HeisenbergFX4
Member
Only another 18 months or so of thisthe back and forth in this thread.................
![]()

Only another 18 months or so of thisthe back and forth in this thread.................
![]()
18 months only? should last forever i reckonOnly another 18 months or so of this![]()
Only another 18 months or so of this![]()
It has already happen with Starfield and Redfall wile existing GAAS will stay multiplat as it make the most money that wayLet's get one thing clear.
- this is what you HOPE happens
- this is not necessarily what will happen.
Just to be sure.
because you have no way to know this. All you have is wishful thinking.It has already happen with Starfield and Redfall wile existing GAAS will stay multiplat as it make the most money that way
why are you still thinking NEW IP and single player game from Bethesda or Activision will come to other platform your thinking is way off from reality
New IP is excusive. Since it doesn't have player base. Only existence games like COD, Overwatch is multiplatform.because you have no way to know this. All you have is wishful thinking.
It not wishful thinking it already happen Starfield is and so will TES6 and Fallout 5 let it go manbecause you have no way to know this. All you have is wishful thinking.
There's no way to be certain of that. Give up.New IP is excusive. Since it doesn't have player base. Only existence games like COD, Overwatch is multiplatform.
You're the one who should let it go. You don't know anything. Unless you can bring some receipts and proof, just stop.It not wishful thinking it already happen Starfield is and so will TES6 and Fallout 5 let it go man
ask starfield.There's no way to be certain of that. Give up.
Let's get one thing clear.
- this is what you HOPE happens
- this is not necessarily what will happen.
Just to be sure.
I already shown you proof that Starfield is exclusive and here is proof bout Elder Scrolls 6You're the one who should let it go. You don't know anything. Unless you can bring some receipts and proof, just stop.
I'm with you.Not really.
MS are not really a competitor with gamepass, it's just a service from a third party as far as Sony will be concerned, just like EA Play.
You enjoy strong story driven, high quality games, and onine play included, you buy Sony's offering (should this be what they do)
You want multiplayer or predominately western centric games, then buy gamepass, Sony take a cut, and you still pay for PlayStation plus anyway to play online.
I really don't see any issues here, but today I'm feeling in a positive mood.
The Green Rats were saying the same thing about COD just last week. You never know what will happen in 2026+ when ES6 comes out. The industry is changing real fast.I already shown you proof that Starfield is exclusive and here is proof bout Elder Scrolls 6
![]()
Phil Spencer basically confirms The Elder Scrolls VI is an Xbox exclusive
We still don’t know when it’s coming, though.www.theverge.com
what more Proof? do you need
Sony could do the same with Spartacus, since they are leaving alot of money on the table.I'm with you.
Microsoft could fully transition to third party publisher and release a Playstation Gamepass version with only Microsoft studio games. They would have a chance of increasing their sub counts and I'm sure Sony wouldn't mind getting the 30% cut, just like they do with EA Play.
Sony could do the same with Spartacus, since they are leaving alot of money on the table.
Think he was trying to state the stupidity of 'leaving money on the table' argument. Every company could make more money in the short term if they sacrifice the long term business model.It's not leaving money on the table. Unless Sony want to do something stupid like competing with MS on the netflix for gaming front. Otherwise that's the last thing they should be doing
Then MS shouldn't do the same.It's not leaving money on the table. Unless Sony want to do something stupid like competing with MS on the netflix for gaming front. Otherwise that's the last thing they should be doing
There's no way to be certain of that. Give up.
Then MS shouldn't do the same.
People are expecting one company to do that, while not asking the other company to do the same thing. That is not how things work. Even if MS is going for 3rd party route, they have no reason to put their stuff on other devices, aside of tv, mobile, pc, and Xbox.
No one is talking about Starfield.So, if on 11/11/22 there is no PS5 version of Starfield are we allowed to call it an exclusive?
Sssh.... you know it's only money on the table when it is PS users being left out. Sony is absolutely leaving nothing on the table when they opted to exclude 55m Xbox users from TLoU2. You know how this works.
No one is talking about Starfield.
That doesn't mean A/B new IP will be exclusive. That's all I'm saying. You don't know. Nobody knows. The deal hasn't even been through yet.Are you sure? Because I think you've been dismissing those who have rightfully pointed it out as an example of new IP being made exclusive.![]()
What? PlayStation has zero leverage with MS. MS will literally own AB, why would they give a fuck what Sony "lets them get away with"?For people still in denial for some sad reason: MS had business talks with Sony about this acquisition. Do you believe PlayStation let them get away with some world salad, failing to ask concrete questions?
What? PlayStation has zero leverage with MS. MS will literally own AB, why would they give a fuck what Sony "lets them get away with"?
Then MS shouldn't do the same.
People are expecting one company to do that, while not asking the other company to do the same thing. That is not how things work. Even if MS is going for 3rd party route, they have no reason to put their stuff on other devices, aside of tv, mobile, pc, and Xbox.
So, if on 11/11/22 there is no PS5 version of Starfield are we allowed to call it an exclusive?
Sssh.... you know it's only money on the table when it is PS users being left out. Sony is absolutely leaving nothing on the table when they opted to exclude 55m Xbox users from TLoU2. You know how this works.
If MS is making COD multiplat then Starfield and especially the next Elder Scrolls or Doom need to be multiplatform too. These are just just devs they acquired. they are entire publishers.
If they want to be a multiplat publisher then go all the way. Making CoD multiplat while leaving Starfield exclusive makes no sense, and if this was to appease the regulators then the regulators will simply point to starfield and ask the same questions we are asking here. "Why CoD and not starfield?", "Are you just saying it to get the deal through?"
Starfield will be Xbox exclusive for sure, even tho i don't think it's smart for MS as i don't see this game ever reach TES or GTA popularity level if they don't release it multi.If MS is making COD multiplat then Starfield and especially the next Elder Scrolls or Doom need to be multiplatform too. These are just just devs they acquired. they are entire publishers.
If they want to be a multiplat publisher then go all the way. Making CoD multiplat while leaving Starfield exclusive makes no sense, and if this was to appease the regulators then the regulators will simply point to starfield and ask the same questions we are asking here. "Why CoD and not starfield?", "Are you just saying it to get the deal through?"
Do you realize how much money Call of Duty makes on PlayStation? Most of it.Then MS shouldn't do the same.
People are expecting one company to do that, while not asking the other company to do the same thing. That is not how things work. Even if MS is going for 3rd party route, they have no reason to put their stuff on other devices, aside of tv, mobile, pc, and Xbox.
This wasn't about COD, but MS exclusive games in form of gamepass.Do you realize how much money Call of Duty makes on PlayStation? Most of it.
The reason is money. Sweet, sweet microtransaction money.
You can use games like Elder Scrolls as exclusives to bring people to your ecosystem. The amount of money you burn by leaving CoD and Minecraft off PlayStation would just be dumb, which is why they announced they won't do it.
You guys reaching this too much. MS owns bethesda. Nothing can make them put those games on other consoles.If MS is making COD multiplat then Starfield and especially the next Elder Scrolls or Doom need to be multiplatform too. These are just just devs they acquired. they are entire publishers.
Agreed.You guys reaching this too much. MS owns bethesda. Nothing can make them put those games on other consoles.
Activision is different talk, since that is almost $70b purchase. 10x of bethesda sale.
He is wrong. Zenimax deal won't pop up at all. As that is already approved and nothing can be done about it.He has a point. The Zenimax aquistion will pop up in their investigation. There's no way it won't. Whether anything actually comes from that is anyone's guess
End goal doesn't mean putting it on competition platform. That is not how their goal works.MS's end goal is being hardware agnostic so yeah that's a reason they would do that. That's not Sony's goal, or if it is then they'll fail.
This isn't fanboy shit. No one is expecting MS to do anything
I wish they can put both companies on the same standards. It's annoying to always judge 1 platform, and leave the other alone.Sssh.... you know it's only money on the table when it is PS users being left out. Sony is absolutely leaving nothing on the table when they opted to exclude 55m Xbox users from TLoU2. You know how this works
He is wrong. Zenimax deal won't pop up at all. As that is already approved and nothing can be done about it.
End goal doesn't mean putting it on competition platform. That is not how their goal works.
They are looking for long lasting systems. Playstation devices have 8 years expiration date. They won't get that much from it, compared to long term devices like TVs, mobile, and PC's.
Even their devices is limited to 8 years. And that is due to new gen coming out after that.
Competitor to their console. But budget wise nope.Oh, so now MS sees Sony as their competitor.
Nothing can be predicted. Nothing that is being said is legally binding. It's all just nonsense and guesswork at this point. Most people on both sides are just making shit up to fit their narrative at this point. The whole discussion is tiring and idiotic.The Green Rats were saying the same thing about COD just last week. You never know what will happen in 2026+ when ES6 comes out. The industry is changing real fast.
Not that I care either way before you accuse me of port-begging or whatever is the new catch phrase you guys use.
I think the most telling point made by Microsoft was that the referenced Minecraft as the model they would follow with COD and "others". I certainly think Activision Blizzard will create Xbox exclusive games, but my gut tells me the cash cow that is Call of Duty will remain multiplat in its entirety indefinitely. Probably Diablo and Overwatch as well. After those, I think it gets fuzzier. But I agree it will be two or three years before the picture becomes more clear.
Spyro and crash comes to mind. MS is in bed with Nintendo. I can see them giving them these games.
Competitor to their console. But budget wise nope.
It depend on when these guys get their focus fully on gaming. As of now, they are testing the waters. And the amount they can throw is no joke.
If you are on trial for anything, your prior history will always play a big part. Even on forums, people get banned after history of prior infractions.He is wrong. Zenimax deal won't pop up at all. As that is already approved and nothing can be done about it.
To be clear, Microsoft will continue to make Call of Duty and other popular Activision Blizzard titles available on PlayStation through the term of any existing agreement with Activision. And we have committed to Sony that we will also make them available on PlayStation beyond the existing agreement and into the future so that Sony fans can continue to enjoy the games they love.