy, one in bad faith insulting and lying without providing a single source to back claims isn't me. It's you.

If there is a baseless claim here, it's yours asking to provide the (confidential so obviously not public) acquisition contract for some unknown reason. It's official that Sony bought 100% of the shares of Bungie and I provided the link to the related Sony Inverstors Relations press release document stating it, so it's a fact that Sony has full control over Bungie. We don't need the acquisition contract to know that.

And well, I won't provide you any single link more to you and don't want to waste more time with you. Use google or read my previous post in this or other threads if you want to know something else. Goodbye.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
I also expect Destiny to continue forward on Xbox as well as other live service games as well. Bungie didn't claim that everything will be available on all platforms so there's definitely a possibility that some things might remain console exclusive. Like for example if Sony loans Bungie the Killzone IP I don't see it appearing on Xbox but that's just my opinion.

I don't know that the extent of the agreement between Sony and Bungie was that Bungie will never create a game for PlayStation and not Xbox. My understand is that Bungie expressed a desire to continue its work on Xbox. That could be for the simple reason of not wanting to lay off part of their team that handles Xbox. I'm guessing, but not unheard of. Either way, it is up to Sony and Bungie as to how strict they are going to be with this in the future.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
You must be crazy if you think that a company is lying on a press release where they say they bought a 100% shares of another company, or that they lie on a SEC filing. I don't have to provide you anything and obviously less a confidential document, it's another nonsensical thing to ask me this.

You're simply desperate because don't have anyhing to back your claims, so his is why you insult and ask for nonsensical things.


Bullshit, stop lying and insulting me.

It's common sense that CEO can fire his employees, and that employees won't go rogue against the interests, strategy and orders of the company that owns them, to do something that would hurt it and doing it against the will of their boss and owner. First they wouldn't be allowed to do it and second if they do something big against the orders of their boss they would be fired. And the CEO and top staff doesn't need the approval of their employees to define or change their strategy. This is geos in this way for Sony, MS and any other compnay in the world.

A separate topic is to lie to their investors and regulators. MS, Sony or any other company can't do it. If they say that will do something, and just after the acquisition they do the opposite, they can get in serious trouble with investors and regulators. What it would be ok would be to say something to the investors and regulators and to do what they promised. And then after several years, let's say 10 years or something like that, after releasing 2 or 3 games of this acquired company, they can say their investors that changed their mind and reviewed their stategy. That would be ok. For Sony, for MS and for any company.

I never said the opposite.

The press release I posted said Sony bought 100% of Bungie, so totally controls them. This is a fact and don't need any legal purchase agreement to know it.


No, it's a fact that Sony owns the 100% of Bungie. Absolutely nothing suggest this is wrong.


You're lying again.

I mentioned a gazillion times that they agreed that Bungie will now be under SIE but to continue publishing using their own Bungie publishing label as multiplatform including in rival consoles for their current and future games instead of being included inside the PS Studios where the are focused on PS exclusive games (and later port some of them to PC). And as happens with their other teams, Sony will have creative freedom to do the games they want. I also explained why Jim Ryan is fine with it since it fits with their SIE and Sony plans and strategy they -and even himself specifically- explained before the acquiisition (SIE wanting to grow to reach new fans outside outside PS hardware, bringing their games to other platforms and to cinema or tv). I think that if they have some kind of exclusive would be limited to console bundles, beta/demos or to the inclusion in game subs because they didn't say anything about these topics and I assume Sony will want to get something.

And I obviously tthink Sony won't make exclusive stuff for Nintendo or Microsoft, it doesn't make sense at all. I don't see why SIE, who are now the only owners of Bungie, would want to do that. I get they keep Bungie as a multiplatform publisher to don't leave money on the table, to don't piss off their fans and to differentiate with a different publishing brand the games thtey will publish on other consoles, to make easier to understand that PS Studios will remain console exclusive.

I think it will work well and that they will continue doing it, I don't expect this to change. But I think that if somewhere in the future (not soon, I'm talking maybe 10 or so in the future) Jim Ryan/SIE change their mind -let's say in an unrealistic case where the next 2 or 3 Bungie games are crap and tank hard in sales- and decide it' better to change it, they'll do it. They own Bungie so can fire and replace people or to change their strategy.


I didn't say they can't leave the company. They are employees, not slaves. What I said is that in many cases key (not all) staff of the acquired sttudio sign as part of the acquisition that will stay there for at least X amount of years after the acquisition and if they personally decide to leave before, they have to pay a penalty to the company. In other cases it's also signed that during X years you can't be hired by direct competition and if you do so they can ask you to pay a penalty. In other cases (which are compatible wtth the previous two), they pay you a bonus if you stay for X years after the acquisition on top of the typical seniority bonus that any employee has for having worked during X years in the company. In some other cases, also compatible with the other ones, for the employees who also owned stocks of the owned studio, part of the payment of these stocks is paid after staying for X years in the acquired company and if they leave before they aren't paid.

These are called retention bonuses and they said in the public documents I mentioned -specifically in a Sony IR report to their invesors, so again aren't lying here even if you don't like it- that $1.2B of the $3.6B will be paid in following years because they are linked to retention bonuses. So we know that, as usual in this type of acquisitions, Bungie employees signed some of these things or something similar. We also know that at least some Bungie employees were stock holders (and now SIE is the only stock holder since they bough 100% of the stocks).

There is nothing wrong in any press release, public IR document or interview that goes against what I'm saying or that proves me wrong in anything I said.

And yes, one of the main reasons of why they bought them is due to their knowledge, expertise, data and tools in GaaS (and I'd add MP and FPS) and to share it with their PS Studios. So in addition to he obvious reasons of why when a company buys another wants to retain at least most of the key staff duing at least during a few years (to continue doing great stuff), in this case Sony specifically wants the GaaS related key staff to remain there to share this knowledge/data/tools with their PS Studios.


MS and Activision said things like this in the SEC filling, a legally binding document for regulators and investors:


Later Phil specifically said that they desire to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation, the MS president said on CNBC that will not only continue on PS, but that they will also release it on Switch. MS also said on their blog this:


So yes, I expect them to keep being multiplatform with "CoD and other popular Activision Blizzard titles" not limited to pre-acquisition agreements, as they did with Minecraft because it's what they said.

For the Bungie acquisition but both Sony and Bungie also said clearly that their current and future games won't PS exclusive but that instead will continue being multiplatform including rival consoles. Bungie said they will also bring Destiny 2 to Switch. We don't have any legally binding document like the SEC filling stating that, but I believe them and I think they will go full multiplatform unless they change their mind somewhere in the future, something I think won't happen because something Sony/Ryan said they want is to reach players who are outside PS. Which makes sense with AAA costs rising every generation, so companies have to find new revenue sources.

I expect Sony and MS to don't be lying to their investors, and to do what they said at least during many years, specially MS because of what they said in the SEC. After that, they may change their mind. And their Bungie/Zenimax/Activision Blizzard will do what their bosses and owners will tell them to do, even if they have their own publishing label and creative freedom to do the games they want.


Bullshit. I frequently provide quotes and link sources again and again to back my claims and did it about this topic several times, also in many other threads.You didn't prove me wrong or baseless in a single claim I made. If there is here a toxic fanboy, one in bad faith insulting and lying without providing a single source to back claims isn't me. It's you.

If there is a baseless claim here, it's yours asking to provide the (confidential so obviously not public) acquisition contract for some unknown reason. It's official that Sony bought 100% of the shares of Bungie and I provided the related Sony Inverstors Relations press release document stating it, so it's a fact they have full control over Bungie. We don't need the acquisition contract to know that.

And well, I won't provide you any single link and don't want to waste more time with you. Use google or read my previous post in this or other threads if you want to know something else.

Very informative post. It really helped me understand how these types of deals are made.

Thank you.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
I don't know that the extent of the agreement between Sony and Bungie was that Bungie will never create a game for PlayStation and not Xbox. My understand is that Bungie expressed a desire to continue its work on Xbox. That could be for the simple reason of not wanting to lay off part of their team that handles Xbox. I'm guessing, but not unheard of. Either way, it is up to Sony and Bungie as to how strict they are going to be with this in the future.

Cutting out a platform doesn't necessarily mean a downsizing of the company. For example PlayStation is being cut out of Stafield but I haven't really read about any downsizing there.

Maybe Bungie said that because they have a huge fanbase on Xbox and they don't want to lose those customers. I know it sounds crazy but it's definitely a possibility.

The good news is that they will be employing more people due to receiving funds from Sony. Hopefully this allows Bungie to make even more and better games as well as helping out with employment.
 

phil_t98

Gold Member
When I said take Destiny off of Xbox I talking about future Destiny games. You cannot remove Destiny from Xbox after the fact. There are contracts in place and people have already purchased the game. So obviously, what I was saying to MasterCornholio MasterCornholio was about the franchise going forward.

Yes, Destiny will continue on Xbox just as Minecraft has continued on PlayStation. I think we've covered this.

question is if Minecraft will get a ps5 version if they upgrade to a series x version
 
Cutting out a platform doesn't necessarily mean a downsizing of the company. For example PlayStation is being cut out of Stafield but I haven't really read about any downsizing there.

Maybe Bungie said that because they have a huge fanbase on Xbox and they don't want to lose those customers. I know it sounds crazy but it's definitely a possibility.

The good news is that they will be employing more people due to receiving funds from Sony. Hopefully this allows Bungie to make even more and better games as well as helping out with employment.


My guess is that they are gone keep doing GaaS stuff and thus having one more platform to recruit from helps them a lot.
Especially like cross play seems invaluable to a GaaS title.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
My guess is that they are gone keep doing GaaS stuff and thus having one more platform to recruit from helps them a lot.
Especially like cross play seems invaluable to a GaaS title.

Definitely sounds likely. I've read several press releases and interviews. What stood out the most was the focus on live service games and the technology involved in making them.

My guess is that Bungie will focus on those types of titles plus share their knowledge to help improve multiplayer games made by PlayStation Studios. It does make sense to release those types of games on other platforms. If you make something as popular as Destiny or Fornite it's a good idea to have a huge install base. It makes sense to release those games on multiple platforms in order to maximize revenue.
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
You already got ratio'd out of the topic by other people, but I can't help myself. Both Sony AND Bungie literally said that, unequivocally, they will remain a multiplatform studio and continue to publish future games on competitor platforms.

Sit down and hold that fat L.
Sony owns Bungie.
Sony controls everything related to Bungie.
Sony don't make games for Xbox.

Destiny 2 is already on Xbox and PC with millions of players and has tons of future content coming, this content/support from Sony's Bungie will continue.

To the other parts of your post...
It must be to a blocked troll.
 

Corndog

Member
Sony owns Bungie.
Sony controls everything related to Bungie.
Sony don't make games for Xbox.

Destiny 2 is already on Xbox and PC with millions of players and has tons of future content coming, this content/support from Sony's Bungie will continue.

To the other parts of your post...
It must be to a blocked troll.
MLB the show is a Sony game on Xbox
 

Banjo64

Member
Can't believe I just read that. Again, it was not up to Sony whether bungie accepted that deal. YOU are really underestimating bungie. They accepted the deal under their terms
It wasn’t a deal. It was an acquisition. Deal makes it sound like there’s 2 equal parties with equal say. Well, there isn’t. It was one company acquiring another. If they wanted to enter a partnership, they could have. But they didn’t. Bungie are subservient to Sony now, end of story.
 

Lognor

Banned
I also expect Destiny to continue forward on Xbox as well as other live service games as well. Bungie didn't claim that everything will be available on all platforms so there's definitely a possibility that some things might remain console exclusive. Like for example if Sony loans Bungie the Killzone IP I don't see it appearing on Xbox but that's just my opinion.
Do you actually think Bungie would take one of Sony's IP rather than make their own new IP? I mean, maybe if Bungie gets large enough to support multiple projects, but I don't see it happening OVER working on a new IP or on Destiny. We know with Bungie they have a habit of getting acquired (or long term partnership in terms of Activision) and then going off on their own again. I don't see them wanting to lose out on another Halo type of IP. They probably want some part ownership in any IP they work on.
 

Lognor

Banned
It wasn’t a deal. It was an acquisition. Deal makes it sound like there’s 2 equal parties with equal say. Well, there isn’t. It was one company acquiring another. If they wanted to enter a partnership, they could have. But they didn’t. Bungie are subservient to Sony now, end of story.
You are joking, right? I think you are, but I can't really tell. You're good.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
It wasn’t a deal. It was an acquisition. Deal makes it sound like there’s 2 equal parties with equal say. Well, there isn’t. It was one company acquiring another. If they wanted to enter a partnership, they could have. But they didn’t. Bungie are subservient to Sony now, end of story.

If anything it was similar to Microsoft buying Bethesda.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
Do you actually think Bungie would take one of Sony's IP rather than make their own new IP? I mean, maybe if Bungie gets large enough to support multiple projects, but I don't see it happening OVER working on a new IP or on Destiny. We know with Bungie they have a habit of getting acquired (or long term partnership in terms of Activision) and then going off on their own again. I don't see them wanting to lose out on another Halo type of IP. They probably want some part ownership in any IP they work on.

I don’t know your just assuming that Bungie will refuse to work with Sony on that. Bungie is definitely using funds from Sony to expand their company. That does mean they are capable of working on multiple projects at once. If Sony wanted to request something built off one of their IPs Bungie would seriously consider it.

Remember things are going to change for Bungie now that they are owned by Sony. It’s not like Sony can’t have any influence over them.
 
I hope this deal gets approved, much better than MS walking around with $75B reserved for gaming related acquisitions, at least now you'd think they are mostly done acquiring publishers.

Both Activision and Blizzard seem to be at an all time low point when it comes to quality and talent (I don't think anyone would disagree with that statement), it can't get any worse under MS, I think.
 
Last edited:

Banjo64

Member
You are joking, right? I think you are, but I can't really tell. You're good.
I can’t tell if you’re being serious to be honest 😂

How much autonomy do Bungie have in your mind? Could they just tell Sony they are exclusively making Flappy Birds games from now on? Could they tank their entire business and go into liquidation?
 

Zeroing

Banned
I hope this deal gets approved, much better than MS walking around with $75B reserved for gaming related acquisitions, at least now you'd think they are mostly done acquiring publishers.

Both Activision and Blizzard seem to be at an all time low point when it comes to quality and talent (I don't think anyone would disagree with that statement), it can't get any worse under MS, I think.
Even if the deal gets approved, they only have 1 year of not buying stuff… are they going to stop? Who knows
 
Even if the deal gets approved, they only have 1 year of not buying stuff… are they going to stop? Who knows
Their buying spree started in 2018 and has just escalated since then. They'll have to stop at some point or their studio infrastructure will be way to big for something like Gamepass to pay for it (unless most of these acquired publishers keep releasing their games everywhere).

Are they going to buy EA/Ubisoft/Take-Two? I doubt it. I could see some sense in them trying to buy Epic but even if it gets approved, it would cost a ridiculous amount of money and it would be a massive risk to take.

To me it's pretty clear that the "Netflix of gaming" is a complete pipedream (we can tell that by how the other companies Valve/Nintendo/Sony/Epic/Meta/Nvidia aren't trying that hard to copy this Gamepass business model). Gamepass has existed for 5 years already, now look at how much MS has had to spend to grow their studios in an attempt to grow the service. It just doesn't seem to be working at all.

Where are the success stories like Fall Guys or Rocket League for games that released on Gamepass? I'm not seeing it. The service it self doesn't seem to be disruptive in any way aside for the fact that MS is willing to spend a lot of money on it.

With all the money MS spent on this, they could be the majority share holder of Netflix at this point, how big would Gamepass have to be to justify that? Not to mention that Netflix itself has had like a 40% drop in value in less than a year, does anyone want to actually be the Netflix of games now?
 
Last edited:

Zeroing

Banned
Their buying spree started in 2018 and has just escalated since then. They'll have to stop at some point or their studio infrastructure will be way to big for something like Gamepass to pay for it (unless most of these acquired publishers keep releasing their games everywhere).

Are they going to buy EA/Ubisoft/Take-Two? I doubt it. I could see some sense in them trying to buy Epic but even if it gets approved, it would cost a ridiculous amount of money and it would be a massive risk to take.

To me it's pretty clear that the "Netflix of gaming" is a complete pipedream (we can tell that by how the other companies Valve/Nintendo/Sony/Epic/Meta/Nvidia aren't trying that hard to copy this Gamepass business model). Gamepass has existed for 5 years already, now look at how much MS has had to spend to grow their studios in an attempt to grow the service. It just doesn't seem to be working at all.

Where are the success stories like Fall Guys or Rocket League for games that released on Gamepass? I'm not seeing it. The service it self doesn't seem to be disruptive in any way aside for the fact that MS is willing to spend a lot of money on it.
MS main business is not even Xbox! If they relied on Xbox they would had been out of business like sega did. Microsoft is a reactive company. They saw google and Amazon trying to get into gaming so their reaction was to buy studios. Before that they didn’t care to invest on Xbox, they even closed a lot of studios.

Microsoft can do gambling risks that might not pay out, something that Sony and Nintendo cannot do.

I also do not see Amazon, Facebook, Google being so aggressive so who knows how all that will pay off.

And yes you are correct! MS does not have the years and experience of managing so many studios and projects. Even if they give them total freedom sooner or later someone will want their investment to pay off!
 

Lognor

Banned
I can’t tell if you’re being serious to be honest 😂

How much autonomy do Bungie have in your mind? Could they just tell Sony they are exclusively making Flappy Birds games from now on? Could they tank their entire business and go into liquidation?
It takes two to tangle. You realize that it was not a hostile takeover, right? Two WILLING partners.
 
Last edited:

Banjo64

Member
It takes two to tangle. You realize that it was not a hostile takeover, right? Two WILLING partners.
Yes, one partner seeking to acquire and one seeking to be acquired.

My question wasn’t even sarcastic, how much autonomy do you think Bungie have now?

I’m happy to set my stall out; they have whatever autonomy Sony grant them.
 

Lognor

Banned
Yes, one partner seeking to acquire and one seeking to be acquired.

My question wasn’t even sarcastic, how much autonomy do you think Bungie have now?

I’m happy to set my stall out; they have whatever autonomy Sony grant them.
Right, UNLESS there are certain stipulations outlined in the contract of sale. We know Bungie wanted to remain multiplatform and they got their wish. Generally, Sony will be able to direct them in the fashion they choose, but again, there may be stipulations we aren't aware of, such as maybe Bungie has the right to work on projects of their choosing. We don't know. But we know that Bungie had some leverage here. They were financially well off and didn't need to be acquired. Sony was really looking to find an attractive acquisition to counter Microsoft so Bungie likely had the upper hand. Do you think Sony would have allowed Bungie to continue to develop for Xbox otherwise?
 

reksveks

Member
To me it's pretty clear that the "Netflix of gaming" is a complete pipedream (we can tell that by how the other companies Valve/Nintendo/Sony/Epic/Meta/Nvidia aren't trying that hard to copy this Gamepass business model). Gamepass has existed for 5 years already, now look at how much MS has had to spend to grow their studios in an attempt to grow the service. It just doesn't seem to be working at all.
The model isn't "Netflix of Gaming", it's more closely aligned to Amazon Prime. Its about giving something away for free (delivery or games) to get engagement on your storefront. GamePass is growing at the same pace of PS+ in the early days.

With all the money MS spent on this, they could be the majority share holder of Netflix at this point, how big would Gamepass have to be to justify that? Not to mention that Netflix itself has had like a 40% drop in value in less than a year, does anyone want to actually be the Netflix of games now?
Have a look at most companies share prices over the year, Disney is also down 30%, Sony down 18%. Netflix has a fundament issue that Microsoft doesn't, they find it really hard to monetize engagement on the platform whereas Microsoft will happily give you a discount on some MTX pack to get some more money from you.
 

Banjo64

Member
Right, UNLESS there are certain stipulations outlined in the contract of sale. We know Bungie wanted to remain multiplatform and they got their wish.
For all we know Sony, seeing the multi-platform success of God of War, MLB the Show, Horizon Zero Dawn and Death Stranding could have been happy to acquiesce.

Generally, Sony will be able to direct them in the fashion they choose, but again, there may be stipulations we aren't aware of, such as maybe Bungie has the right to work on projects of their choosing.
What does that look like in reality? Sony can generally direct them but Bungie can choose what they work on? I’m not being obtuse here but that doesn’t sound very well thought out. Who is the boss and makes the final decision when push comes to shove?

We don't know. But we know that Bungie had some leverage here. They were financially well off and didn't need to be acquired.
Need and want are 2 separate things. They wanted to be acquired by MS, then Activision and now Sony. Some developers don’t want to be independent.

Sony was really looking to find an attractive acquisition to counter Microsoft so Bungie likely had the upper hand. Do you think Sony would have allowed Bungie to continue to develop for Xbox otherwise?
Again, if Bungie suggested it and the numbers financially make sense for Sony I see no reason for them to oppose.

Let’s not forget MS are also allowing Activision to continue publishing CoD on Switch and PS also. That’s not because Activision are the boss, it’s because financially it makes sense for MS.
 
The model isn't "Netflix of Gaming", it's more closely aligned to Amazon Prime. Its about giving something away for free (delivery or games) to get engagement on your storefront. GamePass is growing at the same pace of PS+ in the early days.
PS+ has like a fraction of the effort put into it and why would someone with gamepass engage more with the storefront? Unless you are talking about microtransaction what is the point of paying for a game subscription if you are not going to be playing these games?

How many games does the average person even play each month? I'm playing Elden Ring for pretty two months now, was able to get it day one, my backlog that I accumulated over the years (game I chose based on my own taste) is already better than any game library service and I bet it's the same case for most people.

Who is gamepass target audience? People that play tons of random games each month? I don't get it.

For all the "value" that is included in the service it sure is taking it's time to become disruptive, it's availiable on PC/mobile/Xbox and still lags behind the offensively bad Switch Online service. Not to mention that a lot of the money Gamepass is getting would already be going into MS's pocked had they just kept Gold as it was.

Have a look at most companies share prices over the year, Disney is also down 30%, Sony down 18%. Netflix has a fundament issue that Microsoft doesn't, they find it really hard to monetize engagement on the platform whereas Microsoft will happily give you a discount on some MTX pack to get some more money from you.

So it comes down to MTX, the thing is F2P games already capitalize on that crowd much better. So again, Gamepass seems to be targeting a very niche audience while spending as if it was going to appeal to everyone.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom