Support NeoGAF

[SlimySnake]

here in central London, there's been an Xbox series X in the wild since December in PC world warren street, i walk past there everyday and see it (i got my Xbox from here as well)

xbox series x is actually fairing much better than the x1. i remember how after an initial strong launch in november and december, the sales just dropped and even titanfall which sold a million units in march didnt help. they were forced to launch a kinect less model for $399 in May.

if the xsx is selling within a few hours instead of minutes or even in a few days thats good news. id be interested to see what happens in june or july when the hardcore xbox fans have all gotten their consoles and the general public gets a chance to buy these consoles.

 

[SlimySnake]

My son likes to play Roblox. I can’t understand the appeal. It looks terrible and controls are the worst. It is also very buggy. He will get stuck (he’s 6) and I have to help him and I am always disgusted. Seems like such a trash game to me.

it could be worse. i got my son into zelda. hes constantly getting stuck in link between world dungeons, and i will be honest, i am not the same gamer i was in 2013 because even i am like wtf. some of these dungeons are evil. i dont remember it being that hard.

hes also six and rage quit a boss fight last night. the 3ds game he picked next is ocarina of time.....

hes a masochist. he will grow up to be a souls fan i just know it.

 

[On Demand]

You know the majority of new games isn't released on Gamepass day one, don't you? Service is around since 2017, but NOW is the time 'the tides will turn'...

That person taking current forum discourse as something meaningful is hilarious. Curated news cycles in one place really does fool people. MS made a bunch of announcements last week and going into this week. Of course there’s going to big a high level of discussions going on. Don’t mistake that for something tangible.

Meanwhile in the real world PS5 outsells the competition easily.

The PlayStation brand continues to be underestimated and I have no idea why. Sony’s one fumbled console still sold 90M. That was without the level of first party games and brand recognition they have now.

 

[DarkMage619]

First of all, these 2 games were NEVER announced as multiplatform titles. So, you can't say at all they were blocked from Xbox. Rise Of The Tomb Raider was announced as multiplatform title on blog of Phil Rogers ( CEO of SQE Europe/America) 8 years ago

Who defended Tomb raider timed exclusive? Timed exclusives suck. But I take your point and I suppose you've just reinforced that this Zenimax deal took nothing from Sony seeing how the announced games will hit the PlayStation as planned. Excellent point indeed.

 

[iamvin22]

My son likes to play Roblox. I can’t understand the appeal. It looks terrible and controls are the worst. It is also very buggy. He will get stuck (he’s 6) and I have to help him and I am always disgusted. Seems like such a trash game to me.

My son is also six and stuck on roblox. I can't understand for the life of me why. It's disgusting to look at. My wife which used to be in the industry cringes when she sees it as well. I pretend to like it but deep down I'm peeling my ankles off lol

 

[Lunatic_Gamer]

 

[farmerboy]

I think you underestimate the ability to buy the games you want. Not everyone wants to play whatever is on gamepass or PS now.

True, not to mention people already have a few subscriptions. I've already got Netflix, Disney, Amazon. Plus Playstation Plus. And with the start of a new football season here, probably another sport subscription, like Kayo in Australia.

I'd only consider a PS gamepass if it superseded Playstation Plus.

 

[FatKingBallman]

Who defended Tomb raider timed exclusive? Timed exclusives suck. But I take your point and I suppose you've just reinforced that this Zenimax deal took nothing from Sony seeing how the announced games will hit the PlayStation as planned. Excellent point indeed.

Who defended ROTR exclusivity? Maybe not here ( need to do some research, maybe i'll find it). But across the net there were bunch of ones like "Tomb Raider is ours!!", "It will never come to PS!" LOL

Anyway :

Shit, this just reminds to DX12 Xbox crap. LOL
So, you comparing few timed exclusives ( or few exclusives) vs. acquisition of the whole publisher with bunch of multiplatform IPs. Excellent point indeed. Pathetic attempt by an Xbox fan.

 

[squidilix]

Sounds AAA to me.

4 or 5 project on UE5 will be reveal this year.

You're not prepared

 

[Little Chicken]

Just tried out Prey on Series X at 60fps. So good. Glad MS made the investments in BC all those years ago, it lead to moments like this.

Would like Sonic Unleashed and Generations at 60fps now.

 

[3liteDragon]

 

[Bojanglez]

I mean, ideally AAA games should be up there as the most polished, but then we have games like Assassin's Creed with jank as big as their budgets

Yeah agreed. But the difference is I wouldn't necessarily class the Assassin's Creed games as AAA just because of its budget and number of devs, I've not played the latest 2 iterations so can't really comment specifically. There are games like Red Dead Redemption 2 and The Last of Us 2 that have raised he bar. The level of polish, attention to detail, animation, pacing, world construction etc. in those are a step above most other games that claim to be AAA, so maybe these become AAAA?

It's all a bit silly though, a game can be janky as hell and really fun or say something interesting and a game can have a massive budget be very polished, but seem like it is designed by committee (or opinion poll) and not be enjoyable at all.

 

[bitbydeath]

Who defended Tomb raider timed exclusive? Timed exclusives suck. But I take your point and I suppose you've just reinforced that this Zenimax deal took nothing from Sony seeing how the announced games will hit the PlayStation as planned. Excellent point indeed.

Do you know for sure that games announced before the purchase like Elder Scrolls VI will reach PlayStation as originally planned?

 

[pratyush]

Who defended ROTR exclusivity? Maybe not here ( need to do some research, maybe i'll find it). But across the net there were bunch of ones like "Tomb Raider is ours!!", "It will never come to PS!" LOL

Anyway :

Shit, this just reminds to DX12 Xbox crap. LOL
So, you comparing few timed exclusives ( or few exclusives) vs. acquisition of the whole publisher with bunch of multiplatform IPs. Excellent point indeed. Pathetic attempt by an Xbox fan.

It's amazing how people love the idea of games not being available to others. Timed exclusivity is shit and so is buying 3rd party big publishers. Buy small studios and develop them. Then I have no issue with new game IP being exclusive.

Nobody has issue with God of War or Halo being exclusive. This notion is lost on teenagers who here simp for Microsoft.

 

[MasterCornholio]

it could be worse. i got my son into zelda. hes constantly getting stuck in link between world dungeons, and i will be honest, i am not the same gamer i was in 2013 because even i am like wtf. some of these dungeons are evil. i dont remember it being that hard.

hes also six and rage quit a boss fight last night. the 3ds game he picked next is ocarina of time.....

hes a masochist. he will grow up to be a souls fan i just know it.

At least your son isn't into The Legend of Beavis.

 

[Hawking Radiation]

here in central London, there's been an Xbox series X in the wild since December in PC world warren street, i walk past there everyday and see it (i got my Xbox from here as well)

Just waiting to pick up a PS5 so I can fuck this Series S through the nearest wall..

Or I could open it up to clean the fans

 

[Riky]

sorry to butt in but huh... FF isnt a new IP... and you think MS bought these devs and will require them to pay to make their own games?

Exactly, if Sony paid the development costs on Street Fighter V when previous games were on Xbox and that's ok then Microsoft is now paying all the development costs for Elder Scrolls VI and Fallout V, so nobody should have any problem with them being exclusive.

 

[bitbydeath]

Any chance we’ll be seeing Disco Elysium as one of next months PS+ titles?

Thought we’d have it on the pre-order list by now.

 

[dcmk7]

Exactly, if Sony paid the development costs on Street Fighter V when previous games were on Xbox and that's ok then Microsoft is now paying all the development costs for Elder Scrolls VI and Fallout V, so nobody should have any problem with them being exclusive.

You haven't really understood or followed the conversation at all have you?

I don't recall anyone saying it's wrong from a business sense.

The (ridiculous) argument is actually a suggestion that timed exclusives are far worse to gamers than a platform holder owning a multi-platform publisher and then making all future studio titles console exclusive.

Ultimately the IP rights holder can do whatever they want with their IP.

Capcom agreed to SFV exclusivity to PS.
Microsoft agreed exclusivity for Starfield.

If you think about it, there is no real difference between the two - the IP holder has the final say.

Only difference is Microsoft is doing one approach to get exclusives (becoming rights holder)... and Sony is doing partnerships with rights holders.

A notorious Xbox fan can only see one approach that is good for console gamers. Guess which side he agrees with?

 

[Riky]

You haven't really understood or followed the conversation at all have you?

I don't recall anyone saying it's wrong from a business sense.

The (ridiculous) argument is actually a suggestion that timed exclusives are far worse to gamers than a platform holder owning a multi-platform publisher and then making all future studio titles console exclusive.

Ultimately the IP rights holder can do whatever they want with their IP.

Capcom agreed to SFV exclusivity to PS.
Microsoft agreed exclusivity for Starfield.

If you think about it, there is no real difference between the two - the IP holder has the final say.

Only difference is Microsoft is doing one approach to get exclusives (becoming rights holder)... and Sony is doing partnerships with rights holders.

A notorious Xbox fan can only see one approach that is good for console gamers. Guess which side he agrees with?

I understand perfectly, you don't.
You agree that there is really no difference between Street Fighter V and Fallout V now, the platform holder is funding development, like I said.
So what's your problem?
Paying a third party to just keep a game off a platform is worse than funding development of a project, that's very obvious.

 

[dcmk7]

I understand perfectly, you don't.
You agree that there is really no difference between Street Fighter V and Fallout V now, the platform holder is funding development, like I said.
So what's your problem?
Paying a third party to just keep a game off a platform is worse than funding development of a project, that's very obvious.

You clearly haven't understood.

Why is paying a third party worse? It's upto the rights holder whether the deal suits them or not. Sony can't force them to develop exclusively. It's business.

That agreement will help fund development of the title.

Explain to me the difference, exactly?

The IP holder controls what happens to their product, whatever they choose suits their needs and goals. No one forces them.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

You clearly haven't understood.

Why is paying a third party worse? It's upto the rights holder whether the deal suits them or not. Sony can't force them to develop exclusively. It's business.

That agreement will help fund development of the title.

Explain to me the difference, exactly?

The IP holder controls what happens to their product, whatever they choose suits their needs and goals. No one forces them.

"The IP holder can do whatever they want" is not an argument.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Let's leave the fanboys to their delusions and get back to some more interesting discussion shall we?

 

[dcmk7]

"The IP holder can do whatever they want" is not an argument.

 

[ethomaz]

"The IP holder can do whatever they want" is not an argument.

It is actually is and a 100% true argument.

If I create a game I can absolutely launch in whatever platform I want.

I can launch the first game on Switch only, the sequel on PS5 only and no game ever on Xbox... there is nothing wrong with that.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

"The IP holder can do whatever they want" is not an argument.

I'd say it is.

If we're judging whether Microsoft buying Zenimax is better than Sony paying for exclusivity for FF16 or whatever then it just becomes an argument of fickle morals

 

[Bernd Lauert]

If you think it's an argument, I never want to see you complain about any exclusivity deals. Just remember that Microsoft has deep af pockets

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

If you think it's an argument, I never want to see you complain about any exclusivity deals. Just remember that Microsoft has deep af pockets

Mate they're both just as bad regardless of whether it's buying studios or paying for exclusivity

 

[ethomaz]

If you think it's an argument, I never want to see you complain about any exclusivity deals. Just remember that Microsoft has deep af pockets

What are you even talking about? Exclusives are good for the industry.

 

[Tchu-Espresso]

What exclusives do Microsoft have coming out this year?

 

[Zoro7]

What exclusives do Microsoft have coming out this year?

Whaaat you silly....you really really silly....have you seen gamepass the value??
Man you silly asking silly question.
Gamepass for life!

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Mate they're both just as bad regardless of whether it's buying studios or paying for exclusivity

I disagree. Paying for exclusivity is anti consumer. Nothing of value gets added, it's just a money grabbing move.

 

[Riky]

You clearly haven't understood.

Why is paying a third party worse? It's upto the rights holder whether the deal suits them or not. Sony can't force them to develop exclusively. It's business.

That agreement will help fund development of the title.

Explain to me the difference, exactly?

The IP holder controls what happens to their product, whatever they choose suits their needs and goals. No one forces them.

Sony are literally paying for me to not be able to play modes of Call Of Duty Black Ops, I don't see how that is helping the development of a multi billion dollar franchise

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

I disagree. Paying for exclusivity is anti consumer. Nothing of value gets added, it's just a money grabbing move.

And Microsoft is still doing that on top of buying Studios

And what value was added by making Starfield microsoft exclusive?

 

[Interfectum]

I disagree. Paying for exclusivity is anti consumer. Nothing of value gets added, it's just a money grabbing move.

I mean, MS is doing the same thing they just got more money to throw around to their idea of 'paying for exclusivity' is just buying the studios. Both are anti-consumer, one is far more permanent.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

What exclusives do Microsoft have coming out this year?

Deathloop and Ghostwire

Fuck sake sorry I did it again

 

[Bernd Lauert]

And Microsoft is still doing that on top of buying Studios

And what value was added by making Starfield microsoft exclusive?

It wasn't made exclusive just for the sake of it. Microsoft literally owns the IP, and as you said, IP owners can do whatever they want.

I mean, MS is doing the same thing they just got more money to throw around to their idea of 'paying for exclusivity' is just buying the studios. Both are anti-consumer, one is far more permanent.

How is owning an IP anti consumer?

 

[Interfectum]

It wasn't made exclusive just for the sake of it. Microsoft literally owns the IP, and as you said, IP owners can do whatever they want.


How is owning an IP anti consumer?

You are trying to change the argument, it's not about IP ownership.

MS bought Bethesda to fill Game Pass with exclusive content. Sony paid SE a certain amount of money to make FF7R exclusive. Both practices serve to push consumers towards their plastic box. One is more permanent as MS now owns it all whereas FF7R will eventually be everywhere.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

It wasn't made exclusive just for the sake of it. Microsoft literally owns the IP, and as you said, IP owners can do whatever they want.

So that's what determines whether it's anti-consumer or not? Like i said, fickle morals

Supposedly it's coming out this year, or close to completion, so a PlayStation version was all but set in stone

If it doesn't hit PS despite that, then yes, it's exclusive for the sake of it. To push people to their platform. That applies to all their games. Sony included

 

[ethomaz]

Sony are literally paying for me to not be able to play modes of Call Of Duty Black Ops, I don't see how that is helping the development of a multi billion dollar franchise

That is because you don't want to buy a PlayStation
It is your choice.

 

[Zheph]

 

[dcmk7]

Sony are literally paying for me to not be able to play modes of Call Of Duty Black Ops, I don't see how that is helping the development of a multi billion dollar franchise

It sounds like your problem is with Activision for accepting the deal.

But you would rather blame Sony?

Why don't you ask them why they felt the deal was worth accepting? Ultimately, it's their IP, their decision and can do whatever they want with it.

Just like MS and the Bethesda titles now.

But the actual question was what makes timed exclusivity far worse for gamers than buying publishers and locking out console gamers

Have any thoughts on that?

 

[ErRor88]

 

[LiquidRex]

 

[Sinthor]

Holy shit! This kind of looks like a D&D themed Dark Souls type of RPG combat game. If that's the case, I'm SO IN! That would be AWESOME!

 

[Bernd Lauert]

tfw 2019 OLED. But I don't have any issues with VRR, at least I don't see any. So it's fine I guess.

 

[ErRor88]

tfw 2019 OLED. But I don't have any issues with VRR, at least I don't see any. So it's fine I guess.

I believe it does have a similar issue as Vince is saying that it will also receive a patch.

 

[ethomaz]

I believe it does have a similar issue as Vince is saying that it will also receive a patch.

All LG OLEDs have color gamma issues in VRR... that is not a fix btw it is just a workaround to the user try to minimize the issue.
The fix will probably only come with 2021 models (I hope).

LG Acknowledges OLED TV VRR Issues - But Can’t Promise A Quick Fix

They are definitely working on it, though

www.forbes.com

 

[Mr_Potato]

If you think it's an argument, I never want to see you complain about any exclusivity deals. Just remember that Microsoft has deep af pockets

That's not the way corps work. They have deep pockets precisely because they don't waste money constantly. Gaming division will have to be greatly profitable or it will be shut down one day like Mixer, Windows phones, Zune or so many other MS projects...

 

[saintjules]