Support NeoGAF

[statham]

Maybe not but that is the goal. That is exactly what they are attempting to do and the fact that they think people will fall for it is insulting.

wut? its the same exact thing. You are trying to make an issue about something thats been going on forever. Whose falling for it? I want names.

 

[jackdoe]

Honestly though, after thinking about it, it possible that Square Enix had planned to release the game in 2016 for all platforms simultaneously, but MS entered the deal with them to get the title out Holiday 2015 for Xbox (which would pretty much mean they are technically spending money on developing the title). I mean, for a 2015 title that's not part of an annual franchise, we should at least be getting something in engine. Uncharted 4 had an in-engine trailer. Halo 5 will have a multiplayer beta later this year. But Rise of the Tomb Raider has been nothing but CGI trailers, and that makes me question exactly how far along they are with development. However, the year's not over yet, and there's still time for them to do a Game Informer exclusive cover story or something and make my point moot.

 

[Shaunboy97]

People are tired of PR bullshit, in this day and age it doesn't work anymore. It's especially egregious the way MS loves to spin and literally lie to customers.

I'm not going to make a list of Sony PR lies... I'm not going to do it because I'm better than that!! Everyone does it, get out your frustrations then move on!!

 

[Nightengale]

Whose falling for it? I want names.

Temujen & NoirVisage

 

[statham]

Temujen & NoirVisage

noir is on my ignore list.

 

[Nightengale]

noir is on my ignore list.

Seems like you should have an open mind to see the world around you instead of ignoring some folks, because that restricts your viewpoint.

I mean, folks without an opinion worth a glance will get banned anyway.

 

[x-Lundz-x]

Polygon.com 11/10

Calling it now.

Uncharted 4 = 7.5
RotTR = 9.5

Bank on it. Bookmark this post.

 

[RexNovis]

wut? its the same exact thing. You are trying to make an issue about something thats been going on forever. Whose falling for it? I want names.

Please reread what I said.

Maybe not but that is the goal. That is exactly what they are attempting to do and the fact that they think people will fall for it is insulting.

Nowhere did I say or imply people were falling for it. In fact, I said that they are attempting to obfuscate and the fact that they think anyone would fall for it is insulting because it basically means that they think people are idiots who can't see through the terminology change. What other reason is there to insist on changing the wording other than to spread just enough vagueness that some might believe what you want them to. Nobody (except for a few gaffers apparently) is falling for their bullshit anymore. They should just stop. All it succeeds in doing at this point is making them look like sleazy assholes.

 

[statham]

Seems like you should have an open mind to see the world around you instead of ignoring some folks, because that restricts your viewpoint.

I mean, folks without an opinion worth a glance will get banned anyway.

nah, he told me cboat was right about TF being 720p, I disagreed and somehow I got banned., he will stay on ignore.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Nowhere did I say or imply people were falling for it. In fact, I said that they are attempting to obfuscate and the fact that they think anyone would fall for it is insulting because it basically means that they think people are idiots who can't see through the terminology change. What other reason is there to insist on changing the wording other than to spread just enough vagueness that some might believe what you want them to. Nobody (except for a few gaffers apparently) is falling for their bullshit anymore. They should just stop. All it succeeds in doing at this point is making them look like sleazy assholes.

I feel like I'm just meandering about here engaging in an argument that's not really worth having. But I don't see how it can be an attempt to obfuscate when they just switched out synonymous terms. And I don't mean "eh, they mean more or less the same thing but one carries with it different connotations than the other," I mean they literally mean the same thing. Like I said, I assume that some marketing hot shot just assured Spencer or Gallagher that duration had more of a certain je ne sais quoi to it and thus that's what they should use going forward.

I could see how it could be argued that they are trying to confuse people if they switched it to something like "it has an indefinite duration."

 

[Zuhzuhzombie!!]

Right, for whatever reason, I guess that didn't focus test well or something. Someone who most likely makes more money than they need to probably said "duration" sounds better, so they agreed that that's the message they're going with. But what I'm getting at is that if we stop trying to psychoanalzye what they're doing over there, I feel like we all understand what either phrase means, right?

Let's for the sake of argument just assume that we are all intelligent adults here. I don't mean in any sort of sense where we brag about being geniuses, because I'm certainly not, but I just mean smart enough interpret the gist of messages without needing everything explicitly explained. Aside from that bit of confusion about whether MS was publishing the game or Square Enix, I felt like "Exclusive to Xbox One Holiday 2015" told me everything I needed to know. I mean, I'm no insider. I could be wrong. But I didn't feel like I needed Polygon's hard-hitting investigative journalism or posts from cboat to clarify what I already knew: it's a timed exclusive. Probably 3 - 6 months based just on that language alone.

Again, I have no source on that. I just guessed 3 - 6 months. But either way, I think it's clear that Microsoft isn't going to explicitly explain what the time frame is. It's just not going to happen. If the end game here is to hound them for clarification so as to attain transparency that will make timed exclusives less desirable in the first place, then I understand. And while it is interesting to note that they changed language in such a fashion, I don't think that what it conveys to us is any more confusing.

It's interesting to watch. But I don't feel like with any twist or turn that has occurred in this story that my understanding of the situation has changed. As when I first heard about it, it's pretty obvious that this is a standard timed exclusive. Using "duration" instead doesn't obfuscate that to me.

Yeah, the whole thing seemed overblown when the language made it fairly clear from the beginning.

 

[ItIsOkBro]

Right, for whatever reason, I guess that didn't focus test well or something. Someone who most likely makes more money than they need to probably said "duration" sounds better, so they agreed that that's the message they're going with. But what I'm getting at is that if we stop trying to psychoanalzye what they're doing over there, I feel like we all understand what either phrase means, right?

Let's for the sake of argument just assume that we are all intelligent adults here. I don't mean in any sort of sense where we brag about being geniuses, because I'm certainly not, but I just mean smart enough interpret the gist of messages without needing everything explicitly explained. Aside from that bit of confusion about whether MS was publishing the game or Square Enix, I felt like "Exclusive to Xbox One Holiday 2015" told me everything I needed to know. I mean, I'm no insider. I could be wrong. But I didn't feel like I needed Polygon's hard-hitting investigative journalism or posts from cboat to clarify what I already knew: it's a timed exclusive. Probably 3 - 6 months based just on that language alone.

Again, I have no source on that. I just guessed 3 - 6 months. But either way, I think it's clear that Microsoft isn't going to explicitly explain what the time frame is. It's just not going to happen. If the end game here is to hound them for clarification so as to attain transparency that will make timed exclusives less desirable in the first place, then I understand. And while it is interesting to note that they changed language in such a fashion, I don't think that what it conveys to us is any more confusing.

It's interesting to watch. But I don't feel like with any twist or turn that has occurred in this story that my understanding of the situation has changed. As when I first heard about it, it's pretty obvious that this is a standard timed exclusive. Using "duration" instead doesn't obfuscate that to me.

If anyone was confused with their initial phrasing I wouldn‘t blame them. There are two acceptable ways to parse “coming holiday 2015, exclusively to Xbox.“ In fact most sites ran with the news that it was exclusive period so either that was terrible communication or good obfuscation.

Duration, on the other hand, I agree is pretty clear. I still think it‘s a (really bad) attempt to mystify things. Yea they‘re synonyms but one is the way everyone uses and one is something no one uses. Also I don‘t think anyone expects them to lay out the length of the duration.

 

[statham]

Its a bought, timed exclusive, don't understand whats so hard to understand. MS is not going to tell you when you can pick up the PC version. You can keep asking and get runaround answers.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Still at it eh? lol

It's simply the aftershocks of a megaton.

 

[Cave Johnson]

Technically, almost every exclusive game (first party or otherwise) is merely a "talking point for your console of choice" by this logic. After all, there often is no technical reason why Numerous Exclusive games on Modern Console A can't exist on Modern Console B. All of those come down to "investor-focused" reasons as well. In regards to Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo, unless we're talking about Kinect-exclusive, PS Camera/touchpad/PS Move-exclusive games, or Wii Gamepad Screen-exclusive games, there's almost never a technical reason for a game's exclusivity. And even then, people could design those peripherals work to be cross platform if they wanted to actually try to reach all gamers.

"But that would be expensive and make no business sense to do!"

Stop thinking like an investor!

Of course, the typical response to that when talking about things like first party developers or "fully funded 3rd party exclusives" is this: "well, the company gets more money to focus on making the best game possible for one platform, instead of splitting their attention between multiple platforms!" Which is a very valid point. And I'd say, if that's the response, why doesn't that apply to Tomb Raider as well? They can now focus on one platform (well, two, assuming they're working on the last gen version, which isn't known yet), instead of 5 or whatever. So by the logic most people typically use to defend first party development, and those "talking point exclusives", it seems like Tomb Raider would qualify as well. Its not like the PS4/PC version was finished and on store shelves, and suddenly got recalled due to a moneyhat. The game is still in development, and all the supposed "first party" benefits apply to them as well (more focused and streamlined development, increased marketing, etc.)

After all, Uncharted exists on Playstation consoles because Sony is putting up the money to do so, and because Sony wants a "talking point for their console of choice", not because a 3rd person action-adventure game controlled by a dual analog controller is suddenly impossible to do on a PC or an Xbox, and only the power of the PS4 can bring it to life.

Halo exists on Xbox consoles because MS is putting up the money to do so, and because MS wants a "talking point for their console of choice", not because an FPS is suddenly impossible to do on a PC or PS4, and only the power of the Xbox can bring it to life.

Zelda exists on Nintendo consoles because Nintendo puts up the money to do so, and they want a "talking point for their console of choice", not because green elven looking heroes can somehow only be rendered on Nintendo hardware.

The console industry, 3rd party royalties, platform holders, and that whole business model by definition is "investor-focused". We've just grown up with this model, so we accept it as "natural" and "pro-gamer" even if it's just as arbitrary as anything else.

...that's why I say burn the whole thing down, one console standard future, unite as one, and bring an end to this tribal warfare!

I admire this enthusiasm, but consoles are more than just machines-that-can-play-competitor's products. Gaming is not a static product. Would we see the advent of analog sticks if N64 did not pursue that ambition? Would we see MOBA's, strategty titles if the KBD/Mouse setup is no longer a viable source of gaming? Would the indie trend even exist to this state if not the open architecture of the PC? This goes on and on and on...

Competition breeds innovation. Games do not exist as a vacuum, they're not inherently binded down based on the history game mechanics around them. A universal console, no matter how altruistic it's promoted from, is not going to explore the possibilities of creating a variety of video games if every developer is going to forced to work under that rigid, monolithic structure.

All, I say is vote-with-your-wallet - a cliche, but nonetheless it is the most effective form of retaliation. I'd rather vote for 10 excellent, well established titles for a year than 1000 garbage, rehashed, checklist bullshit simulators to waste my time. I'm an ardent supporter of games that are well designed, whether it be exclusive or multiplat, I will BUY that system if it merits my interest legitimately and NOT based on shady corporates tactics like RoTTR.

 

[Jhn]

Aside from that bit of confusion about whether MS was publishing the game or Square Enix, I felt like "Exclusive to Xbox One Holiday 2015" told me everything I needed to know.

Sure, arguably it would have. But that's not what they said.
They said, specifically, "Rise of the Tomb Raider, coming Holiday 2015, is exclusively on Xbox".
This was the exact phrasing on both the CD tumblr and during the actual MS conference. I would argue that your baseline "intelligent adult" will likely interpret this as
A: Tomb Raider is coming Holiday 2015
B: Tomb Raider is exclusive to Xbox

If their intention was to be clear about the timed nature of the exclusivity, there are many ways they could have structured that sentence to make their intentions clearer, even using the exact same words but in a different order.

They would not have phrased it as specifically and ambiguously if deception was not their intention. And it's that intention that I have a problem with.

 

[Gator86]

Calling it now.

Uncharted 4 = 7.5
RotTR = 9.5

Bank on it. Bookmark this post.

I'm pretty sure this is what everyone expects so it won't be much of a surprise.

 

[zkorejo]

IDk.. I never really was excited to ROTTR to begin with.. but this has gotten very interesting.

Uncharted 4 for Ps4 and Tomb Raider for XOne probably releasing in the same year. This is going to be an interesting war.

 

[Avatar1]

It's simply the aftershocks of a megaton.

Hardly a megaton. I dont think tomb raider can move many consoles. It also faces direct comparison with uncharted. Tomb raider was a good game but its hardly a blockbuster that will cause more than a ripple in xbox sales.

The only stir here is Microsoft's tactics and pr.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Right, for whatever reason, I guess that didn't focus test well or something. Someone who most likely makes more money than they need to probably said "duration" sounds better, so they agreed that that's the message they're going with. But what I'm getting at is that if we stop trying to psychoanalzye what they're doing over there, I feel like we all understand what either phrase means, right?

Let's for the sake of argument just assume that we are all intelligent adults here. I don't mean in any sort of sense where we brag about being geniuses, because I'm certainly not, but I just mean smart enough interpret the gist of messages without needing everything explicitly explained. Aside from that bit of confusion about whether MS was publishing the game or Square Enix, I felt like "Exclusive to Xbox One Holiday 2015" told me everything I needed to know. I mean, I'm no insider. I could be wrong. But I didn't feel like I needed Polygon's hard-hitting investigative journalism or posts from cboat to clarify what I already knew: it's a timed exclusive. Probably 3 - 6 months based just on that language alone.

Again, I have no source on that. I just guessed 3 - 6 months. But either way, I think it's clear that Microsoft isn't going to explicitly explain what the time frame is. It's just not going to happen. If the end game here is to hound them for clarification so as to attain transparency that will make timed exclusives less desirable in the first place, then I understand. And while it is interesting to note that they changed language in such a fashion, I don't think that what it conveys to us is any more confusing.

It's interesting to watch. But I don't feel like with any twist or turn that has occurred in this story that my understanding of the situation has changed. As when I first heard about it, it's pretty obvious that this is a standard timed exclusive. Using "duration" instead doesn't obfuscate that to me.

Exactly my thoughts. I don't understand why this needs to be explained down to the most explicit of details. It's pretty clear based on what's already been said. We keep hopping on every out of place word. What he has said means exactly what people want him to say, but people are getting mad because he isn't using the precise words people want him to use. They aren't obligated to say it in a way that decreases the perceived significance of the deal they've announced, and they won't do it.

 

[Amir0x]

http://tombraider.tumblr.com/post/94529480860/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-update

What it said yesterday:

What is says today:

What does this mean. Why would they change it?

Because they can't pass a day without at least making a mistake, no matter how tiny or insignificant that mistake. It's basically part of their daily strategy at this point I assume.

Mattrick 2.0, all the bloody time

Every Sith has an apprentice

It says basically the same thing in essence, but that's what is hilarious. They are so muddied up their own ass about this mess they can't even leave well enough alone. They're tinkering even the way they're using words now. Can't say timed, they can say "duration?" It's not specifically obfuscation in this case - actually all the many different stories they gave earlier in the week amount to that - but this illustrates clearly why this is such a mess. They are micromanaging even the types of synonyms you're allowed to use.

They have a timed exclusive. It is not going to end Microsoft's world if they would have said from the very second it was announced that it was timed. The only alternative is to actively deceive the majority of gamers - since PS4 alone is going to continue to clomple Xbox One, and PC adds another hefty bounty of gamers - for a simple punch card that says 'we just fucked you guys for no added gain, lolol.'

This deal makes no sense to me. Tomb Raider is not going to move consoles. It's not a megaton in any traditional sense, because this simply is not that type of series and hasn't been for a long time. The Xbox One is not in a position to allow a franchise to flourish the way it otherwise would multiplatform, and I cannot even imagine the inordinate amount of money Microsoft needed to spend to make a timed exclusive for fuggin' Tomb Raider seem a good option after Definitive Edition sold better on PS4 (much better in fact), and after all the years of data illustrating Tomb Raider has always sold best on PS platforms. Now they risk critically damaging the franchise for good, cutting off the only positive growth the franchise has seen in over a decade, and have yet again tarnished their - and SquareEnix's - already justifiably shaky reputation in the exchange.

I cannot think of a more hilarious way this all played out.

Its a bought, timed exclusive, don't understand whats so hard to understand. MS is not going to tell you when you can pick up the PC version. You can keep asking and get runaround answers.

They didn't say it was timed exclusive at first, instead they were forced to. And they keep modifying the language or the story involved to make it confusing. That's obfuscation. People are angry about that obfuscation. All they had to do is from the very second say "Rise of Tomb Raider, timed exclusive, launching in Holiday 2015." Then Tomb Raider fans would have still justifiably been annoyed (since it only makes sense to assume TR would be on PS4 since Definitive Edition performed best, looked the best, sold the best. And all TR games sell the best on PS platforms. Only logical to assume the next one would be there day one), but there wouldn't be the anger about their pattern of behavior. There'd just be understated disappointment all around from those who loved TR2013 and spent their money on a PS4 or PC.

Xbox one edition now exclusive to PS4/PC.

They are ridiculous. They insult everyone with their statements, they must think we are all completely stupid.

Haha, wow.

It's just sad that this doesn't even surprise me at this point. MS PR so far is just some of the worst I have ever seen. Truly horrible.

Yeah, but in police terms they'd call it a "pattern of behavior" at this point. There are dozens upon dozens of examples of such behavior before and after Xbox One launch, and it continues to this very day.

One thing that is clear to me is how little the Xbox extremists - I'm just referencing the extremists here for clarity's sake - want to admit to this. They keep coming into these topics pretending to be so shocked as to why people remain angry at Microsoft. They wonder aloud how a system that has basically 'improved in every way since launch it's so awesome lol @ PlayStation in comparrison' can still be receiving so much "hate."

They perceive the system has having the better lineup, I suppose because Sony has been much more active in the proliferation of the astonishing and boldly creative indie titles that are now beginning to fill in the much desired and lost AA category of games. Even though Sony is getting most of those AAA games and most of their big first party developers still haven't shown the massive projects they're working on (wait until this shit starts getting revealed, it's gonna be a bloody shock for these folk at this point on a game-vs-game basis), they never hesitate to show that, yes, holiday 2014 Xbox One has a better lineup and, yo, doesn't that mean they're doing a better job focusing on the gamers?

But as much as they keep waving these flags around in an attempt to show how much Microsoft has changed, they keep refusing to acknowledge all the bad behavior that continues to happen.

After they revealed their venomous scheme to fuck consumers with their original Xbox One vision, they didn't say to us "yeah I understand why the proposition wasn't appealing. We should have listened to gamers earlier, since we focus tested this stuff (Amir0x's note: they actually did) and even back then it was widely hated in those groups." They acknowledged their messaging was "confused" now, but refuse to admit it was the core of the vision that people grasped and furiously rejected. They refuse to admit no sane person would not be skeptical after the raging tsunami of bullshit they put upon our heads during the period. No instead, even recently, we get stuff like this:

"We just think that's the way the future's gonna go. We may have been right. What we were wrong about was that it's just too soon. People just weren't ready to make that leap right away."

I mean, this is from a company who was saying shit like this because of how confused their messaging was back then:

"Fortunately we have a product for people aren't able to get some form of connectivity: it's called Xbox 360."

"If you have zero access, [the 360] is an offline device. I mean, when I read the blogs and thought about who really is the most impacted, there was a person who said ‘hey, I’m on a nuclear sub’ – and I don’t even know what it means to be on a nuclear sub [grins] – but I imagine it’s not easy to get an internet connection. I can empathize, if I was on a sub, I’d be disappointed."

And they were STILL saying shit like this at E3 2014:

“I think it was the right vision,” says Mehdi. “I think a digital future for games is the way to go. I think where we missed was that we didn’t give customers the choice if they wanted to sell or pass on their disc. If we had more dialogue with our fans, we would have heard more loud and clear that this was important and we would have delivered that future. If we had done that maybe we would have gotten to a better place. Who knows, maybe fans would have said no, let’s skip the disc and give me those features.”

If they had more dialogue with the fans we'd get it? There were literally dozens upon dozens of interviews with an equally diverse range of lies and bullshit, all systematically designed to mislead gamers and make us all think the system offered shit that simply wasn't there or that it was better than it actually was.

Then at the last possible moment they tried to bullshit us with enticements like the family share plan, because even they realized there was no possible way to make the consumer-fucking strategy appealing to the vast, vast, VAST majority of gamers.

This was said at E3 2014. If you realize that Microsoft thinks the same way now as they did even back in May 2013, and they keep saying it's that we don't understand, then you begin to realizing that supporting Microsoft wholeheartedly means giving them the money to potentially reinvest down-the-line at this precise same strategy for the next Xbox.

It's never one thing or the other thing. It's ALWAYS that Microsoft simply has not changed. Xbox 360 had lots of great games, and I spent almost all my time last gen on the platform. But those games generally came with a positive attitude, dramatically fewer deceptions and no attempt to insult my intelligence every other week.

And it all matters. Because when you break someone's trust, you have to rebuild it again. That's how trust works. People who simply go right back to trusting are usually called "gullible" or "naive" in the real world. All companies have a sort of relationship with the consumers of their products, and like any real relationship, you have to deal with people who get angry when they're mistreated. Sony did, Nintendo did back in the day, Microsoft is now.

Rise of the Tomb Raider is simply emblematic of a larger problem that has not been fixed even under Phil Spencer.

 

[Bgamer90]

Right, for whatever reason, I guess that didn't focus test well or something. Someone who most likely makes more money than they need to probably said "duration" sounds better, so they agreed that that's the message they're going with. But what I'm getting at is that if we stop trying to psychoanalzye what they're doing over there, I feel like we all understand what either phrase means, right?

Let's for the sake of argument just assume that we are all intelligent adults here. I don't mean in any sort of sense where we brag about being geniuses, because I'm certainly not, but I just mean smart enough interpret the gist of messages without needing everything explicitly explained. Aside from that bit of confusion about whether MS was publishing the game or Square Enix, I felt like "Exclusive to Xbox One Holiday 2015" told me everything I needed to know. I mean, I'm no insider. I could be wrong. But I didn't feel like I needed Polygon's hard-hitting investigative journalism or posts from cboat to clarify what I already knew: it's a timed exclusive. Probably 3 - 6 months based just on that language alone.

Again, I have no source on that. I just guessed 3 - 6 months. But either way, I think it's clear that Microsoft isn't going to explicitly explain what the time frame is. It's just not going to happen. If the end game here is to hound them for clarification so as to attain transparency that will make timed exclusives less desirable in the first place, then I understand. And while it is interesting to note that they changed language in such a fashion, I don't think that what it conveys to us is any more confusing.

It's interesting to watch. But I don't feel like with any twist or turn that has occurred in this story that my understanding of the situation has changed. As when I first heard about it, it's pretty obvious that this is a standard timed exclusive. Using "duration" instead doesn't obfuscate that to me.

Pretty good post. Obvious that some people aren't going to be satisfied until MS states details by the exact number of months in terms of the length of exclusivity but that's never going to happen.

Personally, I felt it was a timed exclusive when it was announced at Gamescom. It wasn't until a few minutes later that I had questions about it because a few journalists got into my feed (via retweets) saying "OMG! It's a full exclusive!" (or something similar to that). That's what caused me to personally be confused.

As of right now I'm feeling that it's definitely timed in the sense that it will be eventually coming to PC. MS' recent statements about them putting money into the development of the game though is making me wonder what the situation will be for other consoles.

 

[atr0cious]

Because they can't pass a day without at least making a mistake, no matter how tiny or insignificant that mistake. It's basically part of their daily strategy at this point I assume.



It says basically the same thing in essence, but that's what is hilarious. They are so muddied up their own ass about this mess they can't even leave well enough alone. They're tinkering even the way they're using words now. Can't say timed, they can say "duration?" It's not specifically obfuscation in this case - actually all the many different stories they gave earlier in the week amount to that - but this illustrates clearly why this is such a mess. They are micromanaging even the types of synonyms you're allowed to use.

They have a timed exclusive. It is not going to end Microsoft's world if they would have said from the very second it was announced that it was timed. The only alternative is to actively deceive the majority of gamers - since PS4 alone is going to continue to clomple Xbox One, and PC adds another hefty bounty of gamers - for a simple punch card that says 'we just fucked you guys for no added gain, lolol.'

This deal makes no sense to me. Tomb Raider is not going to move consoles. It's not a megaton in any traditional sense, because this simply is not that type of series and hasn't been for a long time. The Xbox One is not in a position to allow a franchise to flourish the way it otherwise would multiplatform, and I cannot even imagine the inordinate amount of money Microsoft needed to spend to make a timed exclusive for fuggin' Tomb Raider seem a good option after Definitive Edition sold better on PS4 (much better in fact), and after all the years of data illustrating Tomb Raider has always sold best on PS platforms. Now they risk critically damaging the franchise for good, cutting off the only positive growth the franchise has seen in over a decade, and have yet again tarnished their - and SquareEnix's - already justifiably shaky reputation in the exchange.

I cannot think of a more hilarious way this all played out.



They didn't say it was timed exclusive at first, instead they were forced to. And they keep modifying the language or the story involved to make it confusing. That's obfuscation. People are angry about that obfuscation. All they had to do is from the very second say "Rise of Tomb Raider, timed exclusive, launching in Holiday 2015." Then Tomb Raider fans would have still justifiably been annoyed (since it only makes sense to assume TR would be on PS4 since Definitive Edition performed best, looked the best, sold the best. And all TR games sell the best on PS platforms. Only logical to assume the next one would be there day one), but there wouldn't be the anger about their pattern of behavior. There'd just be understated disappointment all around from those who loved TR2013 and spent their money on a PS4.






Yeah, but in police terms they'd call it a "pattern of behavior" at this point. There are dozens upon dozens of examples of such behavior before and after Xbox One launch, and it continues to this very day.

One thing that is clear to me is how little the Xbox extremists - I'm just referencing the extremists here for clarity's sake - want to admit to this. They keep coming into these topics pretending to be so shocked as to why people remain angry at Microsoft. They wonder aloud how a system that has basically 'improved in every way since launch it's so awesome lol @ PlayStation in comparrison' can still be receiving so much "hate."

They perceive the system has having the better lineup, I suppose because Sony has been much more active in the proliferation of the astonishing and boldly creative indie titles that are now beginning to fill in the much desired and lost AA category of games. Even though Sony is getting most of those AAA games and most of their big first party developers still haven't shown the massive projects they're working on (wait until this shit starts getting revealed, it's gonna be a bloody shock for these folk at this point on a game-vs-game basis), they never hesitate to show that, yes, holiday 2014 Xbox One has a better lineup and, yo, doesn't that mean they're doing a better job focusing on the gamers?

But as much as they keep waving these flags around in an attempt to show how much Microsoft has changed, they keep refusing to acknowledge all the bad behavior that continues to happen.

After they revealed their venomous scheme to fuck consumers with their original Xbox One vision, they didn't say to us "yeah I understand why the proposition wasn't appealing. We should have listened to gamers earlier, since we focus tested this stuff (Amir0x's note: they actually did) and even back then it was widely hated in those groups." They acknowledged their messaging was "confused" now, but refuse to admit it was the core of the vision that people grasped and furiously rejected. They refuse to admit no sane person would not be skeptical after the raging tsunami of bullshit they put upon our heads during the period. No instead, even recently, we get stuff like this:



I mean, this is from a company who was saying shit like this because of how confused their messaging was back then:



And they were STILL saying shit like this at E3 2014:



If they had more dialogue with the fans we'd get it? There were literally dozens upon dozens of interviews with an equally diverse range of lies and bullshit, all systematically designed to mislead gamers and make us all think the system offered shit that simply wasn't there or that it was better than it actually was.

Then at the last possible moment they tried to bullshit us with enticements like the family share plan, because even they realized there was no possible way to make the consumer-fucking strategy appealing to the vast, vast, VAST majority of gamers.

This was said at E3 2014. If you realize that Microsoft thinks the same way now as they did even back in May 2013, and they keep saying it's that we don't understand, then you begin to realizing that supporting Microsoft wholeheartedly means giving them the money to potentially reinvest down-the-line at this precise same strategy for the next Xbox.

It's never one thing or the other thing. It's ALWAYS that Microsoft simply has not changed. Xbox 360 had lots of great games, and I spent almost all my time last gen on the platform. But those games generally came with a positive attitude, dramatically fewer deceptions and no attempt to insult my intelligence every other week.

And it all matters. Because when you break someone's trust, you have to rebuild it again. That's how trust works. People who simply go right back to trusting are usually called "gullible" or "naive" in the real world. All companies have a sort of relationship with the consumers of their products, and like any real relationship, you have to deal with people who get angry when they're mistreated. Sony did, Nintendo did back in the day, Microsoft is now.

Rise of the Tomb Raider is simply emblematic of a larger problem that has not been fixed even under Phil Spencer.

Quoting this, so maybe people will understand it's not the exclusivity people have a problem with.

 

[HighResTomato]

The only stir here is Microsoft's tactics and pr.

Phil Spencer is doing what he think is necessary for his department. I don't think they care too much about what their competitors customers think.

 

[Bgamer90]

Sure, arguably it would have. But that's not what they said.
They said, specifically, "Rise of the Tomb Raider, coming Holiday 2015, is exclusively on Xbox".
This was the exact phrasing on both the CD tumblr and during the actual MS conference. I would argue that your baseline "intelligent adult" will likely interpret this as
A: Tomb Raider is coming Holiday 2015
B: Tomb Raider is exclusive to Xbox

They just said "...exclusively on Xbox", not "...is exclusively on Xbox"; It's funny since "is" is such a small word but that would have made a difference for me in terms of how I originally interpreted the exclusivity deal.

I took it (at least when they said it) as "exclusive during the Holiday 2015 period".

 

[jordan0386]

Shouldn't be upset that the game is coming out first on Xbox. That's childish, imo.

MS values the IP to help X1 sales.

Its good business for a game company to say, hey we like this. Can we keep it for ourselves, if only for a short span of time?

 

[Amir0x]

Quoting this, so maybe people will understand it's not the exclusivity people have a problem with.

Don't worry the extremists will be sure to not understand once again anyway

Hope I'm wrong though. It'd be nice if they stopped trying to hit targets that were never there

 

[HighResTomato]

Although what MS is doing with TR is fine with me, their wording when it comes to exclusives and timed exclusives is shady as fuck and they need to stop it.

"Is coming holiday 2015, exclusively to Xbox", the hell does that mean? Exclusive during the holiday or for ever? That's why I consider every game they do this to as timed, can not be arsed with Microsofts corporate speak and that doesn't exclude PC-devs, Nintendo or Sony. If they don't flat out say it's exclusive then its not.

 

[TheFLYINGManga_Ka]

If MS is help developing than I guess it is console exclusive to the X1 while a PC version later on, is my guess.

Or it can be like Underworld's exclusive dlc.

Whatever it is, PC version is for me.

 

[Neuromancer]

If MS is help developing than I guess it is console exclusive to the X1 while a PC version later on, is my guess.

Or it can be like Underworld's exclusive dlc.

Whatever it is, PC version is for me.

Yeah I'm not convinced this is actually happening.

 

[StarBlazers1]

Because they can't pass a day without at least making a mistake, no matter how tiny or insignificant that mistake. It's basically part of their daily strategy at this point I assume.



It says basically the same thing in essence, but that's what is hilarious. They are so muddied up their own ass about this mess they can't even leave well enough alone. They're tinkering even the way they're using words now. Can't say timed, they can say "duration?" It's not specifically obfuscation in this case - actually all the many different stories they gave earlier in the week amount to that - but this illustrates clearly why this is such a mess. They are micromanaging even the types of synonyms you're allowed to use.

They have a timed exclusive. It is not going to end Microsoft's world if they would have said from the very second it was announced that it was timed. The only alternative is to actively deceive the majority of gamers - since PS4 alone is going to continue to clomple Xbox One, and PC adds another hefty bounty of gamers - for a simple punch card that says 'we just fucked you guys for no added gain, lolol.'

This deal makes no sense to me. Tomb Raider is not going to move consoles. It's not a megaton in any traditional sense, because this simply is not that type of series and hasn't been for a long time. The Xbox One is not in a position to allow a franchise to flourish the way it otherwise would multiplatform, and I cannot even imagine the inordinate amount of money Microsoft needed to spend to make a timed exclusive for fuggin' Tomb Raider seem a good option after Definitive Edition sold better on PS4 (much better in fact), and after all the years of data illustrating Tomb Raider has always sold best on PS platforms. Now they risk critically damaging the franchise for good, cutting off the only positive growth the franchise has seen in over a decade, and have yet again tarnished their - and SquareEnix's - already justifiably shaky reputation in the exchange.

I cannot think of a more hilarious way this all played out.



They didn't say it was timed exclusive at first, instead they were forced to. And they keep modifying the language or the story involved to make it confusing. That's obfuscation. People are angry about that obfuscation. All they had to do is from the very second say "Rise of Tomb Raider, timed exclusive, launching in Holiday 2015." Then Tomb Raider fans would have still justifiably been annoyed (since it only makes sense to assume TR would be on PS4 since Definitive Edition performed best, looked the best, sold the best. And all TR games sell the best on PS platforms. Only logical to assume the next one would be there day one), but there wouldn't be the anger about their pattern of behavior. There'd just be understated disappointment all around from those who loved TR2013 and spent their money on a PS4.






Yeah, but in police terms they'd call it a "pattern of behavior" at this point. There are dozens upon dozens of examples of such behavior before and after Xbox One launch, and it continues to this very day.

One thing that is clear to me is how little the Xbox extremists - I'm just referencing the extremists here for clarity's sake - want to admit to this. They keep coming into these topics pretending to be so shocked as to why people remain angry at Microsoft. They wonder aloud how a system that has basically 'improved in every way since launch it's so awesome lol @ PlayStation in comparrison' can still be receiving so much "hate."

They perceive the system has having the better lineup, I suppose because Sony has been much more active in the proliferation of the astonishing and boldly creative indie titles that are now beginning to fill in the much desired and lost AA category of games. Even though Sony is getting most of those AAA games and most of their big first party developers still haven't shown the massive projects they're working on (wait until this shit starts getting revealed, it's gonna be a bloody shock for these folk at this point on a game-vs-game basis), they never hesitate to show that, yes, holiday 2014 Xbox One has a better lineup and, yo, doesn't that mean they're doing a better job focusing on the gamers?

But as much as they keep waving these flags around in an attempt to show how much Microsoft has changed, they keep refusing to acknowledge all the bad behavior that continues to happen.

After they revealed their venomous scheme to fuck consumers with their original Xbox One vision, they didn't say to us "yeah I understand why the proposition wasn't appealing. We should have listened to gamers earlier, since we focus tested this stuff (Amir0x's note: they actually did) and even back then it was widely hated in those groups." They acknowledged their messaging was "confused" now, but refuse to admit it was the core of the vision that people grasped and furiously rejected. They refuse to admit no sane person would not be skeptical after the raging tsunami of bullshit they put upon our heads during the period. No instead, even recently, we get stuff like this:



I mean, this is from a company who was saying shit like this because of how confused their messaging was back then:



And they were STILL saying shit like this at E3 2014:



If they had more dialogue with the fans we'd get it? There were literally dozens upon dozens of interviews with an equally diverse range of lies and bullshit, all systematically designed to mislead gamers and make us all think the system offered shit that simply wasn't there or that it was better than it actually was.

Then at the last possible moment they tried to bullshit us with enticements like the family share plan, because even they realized there was no possible way to make the consumer-fucking strategy appealing to the vast, vast, VAST majority of gamers.

This was said at E3 2014. If you realize that Microsoft thinks the same way now as they did even back in May 2013, and they keep saying it's that we don't understand, then you begin to realizing that supporting Microsoft wholeheartedly means giving them the money to potentially reinvest down-the-line at this precise same strategy for the next Xbox.

It's never one thing or the other thing. It's ALWAYS that Microsoft simply has not changed. Xbox 360 had lots of great games, and I spent almost all my time last gen on the platform. But those games generally came with a positive attitude, dramatically fewer deceptions and no attempt to insult my intelligence every other week.

And it all matters. Because when you break someone's trust, you have to rebuild it again. That's how trust works. People who simply go right back to trusting are usually called "gullible" or "naive" in the real world. All companies have a sort of relationship with the consumers of their products, and like any real relationship, you have to deal with people who get angry when they're mistreated. Sony did, Nintendo did back in the day, Microsoft is now.

Rise of the Tomb Raider is simply emblematic of a larger problem that has not been fixed even under Phil Spencer.

It doesn't make good business sense to come right out and say it's a timed exclusive when the goal is to get people to buy your system because of it. I understand your point about trust, but this situation really doesn't fall into the same category as the reveal and backtracking that occurred over the last year.
It happens in other industries too. Look at Netflix. They said in order to see House of Cards, you had to subscribe to Netflix. Now I can watch it on demand with my Fios and get the DVD without subscribing. Though I know many people that subscribed just so they can see it when it came out. They didn't tell us it would ever come out on anything other than possibly a DVD. They explicitly said we had to subscribe.
The Idea is to get people to subscribe or MS' case, purchase the XB1. If they came out and said it was timed, most people would just wait. The hate and salt that is occurring is juvenile. No Man's Sky is timed, yet when Sony announced it at their E3 Conference, it was made to sound like it was console exclusive. Luckily I own both, but I know several XB1 people who are upset about it.

 

[Futaba]

His statement would be true if the only thing Microsoft did was print a single poster for the game, and send them a single game controller to use on their devkit.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

Shouldn't be upset that the game is coming out first on Xbox. That's childish, imo.

MS values the IP to help X1 sales.

Its good business for a game company to say, hey we like this. Can we keep it for ourselves, if only for a short span of time?

If you say so. Xbox owners don't value it much as the sales are heavily slanted to PlayStation.

 

[brandonh83]

The Idea is to get people to subscribe or MS' case, purchase the XB1. If they came out and said it was timed, most people would just wait. The hate and salt that is occurring is juvenile.

You think people are being "salty" by being upset that a company they are potentially investing quite a bit of money in has been doing nothing but completely bullshitting their fans and consumers lately? The fuck? Microsoft should be trying to regain their image after last year's catastrophe and here they are going right back to the same thing with a bunch of mixed signals for no reason other than to confuse people or to make people think something that isn't true.

 

[RexNovis]

Don't worry the extremists will be sure to not understand once again anyway

Hope I'm wrong though. It'd be nice if they stopped trying to hit targets that were never there

The post was masterful and pretty much sums up the heart of the issue for me. But no matter how well explained it is people are going to continue dismissing it by framing the outcry as a response to things that they can then turn around and claim are "business as usual" or "everyone does it." This whole defense of MS is absolutely maddening but obviously unavoidable. Regardless I'll toss you an amen as that post deserved it.

 

[avaya]

You have to assume they're lying to you, they always lie to you. When it comes to corporations this should always be your default position whether you're a consumer or investor.

 

[StarBlazers1]

You think people are being "salty" by being upset that a company they are potentially investing quite a bit of money in has been doing nothing but completely bullshitting their fans and consumers lately? The fuck? Microsoft should be trying to regain their image after last year's catastrophe and here they are going right back to the same thing with a bunch of mixed signals for no reason other than to confuse people or to make people think something that isn't true.

Bullshitting how? The way I see it, they have been throwing money at 3rd parties to gain an advantage and to give their owners exclusive content. They have given us monthly updates and delivering on promises they made last year with the OS. They still have a ton of work to do to get the fans back, but the over-reaction to this Tomb Raider situation is laughable. I will say this again. It is in both companies(SE and MS) best interest to word it exactly the way it was worded. The intention is to 1)make XB1 owners feel better about their investment and 2) get potential buyers to go out and buy the system. Saying anything else is just plain against good business sense. You may not like it, but it's the truth.
The salt and hatred is just there because the game was multiplatform before. If anything, you should be more angry at SE who took the money. If I had the money MS did, I would go to EVERY company and try this and they probably did. SE just took it. They could've said no.

 

[Muscle Wizard]

Wish Microsoft would have given me the money, I could make a sequel to Tomb Raider within two weeks. It would basically be grainy footage of a blow-up sex doll filled with blood packs being thrown down on jagged rocks. The DLC would be to remove the grainy filter.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

Wish Microsoft would have given me the money, I could make a sequel to Tomb Raider within two weeks. It would basically be grainy footage of a blow-up sex doll filled with blood packs being thrown down on jagged rocks. The DLC would be to remove the grainy filter.

Is this what is referred to as "shit posting"?

 

[licktheenvelope]

Phil Spencer is doing what he think is necessary for his department. I don't think they care too much about what their competitors customers think.

... wow I hope they don't actually think that way because their competitors customers are the most likely people to also be their customers...

 

[brandonh83]

Bullshitting how? The way I see it, they have been throwing money at 3rd parties to gain an advantage and to give their owners exclusive content.

This isn't exclusive content though, let alone content that segregates the console from it's main competitor. People want to see them throw money at new IP's and Microsoft-owned franchises to help give the console more of an identity. Throwing money at a third party developer to get the game on their console first isn't doing much to do that, if doing anything at all.

I will say this again. It is in both companies(SE and MS) best interest to word it exactly the way it was worded. The intention is to 1)make XB1 owners feel better about their investment and 2) get potential buyers to go out and buy the system. Saying anything else is just plain against good business sense. You may not like it, but it's the truth.

Xbox One owners aren't going to feel better overall about getting a game a little bit before other platforms. Some will think "cool the new Tomb Raider is out and I can play it" not necessarily "YES THE NEW TOMB RAIDER IS OUT AND I GET TO PLAY IT FIRST MOTHER FUCKER" and if they do, they're idiots.

The salt and hatred is just there because the game was multiplatform before. If anything, you should be more angry at SE who took the money. If I had the money MS did, I would go to EVERY company and try this and they probably did. SE just took it. They could've said no.

Again, this is not salt or sodium or ramen noodles. I'm not upset because it started out as multiplatform. I think it's lame, yes, but when I heard the announcement I didn't get pissed off because I assumed it would eventually come later to other platforms; that and I plan on owning an Xbox One before next holiday so it's not a matter, from where I'm coming from at least, of getting to play the game. It's a matter of a company that I feel are still making stupid decisions and still have no problems being deceitful to the people who are supporting them.

 

[Muscle Wizard]

Is this what is referred to as "shit posting"?

It's called artistic integrity.

 

[licktheenvelope]

It doesn't make good business sense to come right out and say it's a timed exclusive when the goal is to get people to buy your system because of it. I understand your point about trust, but this situation really doesn't fall into the same category as the reveal and backtracking that occurred over the last year.
It happens in other industries too. Look at Netflix. They said in order to see House of Cards, you had to subscribe to Netflix. Now I can watch it on demand with my Fios and get the DVD without subscribing. Though I know many people that subscribed just so they can see it when it came out. They didn't tell us it would ever come out on anything other than possibly a DVD. They explicitly said we had to subscribe.
The Idea is to get people to subscribe or MS' case, purchase the XB1. If they came out and said it was timed, most people would just wait. The hate and salt that is occurring is juvenile. No Man's Sky is timed, yet when Sony announced it at their E3 Conference, it was made to sound like it was console exclusive. Luckily I own both, but I know several XB1 people who are upset about it.

Okay but (again...) this is a false analogy. Spacey and Co. went to Netflix because they were sick and tired of being BS'd by regular networks who would not commit to the series. House of Cards would not have happened without Netflix... Tomb Raider was already in mid development and would be launching on Xbox One anyways.

Again, my problem is Microsoft is paying for people not to be able to play a game... their customers gain nothing.

 

[daman824]

Yeah I'm not convinced this is actually happening.

Did money change hands?

If the answer is yes, then that money is most likely going toward this games development. You know, paying employees salaries and all that.

 

[Faustek]

I felt like "Exclusive to Xbox One Holiday 2015" told me everything I needed to know. I mean, I'm no insider. I could be wrong. But I didn't feel like I needed Polygon's hard-hitting investigative journalism or posts from cboat to clarify what I already knew: it's a timed exclusive. Probably 3 - 6 months based just on that language alone.

Same here, everything was pretty much chill until I saw the Dead Rising comparison being made. That threw me off as the first game was only on 360 and now the latest didn't look like it would come to PC either. It is, that is good. Then the fact that the thread just jumped from manageable to Godzilla didn't make it easier to overlook the facts or finding that new input that made the thread grow.

Calling it now.

Uncharted 4 = 7.5
RotTR = 9.5

Bank on it. Bookmark this post.

Done.

 

[orochi91]

Calling it now.

Uncharted 4 = 7.5
RotTR = 9.5

Bank on it. Bookmark this post.

Oh my god.

The internet drama that would ensue.

*shudders*

 

[Amir0x]

The post was masterful and pretty much sums up the heart of the issue for me. But no matter how well explained it is people are going to continue dismissing it by framing the outcry as a response to things that they can then turn around and claim are "business as usual" or "everyone does it." This whole defense of MS is absolutely maddening but obviously unavoidable. Regardless I'll toss you an amen as that post deserved it.

Yup. It's right alongside Sony Too™ in the shit category of arguments.

It's not that I don't think it's fine that people love Xbox One and refuse to get angry over Microsoft's continued behavior. It's the incessant need to tell those who aren't satisfied with constantly being lied to that this is all not actually still happening and thta this is somehow an unreasonable response to their terrible behavior.

They'll then quote how bad Sony has been in the past, to which I'll once again be forced to demonstrate my objectivity by showcasing precisely how harsh I and all of NeoGAF was about their PS3.

It's a true shame. All they have to do is acknowledge Microsoft is still behaving badly but that they don't give a shit about that and we'd have so many less issues. The problems are in black and white, so there's really no way to deny it plausibly.

It doesn't make good business sense to come right out and say it's a timed exclusive when the goal is to get people to buy your system because of it.

It makes good business sense to me not to mislead their customers, since building trust with your consumer base is essential to any great business. Any other justification is just a justification for a bad behavior in the abstract. Taken to its logical extreme, it basically means any action from them is justified as long as it is in dogged pursuit of making a profit. To arrive at this conclusion as a consumer is too foreign to me to even understand. It's actively against your own best interest in fact to think this.

I understand your point about trust, but this situation really doesn't fall into the same category as the reveal and backtracking that occurred over the last year.

It does though. They tried to obfuscate the details in order to give the impressions that something else was true about Tomb Raider than what actually was true. They were forced to clarify after the 3 or 4 different stories played out in the media, but they were forced to. That is a constant theme. Microsoft doesn't change unless they see a threat to their bottom line, and even then they do it begrudgingly.

It happens in other industries too. Look at Netflix. They said in order to see House of Cards, you had to subscribe to Netflix. Now I can watch it on demand with my Fios and get the DVD without subscribing. Though I know many people that subscribed just so they can see it when it came out. They didn't tell us it would ever come out on anything other than possibly a DVD. They explicitly said we had to subscribe.

Bad behavior by one company does not justify bad behavior from another.

The Idea is to get people to subscribe or MS' case, purchase the XB1. If they came out and said it was timed, most people would just wait. The hate and salt that is occurring is juvenile.

Rise of the Tomb Raider was always coming to XBO, they simply paid to fuck over PC and PS4 gamers. Subtracting value from others, neutral value added on them. The value added part will come with DLC and unique XBO items/missions, but they did not need any period of exclusivity for that to still happen.

In any event, they would have been much better investing in a franchise that actually had a chance of impacting the systems relevancy.

The hate is not 'juvenile.' People justifiably thought it was coming to PS4, because Definitive Edition TR2013 sold best on PS4, looked and ran best on PS4, and the entire rest of the series has always been out on PS day one. For nearly 20 years now, this was the case. Again, it comes down to money. It's not that every gamer here wouldn't buy every console a hundred times over if they had enough money. But in the real world, you have to make choices when you're talking about systems that cost hundreds of dollars and games that cost sixty a pop. Many, if not most, people do not have the money to buy multiple expensive platforms. 2/3 of all the conversations in the Tomb Raider communities online is livid. And they should be, but mostly because of how MS tried to obfuscate the truth.

 

[daman824]

Calling it now.

Uncharted 4 = 7.5
RotTR = 9.5

Bank on it. Bookmark this post.

haha

How much are you willing to bet on this? You have a paypal?

 

[StarBlazers1]

This isn't exclusive content though, let alone content that segregates the console from it's main competitor. People want to see them throw money at new IP's and Microsoft-owned franchises to help give the console more of an identity. Throwing money at a third party developer to get the game on their console first isn't doing much to do that, if doing anything at all.



Xbox One owners aren't going to feel better overall about getting a game a little bit before other platforms. Some will think "cool the new Tomb Raider is out and I can play it" not necessarily "YES THE NEW TOMB RAIDER IS OUT AND I GET TO PLAY IT FIRST MOTHER FUCKER" and if they do, they're idiots.



Again, this is not salt or sodium or ramen noodles. I'm not upset because it started out as multiplatform. I think it's lame, yes, but when I heard the announcement I didn't get pissed off because I assumed it would eventually come later to other platforms; that and I plan on owning an Xbox One before next holiday so it's not a matter, from where I'm coming from at least, of getting to play the game. It's a matter of a company that I feel are still making stupid decisions and still have no problems being deceitful to the people who are supporting them.

But they are doing new IP's. Ori, Scalebound, Ryse, Sunset Overdrive, Quantum Break are all new IP's. They've got Screamride, Phantom Dust(basically a new IP as most gamers today haven't heard of it), in addition to the mainstays like Halo, Gears and Forza. As an XB1 owner I am very happy with their games. I understand their not all 1st party games, but they are console exclusives and differentiate themselves from their console competition. The fact is their system is less powerful than the PS4 and they need to stand out someway in addition to their exclusives. That's where the ID@Xbox first to console games, marketing partnerships, DLC first on their system and timed exclusive 3rd party games come into play. We all know this industry is about the mindshare each company creates. MS was in a really bad place a year ago and they have to do more than coast like Sony is doing to make up ground. I'm ok with this all. I would be ok with Sony doing it too. The more reasons they give me to be excited with their console, the better.
Incidentally, I am very happy with my purchases of both systems.

 

[machemachete]

Is this what is referred to as "shit posting"?

Yes it is, that post doesn't make sense in any way.

On topic, i think the most people play the game, the better; but also i understand that microsoft wants to add value to their console (even if it taking that value from other consoles, its a business after all) to have more sales, the Xbox One and their user base needs more sales.

More sales -> More developers interested on make game on the platform