Microsoft has argued that the Steam Deck did not need Call of Duty to be successful, a claim that is easily proven by the Deck's success.
  • nik282000@lemmy.mlEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    Microsoft explains that Call of Duty doesn’t have to be on every console, because it isn’t that important to the video game industry.

    I feel like they should not be the ones making that judgement when deciding if some company is going to be buying up large portions of an industry.

    • johnthedoe@lemmy.mlEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      Cod is like one of the few games non gamers play. People buy consoles just to play it. They either insanely out of touch or they couldn’t think of a better excuse

  • acastcandream@beehaw.orgEnglish
    0·
    1 year ago

    This fixation on call of duty was a huge misstep by Sony both from a legal/business standpoint and PR standpoint.

    Call of Duty is not the issue. The issue is that Microsoft is a 2 trillion dollar company, Sony is a 100 billion dollar company, and Nintendo is a 50 billion dollar company.

    • Sony is 20x the size of Nintendo.

    • Microsoft is 20x the size of Sony and 400x the size of Nintendo. (Yes I know that’s not “size” but I’m keeping this stripped down).

    The problem isn’t COD, it’s Microsoft’s potential ability to outspend their competitors into irrelevance because they have seemingly endless pockets. They can buy studio after studio in a way their competitors can’t, so they are! And consolidation is almost always bad for media.

    Microsoft has the ability to take any good studio away nearly at-will in a way their competitors simply cannot and they have been flexing that muscle slowly but surely for the last 10 years. And I’m not even getting into how many studios they’ve allowed to languish.