Xando Member Oct 28, 2017 38,006 With the launch of Call of Duty Season 4, Activision quietly put adverts inside loadouts for Black Ops 6 and Warzone, sparking a backlash in the process. Activision already has a bad reputation for the aggressive monetization of the premium Black Ops 6 and its free-to-play battle royale Warzone, but this latest move may have tipped some players over the edge. Following the launch of Season 4, adverts for weapon bundles can be seen in the build and weapon menus. These are unavoidable for players as they tinker with their loadouts. Elsewhere, Activision has added bundle and Battle Pass advertisements to the Events tab, another controversial change that has caused complaints. Here's a snippet of the response, sourced from across Call of Duty subreddits, Discords, and social media: I wouldn't even be mad if this was just in Warzone, a free game, but putting it in a pay-to-play premium title, with how expensive they're getting? F**k off. This game is still 80€ I get that they make most of their money from the store, but I feel like the bare minimum for a premium product would be to not have ads clogging the menus right? At this point it really feels like opening up a mobile game with how much more you see an option to buy anything in this game. Anyone who wanted this bundle would've checked the store and bought it. Putting it here isn't gonna make more people buy it, its justannoying. Just wait until they add pop up ads for bundles while you are playing the game. Click to expand... Click to shrink... More including some examples here: Activision Quietly Force Adverts into Call of Duty Black Ops 6 and Warzone Loadouts and Players Absolutely Hate It: 'At This Point It Really Feels Like Opening Up a Mobile Game' - IGN With the launch of Call of Duty Season 4, Activision quietly put adverts inside loadouts for Black Ops 6 and Warzone, sparking a backlash in the process. www.ign.com   Gaspode Member Jan 17, 2025 152 gross   MarcosBrXD Member Aug 28, 2024 1,779 Crazy one of the biggest IPs doing this   Wallace Member Oct 25, 2017 28,182 Midwest What a shit franchise.   Shirkelton Member Aug 20, 2020 6,976 Fuck that.   MinerArcaniner Uncle Works at Nintendo Member Oct 29, 2017 7,473 The revenue line has to keep going up. There's no such thing as "enough" with corporations.   Kinthey Avenger Oct 27, 2017 25,551 Poor Cod really needs the money to keep the lights on   skullmuffins Member Oct 25, 2017 7,615 oh, ads for in-game microtransactions. guess i'm not surprised. that's where all the money is these days.   Remark Member Oct 27, 2017 4,184 Yeah the ads are so bad this season. When you boot up the game in CoD HQ, theres a big ass button for Blackcell and BO6 and WZ are all the way on the right side of the menu. It's so annoying. Huge disrespect to the people who actually bought the game. I wish CoD HQ would go away, it doesn't even actually help with anything and actually hampers the UX experience in a lot of ways especially on PC.  Last edited: Today at 10:14 AM LiquidDom Avenger Oct 27, 2017 2,730 Wait it's just ads for the in-game purchases? Not outside ads that have nothing to do with the game? I don't have that much of an issue with it, still shit though.  Richietto One Winged Slayer Member Oct 25, 2017 26,147 North Carolina Lmao what a joke   Loxley Prophet of Truth Member Oct 25, 2017 10,702 We're inching closer and closer to this scene from Ready Player One. "We estimate we can sell up to 80% of an individual's visual field before inducing seizures" View: https://youtu.be/KpPE85Jogjw?si=Di0mlmiF27KidwWs  Fabs Member Aug 22, 2019 2,780 This doesn't seem that different than like Fortnite advertising the shop updates in the main menu. It's fairly harmless.   Noisepurge Corrupted by Vengeance Member Oct 25, 2017 9,775 Fabs said: This doesn't seem that different than like Fortnite advertising the shop updates in the main menu. It's fairly harmless. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Fortnite doesn't cost 80$  OP OP Xando Member Oct 28, 2017 38,006 LiquidDom said: Wait it's just ads for the in-game purchases? Not outside ads that have nothing to do with the game? I don't have that much of an issue with it, still shit though. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Considering half of the in-game purchases are basically ads for some brands or characters that have nothing to do with COD it's basically the same thing   Remark Member Oct 27, 2017 4,184 Noisepurge said: Fortnite doesn't cost 80$ Click to expand... Click to shrink... To be fair, Warzone is F2P but that shit should be in there. Whether you buy the game or not, you have to go through CoD HQ which is so annoying.   Doskoi Panda One Winged Slayer Member Oct 27, 2017 17,314 CoD is so fucking trashy lmao. I will never understand how it remains so popular. It just gets worse year over yesr, even Warzone.   SunBroDave "This guy are sick" Member Oct 25, 2017 15,148 How else is COD supposed to make money   Decarb Member Oct 27, 2017 9,264 Fabs said: This doesn't seem that different than like Fortnite advertising the shop updates in the main menu. It's fairly harmless. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Not only is it in a full priced mode, but its also in the weapon customization menu where you least expect it.   Agni Kai Member Nov 2, 2017 10,037 Only Battlefield 6 can save us now. Hold the line, my friends. Hold the line.   jroc74 Member Oct 27, 2017 34,177 Yeah I dont think it needs to be this aggressive. LiquidDom said: Wait it's just ads for the in-game purchases? Not outside ads that have nothing to do with the game? I don't have that much of an issue with it, still shit though. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Fabs said: This doesn't seem that different than like Fortnite advertising the shop updates in the main menu. It's fairly harmless. Click to expand... Click to shrink... While trying to play the game tho? "Following the launch of Season 4, adverts for weapon bundles can be seen in the build and weapon menus. These are unavoidable for players as they tinker with their loadouts." Imagine getting hit with Shark Card ads while browsing the in game stores in GTA Online....please Rockstar dont do this. Noisepurge said: Fortnite doesn't cost 80$ Click to expand... Click to shrink... Also this.  BradleyLove Member Oct 29, 2017 1,661 Doesn't surprise me. I bought Forza Horizon for PS5 a few days ago and was shocked to encounter unskippable ads for DLC. The American obsession with forcing ads everywhere they can is horrible. This reply was brought to you by NEW Mountain Dew—new look, same bold refreshing flavour.  TransEuropaExpress Member Dec 6, 2017 11,420 US They should go all in and start doing random 5-minute commercial breaks in the middle of rounds.   Pyro God help us the mods are making weekend threads Member Jul 30, 2018 18,922 United States Really fucking gross.   Vourlis Member Aug 14, 2022 5,911 United States I...where are the ads? edit: Oh like advertising the bundles or whatever. Okay.  jroc74 Member Oct 27, 2017 34,177 BradleyLove said: Doesn't surprise me. I bought Forza Horizon for PS5 a few days ago and was shocked to encounter unskippable ads for DLC. The American obsession with forcing ads everywhere they can is horrible. This reply was brought to you by NEW Mountain Dew—new look, same bold refreshing flavour. Click to expand... Click to shrink... I either forgot how it was or just didnt know, because I played it on XSX when it launched. But I was and am shocked at the mtx in FH5.  shadowman16 Member Oct 25, 2017 41,804 I feel like this has already become too normalised because I honestly assumed we were talking about unrelated product ads... Meanwhile the examples above... honestly I kinda expected. Granted the article also points it out perfectly that if it were just in Warzone (free) it'd be... less bad, but charging however much for COD THEN pushing those ads on you... you just know people will crack. Not the worst example of ads in games though, I still give that to SFVI's Turtles costumes, aside the cost, having that damn song playing constantly in the battle hub for month(s) on end drove me nuts at the time.  Papaya The Fallen Oct 25, 2017 2,735 California The financial model for CoD is awful and lacks any sort of creativity. They just copied fortnite even though it doesn't work for a military shooter. They rarely release any good content because it either doesn't match the game's tone, or it sucks. It just doesn't lend itself well to skins, and other visual customization options. Or maybe they just don't know how to make good. Either way, I've never seen a more boring battlepass in my life. CoD can be a super fun action game, but it's never felt more hollow and lifeless. The best counter-example to "games are art" I've ever seen.  BestBrand Member Mar 5, 2025 457 Call of duty is the worst man. I may not even buy another COD again.   MerluzaSamus Member Dec 3, 2018 1,471 Argentina Agni Kai said: Only Battlefield 6 can save us now. Hold the line, my friends. Hold the line. Click to expand... Click to shrink... The game published by EA to gather obscene money on the fps market? That one Battlefield? Jokes aside, 'fraid this is going to be the norm long term, Fortnite normalized it and publishers with less restraint are going wild, same with AI. At least on the AAA market.  Lumination Member Oct 26, 2017 16,064 Who could have expected them giving the game away would have affected the revenue stream and business model of the game itself.   Geeko Member Oct 27, 2017 1,413 San Jose, CA Lame as hell. The problem is that the masses won't care about it and will still spend crap tons of money on this game thus continuing this constant bombardment of ads.   shadowman16 Member Oct 25, 2017 41,804 Agni Kai said: Only Battlefield 6 can save us now. Hold the line, my friends. Hold the line. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Gameplay wise, Hopefully Dice will take the time and make something truly special. However... I wouldnt expect much better from EA of all publishers. They are every bit as summy...  OP OP Xando Member Oct 28, 2017 38,006 My guess is this is only going to get worse as MS tries to make up the lost revenue from people playing via GP instead of buying   SP. Member Oct 27, 2017 8,578 I guess I thought it would be worse than the reaction seems to suggest… They're in-game micro transaction ads and for the most are for weapon skins which naturally don't seem that out of place in a weapon selection menu. It's not like they're advertising a Burger King Whopper in here. Obviously it'd be better if they weren't there at all but honestly if I played the game and saw these I wouldn't think it's anything out of the ordinary.  Ravelle Member Oct 31, 2017 20,432 Noisepurge said: Fortnite doesn't cost 80$ Click to expand... Click to shrink... It doesn't spam you with multiple windows to buy something either  Rosebud Two Pieces Member Apr 16, 2018 51,386 Wallace said: What a shit franchise. Click to expand... Click to shrink... .   Kyokanto Member Mar 4, 2025 493 For a second I thought this was going to be McDonald's ads or something lol. I wonder how far off that is… Still scummy as is.  Pop-O-Matic Avenger Oct 25, 2017 14,007 MarcosBrXD said: Crazy one of the biggest IPs doing this Click to expand... Click to shrink... Not really. CoD might move more money than most of the rest of the industry put together, but capitalism (especially at publicly traded mega corps like MS and ActiBlizz before them) demands that the line must always be going up, and there isn't really much CoD can do to grow the player base in any significant way in the short-to-medium term, so they're going to start trying out shit like this to get even more money out of the existing players so the line goes up and the shareholders can be happy.   Fabs Member Aug 22, 2019 2,780 Noisepurge said: Fortnite doesn't cost 80$ Click to expand... Click to shrink... Decarb said: Not only is it in a full priced mode, but its also in the weapon customization menu where you least expect it. Click to expand... Click to shrink... jroc74 said: Yeah I dont think it needs to be this aggressive. While trying to play the game tho? "Following the launch of Season 4, adverts for weapon bundles can be seen in the build and weapon menus. These are unavoidable for players as they tinker with their loadouts." Imagine getting hit with Shark Card ads while browsing the in game stores in GTA Online....please Rockstar dont do this. Also this. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Full priced games advertise their dlc in menus all the time. Is it because it's in a new place? Is this that different than having the paid operators in the menu for selection like they have in past CoD? Or when I play Street Fighter and I can't pick Akuma because he costs money? I get it if it was for McDonalds but this seems like rage bait.  Plexas Member Jan 24, 2025 289 Several trillion dollar company needs some money to survive, please understand.   Twister Member Feb 11, 2019 6,692 This franchise peaked with BO3. Everything after has been a disaster   Vertigo1 Member Jun 30, 2023 1,093 CoD will never be as good as it was in the 360 era, ever again.   Sordid Plebeian Member Oct 26, 2017 19,955 Yeah I remember seeing that AI store slop when I booted up S4, and they wonder why they're driving players away   Tommy Showbiz Member Jul 20, 2022 3,727 This is pretty corny, but I was honestly expecting ads for like Dr. Squatch and not just prodding you to buy in-game bundles.   Apathy Member Oct 25, 2017 13,538 So the biggest game, created by the biggest publisher, paced by the riches company in the world needs to slide ads into their paid games. Lovely   DarkJ Member Nov 11, 2017 1,918 Ai slop? Ads in the menus? In a fully priced game? Really just making sure I don't even look at the next game.  T88heon Member Aug 26, 2024 1,042 This is a profitability issue coupled with horrendous stewardship of the ip. If the retail side was profitable would they need to stealthily run ads in "COD" of all ip? 😬  DSync Member Oct 27, 2017 884 Black Ops 6 in 2025 after the most recent update for Season 4 > £70 for the base game > £100 for the "Vault Editon" > £50/60 for a year of PS Plus to play the game online > £10 for the Battlepass > £15 for the Battlepass plus tier skips > £25 for the "Blackcell" Battlepass > Free and Premium (Costs money) Battlepasses for the Seth Rogan Operator Weed event > £16-25 Weapon and Operator bundles > AI art in the emblems, calling cards, posters in certain levels > Ads for bundles in creating a Loadout > Server instability issues > Whole game crashes to desktop/homescreen when editing your loadout during a match > UI Menu lagging > Cheaters, hackers run rampant > Store will 100% work no matter what (Prices for everything may not be exact)  Pai Pai Master Member Oct 25, 2017 37,298 Atlanta GA AI crap and ads, yet people will still buy this shit in record numbers every year  

Akiba756 Member Oct 1, 2020 1,600 Sao Paolo, Brazil So, there was a dumb controversy a few months ago, when E33 unveiled its MSRP of 50 dollars, some were wondering if there was a "catch" (the game is super short, unpolished, etc.) to the point that it's developer had to came foward to clarify things (which goes to show how cynical everyone is now). Expedition 33 Dev Confirms $50 Price Is Correct, '30+ Hours of Main Game' Wants as many people as possible to play RPG www.pushsquare.com So obviously, we now know that there is no catch, the game is a serious goty contender, but that had me curious, had the game been sold for 60 or even 70 bucks, do you think it would have achieved the same financial success? Obviously, less people would've bought it at launch, but considering the latest sales figure, 2 million, had it been sold at 70 bucks, it would need to sell roughly 1,43 million units to result in the same revenue, could it have reached that?  Last edited: Today at 9:02 PM Pikagreg Member Feb 5, 2018 513 I think the cheaper price definitely helped a lot of people but I think the game is worth full price a lot more than a lot of other things I end up buying.   DontHateTheBacon Unshakable Resolve Member Oct 27, 2017 14,472 Short answer: critically it would still be hugely successful and commercially, less successful but still a huge success.   808s & Villainy Member Oct 27, 2017 46,629 Of course anew IP from an unknown first time indie studio wouldn't do as well at $70 as it did at $50...   colorboy Member Apr 5, 2025 169 If by "successful" you mean "units sold" then no.   PlanetSmasher The Abominable Showman Member Oct 25, 2017 132,763 No. Absolutely not. I think it still would've wound up in the zeitgeist but it would not have sold nearly as many copies.  Stone Ocean Member Oct 25, 2017 3,354 For me the price made it go from keeping an eye on it to an instant impulse purchase so I'd go with "no"   Khanimus Avenger Oct 25, 2017 46,440 Greater Vancouver It still would've sold, but obviously not as many as it has so far.   R3ndezvous Member Dec 17, 2024 1,338 As quick? No I don't think so. The price and word of mouth regarding the game being amazing, just made it a easy instant buy with that price being the threshold Moreover, I got the game for less than €44.95 at launch and the "gamble" paid off :)  cursed knowledge Member Mar 15, 2019 3,594 Brazil hell nah dawg the cheaper you go the more units you sell  Dyno AVALANCHE The Fallen Oct 25, 2017 16,779 I mean, I probably wouldn't have bitten at that price since I had other options then too, but that said I also think there's some, I guess shortcomings compared to AAA, where I'd have been much more critical if it was full priced. The level design for one doesn't feel up to AAA standards even at the lower end. It would still be successful is my guess but I also don't think it quite holds up for AAA pricing in some areas if it were to have launched at it.  Vincent Grayson Member Oct 27, 2017 7,356 Mount Airy, MD I got far more than 30 hours out of it, and wouldn't have balked at paying "full" price. But I think it's a given that at a higher price fewer people would check out a new title from a new developer. Perhaps moreso with it also being on Game Pass. I often wonder how much the game's price factors into the GP effect. Like, if I try something I wouldn't have bought otherwise and like it, I might buy it to support the developer further. That's *far* less likely with a game that's $70, simply on a practical level.  Xando Member Oct 28, 2017 37,600 No but probably would still have sold somewhat decent based on reviews   Mobius and Pet Octopus Member Oct 25, 2017 16,771 The game is definitely worth 70 or more, so people who bought it basically got a really good deal. Obviously value is subjective, and I'm not commenting on the hypothetical, but I wouldn't be complaining if I bought the game for 70 or even 80 because it's that special.   AAION Member Dec 28, 2018 2,006 I would have waited at $70   jitteryzeitgeist Member May 26, 2023 9,115 A quiet place I think it would've had less initial sales, but relatively the same given enough time. What really helped Sandfall was the sprint to 2 million, though. That's huge.  kami_sama Member Oct 26, 2017 7,543 I bought it the day reviews hit because it was cheap. Even if it's a great game, were it more expensive I'd have waited.  UraMallas Member Nov 1, 2017 24,425 United States Absolutely yes.   Geode Keeper of the White Materia Member Oct 27, 2017 5,476 Nope.   Lord Vatek Avenger Jan 18, 2018 24,722 Still successful but definitely not as much, nope.   Mekanos ▲ Legend ▲ Member Oct 17, 2018 48,536 I think $50 was impulse buy territory with the strong WOM. $70 I'm not sure. Only the studio could probably tell you the ROI.   Z-Brownie Member Nov 6, 2017 4,347 it sold quite well but i think the word of mouth and the reveals would make it sucessful anyway.   Shryke Member Oct 26, 2017 3,350 Hell no. I got it at $40. Easy choice right there. If it was higher, I'd wait for a long while. I'm sure others would too.   NotLiquid One Winged Slayer Member Oct 25, 2017 37,848 Eventually. Probably. Hard to tell from my own perspective because despite people gassing up that it launched at an economical price, I already didn't buy it at $50.  Linus815 Member Oct 29, 2017 24,084 obviously not lower price = more impulse buys, lower barrier of entry  -orion- Member Oct 27, 2017 132 Anecdotally, I wouldn't buy before a sale if it was $70... so I think the price maybe plays a small part in the success  Yerffej Prophet of Regret Member Oct 25, 2017 29,419 um no   Joule Member Nov 19, 2017 4,947 Yep, sales would've been nigh identical. This is the 2025 version of that *one* game that seems to catch that "wave" and blows up thanks to WoM, internet discussion, twitter, streamers and just the general cultural zeitgeist. Nothing was gonna stop this train from reaching 2(?) million sales [as of this post]. Incredibly lucky and seems to happen to 1-2 games per year. This one also happens to be well received by critics.   Desma "This guy are sick" Member Oct 27, 2017 6,754 I wouldn't had brought it, but I think it would   Rosebud Two Pieces Member Apr 16, 2018 51,162 Nope. In US it's "only" $20, but in my country for example Clair Obscur is half the price of Doom. Insane difference.  Nano-Nandy Member Mar 26, 2019 2,840 Game's really good, but there's no denying that the price helped.   ElFly Member Oct 27, 2017 3,736 no at full price people wouldn't have overlooked the many limitations and technical faults of the game  Renteka-Bond Chicken Chaser Member Dec 28, 2017 6,030 Clearwater, Florida No and anyone saying yes, I think, has not been paying attention. It is absolutely worth the $70 bucks. People will not buy it for $70 though AND people will judge it more harshly at $70 since a lot of the facets of the game that are adorably quaint in a cheaper 'indie' dark horse story would be reviled at a higher pricepoint. Edit: It's a large part of why the narrative of "Square / Big devs should just copy Clair, look at how this worked out!" is annoying, because people are seemingly either unaware or unable to admit the obvious generosity they're giving Clair here.  Dust C H A O S Member Oct 25, 2017 40,978 $50 is impulse price point, the WoM is absolutely insane so it's really easy to jump in.   RpgN Member Oct 25, 2017 1,796 The Netherlands Nope, I would have waited on the game with a deep sale. The price along with the word of mouth is what got me to play day one. Word of mouth would have not been enough alone.   Mason56 Member Feb 8, 2024 153 I mean in terms of pure numbers sold…no. Just about everything would be more successful it were cheaper   tucah Member Oct 25, 2017 1,501 AS successful? No. Still successful? Absolutely   HellofaMouse Member Oct 27, 2017 8,360 i sure wouldnt buy it week 1 as soon as the reviews were out   Raskol Member Sep 5, 2018 845 No. Its price was one of the main reasons I picked it up now instead of later.   Alek Games User Researcher Verified Oct 28, 2017 9,797 Higher priced items very obviously tend to sell less units. I don't think this is a sensible question. The question is, if the game was one of those higher priced titles, would it still have sold enough units to generate the same revenue, as it has at the lower price. And the answer is not one that anyone on this forum can give. Because we can't know. But, to try and answer this I think it's worth considering the appeal of the lower price tag the factors that consumers are considering when making a purchase. So, most consumers are inherently risk averse by default, so they'll avoid spending if they think there might be a risk that they won't have a good time. In relation to that there are a couple of components worth discussing. 1) It's a new IP. So this means that people aren't coming into it with strong expectations about the games quality. 2) It was received very well by critics and social media influencers. I think people are more guarded with new IPs but because it was received so well, that component that would encourage a risk aversive attitude towards the game, actually gets flipped. Suddenly, people are very excited to play a new IP that's good, because they haven't had that experience in some time. I think this also heightened excitement around the game on social media, allowing it to reach more people as influencers were keen to talk about this game that seemed to come out of nowhere. So, I think in this case, it would have been likely to perform well at a higher price point too. Obviously it would have sold fewer units as some players were literally priced out, but I suspect it would have seen similar revenue. Because they've built that relationship with players, I would probably expect a sequel to target a higher price point.  Brawly Likes to Brawl Member Oct 25, 2017 16,523 Ryohei Suzuki's bedroom No. It being in the impulse buy range on top of the WoM gave it crazy momentum. I fully expect the sequel to be $70 because now it's a known and highly regarded property.  Gestault Member Oct 26, 2017 14,681 I don't think we can ever really know, but speaking personally, I don't buy $70 games unless there's some major draw (which is almost never), so I definitely wouldn't have grabbed it during this launch window. I happily grabbed a hard copy after loving what I played through Game Pass.   Mekanos ▲ Legend ▲ Member Oct 17, 2018 48,536 NotLiquid said: Eventually. Probably. Hard to tell from my own perspective because despite people gassing up that it launched at an economical price, I already didn't buy it at $50. Click to expand... Click to shrink... I didn't either, but that was more a function of already having too many RPGs to play. If it hits $30 that's probably my impulse buy range.   OnionPowder Member Oct 25, 2017 10,838 Orlando, FL No way. I think the $50 price tag is a bigger factor than people realize. Especially right as Nintendo and Microsoft announce $80 games.   carlsojo Shinra Employee Member Oct 28, 2017 37,551 San Francisco I think word of mouth would have carried it to commercial success regardless of the price.   HolyJonte AVALANCHE Member Aug 31, 2023 1,290 From Stockholm but now living in Padova, Italy Nope. The game is fantastic but a very big part of the record breaking user score that made much of the hype is the goodwill behind it being a new developer, old ubisoft employees, small team and the price tag. With a full price title it would probably have been much less talk about it.   kowhite Member May 14, 2019 7,454 I don't know. I don't necessarily believe it couldn't have succeeded at that price. I mean they didn't price it at 50 bucks cause they knew it would be received this way.   Splinky Member Jul 12, 2023 133 Obviously it would sell fewer copies guys. The real question is if it would've ended up with more or less revenue overall I lean toward "no". And I think a lower price point + GP makes a lot of sense for a debut studio that wants to get their name out there.  JRedCX Member Nov 10, 2020 1,277 Yeah   Universal Acclaim Member Oct 5, 2024 2,292 Alek said: Higher priced items very obviously tend to sell less units. I don't think this is a sensible question. The question is, if the game was one of those higher priced titles, would it still have sold enough units to generate the same revenue, as it has at the lower price. And the answer is not one that anyone on this forum can give. Because we can't know. But, to try and answer this I think it's worth considering the appeal of the lower price tag the factors that consumers are considering when making a purchase. So, most consumers are inherently risk averse by default, so they'll avoid spending if they think there might be a risk that they won't have a good time. In relation to that there are a couple of components worth discussing. 1) It's a new IP. So this means that people aren't coming into it with strong expectations about the games quality. 2) It was received very well by critics and social media influencers. I think people are more guarded with new IPs but because it was received so well, that component that would encourage a risk aversive attitude towards the game, actually gets flipped. Suddenly, people are very excited to play a new IP that's good, because they haven't had that experience in some time. I think this also heightened excitement around the game on social media, allowing it to reach more people as influencers were keen to talk about this game that seemed to come out of nowhere. So, I think in this case, it would have been likely to perform well at a higher price point too. Obviously it would have sold fewer units as some players were literally priced out, but I suspect it would have seen similar revenue. Because they've built that relationship with players, I would probably expect a sequel to target a higher price point. Click to expand... Click to shrink... This is what I'm thinking. Maybe slightly lower revenue, but still very successful.  

Strikerrr Member Oct 25, 2017 2,842 N² (@4nt1r34l) the Marathon alpha released recently and its environments are covered with assets lifted from poster designs i made in 2017. @Bungie @josephacross xcancel.com Here are bigger versions of the examples that she lists: This isn't the first time Bungie has been using art without crediting the artist. A similar situation happened in Destiny 2 a couple of years ago. In that situation, Bungie at least reached out to apologize to the artist and worked out a deal to compensate them Destiny 2 makers apologize for ‘mistaken’ use of fan art in cutscene Bungie says it will compensate the graphic designer www.polygon.com I hope ANTIREAL can get some similar recognition and compensation at the bare minimum. I'm curious how common this kind of art theft is within the games industry.  Zebesian-X Member Dec 3, 2018 25,231 Yeah that seems… pretty blatant. Bungie's gotta make this right   StarsAreStuff Member Feb 16, 2021 1,757 seeing as this art was all posted around 2017 really aligns with the Marathon production timeline start. gross stuff Bungie, disappointing as hell. BSKY link View: https://bsky.app/profile/antire.al/post/3lpa4gamtzs2l N² (@antire.al) the Marathon alpha released recently and its environments are covered with assets lifted from poster designs i made in 2017. @bungie.net @marathonthegame.bungie.net bsky.app   ResinPeasant93 Member Apr 24, 2024 2,420 It seems to be more common than one would think. Don't ask for permission, and don't ask for forgiveness either, unless by a court order.   AgentStrange Member Oct 25, 2017 5,001 Yeah, this is like the third instance of Bungie doing this this now I think. Pretty sus to say the least.   Ant_17 Member Oct 28, 2017 2,902 Greece As if we need more reasons to hate this game.   Sanders21 Member Sep 3, 2023 339 AgentStrange said: Yeah, this is like the third instance of this now I think. Pretty sus to say the least. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Fourth, based on this Verge article.   vixolus Prophet of Truth Member Sep 22, 2020 70,590 Yeah I just saw this come up on my bsky feed. It's literally ripped 1:1 in many areas as shown, not even just "inspired by"   Kinthey Avenger Oct 27, 2017 25,412 Straight up copying "Aleph Dark Space haulage logistics" is wild. Should be pretty open and shut. Like usually you could make some excuses about "Well, a double arrow symbol is going to look similar etc." but that's just a whole ass sentence copied, no ifs or buts.  NameUser Member Oct 25, 2017 17,190 They better make it right. Cut a check, put the artist in the credits.   Uhyve Member Oct 25, 2017 1,279 So the only part of Marathon that interests me was blatantly plagiarised. Modern Bungie makes me sad.  Smash-It Stan Member Oct 25, 2017 5,652 I saw the thread title and thought "AGAIN??" this has happened MULTIPLE times...   Audiblee Member Mar 14, 2025 1,386 Bungie's roll of negativity and self-owns continues. Compensate this artist.   The elusive man Member May 19, 2024 787 Damn they didn't even change it a little.   Crespo Member Oct 27, 2017 6,088 Sucks to see that.   LinguisticGoblin Member Jul 19, 2020 1,280 That is incredibly blatant looking   Suntzupp Member Mar 26, 2022 3,490 Bungie, the fuck is wrong with you?   Praedyth Member Feb 25, 2020 8,566 Brazil Yikes. This is blatant.   fiendcode Member Oct 26, 2017 26,291 Garbage company.   7thFloor Member Oct 27, 2017 7,268 U.S. Probably a single person responsible, that sucks   Remark Member Oct 27, 2017 4,135 The fact that Bungie has done this multiple times shows they seriously don't care lmao. Hope they get paid.  SolidSnakeUS Member Oct 25, 2017 12,072 Bungie... just come the fuck on. How about we don't fucking do this and be better... That is just blatant.   PimentaGui Member Jul 29, 2021 982 Fuck Bungie, wtf   Tagyhag Member Oct 27, 2017 15,119 Someone should get fired   TheRed Member Oct 31, 2017 3,176 The Aleph thing is just crazy to me lol just a straight copy   Temperance "This guy are sick" Member Oct 25, 2017 6,977 [NO 2FA] Remark said: The fact that Bungie has done this multiple times shows they seriously don't care lmao. Hope they get paid. Click to expand... Click to shrink... You say Bungie but who'd be responsibility for the actual actions of theft. Is it more Bungie artist department looking more and more sus? absolutely   banananahammock Member Aug 15, 2022 1,195 Uhyve said: So the only part of Marathon that interests me was blatantly plagiarised. Modern Bungie makes me sad. Click to expand... Click to shrink... this  Stencil Mailing His Own Damn Business Member Oct 30, 2017 13,474 USA Gross. Has anything come of the other three instances in which they've done this?  Nida Member Aug 31, 2019 15,091 Everett, Washington 7thFloor said: Probably a single person responsible, that sucks Click to expand... Click to shrink... Do they keep track of who does what exact art?  Dever Member Dec 25, 2019 5,830 Yikes lol. "Aleph Dark Space Haulage Logistics" totally sounds like it would be some minor part of the game's lore. But it's just copied and pasted from somewhere??   Falchion Member Oct 25, 2017 44,340 Oof, definitely looks like a copy + paste job.   7thFloor Member Oct 27, 2017 7,268 U.S. Nida said: Do they keep track of who does what exact art? Click to expand... Click to shrink... Internally? Yeah probably, and I imagine they're going to be in trouble for this   flyinj Member Oct 25, 2017 11,883 7thFloor said: Probably a single person responsible, that sucks Click to expand... Click to shrink... The question is- is it the same person who did it four times before  nihilence nøthing but silence Moderator Oct 25, 2017 18,908 From 'quake area to big OH. You could make a case for coincidence, except for the ALEPH thing. Yikes   DoradoWinston Member Apr 9, 2019 8,355 How am I not surprised the only part that seemed remotely interesting did not come from Bungie. That shit is blatant copy and paste holy   super moustique Member Oct 31, 2017 9,761 Hopefully, she'll get both the recognition and money she deserves for her (indirect) work on Marathon.   cowbanana Member Feb 2, 2018 16,331 a Socialist Utopia This is extremely blatant with the 1:1 ripping of exact design elements. There's literally zero excuses in this case. But I wouldn't call the overall design language very unique/original, it's very "Designer's Republic" going back to the 90s. They could just have made their own take on this style of design and they'd be fine, if unoriginal. But straight ripping elements makes Bungie look insanely bad in this case.  Nameless Hero Member Oct 25, 2017 23,330 Dever said: Yikes lol. "Aleph Dark Space Haulage Logistics" totally sounds like it would be some minor part of the game's lore. But it's just copied and pasted from somewhere?? Click to expand... Click to shrink... I'm 99% sure Aleph is part of the Marathon lore. The (fan) port of the original game is called Marathon Aleph One  Muffin Member Oct 26, 2017 10,751 nihilence said: You could make a case for coincidence, except for the ALEPH thing. Yikes Click to expand... Click to shrink... That logo row is already bad enough imo   maze001 Member Sep 18, 2024 584 Wow, I was not expecting it to be such a blatant case of theft. They literally copy pasted and rotated her art and called it a day. Crazy shit!  pittman Member Aug 15, 2019 252 Theres nothing wrong with being inspired by something. But whole sale lifting this stuff is nuts. This stuff was definitely on some mood board for the game and filter it's way through everything   Hong Member Oct 30, 2017 855 Literally stolen. Absolutely shameless. Imagine all the art that hasn't been recognised as stolen.   Kiyamet Member Apr 21, 2024 3,563 I dont know about Bungie's art director situation but often when I worked on assets I would be given mood boards for inspiration and be expected to basically, well, do just this Its most likely multiple layers of contract work that allowed this to happen I wouldnt put it squarely on Bungie for happening, though it is indeed on Bungie to fix it  cyress8 "This guy are sick" Avenger Oct 25, 2017 6,015 being broke, to being semi-broke. Straight copies. Guess they need to hire her and fire the person leading the art dept. Massive screw up.  PlanetSmasher The Abominable Showman Member Oct 25, 2017 132,602 Dever said: Yikes lol. "Aleph Dark Space Haulage Logistics" totally sounds like it would be some minor part of the game's lore. But it's just copied and pasted from somewhere?? Click to expand... Click to shrink... nihilence said: You could make a case for coincidence, except for the ALEPH thing. Yikes Click to expand... Click to shrink... Aleph One Aleph One is an enhanced open source version of Marathon 2: Durandal's game engine.[1] The game engine has been in development since the year 2000 when Bungie released Marathon 2's source code prior to its acquisition by Microsoft. The game engine has made many improvements to Marathon 2, such... bungie.fandom.com   Threadmarks Bungee Art Director follows Artist New Index Cian One Winged Slayer Member Feb 17, 2018 676 Joseph Cross, Marathon's Art Director, has followed her for years, but never reached out.   New Index Turnabout Sisters The Fallen Oct 25, 2017 2,704 Wow wasn't there just a story about someone suing Bungie for copying something in some Destiny 2 stuff?   Vic Tokai Member Aug 9, 2018 207 Wow. The art & graphic design style of the game was the only thing interesting to me about it (I'm simply too old for competitive multiplayer games, I would rather spend my time doing literally anything else that doesn't involve getting yelled at by 12 year olds online), so now I'm just gonna go to the source for that art. Just followed this artist on Bluesky and will definitely buy prints of their work, if they sell any. EDIT: Was just scrolling through images on their site, and damn. There's my next decade of phone wallpapers sorted...  Last edited: 59 minutes ago LiK Member Oct 25, 2017 34,452 Considering they had laid off so many artists, I can def see this happening. I had zero interest in Marathon and this just makes it easier to ignore.   Uhyve Member Oct 25, 2017 1,279 7thFloor said: Probably a single person responsible, that sucks Click to expand... Click to shrink... While it might have been one person responsible for the plagiarism, the art style for the entire game ended up riffing on this persons art seemingly without credit. It's just kinda bizarre that they presumably built their style guide ripping the artist off, and then also directly ripped the artist off. 

entremet You wouldn't toast a NES cartridge Member Oct 26, 2017 70,440 I've also loved this troupe. It's like a fun fakeout lol. My pick: Monster World IV, the last Genesis installment of the installment of the excellent, and confusing Monster World/Wonder Boy series. It also got a remake a few years ago as well, which I haven't played. End game just goes crazy while you basically coast for 75 percent of the game. It's not crazy, but a nice jump in difficulty.  Last edited: Yesterday at 10:21 PM PlanetSmasher The Abominable Showman Member Oct 25, 2017 132,547 The last few missions of Super Robot Wars OG: Moon Dwellers are nuts. The game is like "we're going to give you one of the most powerful mechas in the entire multiverse! so now we need to make every fight 2-3x harder to compensate!" The Neo Granzon is an absolute monster, but even that thing can't solve an entire mission by itself if the rest of your units get killed.  shadowman16 Member Oct 25, 2017 41,370 Ill be honest the remake of MWIV didnt really feel like it had a difficulty spike aside that darned quiz that popped up mid? way through the game. Its basically a knowledge check, in a game which Id been sleeping through the story. That'll teach me to pay more attention next time lol. Ones that hit me personally: Ninja Gaiden (NES) - That darned bird in stage... 7-2? Its actually not just the bird but rather a combo of the bird and other enemies that constantly respawn. The level actually wouldnt be as bad if the respawning was more lenient. Or you know, the checkpointing after that point was solid instead of kicking you back to 7-1 if you lose to the boss' multiple phases! Ninja Gaiden (Black/Sigma) - Bump the difficulty all the way up to Very Hard/Master Ninja, then play the penultimate stage and do the boss rush run toward the end of the penultimate chapter... when the Alma like bosses show up, it can become a real test of skill just to hit the bosses, let alone win! TMNT NES - No, not the over rated dam level, Im talking level 6 - the finale. And specifically, the long corridor section right before Shredder - the game basically over and over spawns these flying dudes with guns that decimate your health and take far too many hits to defeat... they dont stop coming and are just a hastle to deal with. Hope for scrolls or at least limp to Shredder's boss room with Don and Leo intact for the fight, as you'll need their reach to cheese Shredder (thankfully said boss is much easier than the journey to him)  DrForester Mod of the Year 2006 Member Oct 25, 2017 24,538 Breath of the Wild, but only because I was so engrossed during the game of exploring on foot that having to do mounted combat for the final battle was not something I was prepared for at all.   OP OP entremet You wouldn't toast a NES cartridge Member Oct 26, 2017 70,440 shadowman16 said: Ill be honest the remake of MWIV didnt really feel like it had a difficulty spike aside that darned quiz that popped up mid? way through the game. Its basically a knowledge check, in a game which Id been sleeping through the story. That'll teach me to pay more attention next time lol. Ones that hit me personally: Ninja Gaiden (NES) - That darned bird in stage... 7-2? Its actually not just the bird but rather a combo of the bird and other enemies that constantly respawn. The level actually wouldnt be as bad if the respawning was more lenient. Or you know, the checkpointing after that point was solid instead of kicking you back to 7-1 if you lose to the boss' multiple phases! Ninja Gaiden (Black/Sigma) - Bump the difficulty all the way up to Very Hard/Master Ninja, then play the penultimate stage and do the boss rush run toward the end of the penultimate chapter... when the Alma like bosses show up, it can become a real test of skill just to hit the bosses, let alone win! TMNT NES - No, not the over rated dam level, Im talking level 6 - the finale. And specifically, the long corridor section right before Shredder - the game basically over and over spawns these flying dudes with guns that decimate your health and take far too many hits to defeat... they dont stop coming and are just a hastle to deal with. Hope for scrolls or at least limp to Shredder's boss room with Don and Leo intact for the fight, as you'll need their reach to cheese Shredder (thankfully said boss is much easier than the journey to him) Click to expand... Click to shrink... I heard the remake is much easier than the Genesis original.   BennyWhatever Member Oct 27, 2017 5,485 US The Last Story for the Wii, I remember the very last fight being a huuuuge difficulty spike. I breezed through most of the game but the final boss took me hours.   JaseMath Member Oct 27, 2017 11,422 Denver, CO The endgame of FFIV (Lunar Subterranean) can be pretty brutal if you're not grinding it.   shadowman16 Member Oct 25, 2017 41,370 entremet said: I heard the remake is much easier than the Genesis original. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Ive not played the original yet, but yeah I can believe it. Still I really liked the remake for what its worth.   Tenck Member Oct 27, 2017 684 Yakuza: Like a Dragon. I almost dropped the game because of it, but because I was so close to the end I was stubborn and pushed through the difficulty spike. That game all around had some bad moments when it came to difficulty, but the ending was on a whole different level.   BranCrackr Member Oct 4, 2019 1,260 Not a complaint for me, but Stellar Blade's last few bosses will beat your ass if you haven't gotten good at parrying and perfect dodging   MimicBox82 Member Jan 9, 2018 5,406 Sweden Elden Ring. Those last few bosses are brutal.   intradictus Member Sep 17, 2023 567 Senator Armstrong in Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance, you can make it to him without mastering the combat system, but he will beat your ass if you have any weaknesses   sukitakit4 Member Aug 2, 2022 25 intradictus said: Senator Armstrong in Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance, you can make it to him without mastering the combat system, but he will beat your ass if you have any weaknesses Click to expand... Click to shrink... Yep...pretty much.  thetrin Member Oct 26, 2017 10,581 Grand Junction, CO Tenck said: Yakuza: Like a Dragon. I almost dropped the game because of it, but because I was so close to the end I was stubborn and pushed through the difficulty spike. That game all around had some bad moments when it came to difficulty, but the ending was on a whole different level. Click to expand... Click to shrink... IF I am thinking of the same part of the game, the difficulty spikes in a really stupid way too. Its not that the enemies are at your level but more difficult. If you dont grind before this point (something you never really need to do up to this point), everything out levels you i that section by several levels. It's bizarre balancing.  cubicle47b Member Aug 9, 2019 921 The real final boss of Octopath Traveler.   JohnTruckasaurus Member Oct 27, 2017 308 The last level of Streets of Rage 4 on a higher difficulty is pretty much designed to make your palms sweat.   3bada The Fallen Oct 27, 2017 512 Kena is a chill adventure game until the final act where it becomes dark souls   Listai 50¢ - "This guy are sick" Member Oct 27, 2017 6,819 Final Fantasy III. I was overlevelled the whole game but that final dungeon was brutal.  Tavernade Tavernade Moderator Sep 18, 2018 11,609 The final boss of the first Mario and Luigi game is total nonsense compared to the rest of the game. Two phases, the second of which resets your HP to zero and then sends you through a gauntlet.   sillyGecko Member Mar 14, 2025 1,262 Does Astrobot count? Those challenge levels are brutal  

By the time you read these words, it’s quite possible that Adorama will be out of stock of the new DJI Mavic 4 Pro. But when I wrote them, the US-based retailer was still selling a drone that wasn’t supposed to go on sale in the US at all, with roughly 70 left in stock.This morning, I wrote how DJI was skipping the US with its most advanced drone yet, citing Trump’s tariffs among other reasons for the decision. DJI did not send the drone to US reviewers, and it wouldn’t provide US prices when we asked.But Adorama and B&H, two rival camera stores based in New York City, apparently didn’t get the message!Today, they both listed the drone for $2,699 — or $3,549 for the Fly More Kit, or $4,649 for the Creator Combo with the fancy new controller with the folding sticks and swiveling 1600-nit screen, or $1,299 for that controller all by its lonesome. B&H even issued a press release.B&H is only offering preorders today; I confirmed with Miguel Perez in the store’s drone department that “we don’t yet have it in stock,” and he wasn’t sure when stock might arrive. “It’s a little bit of a grey area for logistics between the US and China for aircraft,” he admits. But he says B&H isn’t taking anyone’s money — “we don’t charge until it ships” — and that he’s heard other US retailers like Adorama are selling the drone this very week.Adorama sales rep Steve Chill confirms that over the phone, and offers to put one on hold for me, because he says they’re moving fast. “We had a few hundred in stock, now we’re down to 70,” he says. “They’ll be gone tomorrow.”Over the phone, he says he has the $3,549 Fly More Combo right now if I want, though he’s out of the $2,699 base model. (At the time I reached out, Adorama’s website was showing the entry model in stock, shipping next week, though it’s now just listing a preorder again; however, the new DJI RC Pro 2 controller appears to be in stock too.)It’s not clear what’s happening. Did DJI ship some to the US early, but not enough for a full launch, perhaps? DJI spokesperson Daisy Kong doesn’t have an answer for me yet.If you want to try your luck, here are the links:DJI Mavic 4 Pro: Adorama, B&HDJI Mavic 4 Pro Fly More Combo: Adorama, B&HDJI Mavic 4 Pro Creator Combo: Adorama, B&HDJI RC Pro 2 Controller: Adorama, B&HOr, you could just call, like me.See More:

If the question, “Who is Meta’s biggest rival?” were on a Family Feud survey, TikTok would likely be the winning answer. In the Federal Trade Commission’s antitrust case against the Facebook and Instagram owner, the government’s response probably wouldn’t even make the top 10: a small blockchain-based platform called MeWe. MeWe looks a fair amount like Facebook at first glance, except that you make an account using the Frequency blockchain — which the company explains is a decentralized protocol that lets you move your social connections to other (mostly hypothetical at this point) apps that support Frequency. The company says 20 million users have joined, but when I make a MeWe account and log in, I scroll through my autopopulated feed and think, “Who are these people?” I search for a few of my Verge colleagues, figuring if anyone has tried this obscure app, it might be one of them, but I come up short. I try some public figures: Tim Cook? Jeff Bezos? Mark Zuckerberg? There are some accounts with these names, but it seems unlikely they’re the ones I have in mind.The claim that MeWe is a closer competitor to Facebook and Instagram than TikTok might be baffling if you’re not steeped in antitrust law or the specifics of the FTC’s complaint. Meta CEO Zuckerberg testified he hadn’t even heard of the app before this case was filed. But the FTC has spent the past three weeks laying out its logic. Using Meta’s own internal discussions about how it views itself and its competition, it says that Meta has historically, and to this day, competed in a market for connecting with friends and family online — and when it saw its dominance in that space threatened by the rise of Instagram and WhatsApp, it bought them to squash the competition.Whether Judge James Boasberg buys this could determine who wins the case — if the FTC can also show that Meta acted illegally through its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp to solidify its alleged monopoly power.Antitrust law is supposed to ensure fair competition, which usually means that people have options for a useful class of goods and services — what’s known as a relevant market. The FTC says that here, that market is “personal social networking services,” or PSNs: spaces where a core purpose is helping people connect with friends and family. While there are many online platforms that overlap with Meta’s services, the FTC argues that virtually none of them serve that market. If internet users want to find and hang out with people they know — as opposed to, say, watching influencers or making work connections — then it’s Mark Zuckerberg’s way or… in the government’s telling, Snapchat, BeReal, and MeWe. Beyond that core definition, PSNs have some other unique features and norms: The apps feature a social graph of users’ friends and family connections, as opposed to mapping users primarily based on their interests. Users can look up and find people they know in real life. And they come to the app to share personal updates with those people.Facebook and Instagram increasingly display videos and photos from influencers and celebrities, but the FTC argues personal social networking remains a core service. It used Instagram chief Adam Mosseri’s testimony to most clearly make this point. In that testimony as well as posts to his own Instagram account, Mosseri said that it’s still important for the app to connect users with their friends. The FTC argues that even if that use case is a smaller portion of what Meta’s apps do these days, it’s still a significant need users have that can virtually only be fulfilled by Facebook and Instagram. While someone might connect with people they know in real life on LinkedIn, they likely won’t primarily share personal updates there. And while they also could follow and interact with people they know on TikTok or YouTube, they’re more likely to passively watch videos from people they don’t.Meta says this is an entirely wrong way to think about it. Social media platforms compete for users’ time and attention, so whether a particular app is squarely aimed at so-called friends and family sharing is beside the point. Facebook and Instagram have evolved to show more content from people like influencers, shifting further from the use case the FTC says Meta has illegally dominated. The company has already landed some important points that could help its case, and it will get more time to push back on the agency’s framing when it calls its own witnesses in the coming weeks.But as the FTC’s case-in-chief continues into its fifth week, its argument for Meta’s dominance is becoming a lot clearer.Why do people use Facebook?When defining a market, each side is trying to answer a key question: why are people choosing one particular company’s product? A lot of goods and services compete with each other in some sense, but this doesn’t mean they serve the same niche. In the case of sodas, for example, “you could buy lemon-lime, but many people would never see that as a close substitute for buying Coke or Pepsi,” says George Washington Law professor and former FTC Chair Bill Kovacic. In the tech world, Netflix has claimed its biggest competitors are Fortnite and sleep — but those comparisons probably wouldn’t stand up in court.The FTC says that outside of Facebook and Instagram, only apps like Snapchat and MeWe can fulfill a users’ desire to broadcast personal updates with friends and family online. To make its case, it brought in a string of executives from other social media companies to explain why their apps can’t quite scratch the same itch for users. Strava’s former VP of connected partnerships Mateo Ortega testified that sure, users of the fitness-tracking social media app could share baby photos on the platform, but they probably wouldn’t unless it was in a running stroller. “It’s all about fitness, and while you can post other stuff, it just doesn’t seem as relevant,” he said. “You could buy lemon-lime, but many people would never see that as a close substitute for buying Coke or Pepsi”Pinterest’s former head of user growth Julia Roberts testified that users who come to Pinterest “expecting it to be like other social media apps … tend to be confused about how to use the product.” That’s because the app is so much not about connecting with other people that it works much differently from other social media platforms. Pinterest is more about finding things users are interested in, she said, so “following is not a big part of the Pinterest experience.”TikTok has a tab where users can watch videos from their friends — identified as people who mutually follow each other. But head of operations Adam Presser testified only about 1 percent of videos watched on the platform are there. The company doesn’t think of itself as competing with Meta’s apps for personal social networking, he testified. And even though side-by-side screenshots of TikTok, Instagram Reels, and YouTube Shorts look identical, Presser said, “when you click out of this view for these other platforms, you would get to essentially what I think of as their core business,” which for Instagram, includes a feed and stories that often contain at least some content from family and friends.At times, Meta’s cross-examination of rival company executives showed the limits of apps’ similarities. When questioning Apple director of product marketing Ronak Shah, Meta sought to show that group chats in Apple’s messaging feature could serve as a social media feed for friends and family sharing. But Shah testified that feed would be limited to 32 people at most, and users can’t just look up each others’ profiles like they would on social platforms. Still, Meta pointed out, Apple’s messages app is listed under social media on its own app store.However, Meta also made important arguments about why the judge should question the FTC’s framing. It pointed out that some documents from TikTok and YouTube owner Google claiming their products are very different from Meta’s were submitted to foreign officials to try to avoid getting drafted into potentially frustrating regulations. It also pointed out when TikTok briefly went dark in the US ahead of a (now-aborted) ban, users flocked to Meta apps, showing consumers see it as a substitute on at least some level. That’s because, Meta argued, competition for users is really about winning their time and attention.Companies can “sometimes make mistakes. They misjudge who their users are”But X VP of product Keith Coleman testified it’s not that useful to think about competition this way. Instead, “it’s much more helpful to understand what people are trying to accomplish in their lives and to try to help them accomplish that.” Under former CEO Jack Dorsey, then-Twitter leaned into focusing on news and users’ interests, Coleman testified, because that’s why people were coming to the platform. Coleman was later surprised at how his own website characterized the product in its help center as a “service for friends, family, and coworkers to communicate and stay connected through the exchange of quick, frequent messages.” “I can’t believe that’s on the website,” he said. “That’s pretty wacky.”This point was “a caution that not everything a company writes down or says is necessarily decisive in establishing what the boundary of a market is,” Kovacic said. Companies can “sometimes make mistakes. They misjudge who their users are.”There are real ramifications for internet users here. Going back to Netflix’s comparisons, if the streaming video service went down, some people would probably be happy to play a video game or get a few hours of shut-eye instead. But others would be frustrated that they couldn’t watch a movie, which is why it’s good that Hulu, HBO, and Amazon Prime Video also exist. The FTC’s argument isn’t that Meta owns the only social apps on the internet, it’s that the company faces little competition for a service many people specifically want — so the fact that you probably don’t know anyone using MeWe is sort of the point.How will the judge decide?Ultimately, Boasberg’s market definition — whether it’s Meta’s, the FTC’s, or his own — will come down to a few things: how Meta views itself, how competitors see it, and his own intuition, says Kovacic. ”Notice how much the FTC has been questioning Meta witnesses on the basis of its own internal documents,” he says. “Does the story in the courtroom match the story of your own internal documents?” So far, the documents have shown that Meta has clocked that at least some portion of users come to its products to connect with family and friends, but also that the rise of TikTok has had it looking over its shoulder. In September 2020, Meta told its board that Instagram revenue would be “meaningfully lower” than planned in the second half of the fiscal year because TikTok was drawing users’ attention. But other internal documents have shown Meta’s well aware that at different points in time, users have come to its apps to connect with family and friends, and worriedly took note of other apps entering that space. In a 2018 presentation, Meta found that the highest percentage of surveyed users said they come to Facebook, Instagram, and Snap to “see daily casual moments” and “see special moments.” By contrast, users came to Twitter’s feed for news and YouTube’s for entertainment. And even as Instagram expands into entertainment, the FTC notes that it still advertises its sign-up page as a place to “see photos and videos from your friends.”“Instagram will always need to focus on friends”In a 2018 email, Zuckerberg told Mosseri that “Instagram will always need to focus on friends.” And even though a lot has changed in the social media landscape since then, Mosseri testified that to this day on the app, “friends are an important part of the experience.” Even though users may share fewer of their own updates on Facebook and Instagram, Mosseri admitted that two friends talking in the comments of a public figure’s post counts as an interaction between friends — and one that Instagram actively tries to facilitate.Meta has argued that this special focus on friends and family sharing makes up a shrinking portion of its offerings as it works to compete with fierce rivals like TikTok. But the FTC says it’s still significant enough to monopolize. It’s a scenario that came up in another major tech monopolization case, Kovacic says: the late-1990s lawsuit US v. Microsoft. In that case, Microsoft argued the Justice Department was ignoring how computing would soon move beyond the personal computer to the Internet of Things, meaning it couldn’t truly lock up the computing ecosystem as much as the government alleged.“Judge Jackson in the Microsoft case said, yeah, those things are happening, but not happening fast enough to deny you real market power in this PC and laptop-based market that the Justice Department is emphasizing,” Kovacic says.Still, he adds, a market niche can at some point become so small that it’s no longer significant in the eyes of antitrust law. “You can have a process of change that ultimately renders the market segment unimportant,” he says. “And the hard task of analysis for the judge is to say, has it already happened?”See More: