twilo99
Member
Please explain it to my retarded brain, why would you not want to play xbox games on the ps5?
It’s like me saying I don’t want Sony games on my PC .. it makes ZERO sense.
Last edited:
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
Please explain it to my retarded brain, why would you not want to play xbox games on the ps5?
It’s like me saying I don’t want Sony games on my PC .. it makes ZERO sense.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Natively? Sure. But I prefer them on the PC.
Nothing is preventing MS from porting their games to the PS5 with a SKU.
But what you wrote... woosah!
IFireflyl
Gold Member
Damn you phil .. you can't keep getting away with this ..
Sony makes $1bn investment in Epic Games ‘to deepen relationship in the metaverse field’ | VGC
Fortnite maker valued at $31.5 billion following latest funding round…www.videogameschronicle.com
The difference here is that I'm not being a hypocrite. I hate the exclusivity agreements across the board. You console warriors are acting like Sony is the Big Bad Wolf because of exclusivity agreements, but your fearless leader is in cahoots with one of the strongest proponents of exclusivity agreements.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
And Elder Scrolls 6, obviously. Where's Redfall too?
Bernd Lauert
Banned
Sure, but they bought Bethesda two years before Starfield releases. "Removing" doesn't quite describe what happened since the game tehcnically never existed.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
The game had an announcement before they bought Zenimax. It conveniently didn't have any platforms listed, a first for Bethesda, because they were in talks with MS for purchase.
Bernd Lauert
Banned
You mentioned TES6, that surely doesn't count as removing, right? The game is coming in 2027 at the earliest.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
And that doesn't constitute as anything being removed.
Using console warrior rhetoric then saying "you console warriors" is an oxymoron though.
The example you quoted on is them talking about Xcloud on other devices, not exclusive content. It doesn't fit at all.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Traditional third party franchises all of a sudden are not third party anymore. A franchise known to port on anything and everything 3 gens in a row.
Keep being disingenuous though.
Last edited:
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
we actually know that it was Sony that were in talks with Bethesda to make Starfield a timed exclusive, Like with Deathloop and GhostWire. It was MS who thought "fuck this" and bought the entire company to stop it from happening.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
No, we do not. That is all forum FUD. Show me the contract.
If that were the case, it would have have PS5 on the reveal, it did not. It had no platforms, which shows MS was in talks with them for quite some time, which is how these deals usually work for such large purchases.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Like Deathloop and Ghostwire being 1 year exclusives ? Possibly forever if MS hadn't bought Zenimax ? yes totally disingenuous.
Topher
Identifies as young
I agree. "Technically" he isn't lying. But making statements about not buying a publisher to take away from other platforms and then see that publisher suddenly no longer making games for a single specific platform? Nothing official and yet, at the same time, it is plain as day.
When Starfield was first announced, Bethesda had not initiated any contact with MS. Simply Bethesda did not announce platforms because the game was many years away from being released.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
1 year vs permanent. Same thing MS does with The Mediuam and Scorn, and many others.Like Deathloop and Ghostwire being 1 year exclusives ? Possibly forever if MS hadn't bought Zenimax ? yes totally disingenuous.
Keep going.
Not even the PC listed, eh? Oh sure sure sure.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Whose to say it was going to be 1 year if it wasn't for the acquisition ? FFVII R was also '1 year' at first, remember ?
Where we going ?
Yep. Same reason they haven't announced that TES VI is going to be on the series consoles, because we don't even know if the consoles will be around when it launches.
Last edited:
3liteDragon
Member
Ah yes, Sony was trying to get timed exclusivity for a game with a non-existent PS5 version.
Topher
Identifies as young
Like Deathloop and Ghostwire being 1 year exclusives ? Possibly forever if MS hadn't bought Zenimax ? yes totally disingenuous.
Possibly forever? How? The deal was already done when MS bought Bethesda.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Sony always puts "for 12 months" on these deals in the announcement trailers.
As for FF, I think Sony is purchasing the IP outright, probably, maybe. Or, ask Square on that one.
Amazing the double speak on the very same page, innit?
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
That’s all it needs to be. Just like it’s going to be on Quest 2.I'm 100% convinced that Game Pass on PlayStation was only ever going to be xCloud.
FalsettoVibe
Member
I'd pay for a low tier Game Pass on PS5 where it's only MS first party games (native) for like $6.99mo. Sony gets something like a 15-20% cut and MS takes the rest....
Call it something like PS+ Ultra for $25.99mo/$149.99yr
Not sure how dumb an idea this is....lol
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
If it were only MS games, and they offered them native, Sony would not say no. They have EA and Ubisoft on there now.
But that is not MS's end game here with crafted PR.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Show me the contracts for your claims...Why would I believe you when evidence shows that Sony were signing next gen deals with Bethesda. Why would you sign Deathloop and GHostwire and not want Bethesdas next biggest franchise that is basically fallout/skyrim in space.
You can't honestly not see how the starfield claims about sony are true. Where theres smoke theres fire. I've listened to enough podcasts with people i trust in the right places that say theyve all heard that Sony was in talks to secure an exclusivity deal on Starfield and MS stepped in.
Its pretty damn obvious it was true.
Sony was reportedly in talks to sign Starfield before Xbox’s Bethesda buyout | VGC
Microsoft has said it will honour PS5’s existing exclusivity agreements with Bethesda…
www.videogameschronicle.com
Imran Khan aint gonna lie.
Last edited:
Topher
Identifies as young
If you think so then that is fine, but factually xCloud is only a part of Game Pass so suggesting MS tried to bring "Game Pass" to PS was a half-truth at best.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I wouldn't be surprised if Sony kept extending the deal ala FFVIIR, the acquisition probably put a big grind in that gear though. It also kinda explains why Sony barely marketed anything for Ghostwire and the game was kinda just put out to pasture despite it being a one year exclusive.,
I think FFVII- R is a clear case of continued exclusivity, if it was the entire IP or if Square deliberately didn't want to put it out, we wouldn't be getting Crisis Core on other platforms, it is an integral part of the greater FFVII lore afterall.
Yeah, doing a native game pass app would mean native development on every game that needs to go on it, that is way too grand when Xcloud can suffice.
Well, they seem to want to make Xcloud a core pillar of the service, so having a cor epillar is probably all they intend or want.
Last edited:
xHunter
Member
When its about FF7R the usuals always say that Sony paid SE to keep it off Xbox, but for Starfield the PS5 Version never existed. Funny how some shills tick.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
But I thought it wasn't announced for any platforms so there was no PS5 version. Which is it?Show me the contracts for your claims...Why would I believe you when evidence shows that Sony were signing next gen deals with Bethesda. Why would you sign Deathloop and GHostwire and not want Bethesdas next biggest franchise that is basically fallout/skyrim in space.
You can't honestly not see how the starfield claims about sony are true. Where theres smoke theres fire. I've listened to enough podcasts with people i trust in the right places that say theyve all heard that Sony was in talks to secure an exclusivity deal on Starfield and MS stepped in.
Its pretty damn obvious it was true.
Sony was reportedly in talks to sign Starfield before Xbox’s Bethesda buyout | VGC
Microsoft has said it will honour PS5’s existing exclusivity agreements with Bethesda…
Imran Khan aint gonna lie.
He doesn't have to lie, he could be fed bullshit.
Seriously. It never existed... unless we need to pull out the one and only report that there was an exclusive.
Last edited:
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Loads of people commented on it, it wasnt just Imran.
Jeez man.
Of course there was a planned PS5 version, just like there would have been for every game Sony has paid to keep off Xbox.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Loads of people commented, loads of people did not have a "source".
So holla at your peeps in here saying it never existed. The defense is getting their wires crossed.
Punished Miku
Human Rights Subscription Service
You guys all sound retarded.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Bernd Lauert
Banned
Starfield is a new franchise. As for TES, I think as with Starfield, Microsoft also wanted to protect itself from Sony's moneyhats. Iirc, TES doesn't have a history of being moneyhatted, so the threat was kinda unprecedented.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Ah, the new spoon-fed narratives.
IFireflyl
Gold Member
I used normal words, not "console warrior rhetoric". When you can't beat the argument, attack the person making it I guess.
Your point isn't relevant to the situation. Phil Spencer is in cahoots with Tim Sweeny. Tim Sweeny is the worst kind of exclusivity weasel, and you can't decry Sony while lifting up Microsoft when it comes to exclusivity while Microsoft is closely working with a huge proponent of exclusivity. You're arguing against something that Microsoft apparently has no issue with since Microsoft:
- is engaging in the same exclusivity practices themself.
- is working closely with the CEO of a company who is extremely pro-exclusivity.
Bernd Lauert
Banned
It's good business. Instead of setting money on fire by trying to outbid Sony's moneyhats (which at a 2:1 MAU disadvantage is extremely expensive), it's better to simply buy the 3rd parties.
SportsFan581
Member
With two titles that already had Sony exclusivity agreements and rumors swirling about Starfield as well, I'm not sure how that is spoon fed. Without the purchase it's unlikely that Xbox was getting these Zenimax games going forward on launch day. It is what it is.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I don't disagree in a business sense, to an extent.
On a side note, how much is paid every time "moneyhats" is mentioned. Is this like a Chinese bot situation, or?
What is spoon-fed, is that one is acting like Xbox is a victim. They only have themselves to blame where now they turn to their parent to take over (the largest publishers) for what they could not do on their own.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Man this is a weird tangent. The email excerpt shows they're talking about Xcloud, Phil also wants Xcloud/game pass on PS platforms. Does that mean Phil is in cahoots with Jim Ryan as well ?
Also, MS/Phil isn't the one who invested $1.2bn for what you called "the worst kind of exclusivity weasel".
Definitely
SportsFan581
Member
I'm sure the acquisitions have been reactionary, at least in a small part. I can see that.
MS's competitor reached a point of dominance where it became much easier and more affordable for it to starve out the competition via content. A realistic reaction to that is to secure content, especially the content that is most important to the user base (Which in MS's case is FPS and WRPG). Once the scales are that uneven you can't say, "well just get more users" because the more content you lose the harder it gets to gain and maintain your users.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
GHG
Gold Member
Come on now, you can't expect a logical answer from those who stuck with them wholeheartedly throughout the entirity of the Xbox One generation. These are the people who supported and acted as cheerleaders for the mess they made of everything.
SportsFan581
Member
Could they have avoided being in that situation to begin with if a lot of different decisions had been made regarding X1? Sure. But, unless there's a working time machine I'm unaware of it's of no consequence how the parties cam to be in their respective positions. Nintendo also has a dominant position in comparison to Xbox, but thus far they have not attempted to leverage that position against the competition.
Market conditions were what they were and MS responded in the best way they could IMO.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I don't buy that as a main sympathy excuse for one minute. There was a report that they were going to shop the division, until the company of subscription/cloud focus was convinced by Phil to change the way the game was played with "Netflix of gaming" ... now the focus is to narrow the industry and funnel it into that plan.
They already went on record to the CMA that they want to "change the consumers' habits," and the CMAs main concern is the sub market and driving the industry into that one sole funnel due to their cloud infrastructure control and able to loss lead that consolidation of the said market.
It's now, "we lost at the way the game was played, so we are going to change the way the game is played."
Purchasing Zenimax, sure. Now onto ABK (and they came out and admitted they would not stop there), this is a dangerous game in the end. It's what narrowing the market looks like.
GHG
Gold Member
The same Nintendo who also do timed (and full) third party exclusives and marketing deals?
Give me a break. It even happens in the PC space with Epic, AMD and Nvidia throwing money around for partnerships and exclusive deals.
Open your eyes and stop being so myopic.
Last edited:
SportsFan581
Member
@
DeepEnigma
At this point, everything MS releases still exists as individual purchases with support for local hardware, both PC & Console. If they are trying to funnel everything into GP and Cloud they are going about it in an ass backwards fashion.
DeepEnigma
At this point, everything MS releases still exists as individual purchases with support for local hardware, both PC & Console. If they are trying to funnel everything into GP and Cloud they are going about it in an ass backwards fashion.
Last edited:
CatLady
Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
Can you imagine how hilarious it would be? Most of the responses would be either "PlayStation is Better" or "Xbox is better"
It hasn't been reactionary at all. That's the xbox fans story to make MS seem like a victim as it buys up studios for exclusives. MS made deals like that without issues prior to gamepass.
The reason is based on their subscription strategy since 2017 and not on a reaction to something they themselves do. With a subscription it is difficult to convince third parties to not sell popular games on any competitors AND even on your own console. How do you build exclusives for your console then when you can't convince them of any meaningful sales on your own or a competitors platform? Pay for all the lost sales everywhere when you go exclusive and release on GP. They made it prohibitively expensive to convince any third parties for xbox exclusives based on their own subscription strategy. Meanwhile they do exclusivity contracts for small games that need exposure so wouldn't cost a lot since projections for sales would have been very low (for scorn or the medium for example) or are GaaS.
When you are at the point where you are essentially convincing third parties to forego sales on most platforms and are footing the bill for all those lost sales you are paying for the games production entirely. Now they buy studios. Not because all of a sudden they didn't like decades old market practices but because it is the only way to secure popular third party games as exclusive indefinitely with their new strategy.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked