Support NeoGAF

[Lort]

Sony desperately using legal restrictions to prevent xbox having a performance and image quality premium.

Sony desperatly using legal restrictions to prevent games being licensed to gamepass.

neogaf posters ... xbox performance and gamepass are irrelevant and sony couldnt care less.

ok champ.

 

[ToadMan]

This has so many grammatical failures and mistypes it's difficult to believe it is a real document sorry.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Nothing unusual about this, in fact I'm sure that big Gamepass titles like Outriders have a clause where they can't go on any other subscription service etc for a minimum period, as MS paid for that deal for publicity

The difference is that Sony would not put them on PS+ or PS Now in the first place. So what Sony is does is literally making people pay more for the games because Sony wants to save the face.

So uh, they did this with RE Village, but not their OWN FUC'ING BASEBALL GAME FROM THEIR OWN 1P STUDIO? Major whoops if true.

I think with MLB there are two factors - the license itself and it being sports game with MTX, made Sony easier to agree (though I am pretty sure they did not want to do that). With Capcom it was much easier because they develop their games and not give the license to Sony to develop RE.

I wonder if that rabbit hole will end with Amaterasu and Zeus

 

[Chukhopops]

It also says "optimize performance and technical capability on Xbox consoles in parity with the Console Game version on the competative platform".

Funny, didn't some of the games that had an Xbox marketing deal actually perform worse post-patch on PS5?

It litterally states "technical capability of Xbox Console versions in parity with the Console Version video game on the Competitive Platform"

It states that in the context of updates post launch, not in the context of the game itself, seriously, read the whole paragraph and it will be clear.

Also to repeat, I'm sure it exists for every console brand but what he posted is not a good example of it.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

I love all the people that usually have a boner at the mere thought of Microsoft buying out developers and entire publishers left and right, and now all of a sudden are disgusted and outraged at the idea of Sony making a deal to retain paid-services (not even platform) exclusivity on a single game.

Yes, because with MS purchasing a publisher / dev you can still access the games via console, PC and even cloud on mobile, fridge and Tesla. Also for 15$ if not less. Compare it to 70$ gatekeeping just for the optics for Playstation platform.

 

[nemiroff]

Well fuck this shit and the jacked up price, I have other games to play.

 

[dcmk7]

The people who are outraged by this need to come back to the real world.

Its. A. Marketing. Agreement.

Just like Microsoft and Cyberpunk 2077.

 

[Vae_Victis]

Yes, because with MS purchasing a publisher / dev you can still access the games via console, PC and even cloud on mobile, fridge and Tesla. Also for 15$ if not less. Compare it to 70$ gatekeeping just for the optics for Playstation platform.

So in your eyes, it's more consumer-friendly if a game is available on GamePass but it's completely unavailable on non-Microsoft platforms, than if a game is available on additional platforms with hundreds of millions of users (PlayStation 4, 5, possibly Switch) but is not included in the GamePass subscription?

Is that your point, for real? How did you even live before GamePass? Or is this just blind console warring and you have no grasp on what you're actually advocating for?

 

[LisaMariaMartin]

Blocking the game from coming to game pass is some petty shit

 

[Shmunter]

Jim making sweet deals again. Redemption.

 

[dext3rr]

Well I wasn't sure on which platform should I buy REVIII. Thanks Jim Ryan for clarification you greedy mf. Series X it is.

 

[DForce]

Blocking the game from coming to game pass is some petty shit

And how many 1 year exclusive deals has MS signed over the years?

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

It states that in the context of updates post launch, not in the context of the game itself, seriously, read the whole paragraph and it will be clear.

Also to repeat, I'm sure it exists for every console brand but what he posted is not a good example of it.

He was showing you that they're using the exact same terminology as evidence that it has nothing to do with holding a platform back. Whether it's for the release itself or post content is irrelevent

 

[Clear]

Blocking the game from coming to game pass is some petty shit

No its business. Noone pays money for a co-promotional deal that leaves the back-door open for its benefits to be undercut by the competition.

Expect a lot more of this in the future. MS opened this Pandora's box by trying to buy themselves an edge, and as I've written extensively in the past, nothing happens in a vacuum. It practically obliges any serious competitor to respond in kind.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

So in your eyes, it's more consumer-friendly if a game is available on GamePass but it's completely unavailable on non-Microsoft platforms, than if a game is available on additional platforms with hundreds of millions of users (PlayStation 4, 5, possibly Switch) but is not included in the GamePass subscription?

Is that your point, for real? How did you even live before GamePass? Or is this just blind console warring and you have no grasp on what you're actually advocating for?

Yes, because it is a cheaper and potentially easier to access than 500$ console + 70$ game?

Now with the regional prices declining and becoming the same as the first world prices the games are even less accessible now. In fact Game Pass deals - like with MLB - does not prohibit you from paying the full price for the game (I wonder why a lot of Playstation folks were not happy with that as it changed nothing for them), while Sony's deal is just anti-consumer gatekeeping. With TV apps, mobile and even browser (ok Sony doesn't want consumers to have a browser) access you can play the games using XCloud without even purchasing the console with 1$ or 10$ or 15$ deal, depending on what you want.

Between PC/Xbox/XCloud vs PS/maybe PC it is obvious what is the better option

 

[BbMajor7th]

I love the ever-reliable implication that contractual terms like these are forced onto helpless third-party publishers by the jackboots of unscrupulous platform holders. It's not part of some sinister plan: it's just a fairly mundane business arrangement, where the publisher benefits from the marketing power of the platform holder and the platform holder benefits from the content of the publisher. They've been around for decades, most publishers and platform holders have them and all know about them. And yet, every time one of them comes to light we all take to our fainting couches as though the platform holders are extorting these poor publishers at gun point.

 

[AdjudicatorHead]

So in your eyes, it's more consumer-friendly if a game is available on GamePass but it's completely unavailable on non-Microsoft platforms, than if a game is available on additional platforms with hundreds of millions of users (PlayStation 4, 5, possibly Switch) but is not included in the GamePass subscription?

Is that your point, for real? How did you even live before GamePass? Or is this just blind console warring and you have no grasp on what you're actually advocating for?

I'm not even bothering to respond to their ridiculous reply to my comment, they are clearly blind console warring and it's not worth the time or effort, you'll get nowhere.

 

[Umbasaborne]

How hard did this site REEEE at ac unity back in 2014 for the same reason? I dont want anyone to hurt themselves bending over backwards to defend playstation here, especially after the "outrage" that came out of microsoft pushing ac unity parity

 

[jigglet]

how did something that could so easily be faked create so much discussion?

 

[killatopak]

how did something that could so easily be faked create so much discussion?

Slow news day.

 

[Dick Jones]

The people who are outraged by this need to come back to the real world.

Its. A. Marketing. Agreement.

Just like Microsoft and Cyberpunk 2077.

Was there a misprint on that contract to make parity for everyone to be the same as the OG Xbox? Only defence CDPR have.

 

[Vae_Victis]

Yes, because it is a cheaper and potentially easier to access than 500$ console + 70$ game?

Now with the regional prices declining and becoming the same as the first world prices the games are even less accessible now. In fact Game Pass deals - like with MLB - does not prohibit you from paying the full price for the game (I wonder why a lot of Playstation folks were not happy with that as it changed nothing for them), while Sony's deal is just anti-consumer gatekeeping. With TV apps, mobile and even browser (ok Sony doesn't want consumers to have a browser) access you can play the games using XCloud without even purchasing the console with 1$ or 10$ or 15$ deal, depending on what you want.

Between PC/Xbox/XCloud vs PS/maybe PC it is obvious what is the better option

OK, so being pro-consumer means limiting the entire market to a single purchase option inside a single ecosystem, fully in the hands of a single company, and on top of that tying all your games to a recurrent-payment system where all games not only stop working if you stop paying, but said company can and does remove games from the service unilaterally whenever they feel like it.

But hey, it's cheaper than impulse-buying on day one on a different platform, so it's clearly better than an almost completely open market, with only a time limit to some particular purchase options on select platforms.


My god you are a titanic sucker.

 

[prinz_valium]

Finally some real world verbiage of those deals.
Good to know.

 

[BlackM1st]

Who said that it's real? What we are even discussing in here? Another Sega acquisition?

 

[Darlingcognito]

Ahaha someone's scared of gamepass

 

[MaxwellParrish]

So what if it's a marketing deal os something like that, the point here is that GAMEPASS is so attractive to third parties that sony needs to put THAT on a contract.

Just slightly less acctactive then a subscriction to Stadia, seeing that Sony felt the need to put THAT first in the contract...

 

[xShaun]

Sony desperately using legal restrictions to prevent xbox having a performance and image quality premium.

Sony desperatly using legal restrictions to prevent games being licensed to gamepass.

neogaf posters ... xbox performance and gamepass are irrelevant and sony couldnt care less.

ok champ.

You do bring a good point.
Sony must clearly be very scared of Gamepass otherwise they wouldn't have done this.

 

[FranXico]

How hard did this site REEEE at ac unity back in 2014 for the same reason? I dont want anyone to hurt themselves bending over backwards to defend playstation here, especially after the "outrage" that came out of microsoft pushing ac unity parity

And how hard did the ones enraged at Sony now defend MS back then? Hipocrisy does not only work in one direction.

 

[FranXico]

 

[LeftThumbstick]

Microsoft pay for exclusivity on Tomb Raider: "rabble rabble rabble"

Sony pay for exclusivity: "but guys, every company does this I'm sick of the narrative "

make your mind up people eh.

 

[KingT731]

Didn't MS sign a deal with Sega to hold the release of the PS5 version of Yakuza: Like A Dragon for nearly 4 months? We acting brand new now?

Edit: This reads very much as fake. Spelling and grammar mistakes everywhere.

 

[Alright]

What part of the discussion is this thread at?

Sony are doomed
Microsoft do it as well
The story is fake

?

 

[xrnzaaas]

Damn, RE8 launching on Game Pass would be huge. I don't support what Sony has done with signing the deal, but in some way it's understandable that they reacted since it's probably the biggest release of the year so far.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Xbox fanboys raising the game. Fake contracts? Goddamn.

 

[assurdum]

Sony desperately using legal restrictions to prevent xbox having a performance and image quality premium.

Sony desperatly using legal restrictions to prevent games being licensed to gamepass.

neogaf posters ... xbox performance and gamepass are irrelevant and sony couldnt care less.

ok champ.

The hell is that bullshit. Hitman 3 also has an exclusive marketing deal with Sony but it runs 4k natively just on series X. Are you for real people? Such deal agreement doesn't implies exactly what you think.

 

[ScaryBrandon]

Just Sony things. "For the payers!"

 

[assurdum]

 

[nemiroff]

..Is Ahmad a simpleton, because that's a stupid comparison - unless I overlooked something of course.. From what I quickly read this Xbox contract is purely about content parity and says the game should not have less features than a comparable competitive platform unless it's because of hardware limitations. I don't understand why it's suggested this is the same thing as forcing parity on stronger platforms like PC (which is not even mentioned in the document you linked to..) and to kick the legs out from Gamepass, and even in addition to other stuff like DLC exclusivity mentioned in the Sony clause.

Edit: Assuming the contract is not faked of course. And for the record: In principle I don't like exclusivity and these kinds of "deals" no matter on which side it's done.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

Why would Capcom RE8 on Gamepass this early anyway before they even see the sales and demand from it? Resident Evil isn't some small, unknown niche title or anything.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

That's a stupid comparison. From what I read of that it's about content parity and says the game should not have less features than a comparative competitive platform unless it's because of hardware limitations. I don't understand why it's suggested this is the same thing as forcing parity on stronger platforms like PC (which is not even mentioned in the document you linked to..) and to kick the legs out from Gamepass, and even in addition to other stuff like DLC exclusivity mentioned in the Sony clause.

Edit: Assuming the contract is not faked of course.

The terminology in both the Xbox and PS contract are the same

That's the point of the comparison

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

OK, so being pro-consumer means limiting the entire market to a single purchase option inside a single ecosystem, fully in the hands of a single company, and on top of that tying all your games to a recurrent-payment system where all games not only stop working if you stop paying, but said company can and does remove games from the service unilaterally whenever they feel like it.

That "single" ecosystem encompasses more devices than Playstation, where the gamers can't even get their own games made by Sony Day 1 on PS Now and PS+ and can only pay 70$ or hope that maybe some time in the future Sony will throw a bone. BTW, now that you are talking about games stopping working - how many games are accessible when you don't pay for PS+? Argument about removing the games from the service is also hilarious in context of Sony...

In fact with Game Pass Ultimate you can purchase game with a discount...And when paying the game with GPU discount + GPU the overall cost will be essentially the same as a single 70$ game. Fascinating right? And you get - aside the game - the access to a library of games for a full month.

But hey, it's cheaper than impulse-buying on day one on a different platform, so it's clearly better than an almost completely open market, with only a time limit to some particular purchase options on select platforms.
My god you are a titanic sucker.

Said the guy who likes to swallow 70$ games and wanting others to do the same, because reasons I also like that topic about open market in context of Sony who gatekeeping games for years. Like where is FFR for PC, what about FF16, what about two years of Forspoken? "Open the pockets" rather than "open market"

Now that I think about, the argument about Switch that some people started to use since the purchase of Bethesda. Nobody cared about third party games that most of the time did not come to Switch before...But when MS purchased Bethesda, suddenly please don't forget about Switch.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Another mountain out of a molehill thread where forum warriors went in overdrive before enough data was out?!? Is this a trap or something ?

 

[AdjudicatorHead]

That "single" ecosystem encompasses more devices than Playstation, where the gamers can't even get their own games made by Sony Day 1 on PS Now and PS+ and can only pay 70$ or hope that maybe some time in the future Sony will throw a bone. BTW, now that you are talking about games stopping working - how many games are accessible when you don't pay for PS+?



Said the guy who likes to swallow 70$ games and wanting others to do the same, because reasons

Now that I think about, the argument about Switch that some people started to use since the purchase of Bethesda. Nobody cared about third party games that most of the time did not come to Switch before...But when MS purchased Bethesda, suddenly please don't forget about Switch.

I like Gamepass (I've got 3 years stacked and use it fairly often) and I think it offers a good catalogue, but I don't think that being locked into paying $15 each and every month (unless you want to lose your entire GP library) to play the games which Microsoft choose to create/add to the service, over paying $70 once (or less, as games are quickly discounted) for a game you yourself choose to buy, is as much of a win as you think it is.

 

[FranXico]

Another mountain out of a molehill thread where forum warriors went in overdrive before enough data was out?!? Is this a trap or something ?

Judging from the amount of spelling errors people are spotting in the supposed leaked document, it's probably even fake.

A whole lot of nothing.

 

[Sony]

Was about to post this. Move along people, standard practice.

 

[BootsLoader]

I don't really get the problem here. Even if Sony made a marketing agreement to "limit performance" on other consoles what's the problem? I don't really get it.
They paid.

It's like crying because MS bought Bethesda and will make the games exclusive.
Get your shit together guys. It's business in the end.

 

[Umbasaborne]

Microsoft pay for exclusivity on Tomb Raider: "rabble rabble rabble"

Sony pay for exclusivity: "but guys, every company does this I'm sick of the narrative "

make your mind up people eh.

The narrative is good every time when it benefits my favorite video game console making company! Microsoft forces ac unity parity=baaad, sony forces re8 parity=goood!

 

[Clear]

I like Gamepass and I think it offers a good catalogue, but I don't think that being locked into paying $15 each and every month (unless you want to lose your entire GP library) to play the games which Microsoft choose to create/add to the service, over paying $70 once (or less, as games are quickly discounted) for a game you yourself choose to buy, is as much of a win as you think it is.

Well said. People seem to personalize companies motives as being pro or anti consumer when the plain fact of the matter is all companies are pro profitability and anti inefficency/loss making!

Corporations don't love anyone but themselves and their share-holders.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

I like Gamepass and I think it offers a good catalogue, but I don't think that being locked into paying $15 each and every month (unless you want to lose your entire GP library) to play the games which Microsoft choose to create/add to the service, over paying $70 once (or less, as games are quickly discounted) for a game you yourself choose to buy, is as much of a win as you think it is.

It is a win because you can still purchase the games with Game Pass and get a discount which will give you the same price as fully priced game. If you buy more than one game that appears on Game Pass you even pay less for a year. In fact Game Pass deals with third party are much better than anything that Sony can offer - when Outriders or MLB came to Game Pass, nobody lost the ability to purchase the game on other platforms whether it is Playstation or Xbox. But some people could do that cheaper and also play it on various devices due to Game Pass.

With Sony? Not only other platforms have to pay the full price, the game is not even available on PS Now or PS+. If the game came to PS+, people would be more or less fine with that. Even FFR remake came year later to PS+ only, despite being moneyhatted. But now, because Sony doesn't want bad optics everybody has to pay the full price for the game (ok with GPU people will get a discount even I think). Basically it boils down to the fact that if Sony cannot get the time exclusivity for the game, it will try to make other platforms pay the same price as their own platform for the game. And there is no a single argument you can use to defend that.

I wonder if Square Enix regrets the deal with Sony and Avengers. On Game Pass Day 1 they would get better or similar results as Outriders in comparison to a fully priced game.

 

[Skyfox]

Another example of how easy it is to spread a lie and how hard it is to unpack it with the truth.

Read the words immediately following the parity bit and you'll understand why this entire story is misleading.

They specifically wrote subject to the material platform capabalities in the same fucking sentence.

This means the game should basically be the same game (no hidden extra special effects on xbox). They then say but if their platform is the limiting factor then that's ok.

So this thread is bullshit.