-
-
'But Disney deal was multi-console prior to Microsoft's Bethesda acquisition.'
MS definitely are the good guys. Long live Mega Corp! -
Namco made loads of games for Sega until Sony came along. Square Soft loved Nintendo before Sony came along. Core Design were all for Sega before Sony came along. Mark Cerny was a great Master System programmer before Sony came along
okay, that last one is a joke. But he did program some good stuff on the Master System 
Same ****, different time.
Let's put this tired argument to rest now. It really is getting long in the tooth.Last edited by Yakumo; 23-06-2023, 15:35.Comment
-
My GamePass expired last night.
Luckily, TMNT just hit PS+ so the boy and I can play it there instead.
Xbox should be sold tomorrow.Comment
-
So Star Wars exclusive deal good... Indiana Jones exclusive deal bad... ok got it.Originally posted by Cassius_Smoke View Post
They mentioned yesterday that it was re-negotiated to be an exclusive because it's a single player experience and it would be less expensive to develop with it being specifically focused to xbox/pc and released through game pass.
When you look across the other information like Xbox having to reduce to a 80/20 revenue split for COD etc... you can see why they went the exclusive route for this game when it doesn't really need a wider player base like a multiplayer title does.Comment
-
People seem to be getting really confused here. And I keep repeating myself...
Paying an independent studio for exclusivity rights is open to a free market. I don't like it, but if you throw money at Square and they make the next Final Fantasy exclusive to Playstation, then it stands to reason anyone can with any studio.
BUYING an entire development studio so that NO future game can EVER be released on another console, is straight up bad. It's completely shuttering the market.
So yes, Star Wars exclusive is 'good'....BUYING Machine Games so that NO future Machine Games games can come out on Playstation is Bad.Comment
-
Except for consumers, money saved either from playing via GP or not bothering with those companies games any more
Comment
-
Except they are buying studios because the market leaders position is so strong they believe it makes less business sense to moneyhat individual titles because the cost to do that in 3rd place market position is huge... i.e. the cost for Sony to make FF16 exclusive is not the same cost it would take for MS to make it exclusive.Originally posted by Cassius_Smoke View Post
Sony buys studios and keeps all their content exclusive doesn't it? So far since the Zenimax deal closed Microsoft actually hasn't done that outside of a few key titles... but I guess it has the option to.
They said yesterday, much like it has been commented in the past... That exclusivity is determined on a title by title basis and the buck stops with Phil Spencer.
So Indiana Jones might be exclusive but that isn't to say Wolfenstein will be as well.Comment
-
I can't imagine at this point how many companies MS would have to hoover up to balance their success out with Sony's. I don't even think Activision will be enough to tip the scale.
Grabbing a Series S and some GP to play these exclusives (when they land) costs less than buying 4 first party PS5 games, that's how much MS has failed to win gamers over in 20 years.Comment
-
The one comment from Phil Spencer I absolutely believe is losing momentum in the last generation was critical.
The PS4/XBO generation is really where digital ownership accelerated and some people started to shift wholly to digital libraries within the respective ecosystem. That is a lot of brand loyalty which is hard to erode... I mean I've got 400+ digital titles on Xbox and I'm sure there's equivalent users on PSN who will just buy the next console in that ecosystem to carry their library forward.
So the console wars are (technically) over... but other markets such as cloud, mobile and PC play into being able to spread these ecosystems wider.
That there-in means that on the console front it is pretty impossible to compete on equal terms with Sony. Nintendo switched strategy, literally... and now Microsoft wants to do the same.
I've said all along, they're not buying Activision to make COD exclusive. They're buying them to guarantee they'll appear on their platform and they really want King and it's mobile reach.Comment
-
Phil Spencer confirms that The Elder Scrolls VI is still over five years away which borderline is saying it's a next-gen title. He has also become very vague on target platforms for the game thanks to the FTC/CMA battle following it previously being confirmed that it would be PC/Xbox exclusive. It is to be made by the Starfield team so likely hasn't really entered development yet.Comment
-
They also mentioned they expect the next generation of consoles to come in 2028 so I think his intentional vagueness is more around that...
I doubt we hear any confirmation of platforms until it's about 2 years out and a lot can happen before that... plus Sony might not want to send them PS6 devkits so there's that issue as well.Comment
-
2028 sounds about right, this gen has taken forever to show signs of life and 2028 would still technically be a shift from a 7 year cycle to an 8 year one. The devkit situation makes complete sense from Sony but at the same time plays into MS's hands helping them to ensure they either get the games first or as better versionsComment
-
I think it was the FTC that mentioned it in one of their documents so it was easily missed but yeah it sounds like 2028 is the change over so you'd assume Elder Scrolls is going to be targeting the next generation.Originally posted by Neon Ignition View Post
I don't get the whole devkit thing. Surely there's chinese walls and protections in place to prevent any insider knowledge sharing with the sort of stuff?
I get the concerns but equally Sony has had to release MLB The Show on game pass and would have needed access to Xbox devkits. Not having access to devkits is worse and ensures a worse product... which seems is precisely what happened with Minecraft and laughably is one of the concerns Sony raised about COD.
What these consoles now being PCs anyway and both camps sourcing their chips from AMD you'd basically assume they have a fair amount of knowledge anyway about each others position for new platforms?Comment
-
Yep, the closeness of both consoles suggests either they already know what the other is planning or the options on the table are becoming increasingly universal anywayComment
Comment