Whirlybird

@Whirlybird@aussie.zone

Profil ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.

Whirlybird,

Not sure why some people are blaming Microsoft for this, they’ve got nothing to do with it. Their amazing backwards compatibility allowed people to play RDR on their consoles for years at 4K already, but rockstar are the ones that chose to not release the port on Xbox.

Whirlybird,

Sounds like they added it after the review embargo ended but before the game releases to the public.

Whirlybird,

There are no “hoops” here though?

Whirlybird,

Where is the false advertising?

Whirlybird,

That’s not how it works. Someone else reviewing your product isn’t advertising by you.

Whirlybird,

That’s not false advertising by the developers/publisher.

Whirlybird,

😂 yeah if they want to get blacklisted and sued.

Whirlybird,

They’re not advertising anything.

Whirlybird,

You know what’s simple to understand? False advertising. They’re not advertising the game as “no Denuvo!!” and then putting in denuvo. A completely independent company doing a review isn’t the publisher doing advertising.

Whirlybird,

Imagine being so dumb you think that correctly pointing out when something isn’t false advertising is “corporate shilling” 😂

Whirlybird,

Epic? This is Ubisoft.

Whirlybird,

False Advertising has a definition, and that ain’t it. Someone else doing “free advertising” for them isn’t false advertising by them.

This isn’t rocket science. They’re not doing any advertising saying it has no denuvo.

Whirlybird,

I’m not wrong though, which is why I won’t accept it. They didn’t publish an advertisement. End of story. It’s shady as shit, but it’s not false advertising because they didn’t advertise anything here, let alone “no denuvo!”.

Whirlybird,

By “more nuance” you mean “ignore meanings of words and terms”, right?

If you didn’t advertise something you didn’t do false advertising.

Whirlybird, (edited )

Eh, people always say this yet data shows it’s not true. Many competitive games have had controller vs m+k and found no discernible advantage. Halo for one, gears of war is another I remember.

I play with an elite controller and I have had zero problem winning and going mvp against m+k players in any game I’ve played. I play PUBG where m+k use is rampant and I still maintain a 30-40% win rate in squads, often in 2 man squads.

Whirlybird,

Microsoft are far, far, far from being close to the leader in the market even with ABK on their books, so your FUD makes no sense. Pretty much no one in the entire industry is against the acquisition apart from their main competitor, Sony, who are the market leader and abuse that position every day of the year to pull content away from Microsoft.

ABK will operate like they do currently, just like Bethesda do, only now they have Microsoft money and backing.

The only people that this deal is bad for are people who only play on PlayStation consoles. Everyone else benefits.

Whirlybird,

Like COD, the best selling game on every platform it’s on every year?

Whirlybird, (edited )

You just listed a bunch of Microsoft made products + GitHub + openAI (who they don’t control) - why shouldn’t they be allowed to control products they created?

You’re also talking like Microsoft is the market leader in game consoles when they’re a distant last and getting further behind. If this acquisition was blocked it would basically be game over for Xbox, and I would bet it would be sold off or go third party software only and exit the hardware market within a few years. Sony are the ones people need to be worried about here as they have a long history of abusing their dominant position and making blatantly anti-consumer moves based on that position.

Without Xbox as a competitor Sony would have free reign with no one to stop them. The video game industry is one of the most expensive industries any company can get into. Google tried and failed. Sega exited. Xbox is the last real competitor that entered and stayed and that was over 20 years ago, and the only reason it’s still around is to stop Sony from getting a monopoly in the living room.

Whirlybird, (edited )

This isn’t a new swing, this is a last ditch effort. They’ve already been absolutely embarrassed in court over this case, basically laughed out.

FTC: Microsoft owning COD will give them a monopoly!!! Poor sony will be run out of business!!! Won’t somebody think of Sony!!!

Sony: nah we’re good even if we lose COD. We don’t think they would take it from us anyway because we make them the most money.

All other publishers: Nah this deal is great for us as if they did take cod away it makes it easier for us to sell our games.

Nintendo: this deal is great for us as we’ll now get more games for our players.

Whirlybird,

Correct, but unfortunately she’s not a big fan of picking her battles well either.

It’s all well and good to “go after big tech”, but you should only go after them when you’ve got a leg to stand on, otherwise you’re going to be made to look stupid by the ludicrously highly paid big tech lawyers. Under khan the FTC has lost almost everything they’ve tried, and most of the times you could take 1 look at their case and know they had no chance in hell.

The Microsoft/ABK case is a perfect example. There’s no lt even the slightest hint of a monopoly or anti-competitive behaviour. Then the ftc basically made their entire argument about poor old market leader Sony potentially being hurt.

Whoever advised them of their strategy in this case should have their credentials stripped. Who thought fighting for the market leader to maintain their dominance and to keep last place in last place was the angle they should take? They’re supposed to look out for consumers and competition, but this case did the opposite.

Whirlybird,

This case shows she’s not fighting on behalf of the people though, but on the behalf of other corporations - Sony specifically. Their entire argument was how it would hurt sony. They basically didn’t mention the consumers at all lol. It was a complete joke. At least the CMA and EU had concerns, however weak they were, around competitiveness in the cloud market which could hurt consumers.

Whirlybird,

They were and they weren’t. They literally said they don’t think Microsoft would make COD exclusive like the FTC were saying they would, and that they would be absolutely fine if Microsoft were to buy them and make all games exclusive, unlike the ftc said, but they wanted to stop the deal because of course they do, Microsoft are a competitor.

I’m saying that even Sony disagreed with the FTCs reasons for challenging the acquisition.

Whirlybird,

How about you actually try and refute any of my points if you disagree? Let me guess……you only own a PlayStation?

I didn’t say any corporation is my friend. Not sure where you’re getting that from?

Whirlybird,

What does 343i, an internally created studio, have to do with ABK?

Whirlybird,

No they won’t because Microsoft have gutted 343 and are completely changing how they are structured.

They’ll be exactly like the other big acquisition, Bethesda, who Microsoft are basically completely hands off.

Whirlybird,

Guess I’ll continue to not buy playstation consoles then. Bought multiple playstations every generation up until the PS4 - PS, PSOne, PS2, PS2 slim, PS3, PS3 slim, PSP, PS Vita all bought on launch day, but after the PS3s slow change to cinematic 3rd person linear story driven games I gave up on them.

Whirlybird,

Yeah, anything with Ray tracing will have player reflections.

Not true, ray tracing isn’t a “everything all the time” thing.

Whirlybird,

They all want a monopoly, not just Microsoft. Microsoft are just the only ones that could afford it.

Whirlybird,

Exactly. He’d be a terrible exec if he didn’t want to.

Whirlybird,

It’s not done yet, definitely still a good chance it’s blocked. I don’t think it should be, but it very well could be.

Whirlybird,

This corporate consolidation helps more people than it hurts.

Corporate consolidation isn’t just always a bad thing. This would be a good thing for basically everyone that’s not exclusively a PlayStation-only player.

Whirlybird,

They’ve been live service games since Halo 3 though, so you haven’t liked them since then?

Whirlybird,

Dropping their own proprietary engine and moving to unreal is a pretty big story actually.

Whirlybird,

Yeah reach is live service too.

Whirlybird, (edited )

Physical and digital copies will still work, they’ve made that explicitly clear.

Whirlybird,

That’s strange because I’ve spent about $15 all up on micro transaction since they became a thing yet I have tens of thousands of hours in live service games and I’ve had a ball.

Whirlybird, (edited )

Every single element of these games isn’t designed to make you want to spend money 😂. Going by your hate for them along with that terrible comment shows that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Almost every single live service game now just has optional cosmetics as the microtransactions. That’s the opposite of what you’re saying.

Whirlybird,

This game is 100% offline playable now with all dlc and microtransactions included for like $4.

Whirlybird,

Yeah that’s literally what live service games are 😂. Would love to hear what they would call them, but doubt we’ll get a response.

Whirlybird,

They’ve explicitly talked about this, the game is entirely playable offline after the delisting.

Whirlybird,

That content wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t a live service game.

Whirlybird,

OK cool so you’ve never played a live service game. Just say that next time.

Whirlybird,

You clearly don’t understand what “live service” games are if that’s what you think.

What did PUBG copy paste and from what? Overwatch? Diablo? Battlefield? Counter strike? Forza horizon and Motorsport?

Your definition of them seems to be a super narrow scope of basically a F2P mobile game.

Whirlybird,

Just because some games have certain content on disk doesn’t mean others would. At some stage a game has to be cut for release and is “content complete” for printing. With live service games they continue creating content to sell in-game. With non live service games they don’t.

If you’re going to bring mods into it then that’s a completely different conversation.

Whirlybird,

The vast majority of Live Service games have zero pay to win microtransactions or barriers to progression. They’re almost all purely cosmetic microtransactions because that’s been proven to be what people want.

There was a bit of a learning curve for devs to see what people would put up with and what they wouldn’t, and stuff you describe was left on the cutting room floor years ago. Even games like COD now give you all actual content for free and just sell you cosmetics, and it’s wildly profitable for them. Selling map pack dlc got abandoned because it split the player base, whereas cosmetics don’t.

Whirlybird, (edited )

That’s not true at all. No Man’s Sky is a live service game, as is minecraft.

Whirlybird, (edited )

Where in there does it say “always online”?

Connecting to the internet and downloading new content when you are online doesn’t mean the game doesn’t work offline.

Whirlybird,

Yeah quite often this place seems like it’s composed of the neckbeards that even Reddit wouldn’t accept 😂

  • Wszystkie
  • Subskrybowane
  • Moderowane
  • Ulubione
  • FromSilesiaToPolesia
  • fediversum
  • Pozytywnie
  • motoryzacja
  • nauka
  • rowery
  • niusy
  • sport
  • slask
  • muzyka
  • informasi
  • Gaming
  • Technologia
  • esport
  • Blogi
  • Psychologia
  • Spoleczenstwo
  • lieratura
  • tech
  • giereczkowo
  • test1
  • ERP
  • krakow
  • antywykop
  • Cyfryzacja
  • zebynieucieklo
  • kino
  • warnersteve
  • Wszystkie magazyny