- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
- tech@kbin.social
- technology@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
- tech@kbin.social
- technology@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
I wish these appeal announcements would include whatever argument they have for how the lower court erred. It just makes “appeal” synonymous with “do over” the way it’s done now.
It would be nice. From your specific wish I take it you probably already know, but for general discussion it looks like they’ve just filed the Notice of Appeal with the trial Court, which is entirely procedural and required before an appeal can be brought to the Circuit Court. We’ll likely have to wait for the briefing before we get the substantive arguments. Reporting on appeals really does give the impression that it’s like a second trial though.
I wish they’d just let it through already. The way it looks, nothing changes for PlayStation gamers, Nintendo gamers get access to CoD for the first time since in years, Activision’s back catalogue goes to a company that’s way more likely to use it for something other than cool easter eggs in Black Ops games, CoD gets more accessible overall by being a part of the subscription, and Sony’s complete market dominance gets another blow that once again forces them to compete and improve their platform.
If anything, I wish the FTC had been this aggressive when it came to the Zenimax purchase. All that really did was give Microsoft the ability to make those games Xbox-exclusive (establishing a pretty scary amount of western RPG dominance) and plop them on Gamepass.
We should be pushing for competition in capitalism whenever we can. Microsoft is openly pushing for a monopoly, they’ve even admitted in leaked documents that they want to squeeze Sony out of the market.
Your view of what is happening is very short sighted, only Microsoft wins when they control the majority of the market.
Buying Activision Blizzard means they are still third in the console space. Just not so far behind the others.
You are also misqjoting out of context. One executive suggested it was a path to spend now in order to gain footbold later. They would still need to spend a lot more to get there.
After having watched Sony rest on their laurels for the last entire generation while doing effectively nothing for their platform except releasing new games, I am pushing for competition. The only company who’s seriously improved their platform in the last decade has been Microsoft, working on backwards compatibility, accessibility features like copilot and the adaptive controller, a full Chromium-based browser so you can do anything from your taxes to playing Mario 64 in-browser on an Xbox, and easy $20 dev access so that users can install Retroarch and have better backwards compatibility than people who actually own PlayStation and Nintendo consoles.
I want that for other platforms. I own a Switch and PS5 because I feel obligated to in order to play games. I own a Series S because I want one and I consider it a good value.
Saying that Sony is sitting on their laurels and doing nothing for their platform but releasing new games is just patently false.
If I had the choice of streaming Starfield on my phone with a games pass subscription or playing it with adaptive triggers, touchpad and/or motion gestures, with instant loading, and possibly even full on VR support with eye tracked foveated rendering on PS5, I think it would be a stupid easy decision. Good thing for Microsoft I don’t get that choice and they don’t have to add new features to their hardware.
FYI, Sony also has retro games on their store and available via streaming, and a specialized controller for disabled persons as well. And no, a web browser on your games console is not “innovation”.
- Whirlybird ( @Whirlybird@aussie.zone ) English8•10 months ago
FYI Microsoft has had an accessible controller for those with disabilities for years before Sony announced theirs. The Sony one isn’t even out yet iirc?
The “retro games” you’re talking about are not the retro games that the other person is talking about. Retroarch is an emulator if you didn’t know. You can play basically any console up to the Dreamcast on an Xbox via retroarch. Can’t do that on a ps5.
Lol adaptive triggers. Touchpad? Games haven’t used that in any meaningful way since…… well ever, actually. Same with motion controls.
The Xbox also has “instant loading” btw.
Also lol at thinking the PS5 could play starfield in VR. Not a chance in hell.
No need to be edgy. I’m just saying it’s wrong to say Sony doesn’t innovate.
FYI Microsoft has had an accessible controller for those with disabilities for years before Sony announced theirs.
Doesn’t matter, Sony has one as well and it’s not exactly a carbon copy or anything. What difference does it make?
The “retro games” you’re talking about are not the retro games that the other person is talking about. Retroarch is an emulator if you didn’t know. You can play basically any console up to the Dreamcast on an Xbox via retroarch. Can’t do that on a ps5.
That’s not innovation. Plus I can do it on my phone anyway?
Lol adaptive triggers. Touchpad? Games haven’t used that in any meaningful way since…… well ever, actually. Same with motion controls.
That’s an unfortunate opinion you have there. It’s still more innovative than the Xbox controller though. Astro Bot, PS5’s free demo game, offers a pretty compelling example of how the features of the dualsense are put to good use. Same with the Demon’s Souls remake. I doubt you’d even care to try, though. Touch pad is also great if you use a Sony controller with PC or android because it doubles as a trackpad.
The Xbox also has “instant loading” btw.
Good. I wasn’t aware of this.
Also lol at thinking the PS5 could play starfield in VR. Not a chance in hell.
I suppose you don’t exactly know the impact foveated rendering has in the VR space. Literally only the part you’re looking at gets fully rendered, while everything in the periphery gets blurred. This significantly increases the level of graphics that can be perceived in a headset. I have full confidence Starfield would be possible on a PS5 with foveated rendering.
- Whirlybird ( @Whirlybird@aussie.zone ) English5•10 months ago
Sonys accessible controller is still an unreleased “project codename” deal. Doubt it sees the light of day this generation tbh.
Retroarch on a console is innovation, as is the fact that every console can become a dev machine. That’s unheard of innovation for consoles. Lol at comparing it to your phone. Does your phone have 12TF of power?
Astros playroom uses the features decently, sure, but it’s literally a demo made only to do that. The generation is what, 3 years old already and that’s still the best use of those features lol. That says all that needs to be said.
I know what divested rendering does. You’re insane and have no idea what you’re talking about if you think foveated tendering would allow the PS5 to run a 30fps game at 120fps while rendering everything twice lol.
I feel like since this conversation is mostly opinion based, I feel that it’s fair to point out that motions controls have been used in quite a meaningful way the last console generation or so.
With the advent of VR, 2 out of the three console developers including it as a standard feature, and deep integration with Steam via the Steamdeck and Steam Controller mapping software, we’ve seen a lot more adoption of the tech in ways that aren’t just waggling a controller.
It is in my opinion a fantastic way to add a little precision to a game that primarily uses analog sticks for aiming. Having an input for broad movements and precise movements something that is really difficult to accomplish with most control solutions, as it often requires something like a keyboard and mouse which sacrifices on form factor or sensitivity curves that has a tricky skill floor.
With VR and games that use motion in combination with some sense of 6 degrees of freedom style gameplay also make for really approachable experience.
Gimmicks are often just that, but most things can turn into something cool with enough time in the oven, and a good team behind it.
Not really much of anything to add to your folks console argument, because as much as I’m passionate about game design, I’m also a dumb caveman who sees minimal game releases and my dumb brain goes “Dead console” lol.
I could care less about console war stuff, but Microsoft has had a specialized controller since at least 2018
I don’t really find any of these features that appealing apart from maybe Retroarch but why is Microsoft charging you extra to use the hardware that you already purchased? Can’t say I’ve ever needed a browser on my console considering I have a smartphone and PC steps away from it. I’m sure accessibility features are great for those that need them but these three things encompass your entire list of features added over a decade.
- Whirlybird ( @Whirlybird@aussie.zone ) English5•10 months ago
They’re not charging you extra to use hardware you already bought. You have to pay to access dev mode, which is very different because it’s a developer fee in order to be able to release your own games.
I’ve created developer accounts with numerous companies for personal use with home automation and have never once been charged a fee. They’re ripping people off with this (ala reddit API access) plain and simple. What resources of theirs will you be using running an emulator on your console to play game files that your provide yourself?
How is that a rip off? You pay 20€ once and get the ability to sideload any UWP app and develop for the console.
Compare it to both Nintendo and Sony where:
- You have to pay multiple times the price of the console for the dev kit
- You don’t own said dev kit
- Their SDKs are not publicly accessible
- You have to sign multiple NDAs on top of all those issues
- Assuming you have no problem with all this, you can be rejected as a developer for any reason
Considering how locked consoles were and still are (Except for the PS3 “other OS”) period. Being able to get a decent current gen console, that doubles as an emulator, with development capabilities for an additional 20 euros is a gift, not a rip-off.
Nintendo and Sony are also a ripoff, which doesn’t make Microsoft’s implementation any less of a cash grab. As I said, what resources of theirs are you using in any of this process that would necessitate a fee to cover their costs? As you said you pay the fee to gain the ability to install your software on your console.
Apple also charges developer fees to release apps.
I have no idea how the PS5 is doing so well. I have had both the PS5 and the XSX since launch (yes, I got VERY lucky) and I almost never use the PS5. The Xbox is a significantly better box for doing everything besides gaming (like watching Netflix, etc), the controller is about 100x better, they’re actually available to buy whenever you want, Gamepass is way better than PS+ equivalent, and Xbox has more exclusives.
Spiderman 2 in a couple months is going to be the first real reason to turn on my PS5 in ages.
Sorry, just ranting a little here. I have been a PS fanboy for ages and the PS5 being so meh is pretty disappointing. I totally agree that Sony sat on their laurels while MS improved. I firmly believe that if more games had cross-platform support, Sony market share would tank. Being able to play with friends on the PS4/PS5 is the main reason I even have a PS5.
You dont need to pay for XBL to do multiplayer anymore? Haven’t touched Xbox since the 360.
Honestly, I’ve had Gamepass Ultimate for so long, I’m not even sure anymore. Maybe, tho? I can edit that bit out… doesn’t make a huge difference to the rant. lol
- Whirlybird ( @Whirlybird@aussie.zone ) English2•10 months ago
You do, just not in free to play games.
The worst part about this is that Sony aren’t even putting out as many games as they used to. I loved their output in the later PS3/early PS4 era. It was full of smaller and more experimental projects. However since Jim Ryan took over they’ve only focused on their big AAA blockbusters. MS have gone the other way and have expanded from the “shooter box” to put out creative projects like Pentiment, Hi-Fi Rush, Tell Me Why, etc.
Speaking of competition, Sony owns Bungie. Maybe they should do something with that.
Not sure if that’s sarcasm but Bungie is working on Marathon
Nintendo squeezed Atari out of the market in the 80s and early 90s, Sony squeezed Sega out of the market in the late 90s. It happens in gaming.
… that doesn’t make it a good thing. We can stop this crap now and make it a thing of the past
Why, there needs to be a competitive edge to the market to keep companies on the ball. What incentive do they have to offer a better deal to customers all their rivals are banned from competing?
What do you mean by Sony’s complete dominance? AFAIK they only dominated with the PS4 because Microsoft bungled the release of the XBOne by tacking a bunch of junk on it that turned people off. Furthermore, online play used to be free with Sony until Microsoft started raking in the dough by charging for Xbox Live so we can thank them for Sony and Nintendo following suit with their own subscription fees. Current gen has PS5 leading in sales despite their production issues contrasting with Microsoft having consoles on the shelf that apparently nobody wanted to buy, but how is that Sony’s fault? They don’t drive demand.
I don’t see how Sony is the dominant one in this scenario.
- Whirlybird ( @Whirlybird@aussie.zone ) English5•10 months ago
You don’t see how the overwhelming market leader is the dominant one?
I don’t see how/why Sony should be taken down a notch just because Microsoft can’t get their shit together, nor how that translates into making Microsoft’s attempt at vertical integration a good thing. This isn’t David vs Goliath it’s Goliath vs Goliath and Microsoft has many past examples of extremely anti-competitive behavior (as does Sony).
- Whirlybird ( @Whirlybird@aussie.zone ) English2•10 months ago
Microsoft are getting their shit together by buying Activision.
It’s not Goliath vs Goliath in the gaming world. Just because Microsoft are bigger company wise doesn’t mean they’re on the same level in gaming, because they’re clearly not.
And if/when Microsoft pulls the same with CoD, is that going to make things better for gamers? That’s what happens when these giant corporations vacuum up all the smaller companies in the industry whether it be video games, movies/tv, music, retail, internet service, etc. Sony doing bad stuff doesn’t mean we should give Microsoft more power to do the same.
You don’t remember the Fortnite case where it showed that Sony abused their dominant position to force better terms from Epic and try to block crossplay?
We cannot allow bobby kotick to enrich himself off the corpses of all the gaming companies he ruined anymore.
Whether you like their output or not, he’s turned Activison into an absolute monster financially. There wouldn’t be this much drama in them being sold if he hadn’t.
I could not understand how some supposedly left-wing people would bend themselves to support this acquisition.
Its anti-competition, its MS flexing their financial muscle to bully other players, its just bad for the gaming industry.
Did people forget IE vs Netscape and what happened to IE after it eliminated competition?
I can see how it could be viewed as pro-competition within the very specific category of the console market… Playstation’s install base is over double Xbox, so Playstation doesn’t really have effective competition and can kind of direct the market or obtain exclusives with the influence of its user base. Sort of how like Walmart doesn’t really have to force exclusivity or pricing per se, they are so big that product vendors can be successful with only Walmart as a customer. They do also force it, like Sony/MS/etc., but for a lot of stuff they don’t have too.
Microsoft is also big in other tech/gaming markets though, which complicates the conversation.
- KoofNoof ( @KoofNoof@lemmy.ml ) English2•10 months ago
There’s a reason why my grandpa used to always refer to the FTC as “Fuck The Cranch”
