![]() ![]() Nadella, for instance, mentioned that he had "no love" for exclusives, while Kotick emphasized that taking Call of Duty exclusive to Xbox would be "very detrimental" to business.Īll of this is in line with Spencer's comments. Collectively, Xbox and its witnesses and lawyers appear to be making the argument that the entire idea of exclusivity is a loathesome one they play along with because Sony forced their hands. If Sony would just stop paying for exclusives like Final Fantasy XVI, they argue Xbox wouldn't have to do deals like it has with Activision just to compete. It's not shocking, either, that Sony Interactive Entertainment head Jim Ryan sang a distinctively different tune yesterday in his video deposition. He noted that while he "didn't like" Redfall and Starfield going exclusive to Xbox post-Zenimax acquisition, he "had no quarrel with it" and didn't view it as anti-competitive. ![]() Ryan is unable to climb up on a high horse about exclusives when Xbox has already shared data in the courtroom that PlayStation's own exclusives far outnumber Xbox's. ![]() Where he draws the line is, of course, at Call of Duty: a franchise so massive and successful that (the FTC and Sony argue) the very idea of it becoming exclusive would supposedly cause irreperable harm to PlayStation. Right now, it's admittedly rather difficult to imagine a scenario where Xbox taking Call of Duty exclusive doesn't massively backfire on Xbox. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |