I'd try a modern evolution of SOCOM 4 or Killzone 3 on PS4/PS5.
(Microsoft can keep their Cod B.O.)
A more than 2 year delay for the first game and never getting the rest of the series is a major downside for existing customers. That’s exactly the kind of monopolist behavior you are supposed to block mergers for. Waiting 2 years cost Microsoft a little revenue directly, but pushed XBox sales which was far more valuable.
Halo would have been a flop if it was Mac exclusive.
Keep in mind, this was back in the year ~2000. Mac market share in the home user market was a rounding error. Schools were full of iMacs, but at home, it was all Windows.
“Due out in the first half of 2000, Halo will have a simultaneous release for PC and Mac, with multiplayer compatibility between the two operating systems. While you'll need a 3D card and a powerful system to take full advantage of the game's features, it'll be scalable so you can play it on less powerful machines.” http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9907/26/halo.idg/
Things got delayed ~18 months so Microsoft could port it to XBox thus waiting till November 2001. Then tacked on another 2 years to release it on Mac.
https://www.halopedia.org/Halo:_Combat_Evolved_for_Macintosh
First Halo was delayed to port it to windows and XBox on top of that two years after its initial release they let the already working Mac version out the door. That’s a huge fuck you by any standard.
On top of this Halo 2 etc was XBox and Windows exclusive fuck PS owners, fuck Mac owners, and fuck the free market.
Maybe Microsoft should argue this point instead. But they didn't. They argued that they would allow CoD on multi-platforms so it's only reasonable to expect people to respond to that point.
It's a bit similar to how some people said that the posts deserved to be deleted while others said those people should just make their own twitter. Depending on whose talking and their argument you need to change your response. Using a response that the posts shouldn't've have been deleted to somebody who said you should make your own twitter is a non-sequitor.
That's just basic business. If I buy a shoe factory, I'm going to say of course I'll sell them to Canadians! I wouldn't say "Eh, stuff it Canada, go make your own shoes!" even if my own internal plans didn't prioritize exports.
But from what I remember is that you were accusing people of being dishonest because they said that Twitter could have an alternative but people aren't saying that Sony can just make a CoD alternative.
And I'm saying its not dishonest because A) its different people and B) Microsoft made a claim and these response are directly in response to that claim.
All this crying about COD from Sony who is proud of how they purchase exclusivity is nonsense.
There are whole areas of games or features or characters beyond skins that Sony purchased exclusivity to. They would have bought Activision if they could afford it.
Which is 1/2 my annoyance at these veneer thick arguments in re-use constantly until the picosecond they are no longer convenient, meaning thier repeaters didn’t actually believe in the point at all.
And the other 1/2 is quite serious. If there is a market for something, it has a chance of existing. Maybe Call of Duty needs actual competition? And I don’t mean Battlefield that DICE seems intent on running into the ground.
I don’t care if MS buys Activision or not. I’m just sick of the intellectually dishonest arguments and crying about most topics.