Microsoft can now go ahead and close its giant deal.

    • Neato@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Competition means there’s choice. Segregating titles that were once across multiple platforms (choice) into individual platforms (no choice) is anti-competitive.

      I can’t really break it down more than that and I thought this was obvious…

      • ampersandrew@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        You do have choice. You have choice between group of exclusives A and group of exclusives B. It’s better for competition but worse for the consumer. In order for it to be better for the consumer and competition, you’d need to eliminate the concept of exclusives entirely. And I’m all for that, but I don’t know how to make that happen.

        • thoro@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well since exclusives will continue to exist, imagine if, hear me out here, third party titles remained cross platform and group B developed their own set of games at worst through infant studio acquisitions instead of, idk, acquiring the second largest third party publisher in the world (and thus all their studios).

            • thoro@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yeah the poor trillion dollar company couldn’t possibly compete with the billion dollar company by organically building an attractive portfolio. It’s not like they did it before and only lost their position due to their own mishandling of studios and misunderstanding of the market.

              • ampersandrew@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                They seemingly can’t compete, so this is how they’re making up for the ground that they lost, because right now the console market is not particularly competitive.

    • Hdcase@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Microsoft creates demand for their system largely by buying up publishers and turning all their future games exclusive, that would otherwise have been multiplatform.

      Sony and Nintendo create demand for their system largely by making great games in house, that otherwise never would have existed.

      So yes you’re right but one is much shittier than the other.

      • ampersandrew@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The games made in house are functionally identical to buying a studio that already existed. It’s a game that can’t be played anywhere else for arbitrary business reasons. I’d consider Sony’s shittier, because I have to wait two years for a PC port, and Nintendo’s shittier still because those games will never legally leave their platform.