Xbox on trial

Behind the iron veil

We've spoken briefly before about the whole 'Xbox/Activision' purchase situation and the way that Sony are wielding their hypocrisy in a war to maintain their vast market dominance over Microsoft. It's a frustrating affair for practically everyone involved as Sony continue to play the victim between clenched teeth whilst trying to slide a knife into the heart of their closest actual competitors all so they can maintain some sort of rank dominance over all AAA non-kid-friendly gaming and one-day, I dunno, go after the PC market? It seems that Sony really want to destroy everything 'Microsoft' afterall, I wouldn't put it past them. But recently the veil of mystique around the specific of this case was peeled away as we got to glimpse into the heart of the courtroom and hear sworn testimony from both Sony and Microsoft about what is really going on in the industry right now, and what has been going on for the past twenty years! Savour this moment, everybody; we may never see such transparency again!

As Microsoft struggles to justify it's rightful purchase and Sony stands there screaming like a woman upset at the table cat, it's hard to cut through all that noise and pomp to the heart of tempers that are actually flaring. Is this really a move from the big M to monopolise over the industry or is Sony intentionally blowing matters far out of proportion in order to be bad-faith competitors? Well, they're never going to tell us and by the very nature of being the industries' biggest players it's only natural to assume they know a lot more than we do in this circumstances, could the general public be on the wrong foot? Stick both of them under oath and see who's story still holds up is a pretty good litmus test I'd say. It's easy to lie to the public, but when there's legal repercussions it would take a special kind of person to keep their game going. A person not in charge of a multimillion dollar company who really doesn't need the bad press of an outwardly criminal CEO.

From proceedings we've learnt just the extent to which Microsoft have been struggling in the market. They've characterised their issues as a 20 year match of chasing behind the competition struggling to be competitive, which slightly conflicts with the fact that the 360 existed and for most of it's lifetime that console had ever game that ever existed, but it's certainly the face of the industry now. Microsoft publicly presents itself as a third-place console forced to make excessive consumer concessions in order to keep ahold of it's place within a market that seems determined to push them out. Not because Nintendo are busy digging potholes mind, Nintendo get more than enough fun out of bullying consumers, but because PlayStation aren't content being on top- they want to be the only company in the scene. As Microsoft presents it, Sony dedicate a huge chunk of their profits towards reducing Microsoft survivability in the market, most notably by jumping around the industry paying developers not to release their games on Xbox or PC. True 'aggressive competitor' behaviour.

And the effect of this all has been Microsoft seriously losing it's standard among the bigger publishers. In a surprise to absolutely no-one, Bobby Kotick himself took to blackmailing Xbox for a more favourable revenue split in order to keep Call of Duty on the platform, when the scumbag CEO realised he had the power to force that issue. (So glad that came out in court, Bobby really is a worm, isn't he?) Even diehard Microsoft partners in the past such as Bethesda were getting to the point where they were giving into Sony money. Selling off Ghostwire and Deathloop for Playstation day one exclusivity. In a bombshell reveal it was even mentioned that Sony were in the middle of buying Starfield exclusivity, which forced Xbox's hand to buy the entirety of Bethesda to avoid that disaster scenario where Starfield wouldn't get access to day one mods. Oh, and to increase their market survivability... that too...

However can we consider Microsoft's turning around of the exclusivity dime an over-reaction? Pete Hines, from Bethesda, found it hypocritical and potential publicly damning that Microsoft seemed more than happy to let COD remain multi platform but Bethesda had to go exclusive. Bethesda have never been about exclusivity in their entire lifespan, afterall, and forcing them to be a pawn in the console wars isn't really fair to them or their brand. (Not to mention their potential for reach.) And unveiled emails have detailed previously raised plans by Microsoft to 'outspend' Sony completely out of the market, essentially matching cut-throat business practices with equally cut-throat solutions, leaving no good guys to side with. Microsoft have since voiced that such a plan was never put into place, but now we know they've considered it, how long until it's brought to life?

What about Playstation's part in this whole song and dance? Well, they were dragged up in order to share their thoughts and, would you look at that, they admitted that they lied back before telling porkies would have had genuine legal repercussions. According to the head of Sony, they don't so much as seriously consider a world where Call of Duty suddenly becomes a Microsoft exclusive even with a change in ownership, despite this whole mess being kicked off with Sony crying about Microsoft setting up unmatchable competition with an exclusive COD series. Microsoft are apparently willing to sign documentation committing to not going exclusive as their plans are apparently 'bigger' with Activision. I don't know if that means 'new IPs' or a Activision/Microsoft theme park, but I'm curious either way.

Sony's spokesperson couldn't even poke holes in the claims that their company was acting as an 'aggressive competitor' striking out to try and secure an industry monopoly; by equalling the playing field Microsoft is simply ensuring a more healthy industry for consumers and publishers alike. (Provided that is indeed how far they go. We know they've threatened to go monopolisitc) But that hasn't come easy. Microsoft shared how they've made the move to totally eat potential profits on their consoles, which are being developed and sold for minus profits right now, in hopes they can recoup the losses with heavy game sales. A bold and difficult step to take, what with Game Pass eating into full game purchases too, but it's a strategy instead of 'try to do what we're doing and hope things work out'. Microsoft really let us see behind the counter where the food is made with this little over-share, certain decisions make a lot more sense now...

This was an attempt to try and break a budding monopoly, but what we ended up seeing instead was a humbled publisher finally realising the absolutely filthy amount of capital they have behind their name and throwing it about. Honestly, the way I see it the more money is being spent, the better the games that get developed will end up being, and if that means a few times exclusivities then no harm no foul. Permanent exclusives can go burn in hell, and although I understand now why they made those moves and agree that Xbox was a better custodian than Sony, the Starfield exclusivity is a real blow to the gut. (Do you think they'll do the same with Elder Scrolls 6? Good god, Sony would go apocalyptic if they did!)