crispy4000

That's an interesting take. On one hand, there is a legitimate concern that things will get worse and not better for the console industry if shareholders start to pull out and Microsoft abandons the console market. Not to mention it'd be devastating for anyone invested in their ecosystem, or what games they produce. On the other hand, Nintendo didn't even fold after the Wii U, which did magnitudes worse than the Xbox One. So I think it's fair to ask what it would truly take for Microsoft to bow out. They've never had a problem maintaining relevance, unlike Nintendo and Sega. They've never gone backwards in marketshare to the point of the original Xbox. And now they have a clear and present mindshare advantage in the subscription gaming sector. Microsoft still needed much more than Halo/Forza/Gears for a while, particularly since their partnerships with Bungie and Epic ended. As much as I'd prefer they (and Sony) spend their capital building studios from the ground up, I get the point of a Bethesda acquisition and their smaller pick ups. There's no time anymore for them to play catch up building from scratch. Everyone should still be questioning if Activision-Blizzard is a step too far. Today we heard about Kottick's efforts to leverage CoD to extort money from Microsoft for a sweetheart royalty discount. Things get so much materially worse than that for Sony if Games Pass gets it day one. And that's just the beginning of how their development resources and IP can be leveraged. Microsoft isn't paying 9x the price of Bethesda to drive the industry as a whole forward. All for the price of paying $60 annually to play the console games you already own online. It's still a net positive on the whole having them here, but I'm always going to be bitter about that one. It's changed my own gaming habits dramatically. Just to mention it, Sony's interest in cloud gaming long preceded xCloud. As much as they shit the bed with it.

The worst take. Unless said publisher/developer makes a one-hit wonder, it matters for a ton more to own them outright. Their past, present and future is bought in one fell swoop. We saw it from Bethesda. Acquisition beats individual exclusivity plays.

I was talking about CoD’s monetization. They’re pulling the same stunt with Diablo too? In CoD’s case, there’s literally no reason to not do it if the audience is paying. An acquisition war wouldn’t go well for Sony, just like their market leader tactics wouldn’t work well for Microsoft. Doesn’t mean they both won’t push things further when this deal presumably goes through.

The PS4/XBO era was probably time the best there ever was for cross-platform releases between Sony & Microsoft. It wasn't perfect, but it was the best you could expect between two competing platforms. To reiterate this to @Xbob42, I think we're pulling back from that now. To get to how things were would take the pressure cooling down, not ratcheting up.

There's absolutely no reason to think Activision wouldn't continue to overmilk their same franchises under Microsoft. It's a proven buisness model for them. We're also talking about a company with a Battle Pass within a Battle Pass structure in place now, post the announcement of the merger. I believe it's a sign they were gearing up to milk the DLC train even harder, which makes things materially worse on platforms where you'd still have to buy it outright. What company will Sony buy or merge with in response to this acquisition going through? And what will Microsoft's response be to that? It's a bit too much magic pixie dust for me to believe such a big M&A will lead to more beneficial-to-consumers forms of competition. The move itself is cutthroat.

Yes, that's true. It would be a losing game in the long run for Microsoft, and Sony knows this and played their hand accordingly. They woke a beast though. It's not like Microsoft needed Activison to compete after buying Bethesda.

Phil's saying that because Sony was buying (timed) exclusivity, they felt the need to own more content to remain viable. Apparently Sony wanted Starfield. So Microsoft swoooped in and bought Bethesda out instead. I don't think you get to throw a pity party about this if you're the ones with the deep pockets. The more measured response would have been to bid higher. Not say Sony's leverage is too great, so we should write a big fat check for everything Zenimax ever produces.

It sounded like Summer Games Fest was the sort of event journalists always wanted. There's just not much room for bigger publishers before it balloons into something E3-ish.

He got it backwards. Super Mario RPG remake was the headline wonder moment. Because we've been wondering what a truly polygonal version of that game could look like for decades. I want to see the original DKC trilogy remastered like this next.

I don't think there's any question its better than 3DS's library. Though A Link Between Worlds is still something very special.

It should be easy enough to port it after the fact. Realistically, we'll see Starfield ported to PS5 the same day we see FFXVI on Xbox Series consoles.

He's not wrong here. It was never about trying to make CoD exclusive. It was about getting Sony to pay them to put it on PS Extra day one, or deal with competitive consequences. The bonus of Microsoft controlling whether Blizzard IP, Tony Hawk, Crash, Spyro, etc, ever release on Playstation again is just icing on the cake. Jim will be questioned on it later. I'm sure he'll flub it in some way regardless.

From Microsoft's arguements today: Nope, they haven't been consistently 3rd.

Today: Next Year: Fallout Shelter 2 announced for Xbox Series, PS5 and Switch Elder Scrolls Blades 2 announced for Xbox Series, PS5 and Switch Mighty Doom announced for Xbox Series, PS5 and Switch Elder Scrolls collection announced for Xbox Series, PS5 and Switch etc

Square took the lead on this back in the day, when they were at their prime. Its more of their joint, which is why a remake is neat to finally see. There's so much oddity to it. New characters that have never been seen in other games since. Strange and twisted early 3D character designs. A plot that bounces between so many fun scenarios. There was no template back then, no Miyamoto edict that had to be followed.

Keeping Bethesda games Microsoft exclusives "powerful evidence" against Activision Blizzard takeover, says FTC WWW.EUROGAMER.NET Microsoft's decision to keep Bethesda's games exclusive is "powerful evidence" against its Activision Blizzard takeover bid, says FTC. The angle the FTC is running with.

I could see not being into remakes. But if you haven't played the original, everyone else here is right. Can't really make an apples to apples comparison, but I'd put it on the level of a Mario Odyssey. In some weird way that might be the closest thing to it, with all the secrets and easter eggs packed in.

As we've already mentioned. I sort of like the idea of something like the Xbox One X but actually made to stick around longer, akin to the Series S. It would be the most cross-gen console ever, rather than an honest generational leap. But that's preferable to a mid-gen refresh with a limited shelf life.

Agreed that it’s likely they jump straight in to the new gen early. But please no incremental phone-like upgrades. The closest we’ve got to that was the New 3DS. Not a fan of that move.

Animal Crossing got expanded enough eventually, even more with its DLC. And Mario Aces is plenty packed with content. It’s that Wii U version of Tennis which is on a whole different level of garbage. I’m very cold on Smash Ultimate. Their solution to improving the netcode was to make the input lag worse all the time. I couldn’t stand more than a few hours of that game because of it. Hopefully we see a Switch 2 port that fixes this. I’d like to enjoy playing it. The Wii U/3DS game was already at my limit of what I could tolerate, regressing further from that was a bad move.

I've been coming around to the system after a lull in the mid cycle. Which I'm pretty sure was mainly because Nintendo almost never cuts game prices below 30%. It's hard for a budget-minded person to care. These past two years have been incredible for the Switch though, with so many more games that are tempting to pay (close to) MSRP for. I think its pretty clear that Nintendo front loaded and back loaded the Switch with their best stuff. Not that the middle is bad or anything. Just nothing too exciting.

Games Pass Ultimate vs Games Pass PC. That’s the closest like to like comparison.

I think its fair to say that the heaviest hitters the Switch has left were likely announced at this show. We got a whiff of two 2024 games (Peach game, Luigi's Mansion 2 remake). Metroid Prime 4 still could come, but it would also be unsurprising to see it pushed to Switch 2. So how are we feeling about the system's library overall right now? Did Nintendo succeed at making Switch its own thing for you? Or did Wii U ports and remakes compensate for too much? Keep hardware talk out of it as much as possible, the obvious can only be stated so many times for a 6 year old handheld. As for big 3rd party publishers, were there enough games from them targeting the systems spec? (ie: Octopath Traveler, Prince of Persia The Lost Crown, etc)

This might be my most expensive year of owning a Switch. Xenoblade Future Redeemed, Zelda ToTK, Pikmin 4, Super Mario RPG, Mario Wonder. And that's if I cut things off. I still want to pick up 3D Kirby and Mario Rabbids 2 from last year.

I don't remember any % gauges in the original. They might be doing something to combat.