• Whirlybird@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    So by your flawed definition Microsoft already have a monopoly since their first party games are only on xcloud? That also means sony have a cloud monopoly too, since their first party games are only on PS+ 😂.

    You clearly don’t understand what a monopoly is. Activision games only being on one platform doesn’t make a monopoly. You’re saying that Activision games are so powerful in the industry that without them no competing platform can survive. Is that what you think? Funny, because the Switch has no Activision games and it’s trouncing the competition 😂. Oh but also by your definition the switch has a monopoly since nintendo games aren’t on any other consoles 😆.

    By your definition all 3 console makers have a monopoly 😂 😂 😂

    How am I wrong about the FTC? They don’t mention the cloud streaming market as a concern, just consoles and game subscription services.

    You really need to get an adult to read and explain this stuff to you. Maybe ask your teacher tomorrow.

      • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Lol, I don’t make the definitions dipstick, it is what it is.

        So you agree that Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo all have a monopoly in video game consoles? And that both Sony and Microsoft have a monopoly in the cloud gaming market?

        You know that by definition more than 1 company can’t have a monopoly, right?

        Re: cloud I apologize as I misremembered, probably because they basically didn’t argue cloud at all in their court cases that they lost.

            • Bernie EcclestonedOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Microsoft will have a monopoly on Activision games. It’s a vertical monopoly…

              • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s not a thing lol. You can’t have a monopoly on a developers games 😂.

                Sony bought insomniac, therefore they have a monopoly on insomniac games, right? So that acquisition should have been blocked unless they sold the publishing rights to a third party, right?

                You have no idea what you’re talking about. Monopolies are about markets, not individual products within a market.

                  • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Yeah, they are. The ftc already got their arse handed to them in court, were you not aware?

                    The CMA did the almost unheard of and walked back from a hard deny to a “please give us something we can call a win so we can keep a bit of dignity when we approve the deal” and the judge even chastised them for what they’ve done.

                    I wouldn’t expect someone that thinks you can have a monopoly over a single publisher’s game to understand.

                    You again didn’t answer my question too - so Sony have a monopoly on insomniac games now? If so, why wasn’t that purchase stopped? In fact why are any studio purchases ever approved if every single one creates a monopoly?