Phil wanted to buy Sega and other companies too

Lmao, what Sony “3rd party deals” is everyone talking about?Final Fantasy 7 Remake? Ya’ll are trying to create a narrative of ’Evil Sony’ making deals with third party companies to ‘crush Xbox’ 🤣

I have never (and never would) said that Sony is evil. What I said was actions have consequences (both good and bad)

Sony has every (legal) right to secure 3rd party deals. Are some anticompetitive? My personal opinion is yes. There is a difference in Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo paying a 3rd party to develop a game that didnt have the funding, or outsourcing development of an owned IP to a 3rd party studio.

What my message was meant to convey is that when Sony (or any of the other 2) pay a publisher NOT to put a game on another platform is anticompetitive (but not illegal). As a response to that, the other players have a choice. They can lay down and take it (as MS did for a long time because of incompetent management). Nintendo chose to switch lanes and rely on their own content and innovative hardware. MS (eventually) recognized that the were never going to win against Sony by trying to play their game so they chose to adapt and go with the movie/TV model of owning a large amount of IPs that you can put on the platforms of your choice.

What im saying is that Sony made a ton of choices over the past 20yrs and now are having to live with the consequences. Its not illegal and it doesn't make them bad.

It does make it a bit ridiculous that they are essentially asking the FTC and UK to force MS to stay in the traditional console business model....................and business model where they are beating everyone soundly..............just so they dont have to adapt and compete.

They are............ironically.........being as anticompetitive as they are accusing MS of being.

MS arent angels in this, and I have stated over and over my feelings and disagreements with buying up IPs and turning the gaming industry into the movie model.

I simply asked a question: What do you think MS should have done to compete in an industry where Sony was securing so many high value IPs as console or timed exclusives? Do you think MS shouldve shrugged and said "oh well" like they did during the XB1 era?

When I have this discussion in real life, most of my colleagues (PS fans 4 to 1 btw) say that its unfair. At the end of the day, it usually just came down to they are used to getting everything except for a few mediocre MS exclusives and now they are missing out on bit hitters................kind of how Nintendo and MS have had to do for 20yrs (referring to PS3 and PS4 big titles, which were many)

@navyguy21: He is not going to read anything you wrote. Good response nonetheless.👍🏽

Could you imagine if Persona was MS exclusive? That would ruffle some feathers for sure. It does seem like MS did a partnership or deal with Sega because a bunch of their games are on GP day 1 on the Series consoles.

The thought of Microsoft having Sonic the Hedgehog as theirs is hilarious to me. I welcome it.

All I’m saying is, we keep hearing that Sony denied Microsoft of so many third party exclusives. What are they? People are talking like there are hundreds of third party exclusives out there. If we’re talking niche Japanese games, I don’t think much of that has to do with exclusive deals than it does with Xbox barely existing in Japan.

Ive been on this forum long enough to know that any list I provide will be quickly qualified in such a way to dismiss them...........but I'll bite anyway because my point is general rather than any particular title

Final Fantasy 7 (and Integrade)

Final Fantasy 16

Ghostwire Tokyo

Deathloop

Forspoken

Final Fantasy Rebirth

Death Stranding

Death Stranding 2

Silent Hill 2 Remake

KOTOR Remake

Those are just the ones off the top of my head, and I excluded the Japanese titles, indie games, and Sony funded 3rd parties.

My point being that this is just in the beginning of the generation, last gen was even more. I am sure we can both agree that there are more big 3rd party games in the pipeline that will be exclusive to PS5, at least for a time............which excludes Xbox again.

So, either Microsoft do something about it, or they lay down like they did with XB1 and get crushed.

What would you have them do? Allow it to continue and have a repeat of last gen? Buy a ton of 3rd party exclusives like Sony (like they did during the 360 era)?

This gen was a little different because not only was Sony paying to keep games from Xbox, but they were also paying to keep games from Game Pass, the one area that MS had shifted to in order to survive? Should they lay down and allow Sony to kill them off?

I have yet to see anyone defending Sony give a realistic answer as to what they were supposed to do. The one thing my colleagues say is "build organically", but that has 2 flaws.

1. Clearly, Sony did not do that. They bought almost all of the studios they have and supplemented that with 3rd party exclusives

2. New studios take 4-6 years to ship a game, Sony would put MS out of business by then.

They had to do something to survive. You may not like it, (and neither do I, id prefer they just bought as many 3rd party exclusives or funded their projects outright) but they had to either adapt or die.

Id prefer they didnt die because competition is good.

@navyguy21: You are wasting your time on this one.

Of course. Microsofts goal is to buy every major publisher. I figured that out when they got into the console business. I'm actually surprised playstation is still around tbh.

Oh snap!

do You really think those select titles are hurting Xbox that badly? I think what is hurting Xbox is lack of strong first party. People like Sony and Nintendo because they support their systems with a strong first party library.

@SolidGame_basic:

You forgot the next tweet right after:

I believe this is known, in modern business theory, as the spanky-bottom-chase-me-chase-me-hard-to-get strategy.

Sega saying that they have no intention to sell at this time means nothing really. You’d think people would have clued into this kind of phrasing by now. How many times have companies said that they have no intention of doing X at this time just to do X at a later date. They announce it when they feel the time is right. Certainly not going to mention a possible acquisition during this whole Activision-Blizzard deal going on.

Exactly. Bluepoint said the same thing right before they were purchased.

Again, you are dismissing the overall impact.

If we the 2 of us are running a race from A to B every year and the public had to bet which would win, would it mater if every year we ran the race i put 3 or 4 hurdles in your way? Taken in any particular year, you could argue that it wouldn't hurt me that much, and Id agree with you.

But the public are betting who will win (which console to purchase), and if I see a consistent pattern of hurdles being put in your way, I'd bet that your chances of winning are slim.

This is the battle that Sony wages on MS because they (rightfully so) know that they cant beat them in dollar spending so they leverage their strength as the leading console to box MS out form select titles..........every year............and it creates the meme "MS has no games".

We could argue that MS could just do a better job with first party, but they would STILL be behind because Sony has a great first party AND pays to keep content from MS.

So, I ask again. Would you have them lay down and take it? Also buy 3rd party games to keep from Sony? Buy more developers (As Sony did with PS1-now)? Buy publishers?

The only alternative that you (and my PS colleagues) are suggesting is "well, that's just the way it is", suggesting that the natural order of things is for Sony to lead and for MS to just eat scraps.

They did that for a long time because MS had a bunch of corporate stooges running the Xbox brand from 2008 until Phil got hired when most of the stooges "resigned" (Phil started with MS as an intern that loved to play games)

I give credit to Phil because he realized that Xbox was never going to win in console sales because that's a Sony stronghold. That's like trying to out Iphone the Iphone.

MS needed to adapt and they did. Sony (and I assume fans) don't like it because it challenges Sony's position as the market leader. Right now, Sony dictates the market and it follows, which is why so easy for them to secure 3rd party exclusives and so hard for MS to do so. Game Pass disrupts that and Sony is afraid of it (and rightfully so from a business standpoint)........but they could always do what they forced Nintendo and MS to do......................adapt.

@Pedro: Yep, they sure did.

While I agree with @Archangel3371 general point, that isn't the same.

Sega is a publicly traded company. BluePoint was not.

---

A public company will come out and say "we're not for sale" for a number of reasons. One example is to prevent it from willing it into existence; I'm sure some shareholders would love a payday but saying ... "yes, we're for sale' is NOT a good look.

Sega Has No Intention Of Being Acquired, Says COO After Microsoft Revelation

Never say never, though.

"We are very close with Microsoft and have a great relationship with its management team," Utsumi continued. "Microsoft particularly has a high regard for us. Xbox’s Phil Spencer and Sarah Bond are really serious about values that video game fans emphasize."

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/sega-has-no-intention-of-being-acquired-says-coo-after-microsoft-revelation/1100-6515568/

---

I get the feeling there's some kind of understanding here between the two that will be revealed after all this other stuff is in the rearview mirror. :P

Really? Name them. Gran Turismo? Nope. God Of War? Nope. Uncharted? Nope. Shadow of The Collossus? Again, no. Tlou? ... Wipeout, Twisted Metal, Ratchet&Clank, Infamous? No, no, no and no. There is more, but i wanted to leave some to you...

Microsoft? Console IPs/Franchises... Forza, Fable, lost odysse, Crackdown. That's about it. No, not much left. Halo was deep into development when MS took notice and aquired Bungie and the originally multiplatform game. Gears of War was Epic, wasn't MS ip till 2015... because it became too expensive for epic. Weak.

The rest of your post is irrelevant.

Microsoft is not healthy competition. Period. Explain to me how Microsoft, this company everybody says could buy Sony with pocket change, while trying to "outspent Sony", OUTSPENT, has a significantly smaller gaming division, lagging behind in quantity but also in quality. Where did all that money go? Not games, that's for sure. Explain to me, why would i want the incompentence that is Microsoft (not just in regards to videogames), to gobble up large portions of the industry? Good competition? Hahaha. You know what good competition is? When bad competitors (i.e. MS) get ejected out of the competitive game. Like Atari or the 3DO Company back in the days.

Why is MS so hellbent on aquiring so many Studios/Publisher? Because they know how f'ed they are if they don't. After two long decades Microsoft finally decides to spent some big money on games, games that were originally intended multiplat. Because twenty years long they sucked. You disagree? Then explain to me why? If they didn't have that kind of money, they would be out. And you dolts celebrate this company...

Sega would have been a huge move and ms did have a great relationship with sega going back to the og Xbox.

well they have more money than god, so it was reasonable to consider it.

I'm not sure Sega's current output would have made that much of a splash. If we were talking about Capcom, that would be different. I know Sega has a number of fantastic IPs that would become available to Microsoft in an acquisition, but let's be real: Microsoft has more than enough IPs that they own, 90% of which aren't getting games made for them as it is. Buying Sega would just mean them having more IPs available that they don't use.

Try learning to read. I said: "Most of Sony's best games comes from Studios that were already made and working." Never mentioned ips.

So the first half of YOUR post is irrelevant. Sony ALREADY bought the studios, they just had them make the new ips. That is exactly what MS is doing now. Just so happens the studios already come with tons of ips.

The funny thing is, if Sony wasn't so needlessly aggressive with third party ips, MS wouldn't be aggressive about buying up studios.

But you don't want to lay any blame at your favourite companies feet do you.

When it comes to competition, you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

The 7th gen was so good, because MS and Sony were pretty equal. Both companies had to work hard and the consumer won. What is happening right now isn't healthy. Sony's strategy is to just release first party games and strangle the competition with third party exclusivity.

A bad market with less competition leads to less effort, more expensive products, and even less quality. You're too much of a fanboy to see this.

MS wouldn't be steam rolling regulators if there was anything healthy about the current market and competition.

Oh and "Explain to me, why would i want" no one gives a shit what you want.

MS dose not know how to compete they always try to outspent the competition. If the deal goes thru other major players in the industry will be able to consolidate other publishers. MS will ruin gaming

However, SEGA enjoys a healthy relationship with everyone. Sony and Nintendo (the latter would complicate things with ownership of Bayonetta, which MS rejected after Bayo 1 and have a bad relationship with Platinum). In addition, Japan would outright disown SEGA given how the Xbox is received down there.

You must’ve forgot, MS doesn’t do exclusives.

Then you are mistaken.🤔

I forgot the whole “PC is considered a MS device by some here”.