Support NeoGAF

[adamsapple]

You're doing your usual disingenuous takes again

The fact that sony blocking games coming to gamepass isn't being contested. It's the scope of it that is.

Microsoft: Sony is blocking games from coming to gamepass

You: Sony is blocking most games from coming to gamepass

Sll you're doing us twisting words

We are both literally doing guess work here.

But denying that is just as absurd.

MS is not able to put out 2 games from studios it *owns* because of these clauses. Hogwarts has Sony marketing so that ain't coming to game pass. Calisto Protocol has exclusive PS4/5 content and Sony marketing, so that ain't coming to game pass. FFVII Remake was only supposed to be 12 month console exclusive but it hasn't come so far, While Sony doesn't have the capital to buy a $70bn studio outright, their role as the 'market leader' and implicit strong-arming in making these deals with third party studios is pretty obvious.

 

[Topher]

If that's true, then why is FFVII still exclusive on console.

Yeah, those are exclusivity deals. Both Sony and MS do those and I agree they suck, but this isn't about those. This is about marketing deals. Different thing.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

We are both literally doing guess work here.

But denying that is just as absurd.

MS is not able to put out 2 games from studios it *owns* because of these clauses. Hogwarts has Sony marketing so that ain't coming to game pass. Calisto Protocol has exclusive PS4/5 content and Sony marketing, so that ain't coming to game pass. FFVII Remake was only supposed to be 12 month console exclusive but it hasn't come so far, While Sony doesn't have the capital to buy a $70bn studio outright, their role as the 'market leader' and implicit strong-arming in making these deals with third party studios is pretty obvious.

And what about Elden Ring? Dying Light 2? Saints Row? Cyberpunk 2077?

Are you seriously going to say all of these games aren't on gamepass because of Sony?

You either have evidence that the blocking clause is that entrenched or you don't and i'm going to laugh it off as tinfoil hat shite

 

[Crayon]

Someone told me that buying $70b publishers is the same as getting exclusive dlc. I am not kidding.

 

[adamsapple]

And what about Elden Ring? Dying Light 2? Saints Row? Cyberpunk 2077?

Are you seriously going to say all of these games aren't on gamepass because of Sony?

No, I'm going to say expecting every single AAA release, especially at day 1, to be on game pass is an absurd and unrealistic premise in the first place.

I have no doubt some of them, Dying Light 2 at least, will be on game pass in the coming months at least.

But none of that precludes or denies what's in writing about *some* games being blocked. What games are blocked in what time frames ? We simply don't know. And we likely never will.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

No, I'm going to say expecting every single AAA release, especially at day 1, to be on game pass is an absurd and unrealistic premise in the first place.

I have no doubt some of them, Dying Light 2 at least, will be on game pass in the coming months at least.

But none of that precludes or denies what's in writing about *some* games being blocked. What games are blocked in what time frames ? We simply don't know. And we likely never will.

Okay, then my point stands on why the likes of Capcom or Activision don't care about the subscription clause. Microsoft isn't spending willy nilly on third party AAA games because they don't want to. Not because Sony is blocking them at every angle.

 

[DeepEnigma]

List wars have become more fun for Xbox gamers since then.

Because of course it is. Grown ass adults, acting like autist children.

 

[adamsapple]

Because of course it is. Grown ass adults, acting like autist children.

Aye man, posting long bulleted lists is fun regardless of age !

 

[DeepEnigma]

Aye man, posting long bulleted lists is fun regardless of age !

 

[Ansphn]

Literally in the post before this, you accuse MS of not using their warchest to 'outbid' Sony for exclusives. Now you're complaining that they've outspent Sony.

You seem confused.

I'm talking about outbidding Sony for games for Gamepass. Not buying whole publishers for 68 billion. Microsoft was crying about Sony blocking them from putting games on Gamepass.

 

[Ansphn]

Someone told me that buying $70b publishers is the same as getting exclusive dlc. I am not kidding.

They will just ignore you. There is no defense for this. Microsoft is giving people $1 montly subscriptions so they can do no wrong in these people's eyes.

Microsoft can somehow buy the biggest publisher in gaming for 68 billion and then turn around and claim little ass Sony compared to the behemoth that is Microsoft is outbidding them for exclusive content and these people eat it up.

When the truth is Microsoft is not even trying to outbid Sony for exclusives because they won't make enough profit when their subscription is still low.

They will just keep "announcing" that they have games coming as a carrot on a stick and will either release it or not depending on the subscription count. If Gamepass is still at 25 million subscribers next year (2023), don't expect any AAA exclusive except Starfield and low tier AA games.

 

[kikii]

We are both literally doing guess work here.

But denying that is just as absurd.

FFVII Remake was only supposed to be 12 month console exclusive but it hasn't come so far,

well it was released on PC so ?

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Microsoft's lawyers are spitting straight facts. Microsoft did with game pass exactly what companies are supposed to do: create new business models to attract customers in order to better compete against the competition. Sony, fearing that new model, is attempting to do all it can to keep it from becoming the very best version of itself because they are worried (they're correct) it too strongly threatens their preferred business model. Would you look at that - competition.

 

[Greggy]

Someone told me that buying $70b publishers is the same as getting exclusive dlc. I am not kidding.

Why exactly does MS have to limit itself to "the same as" what Sony does?
Who appointed Sony the rule maker and limit setter of competion strategies in the industry?
They pushed Sega out of the console business with their exclusive deals and moneyhat policies that Sega couldn't afford to do.
Now they are self admittedly shitting their pants because MS is about to one up them at their own game.
But again, MS isn't even going as far as they could, i.e making COD and Diablo Xbox exclusive.
There isn't much to see here other than Sony's hypocrisy and sense of entitlement. We all know that.

 

[adamsapple]

well it was released on PC so ?

Not day and date.

The 12 month console exclusivity was literally printed on the cover art.

 

[Topher]

We are both literally doing guess work here.

But denying that is just as absurd.

MS is not able to put out 2 games from studios it *owns* because of these clauses. Hogwarts has Sony marketing so that ain't coming to game pass. Calisto Protocol has exclusive PS4/5 content and Sony marketing, so that ain't coming to game pass. FFVII Remake was only supposed to be 12 month console exclusive but it hasn't come so far, While Sony doesn't have the capital to buy a $70bn studio outright, their role as the 'market leader' and implicit strong-arming in making these deals with third party studios is pretty obvious.

There is no "strong-arming" here. No one was forced into these marketing deals. Not implicitly or otherwise. Simple fact of the matter is that if being on Game Pass were the more lucrative option then these games would be on Game Pass. But it isn't and so they are not. Actually selling games still matter.

 

[Clear]

Why exactly does MS have to limit itself to "the same as" what Sony does?
Who appointed Sony to rule maker an limit setter of competion strategies in the industry?
They pushed Sega out of the console business with their exclusive deals and moneyhat policies that Sega couldn't afford to do.

What? Sega pushed themselves out of the console business! Following Genesis/Megadrive every hardware release floundered, and they've never created an IP of the magnitude of Sonic since 1991!
Also, lets not forget their on-again, off-again semi partnership with MS which likely cost them way more dearly than anything Sony did.

Never forget, the Dreamcast was discontinued within 3 months of PS2's European launch.

Now they are self admittedly shitting their pants because MS is about to one up them at their own game.
But again, MS isn't even going as far as they could, i.e making COD and Diablo Xbox exclusive.
There isn't much to see here other than Sony's hypocrisy and sense of entitlement. We all know that.

No company in the entire history of videogaming has ever gone on a campaign of acquisitions of the scale of MS' recent moves, so arguing any sort of equivalence is a joke.

 

[ZywyPL]

True.

I guess for many thats a more fun game

Neogaf is:
-F2P;
-no MTX/DLC/Season Pass;
-bug free;
-hell, you can even get Gold sometimes.

So no wonder many prefer it to the actual video games ;P

 

[Crayon]

Why exactly does MS have to limit itself to "the same as" what Sony does?
Who appointed Sony the rule maker and limit setter of competion strategies in the industry?
They pushed Sega out of the console business with their exclusive deals and moneyhat policies that Sega couldn't afford to do.
Now they are self admittedly shitting their pants because MS is about to one up them at their own game.
But again, MS isn't even going as far as they could, i.e making COD and Diablo Xbox exclusive.
There isn't much to see here other than Sony's hypocrisy and sense of entitlement. We all know that.

I acknowledge your heartfelt response but to what I don't know.

 

[onesvenus]

Microsoft can somehow buy the biggest publisher in gaming for 68 billion and then turn around and claim little ass Sony compared to the behemoth that is Microsoft is outbidding them for exclusive content and these people eat it up.

When the truth is Microsoft is not even trying to outbid Sony for exclusives because they won't make enough profit when their subscription is still low.

How do you think these deals work? Do you think that Sony approaches a publisher and that publisher then goes to Microsoft to start a bidding war?
Those deals are usually done in secret so Microsoft would know about them when they're already signed. There's no way they could outbid Sony because the publishers wouldn't want to break a signed contract

 

[kikii]

Not day and date.

The 12 month console exclusivity was literally printed on the cover art.

but it was also delayed or was it ? cant remember

 

[Helghan]

You just gave a scenario where PS pays TakeTwo for console exclusivity. Which means it's not on Xbox. It's been blocked.

Then read it again, because that's not what I said at all.

I'm open for being wrong, but the way I understood this situation is that you have a game that is available on every system and subscription but Sony paid to not make it available on Game Pass. The rest they don't care. So you can buy it on Xbox, but Microsoft can't put it on Game Pass.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Then read it again, because that's not what I said at all.

I'm open for being wrong, but the way I understood this situation is that you have a game that is available on every system and subscription but Sony paid to not make it available on Game Pass. The rest they don't care. So you can buy it on Xbox, but Microsoft can't put it on Game Pass.

Yes, you did.

Read your own comments again.

I'm saying "exclusive rights" and "blocking rights" are the same. You're contesting that by giving two examples. One being GTA 6 is an exclusive to PS, and the other having a marketing deal blocking gamepass. Both result in platform denial. They're the same.

 

[adamsapple]

but it was also delayed or was it ? cant remember

PC version ? No even that got scattered release, EGS had the exclusive PC launch with Steam getting it much later. The original EGS release was half a year or so after the PS4 one .

 

[TidusYuna]

How do you think these deals work? Do you think that Sony approaches a publisher and that publisher then goes to Microsoft to start a bidding war?
Those deals are usually done in secret so Microsoft would know about them when they're already signed. There's no way they could outbid Sony because the publishers wouldn't want to break a signed contract

The publisher decides who they want do business with (in terms of marketing deals, exclusivity deals, etc.) Neither Sony nor Microsoft can force a company to do business with them. It is up to the publisher, they chose who they want to do business with.

 

[Topher]

PC version ? No even that got scattered release, EGS had the exclusive PC launch with Steam getting it much later. The original EGS release was half a year or so after the PS4 one .

What does FF7 have to do with this any of this again? It is a timed exclusive just like any other timed exclusive. Not following the point, I guess.

 

[adamsapple]

What does FF7 have to do with this any of this again? It is a timed exclusive just like any other timed exclusive. Not following the point, I guess.

I'm just replying to the user asking about it

 

[DForce]

Why exactly does MS have to limit itself to "the same as" what Sony does?
Who appointed Sony the rule maker and limit setter of competion strategies in the industry?
They pushed Sega out of the console business with their exclusive deals and moneyhat policies that Sega couldn't afford to do.
Now they are self admittedly shitting their pants because MS is about to one up them at their own game.
But again, MS isn't even going as far as they could, i.e making COD and Diablo Xbox exclusive.
There isn't much to see here other than Sony's hypocrisy and sense of entitlement. We all know that.

How? I've seen this floating around on Twitter without any evidence. Just made up accusations by Xbox fans.

Let me remind you that Sony approached Sega to make a console, and they declined due to their inexperience in the gaming market. What pushed Sega out of the console business was Sega themselves.

Want to tell me why they would launch the Sega 32X within the same 12-month time period as the Sega Saturn? This caused shortages for the Sega Saturn and they tried to develop games for both platforms. The design of the Sega Saturn was terrible and misread as to how games were going to be designed in the future.

And what happened with the Dreamcast?

Sega breached a contract with 3Dfx by going with a Japanese manufacturer in Hitachi for their Dreamcast console. This ruined their relationship with EA because they were investors of 3Dfx.

At the time, EA had invested stock in 3Dfx. Did EA's investment in 3Dfx influence its decision? Gordon says it didn't. "If Sega had picked the direct competitor to 3Dfx at the time, it would have been fine. But they picked someone we had never heard of. It was somebody's friend of somebody's friend at a Japanese country club. It was a head-scratcher, like, 'What are they doing?' That was mostly it."

PlayStation 2 launched on March 4, 2000 in Japan and on October 26th in North America.
Sega announced they stopped production of the Dreamcast on January 31st, 2001.


How did these so-called "exclusive deals" kick Sony out of the gaming business?

 

[DForce]

It's still funny to me that Xbox fans want to portray Microsoft as innocent when it comes to exclusive deals.

Let me remind you of what Microsoft did in the past when it came to exclusive deals. This will include exclusive deals, lifetime deals, and failed deals.

XBOX

TECMO
Microsoft made exclusive deals with Tecmo to make games exclusively for their platform.

Ninja Gaiden Black, Ninja Gaiden II, Dead or Alive 3

After the success of Dead or Alive 2, Tecmo was working on continuing the series when Microsoft approached them, offering a deal to develop the next Dead or Alive as an exclusive title for the recently announced Xbox.

SEGA
Microsoft made 11 game deal with Microsoft.

Microsoft Corp put more firepower in the arsenal of its new Xbox videogame console with 11 game titles to be created by Japanese software developer Sega Corp for its autumn launch, according to chairman Mr Bill Gates.

This includes games such as Jet Set Radio Future, Crazy Taxi 3, Shenmu II and Panzer Dragoon Orta.

CAPCOM
Microsoft had the chance to make Resident Evil 4 exclusive to Xbox.

Microsoft's mistake made Resident Evil 4 a GameCube exclusive

Resident Evil 4 was very briefly a GameCube exclusive, but had Microsoft been better equipped, it might have been a long-term Xbox exclusive instead.

www.nintendo.destructoid.com

BIOWARE
Microsoft made deals with Bioware to make games exclusively for their platform. Probably why we didn't see some of their other titles on other platforms.

Xbox Exclusive "Jade Empire" in Development by BioWare - Source

Microsoft Unveils Much-Anticipated Action Role-Playing Game at Tokyo Game Show

news.microsoft.com

XBOX 360

Dead or Alive 4

Bioshock
Time exclusive deal

2K Announces BioShock as an Exclusive Xbox 360 and Games for Windows title

New York, NY - September 28, 2006 - 2K, a publishing label of Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. (NASDAQ: TTWO), today…

www.gamesindustry.biz

Oblivion
Time Exclusive

BIOWARE
Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 were time exclusive for Xbox.

BioWare: EA owns Mass Effect IP (Translation: It could still come to PS3) [update]

We've been doing a lot of wondering about BioWare lately: wondering what the company is going to do with the Wii; wondering what our saves from the first Mass Effect will do to the sequel. But most of all, we've been wondering if Mass Effect 2 will be making its way to the PlayStation 3, like...

www.engadget.com

Alan Wake
Alan Wake was a marketing deal for the 360. Remedy bought the rights back from Microsoft.

Remedy Acquires Alan Wake Rights From Microsoft

Remedy Entertainment has reacquired the publishing rights for Alan Wake games, the company has announced.

www.gamespot.com

XBOX ONE
Full Exclusive Deals
Dead Rising 3
Ryse

Time Exclusive Deals
Dead Rising 4
Rise of the Tomb Raider
PUBG


There are more but these are notable titles.

Deals happen and they have been happening for years. I don't get this crap about Sony being shady when it Nintendo and Sega were doing it in the 90s.

 

[drganon]

How? I've seen this floating around on Twitter without any evidence. Just made up accusations by Xbox fans.

Let me remind you that Sony approached Sega to make a console, and they declined due to their inexperience in the gaming market. What pushed Sega out of the console business was Sega themselves.

Want to tell me why they would launch the Sega 32X within the same 12-month time period as the Sega Saturn? This caused shortages for the Sega Saturn and they tried to develop games for both platforms. The design of the Sega Saturn was terrible and misread as to how games were going to be designed in the future.

And what happened with the Dreamcast?

Sega breached a contract with 3Dfx by going with a Japanese manufacturer in Hitachi for their Dreamcast console. This ruined their relationship with EA because they were investors of 3Dfx.



PlayStation 2 launched on March 4, 2000 in Japan and on October 26th in North America.
Sega announced they stopped production of the Dreamcast on January 31st, 2001.


How did these so-called "exclusive deals" kick Sony out of the gaming business?

It's revisionist history. Sony didn't kill sega, sega killed themselves by launching a console that was too hard to program for, 100 dollars more, and a botched launch in America. Nothing to do with Sony.

 

[rnlval]

It is ironic you mention Titanfall 1, this was a game Microsoft paid to keep off of playstation.

Electronic Arts revealed today that it came to an agreement with Microsoft that makes Titanfall an exclusive to the Xbox One, Xbox 360, and PC for the "life of the title." That means Titanfall developer Respawn Entertainment can't release the game on PlayStation 4.
https://venturebeat.com/games/titan...sivity-deal-we-will-make-playstation-4-games/

This was all the way back in 2014, Microsoft paid to keep TitanFall 1 off of Playstation and til this day, Playstation players have not been able to play Titanfall 1. So not only was Microsoft the one to start the Call of Duty deals, they were doing Console Exclusive deals back in 2014, & they more likely would have kept doing them if they had the marketshare.

Microsoft didn't decline to renew the deal with Activision for CoD, Activision chose not to do the deal with Microsoft. Activision saw the numbers, they saw the PS4 had the larger market share, and they chose to do a deal with the larger market at the time, which was the PS4. It is the same reason TitanFall 2 came to the PS4 and wasn't exclusive to the XBOXOne. They didn't want their game to be exclusive to a smaller market, they wanted to reach more potential buyers.

Note that the PC is a clone hardware standard with many hardware vendors.

 

[ManaByte]

TECMO
Microsoft made exclusive deals with Tecmo to make games exclusively for their platform.

Ninja Gaiden Black, Ninja Gaiden II, Dead or Alive 3

That was less of a deal and more on Itagaki liking the hardware. He said seeing DOA Hardcore running on the PS2 (without anti-aliasing) physically hurt him.

https://www.eurogamer.net/itagaki-tecmo-tricked-me-into-releasing-unfinished-dead-or-alive-2

The game did very well for Tecmo but Itagaki insisted that its release sent him into a spiraling depression which nearly made him quit the games industry altogether.

He told the audience that he started drinking all day, watching Michael Bay disaster movie Armageddon on repeat with his three-year-old daughter, and listening to Aerosmith's theme tune I Don't Want to Miss a Thing in floods of tears.

BIOWARE
Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 were time exclusive for Xbox.

Microsoft was the publisher for the first Mass Effect.

 

[clarky]

Neogaf is:
-F2P;
-no MTX/DLC/Season Pass;
-bug free;
-hell, you can even get Gold sometimes.

So no wonder many prefer it to the actual video games ;P

-All of the NPC's are a joke.

 

[DForce]

That was less of a deal and more on Itagaki liking the hardware. He said seeing DOA Hardcore running on the PS2 (without anti-aliasing) physically hurt him.

https://www.eurogamer.net/itagaki-tecmo-tricked-me-into-releasing-unfinished-dead-or-alive-2

Microsoft approached Tecmo before the Xbox was in development. If Microsoft didn't, then games like Dead or Alive 3 and 4 would be on PlayStation consoles, including many other Tecmo titles that didn't appear on PlayStation at that time.

Microsoft was the publisher for the first Mass Effect.

Microsoft simply bought a time exclusive contract and it eventually ran out. Mass Effect was later ported to PS3, along with Mass Effect 2.

Microsoft won't say whether it's disappointed to lose Mass Effect 2's exclusivity, but the company was quick to point out in an interview with IGN, that it believes its console is still the best place to play the venerable title.

"Xbox 360 remains the best place to experience the Mass Effect franchise," a Microsoft representative told IGN.

 

[MScarpa]

Same people, same arguments, same result Welp, back to Teofimo/Campa. Good luck guys. Don't ever give up.

 

[ManaByte]

Microsoft simply bought a time exclusive contract and it eventually ran out. Mass Effect was later ported to PS3, along with Mass Effect 2.

They didn't buy a time-exclusive contract, they published the first game. EA didn't own BioWare when they were making the first Mass Effect for MS. EA bought out BioWare (and Pandemic) and when EA owned BioWare the bought they publishing rights for the ME trilogy. BioWare intended the whole trilogy to be exclusive to the 360. That changed when EA bought them.

 

[kungfuian]

Don't care how Microsoft PR and lawyers spin it. Anything painting themselves as some type of 'victim' to Sony is total bullshit. This is a monstrous monopolistic capitalist monster that will devour the games industry if you let them. Don't be fooled by cheap games now. Sony, and Nintendo, are no saints when it comes to business practices, but I'd much rather have them as the market leaders than Microsoft. Microsoft would destroy the industry and replace it with cheap gotcha free to play monetized bullshit if you let them. This is the trajectory of Gamepass, when/once they decide their aren't enough console gamers to grow the service. Gamers should be careful what they wish for.

 

[ReBurn]

Microsoft simply bought a time exclusive contract and it eventually ran out.

It's not really that simple, though. Microsoft Game Studios published the game on Xbox 360 and BioWare owned the IP. If EA hadn't purchased BioWare there's no way to know whether any of the games would have ever been published on PS3 or PC. It's plausible that without EA Microsoft and BioWare would have extended their publishing relationship and the games would never have gone beyond Xbox 360. So the nature of the exclusivity deals is actually a pretty silly thing to argue about considering the actual context at the time.

After their experience developing on the OG Xbox BioWare made the decision to target Xbox 360 as the release platform and likely made the exclusivity deal for the first two games along with the publishing deal with Microsoft. Mass Effect was announced as an Xbox exclusive 2 years before EA was in the picture with BioWare so BioWare would have needed a publisher. But there's not a lot out there that backs up the insinuation that Microsoft sought out BioWare to keep the game off of PlayStation. It was likely that BioWare needed a publisher to make the game happen and Microsoft was the best deal they got, especially since they conceived the first game with Xbox 360 in mind.

When whatever deal EA was forced to honor with Microsoft ran out they didn't waste any time in porting the games to PS3, though. I loved the trilogy on PS3.

 

[ManaByte]

But there's not a lot out there that backs up the insinuation that Microsoft sought out BioWare to keep the game off of PlayStation. It was likely that BioWare needed a publisher to make the game happen and Microsoft was the best deal they got, especially since they conceived the first game with Xbox 360 in mind.

MS was really the only viable publisher for it at the time. They published games for Interplay, but then Interplay died. Then Infogrames/Atari for the D&D games and Lucasarts for KOTOR. They made Jade Empire for MS on the Xbox and that publishing arrangement continued with Mass Effect, and yes, the intention was for the whole trilogy to be on the 360 before EA came into the picture and wanted it multi-plat.

 

[Sosokrates]

Don't care how Microsoft PR and lawyers spin it. Anything painting themselves as some type of 'victim' to Sony is total bullshit. This is a monstrous monopolistic capitalist monster that will devour the games industry if you let them. Don't be fooled by cheap games now. Sony, and Nintendo, are no saints when it comes to business practices, but I'd much rather have them as the market leaders than Microsoft. Microsoft would destroy the industry and replace it with cheap gotcha free to play monetized bullshit if you let them. This is the trajectory of Gamepass, when/once they decide their aren't enough console gamers to grow the service. Gamers should be careful what they wish for.

Not happening because people won't buy a bad product. They will go where the money is. Making Fortnite and warzone is not easy. Those games are so profitable because they are very high quality.

Microsoft and Sony want money just as much as each other, only a naive person would think one has the customers best interest more then the other.

They are both saying stuff which has there best interests at mind. Nether has a moral high ground, it's ruthless business. Its not the best look for Sony though, the only reason they have not been buying more studios at a faster rate is because they have not needed to, but they seem to think the passage of time makes acquisitions ok and completely fair.

Cod going to gamepass will lose Sony money

Microsoft want COD because gamepass needs the best content to work.

It's as simple as that, it's business.

 

[Ansphn]

How do you think these deals work? Do you think that Sony approaches a publisher and that publisher then goes to Microsoft to start a bidding war?
Those deals are usually done in secret so Microsoft would know about them when they're already signed. There's no way they could outbid Sony because the publishers wouldn't want to break a signed contract

Are you telling me that a company with endless pockets like Microsoft can't contact all publishers and tell them beforehand that come to them first before signing a contract because they will outbid any pricing Playstation offer? You think these CEO stupid and only react after something happens in secret? Preemptive strategies don't exist for Xbox leadership?

No way and in secret lmao.

 

[Ansphn]

Don't care how Microsoft PR and lawyers spin it. Anything painting themselves as some type of 'victim' to Sony is total bullshit. This is a monstrous monopolistic capitalist monster that will devour the games industry if you let them. Don't be fooled by cheap games now. Sony, and Nintendo, are no saints when it comes to business practices, but I'd much rather have them as the market leaders than Microsoft. Microsoft would destroy the industry and replace it with cheap gotcha free to play monetized bullshit if you let them. This is the trajectory of Gamepass, when/once they decide their aren't enough console gamers to grow the service. Gamers should be careful what they wish for.

Facts. Microsoft is trying to pull a Trojan horse strategy to strong arm the gaming industry. Even Steve Jobs had to put up with their dirty tactics. Now theyre going after Playstation (The top dog) but the good thing is they won't be successful because subscriptions are not as profitable compared to making Premium content and selling it premium pricing ($70).

 

[ManaByte]

Facts. Microsoft is trying to pull a Trojan horse strategy to strong arm the gaming industry. Even Steve Jobs had to put up with their dirty tactics. Now theyre going after Playstation (The top dog) but the good thing is they won't be successful because subscriptions are not as profitable compared to making Premium content and selling it premium pricing ($70).

MS has been making console games for longer than Sega had a home console.

 

[DForce]

They didn't buy a time-exclusive contract, they published the first game. EA didn't own BioWare when they were making the first Mass Effect for MS. EA bought out BioWare (and Pandemic) and when EA owned BioWare the bought they publishing rights for the ME trilogy. BioWare intended the whole trilogy to be exclusive to the 360. That changed when EA bought them.

It's not really that simple, though. Microsoft Game Studios published the game on Xbox 360 and BioWare owned the IP. If EA hadn't purchased BioWare there's no way to know whether any of the games would have ever been published on PS3 or PC. It's plausible that without EA Microsoft and BioWare would have extended their publishing relationship and the games would never have gone beyond Xbox 360. So the nature of the exclusivity deals is actually a pretty silly thing to argue about considering the actual context at the time.

After their experience developing on the OG Xbox BioWare made the decision to target Xbox 360 as the release platform and likely made the exclusivity deal for the first two games along with the publishing deal with Microsoft. Mass Effect was announced as an Xbox exclusive 2 years before EA was in the picture with BioWare so BioWare would have needed a publisher. But there's not a lot out there that backs up the insinuation that Microsoft sought out BioWare to keep the game off of PlayStation. It was likely that BioWare needed a publisher to make the game happen and Microsoft was the best deal they got, especially since they conceived the first game with Xbox 360 in mind.

When whatever deal EA was forced to honor with Microsoft ran out they didn't waste any time in porting the games to PS3, though. I loved the trilogy on PS3.

Mass Effect 2 was released Jan. 26th, 2010 for both PC and Xbox 360. It wasn't until a Jan 17th, 2011 that it was released on PC.

EA was the publisher for Mass Effect 2 after buying Bioware in 2007.

"I believe we'll be Xbox 360 exclusive for at least a short period of time. We're still working out the details on that, but we've had a great relationship with Microsoft and done very well."

No doubt Mass Effect 2 was tied to a time exclusive deal by Microsoft. Mass Effect was in fact published by Microsoft, which ties into its exclusivity.

There were reports that it was a time exclusive deal years before the game was released.

BioWare: Mass Effect 2 likely a timed Xbox 360 exclusive, PC version confirmed [updated]

When EA snapped up BioWare, common wisdom was that the game's main attractions would be ported to any system that would have them. But it seems that (for now, at least) that doesn't hold true for space opera Mass Effect. As BioWare senior manager Matt Atwood told CVG, "I believe we'll be Xbox...

sg.news.yahoo.com

It really doesn't matter if they needed a publisher because many people mention Street Fighter V as being part of Sony's shady tactics when in fact Capcom needed funding just like Bioware needed a publisher.

 

[ManaByte]

It really doesn't matter if they needed a publisher because many people mention Street Fighter V as being part of Sony's shady tactics when in fact Capcom needed funding just like Bioware needed a publisher.

Capcom is a publisher though. BioWare never was a publisher.

 

[DForce]

Capcom is a publisher though. BioWare never was a publisher.

I know Capcom is a publisher. The point is that they both needed help and that's when Sony and Microsoft stepped in.

 

[Helghan]

Yes, you did.

Read your own comments again.

I'm saying "exclusive rights" and "blocking rights" are the same. You're contesting that by giving two examples. One being GTA 6 is an exclusive to PS, and the other having a marketing deal blocking gamepass. Both result in platform denial. They're the same.

My example didn't say that GTA wouldn't be available on Xbox, just not on Game Pass. So it's blocking, has nothing to do with exclusivity.

Again, the way I understood this situation is that you have a game that is available on every system but Sony paid to not make it available on Game Pass, and it's not on PS Now. So you can buy it on Xbox, but Microsoft can't put it on Game Pass, even though they don't put it on PS Now. They just pay Take Two for not putting it on Game Pass. Nothing else.

 

[DonJimbo]

Sometimes i question Jimbo Ryans age he acts very childish most of the time fire him Sony and choose a capable Head for the Playstation Brand and not such a person like Jimbo
Bring Jack Tretton back please

 

[Three]

but .. the "blocking deals" preventing from doing that is exactly what this is about ..

they're still offering games like Plague Tale, STALKER 2, Scorn, Atomic Heart etc when they can but one of the bigger point of their rebuttal is that they're being blocked.

What a crock of shit. The RE8 contract that leaked mentioned stadia too. RE8 is available on stadia right now.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

My example didn't say that GTA wouldn't be available on Xbox, just not on Game Pass. So it's blocking, has nothing to do with exclusivity.

Again, the way I understood this situation is that you have a game that is available on every system but Sony paid to not make it available on Game Pass, and it's not on PS Now. So you can buy it on Xbox, but Microsoft can't put it on Game Pass, even though they don't put it on PS Now. They just pay Take Two for not putting it on Game Pass. Nothing else.

Not really. Let's say you've got GTA6 coming out whenever the following years, and you're Jim from Sony.

Exclusive rights mean that you make sure GTA6 is only playable on your console (PS5), and you pay Take-Two/Rockstar for this.
Blocking rights mean that you don't want GTA6 to be available on Game Pass, but it can be available on Xbox, and you pay Take-Two/Rockstar to not make a deal with Microsoft if they want it on Game Pass.

That's a huge difference. The blocking rights, don't give you any exclusivity, but you are just trying to slow down the growth of a competitors subscription service.