Im going to make a prediction right now.

The Keystone "puck" will NOT be just inert streaming hardware.

I believe Microsoft is making a full handheld Xbox console. This console will be a standalone third leg of the Xbox Series X/S family, and directly positioned against the Switch 2. I will have a dedicated purpose-built Soc (rdna2/zen2) targeting the base Xbox One performance profile, and will run all XB1 code natively.

This device will not be some "firestick" or Apple TV box with intert hardware. I believe they've pivoted to a standalone console. Or more precisely, a "steam deck" esque handheld.

And whatever this "handheld" console is, there will be a TV puck version of it. THATS what the "puck" will be.

Honesy, the way Xbox's ecosystem is set up, with GamePass, Smart Delivery, Play Anywhere, and cross buy/save/progression, imo they are perfectly positioned to obliterate the Switch if they decided to actually compete in this space. I mean, the switch doesnt even have an Achievement system ffs. Thats coming from someone who loves the switch, Nintendo are completely on their laurels with no competition lol. Nintendo gives negative fucks.

Imagine being able to play the entire XB1 library, like 4000 multiplats, plus pretty much every single GamePass game out right now, with Achievements, Xbox Live, no friendcodes or general Nintendo nonsense, and an eco/meta-system people actually give a shit about.

Discuss.

He and Michael Salvatori also settled their lawsuit with Microsoft a few weeks ago, and "amicably" "resolved their differences".

👀👀👀👀

Exclusive footage of Polyphony Digital trying to make sure Gran Turismo 7's Metacritic score keeps a green box around it:

Never let Cows forget that in Sony's moment of weakness.......

At a time when they found themselves vulnerable, and indisposed.......At a time when $20 billion was wiped off their value in one hour........

The life raft they reached for was not Kojima. They did not run out and go buy Konami or Metal Gear. They did not run into the loving arms of Square Enix or seek comfort in Final Fantasy. They did not secure Capcom.

Their literal first survival instinct when they felt threatened was "oh shit......hurry! lock down that legacy Xbox studio that Microsoft Organically™ nurtured from its infancy. We need their wealth of expertise, proprietary tools, systems, netcode, and production capabilities because we cant build it ourselves, the financial health of our business depends on it!!!! we cannot afford for Microsoft to buy them back too!!"

All of this is fine. But do not EVER let Cows undermine Xbox's foundational influence in gaming history ever again. Don't let them pull the "Xbox doesnt cultivate/build, they just buy" nonsense.

Never let ponies forget that the thing Sony most direly needed in their hour of weakness, was built by Microsoft. Something Microsoft not only STILL has (343's engine/codebase at its core is STILL a forked, completely overhauled version of Bungie's blam engine), but has spent 15 years iterating ontop of.

Yeah, this game looks trash imo. Not interested in the slightest even if it was on GamePass.

So are we all on the same page here that this acquisition was not one made from a position of strength or leverage? but instead, one from weakness and desperation? Also, that Bungie held all of the leverage here?

This feels to me like a similar situation Iran and the US were in, in 2020. The US millitary assassinating general Qasem Soleimani, and Iran (probably)secretly negotiating (begging) via backchannels to allow them to "respond"

"Uhh, we know you'll destroy us, but we have to look strong to our domestic base, and we cant ignore this. So can you pretty please let us lob some missles into an empty field/unoccupied installation near one of your bases, that you don't give a shit about, so we can look like we "responded" to you?. Just give us some coordinate man, anything please"

It was my understanding that Microsoft basically told Bungie to phuck off because the price was too high for what they were worth.

Responding because the other thread was locked:

This is not true. The game started as an RTS, and the 3rd Person shooter demo that was shown off at E3 was a cobbled together tech demo that was just animated/rigged unnamed character models running around. There wasnt an actual tangible game outside of that tech demo.

Thats to say nothing of Bungie literally inventing multiplayer Matchmaking in Halo 2. The success of this game and the pioneering netcode of Xbox Live cannot be divorced from eachother. Also the weird flex about "only 6 months" is not only untrue, but even if it WAS true (it isnt), that would have still been a VERY long time in 2000 development cycles. Famously, the build of Halo 2 that actually ended up shipping to consumers was basically built from the ground up in only 9 months (after Bungie spent 2 years building a brand new engine only to throw it away and start over).

Trying to take away MS's involvement in Bungie is dishonest. Again, for only $30 million, MS took a dorm-room startup in Chicago, made up of 26 (mostly)kids fresh out of college, moved them all to Seattle, and turned them into a gigantic corporate entity worth $3.6 billion dollars, who generated their most valuable property. One of the most revered entities in gaming. And people say Insomniac was a steal? Sony paid 120 times what MS paid for Bungie, to inherit a fully mature development apparatus that Microsoft "cultivated" from relative infancy.

Pretending that the Bungie that Microsoft inherited was anywhere close to resembling the entity that they let go of (and gave back to the industry), is nothing short of intellectual dishonesty.

Why does it hurt Cows ego so bad to admit that Microsoft contributed so much to basic foundational staples of the gaming industry, that they now take for granted? In 10 years, you all will be subscribed to PlayStation-Pass like it was Sony's idea and you always liked it, claiming Microsoft contributed nothing to gaming.

Is that ponies say "Microsoft doesn't build, only buy" or "MS cannot create/cultivate talent" and "MS has contributed nothing to gaming"........or "Muh Organic Growth™"

Yet Sony was apparently in such dire/desperate need of Bungie's "talent" "tools" "tech" and "expertise" that was basically all built by and under Microsoft, that they spent roughly 120 times what Microsoft paid for Bungie 20 years ago.

Im sorry....."cultivated" under Microsoft. That used to be Cows favorite new word. Also "organic growth™".

Microsoft paid $30 million dollars for a "Doom clone"/RTS developer made up of 26 people, that was basically a dorm room startup comprised of a bunch of kids fresh out of college. They saved them from the brink of bankruptcy, moved them all from Chicago to Seattle, created a $16 billion dollar franchise that revolutionized the gaming industry, and one of the most revered franchises in gaming history, and now their this gigantic industry juggernaut with 1100 employees, worth $3.6 billion dollars.

Yet the Organic growth™ crowd just never talks about this lol. Lets make one thing absolutely clear: The only reason there exists a Bungie, let alone one worth $3.6 billion dollars, is because of Microsoft's cultivation of talent and organic growth™. Nothing Sony has EVER done, or given to the games industry has come close.

Im sorry, but it will never not be funny the utter paramount importance it was to Sony that they get their hands on a studio built up by Microsoft (Microsoft's "sloppy seconds" as it were) just to have any prayer of retaining a footprint in the Live Service multiplayer space, while at the same time MANY in Sony's fanbase wish to erase/whitewash any contribution made by Microsoft to gaming at all.

Furthermore, Microsoft still has access to Bungie's "tech/tools/expertise". Bungie's Blam engine that Halo and Destiny are built on is the foundation of Microsoft/343's own modernized game engine were built on as well.

Though Im aware that the crux of the Organic Growth™ talking point is often steeped in "sour grapes" at Sony's comparatively limited purchasing capacity.

People dont realize, that it was Bungie that had ALL of the leverage going into this deal. It was most likely BUNGIE's contractual demand that they have complete autonomy, and all of their games would remain multiplatform (which they've stated in the most explicit, unequivocal language possible is the case).

Bungie did not need Sony. They could have went to Microsoft for the same pricetag (and it was rumored since 2020 that they were in talks with MS for a similar pricetag, but Microsoft thought the price was too high, and theres no way they would agree to remain multiplatform). Sony, however, NEEDED Bungie. They needed bungie's expertise, they needed Bungie's live service revenue, and they needed to "respond" to please their shareholders and galvanize their audience.

It's my opinion that Sony did this as a defensive move to keep from permanently losing a foothold in the Live Service FPS space. Sony basically said "we'll pay you the same price as MS would have, but you get none of the cons of being first party. You do absolutely nothing/change nothing, but we get your revenue and we get to put your logo next to PlayStation letterhead on twitter." This is an "acquisition" in name only, and was done to please shareholders and look like Sony "responded" to their base.

Also, I dont believe a word of the "this was in the works for 6 months/not an Activision response" PR nonsense. I absolutely believe Bungie shopped themselves out to anyone who would buy them, and Jim Ryan (among others) likely sat on this for months. But if you dont believe Jim Ryan decided to pull the trigger directly in response to Activision, I have a bridge to sell you lol.