I’d like to see Sony’s response to this. “No, we really can’t,” Sony Interactive Entertainment CEO Jim Ryan might say. “We’ve tried that before and it’s called Killzone. RIP.” He might also add that a game like Modern Warfare II doesn’t come out overnight, but builds on the success of a series of games that have grown and evolved over 20 years. However, “We’re not good enough” was Microsoft’s policy throughout this messy proceeding. One of its main arguments is based on the idea that after being beaten by Sony and PS4 for many years, a massive acquisition is in fact one of the only ways to disrupt the market and make a lot of money. more competitive. The real implication is that Microsoft can’t make hits on its own, so they have to buy them instead.
Okay, that’s not exactly what Microsoft said, but that’s certainly the spirit of a small excerpt from the company’s latest testimony released by the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). As VGC noted, Microsoft argued in an additional response that its 10-year proposal to continue offering Call of Duty on PlayStation 5 and future Sony consoles is time consuming and will not puts the hardware manufacturer on “the brink” once it expires. Why not? Because Sony could use this time to create its own version of its best-selling military shooter.
Coincidentally, it’s been almost 10 years since Killzone was last released. Since then, Sony has seen its first-party studios turn to wildly successful console exclusives like Horizon Zero Dawn, God of War. Tsushima’s ghost. Who knows what the next 10 years will bring? While it’s fair to say, Sony hasn’t been afraid to replenish its bench with acquisitions. Perhaps Bungie could become Call of Duty’s next assassin. You don’t like capitalism?