Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Sony gave them money to develop those modes. Those modes would not exist otherwise.
gothmog
Gold Member
Also 7 isn't on PSVR2 so maybe it's not as simple as people think to just port it over.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I mean, Capcom seemingly broke their RT in RE2 & 3 on the PC and removed it.
Varteras
Member
Somehow we've shifted the console wars into a peripheral two of the first parties haven't even bothered with.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Started with minecraft now we here.
It's probably gonna be a lot of idle banter until the 26th.
Yeah but it was supposed to be exclusive for 1 year.
Resident Evil 7 VR is "exclusive to PlayStation VR" for a year
Capcom says the PSVR is the only announced VR platform.
Looks like another case of extending exclusivity.
Similarly, the RE Village datamined files contain references to SteamVR and OpenVR, but no updates on that front yet either.
So, T Three , i understand you'll be happy if all consoles have VR, but just having it won't guarantee getting these modes elsewhere.
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Started with minecraft now we here.
It's probably gonna be a lot of idle banter until the 26th.
Yeah but it was supposed to be exclusive for 1 year.
Resident Evil 7 VR is "exclusive to PlayStation VR" for a year
Capcom says the PSVR is the only announced VR platform.www.pcgamer.com
Looks like another case of extending exclusivity.
Similarly, the RE Village datamined files contain references to SteamVR and OpenVR, but no updates on that front yet either.
And? Blame Capcom.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I'm addressing Three's point about it being a strawman because more devices don't have VR. More devices having VR doesn't change the standard practices of paid exclusives and modes.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Address the clowns saying wHy nO mInEcRaFt vR oN oThEr cOnSoLeS. That's a rere strawman for ya.
I'm addressing Three's point about it being a strawman because more devices don't have VR. More devices having VR doesn't change the standard practices of paid exclusives and modes.
Last edited:
Varteras
Member
I'm addressing Three's point about it being a strawman because more devices don't have VR. More devices having VR doesn't change the standard practices of paid exclusives and modes.
Quest went after him over a scenario that doesn't exist. How can Three be happy or upset over PS being the only console that has a particular VR experience when no other console bothers with VR? It is a strawman.
That's true but we aren't talking about some third party getting money to bring VR to RE. I would love for Capcom to do PC versions of those too. They also got money from Meta for RE4 Oculus exclusive.
This isn't the same as partial foreclosure. If Sony bought Capcom and Meta complained that they might no longer get VR then yeah this would also be suspect if they said they wouldn't. if they were showing degraded software on other platforms from those acquisitions and saying it isn't something they would do then I'd have a hard time imagining this isn't a possibility.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Right, but that's analogous to the hypothetical RT mode as well. Minecraft RT does not exist on consoles (yet), minecraft VR also obviously cannot exist on devices that don't have VR (yet).
If here you're talking about potential future Minecraft updates, MS has had Mojang for almost a decade now, long before Zenimax or Activision were a twinkle in the acquisition sphere, they would have made changes to the parity long ago. At this point I firmly believe if Minecraft ever gets an official RT mode, it will come on both PS and Xbox.
Last edited:
Exactly the ps vr version was done even though it didn't help Microsoft or xbox one bit. They could of said no other console has vr and not waste resources on it.
Varteras
Member
Sure, I get that. But Microsoft is the one under the microscope for potential foreclosure practices involving popular multiplatform IP that they outright bought. Sony is not. So the suggestion to ask what their plans are for Minecraft has merit, even if it's not all that strong, considering how long they've owned them and done nothing to affect parity.
Going after Sony over making deals for a different version of a game in a franchise Sony didn't buy, along with Capcom, on a peripheral that neither Microsoft nor Nintendo have bothered with, especially when there has yet to be a killer app on VR like Minecraft or CoD, in a corner of the market which is struggling and Oculus appears to be the bigger platform in... I don't know that's even an apt comparison.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
It helps MS with another avenue for sales.
feynoob
Banned
They are on AR business.
Thought that might change after activision deal gets approved.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
You think they might do a push into VR post acquisition ? Probably not in this console gen.
feynoob
Banned
They will if activision gets approved.
They wont sit down and let meta get a head of them.
PaintTinJr
Gold Member
How is that hypothetical, when the version was in Beta form even on the S and X? The work involved getting a game to that level is most of the job done, even at alpha level it is way beyond the description of "hypothetical".
Now that PlayStation has raised the issue about parity, and Minecraft RT on console is now being discussed again, how's about the Minecraft platform that has been diverged through that 10years and is far off getting parity?
If you aren't sure what "Minecraft platform" I'm talking about, well that would be the original Minecraft (Java Edition), the one that is the largest Minecraft user base by miles, which would have been the obvious choice for an RT update given it would have the most players with RT capable hardware - and the Java edition doesn't even get kept in sync for simple thing like the console command syntax.
A simple command like:
/fill -20 -2 -20 20 0 20 clay replace
has diverged syntax on console versions like the Switch - which is a port of the Windows/Xbox version AFAIK, and more importantly QoL features for things like special blocks like a structure_block to copy assets between world maps doesn't have any of the basic feature enhancements added to do a 3D visualization of the loaded structure with a preview of its new orientation before potentially destroying the area in the new worldmap. unlike the Windows native versions feature set, with export to 3D files also to name just a few things.
Clearly there is a 10year pattern of Minecraft under Microsoft stewardship that has favoured Windows OS/APIs platform - with newer features, etc - and encouragement to move away from the Java edition, even though monetarily, as is their argument to the CMA, the Java edition is the platform that is the money maker in B2P and going by their arguments should be the reference version and getting everything new, first - assuming customer retention and expansion was more important to Microsoft as they claim, than capturing players to the Microsoft proprietary OSes/APIs and getting players to pay for addons/services in their easily controlled walled garden version of Minecraft they can restrict to Windows. Xbox, gamepass/Xcloud, easily in the future.
Last edited:
PaintTinJr
Gold Member
You say it didn't help Microsoft, but how can you be sure? A cheap VR update that could have been a surprise killer app for VR to pave the way for potentially a Microsoft VR solution may have saved them untold money by seeing it unable to move the needle or raise any meaningful interest in Minecraft player groups.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Why would you expect them to continue keep supporting 2 different versions in perpetuity, especially now that the Bedrock base is the more forward compatible and easier to port and continue supporting on future console / PC hardware. More people have been on the Bedrock edition for years now.
That's like saying why we don't support DX9 now even though it was at one point the biggest DX userbase.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 471617
Unconfirmed Member
I don't see Microsoft investing into VR gaming whatsoever nor should they. It's an extremely niche market that is better suited for watching sporting events and concerts as opposed to playing games. If anything, they should just work with Meta to allow Oculus Rift compatibility on Xbox Series which would be a far better decision in my opinion.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
Right, they shouldn't invest in anything innovative and should instead focus on just trying to get something like Redfall out the door in a coherent state. Obviously VR is a luxury they do not have at the moment
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
PaintTinJr
Gold Member
Well when/if they acquire ATVI with CoD, PlayStation's version will be linux/opengl es based and Xbox's will be Windows/DirectX, are you agreeing they will only support the latter platform properly? It sure sounds like that's the common sense argument you are floating, which makes PlayStation's point to the CMA
your directX9 analogy for the Java edition is false, it is more like comparing Vulkan to DirectX12, and no the biggest userbase play on SpigotMC based servers using the Java edition AFAIK, so supporting the biggest userbase with the most advanced hardware that makes the most MC money for Microsoft is normal practice if we believe what they submit in arguments to the CMA, no?
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Minecraft has 2 different versions, one is PC exclusive (Java) the other is available on pretty much all consoles along with PC, cross-platform compatible and is forward compatible with future hardware and not tied to one platform (Bedrock).
Anyone can reasonably guess which version continue to get supported in that comparison. Counter to your argument, this shows that MS is invested in supporting the cross-platfrom version more than the platform exclusive one. They're already supporting the Windows/DX based version along with the Linux/PS based version for years.
So, no, this is not the same argument at all. It's actually the opposite.
I don't have minute to minute stats but as early as 2019, in popular servers, the Bedrock edition was outpacing the java edition, and this was year(s) ago.
It having support for all modern consoles makes it more accessible by default.
--
Anyway, that's enough on Minecraft from me, I'll avoid being dragged in this discussion any further now, thanks.
Last edited:
They sold Minecraft VR in the VR rush. It helped MS make sales it couldn't on its own platform. There was no competing xbox VR to attract those customers. They also did a Hololens version and windows mixed reality version though.
ChuckeRearmed
Member
Rather than innovative, I would call VR being a walking dead.
Last edited:
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
Q: Explain America's involvement in World War IIUse the arguments here in your test
A: It was the Spartans who first mastered the phalanx formation for warfare. The Spartans just beat the Leathernecks in a baseball game, and the leathernecks is a term used for US marines. Baseball has a world series. In conclusion - Microsoft should not be allowed to buy Nintendo.
I'm trying to draw the analogy you drew for RE7 VR using RE only but make it relevant instead of just saying RE7 doesn't exist on PC.
Minecraft was what it was originally drawn from. For Minecraft very little was happening for most of those years. For 6yrs Sony Interactive Entertainment themselves were publishing an old version of Minecraft but I do think there has been some degraded support and it happened more during the console transition. An update that could have released was delayed for 2 years. 1yr longer than when crossplay was already a thing, and they advertised and pushed a raytracing update for xbox that may or may not have been in development on the PS5 (there is nothing public to show it was) . If it was in development for PS5 then there is nothing to worry about but I have my doubts and there is nothing stopping them when this acquisition scrutiny is over maybe going down that route of releasing an xbox specific raytracing update like Hellblade 1.
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
I would have to put it in python formUse the arguments here in your test
.After today, I hope I dont see this class anymore.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
Would you say the same about all the indie sized titles that MS releases on GP?
VR is basically in the same niche category that y'all love to praise, only difference is that some AAA games can easily be retrofitted for VR
Last edited:
freefornow
Member
Table Top gaming is next!
ChuckeRearmed
Member
What the content aka games have to do with VR as a platform? Weird comparison. One does not require a full blown platform to own or any additional investment (hell, it does not even take a place on your shelf if you go digital)
Last edited:
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
It's all about games at the end of the day. The platform is just the way to experience them
ChuckeRearmed
Member
How many people buy consoles to play indie games only? Indie games are the addition to the existent ocean of content.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
not many, doesn't mean they aren't worth supporting though. Clearly it's been a big focus for MS
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
Board games - has the CMA even evaluated the impact that this could have on Call of Duty: Black ops monopoly. How is Sony going to be able to compete in the monopoly editions market. Sure it's a small market now but how can we predict how big it could be in the future? Nintendo have Mario Monopoly but they aren't really in the high performance adult monopoly market.
Plus you know the game is called monopoly.
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
Reality.
Money rules.
9/10 games sold on either console are third party games. The best selling and most played are usually fifa, GTA, Madden, and the two latest COD games. The existence of a cod/fifa gamer has been observed so long that it no longer needs to be proven in casual conversation.
You're getting pedantic though. My original example of marketing to a "cod only" gamer is the hardest case. The deal is even better for a player who mains cod but plays other games since gamepass will likely result in savings. Gamers who want to play Sony exclusives are the only ones who probably can't be swayed but they are the minority of the overall marketplace and have very little overlap with the general gaming market.
SSfox
Member
Yeah, guess it shouldn't be that surpring from MS in a sens, Money has always been the only thing that allowed them to still be alive in gaming business
feynoob
Banned
For godsake, lets not pretend that either company is saint.
This is business, and each company will use what is in their disposable to gain advantage.
Neither company is saint, and neither of them are your friends.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Niche VR games require a $500+ headset. Traditional niche games dont. That's the key difference.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
True. The barrier of entry and availability is the biggest differentiator there.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Like I said,t his gen is already far enough that I don't think we'll see any VR endeavor from them but maybe next one.
ChorizoPicozo
Member
c'mon bro they can barely make traditional games and now you want they make VR games? let's go easy on them. they are just babies learning to walk.
Iced Arcade
Member
That's apparent
- Status