- Apr 5, 2020
Not sure what you're getting at here exactly, but taking a guess, I'd state the following.I'm not talking about the gameplay differences from a consumer perspective, I am talking about their positioning in the market from a commercial perspective. Microsoft has effectively doubled down on what was already a strong position in the FPS market instead of fortifying their position in sub-markets that aren't as strong.
-I doubt Microsoft was overly concerned with Bethesda's FPS IPs (no, Fallout doesn't count) when it purchased it. Bethesda's biggest IPs are Fallout and Elder Scrolls, and both are RPGs, and RPGs that are played extensively on PC at that (rather than, say, JRPGs). So if there was any genre they were interested in, it would be that one. So if anything, that's them getting their hands into markets that their main IPs aren't already in.
-I doubt bringing Doom, Quake, and Wolfenstein into the Microsoft family is really going to cut into Halo. I really can't say how much pollination there is between the IPs, but unlike other genres, it's probably possible to play multiple FPS games without it seriously cutting into your time. Least if you're looking at singleplayer.
I didn't deny it was being monopolized, pointed out that so far, we've had a surge of TV shows.Also the TV space is already being monopolized, Disney
ownscontrols two of the biggest streaming platforms (Disney+ and Hulu), and a not-insignificant share of programming that is currently licensed to its biggest competitor (Netflix)
If anything, I'd kind of prefer a monopoly on streaming content, because it would mean I'd be able to access everything from the one site. Nowadays, I have to keep track as to what show's on which streaming platform, where. And living outside the US, that's a significantly reduced selection for a lot of streaming services, and in some cases, the services aren't available here at all.