• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Phil Spencer: The Elder Scrolls 6 Still 'Five+ Years Away', PlayStation Version Undecided. Doesn’t recall saying it will be exclusive

H

Hastelander

Banned
Why, not enough versions of Skyrim yet? Funny how Suckstar became a non-releasing remaster whore after taking out most rivals, while BGS became one after gaining some serious ones. Regardless, most, if not all, games have become too bloated (file size, performance cost, (mostly filler) play time, prices) and we need another crash, hopefully world-wide this time.
 
Bo_Hazem

Bo_Hazem

Banned

Doesn’t recall saying it will be exclusive​


Fl4XISFXoAAToHe.jpg
 
Morrie’s wig shop

Morrie’s wig shop

Member
I’d keep trolling everyone also……. “hmmm I don’t recall saying it would be exclusive”……. Leave everyone hanging for years then 6 months till release announce that it will be coming to Xbox, Switch 2, and PC……… and that’s all
 
FingerBang

FingerBang

Member
In Cold Blood said:
As it should be.
I'm glad MS had the balls to do what they needed to, and I hope after 10 years if COD is still massive, they make that exclusive as well.
The more competition between MS and Sony, the better for everyone, and the more exclusives on each console, the better.
Click to expand...
This fucking point I see Xbox fanboys make constantly online. "As it should be! MS needs exclusives!"

You gained NOTHING. You were always gonna get that game. You're celebrating taking shit away from others instead of having more games made by MS. You're celebrating market consolidation, not competition.
 
graywolf323

graywolf323

Member
In Cold Blood said:
As it should be.
I'm glad MS had the balls to do what they needed to, and I hope after 10 years if COD is still massive, they make that exclusive as well.
The more competition between MS and Sony, the better for everyone, and the more exclusives on each console, the better.
Click to expand...
go touch grass and get a life… if you’re celebrating the idea of the biggest franchise in gaming going exclusive to your preferred platform (which was ALWAYS coming to your platform) then you have issues
 
lh032

lh032

I cry about Xbox and hate PlayStation.
In Cold Blood said:
As it should be.
I'm glad MS had the balls to do what they needed to, and I hope after 10 years if COD is still massive, they make that exclusive as well.
The more competition between MS and Sony, the better for everyone, and the more exclusives on each console, the better.
Click to expand...
"Microsoft should acquire more multiplatform publishers and make it exclusive, while doing nothing for their first party studio, that should show Sony whos the king, Xbox best gaming platform!!!
 
Last edited:
In Cold Blood

In Cold Blood

Banned
You can't take away games that never were.
MS has purchased studios to make exclusive games for their platform.
Anything and everything after the purchase is made is then funded by MS for content for their ecosystem.

Should Sony have purchased Bluepoint? They got all their games anyway.
Should they have purchased Guerilla? They got all their games anyway?

Your post makes no logical sense.
And as Ghostwire and Deathloop showed, Xbox might not have got it "anyway",

MS was smashed for not investing in their studios. They were canned for only have Coalition, 343 and T10 making exclusive content.
So, they invested big time. They bought smaller struggling studios like Ninja Theory, Double Fine and Compulsion Games to add to their first party.
Then when they do that the fanboys laughed saying MS was buying bargin basement studios who no one else wanted.

They bought studios they had worked with for years such as Playground and Undead Labs.
They bought middle sized studios that were struggling to keep their heads above water like Obsidian. Again the cries of "meh" went out.

Then MS goes and buys Zenimax. Now all of a sudden the laughs wernt so loud, but never mind, no way MS would make those games exclusive, because MS wouldn't dare miss out on that PlayStation money. Well, they did.
So then the cries go out about "taking me games away" from the usual suspects.

Gaming is a content driven industry. Both Sony and MS have done the same thing, buying studios and exclusive content to put on their platforms to attract gamers to it. There is only a couple of differences.
One is that MS has more money and can buy better studios and publishers than Sony can, and the other is that until now, Sony had the vast majority of quality exclusives, and as such their player base has had more effect on them than the Xbox ones have.

This is exactly what competition is and should be.
It's not competition to have two companies release identical performing consoles, with the same price tag, and then have 99% the same games. What purpose does that serve? We might as well scrap both consoles off and just have PCs.

The definition of competition is two or more companies who are trying to harm the others and to take their customer by offering better products and or services.
What regulators are really hot on is creating situations where there is no way other companies cannot enter the game if they wanted to. Locking out competitors from competing is the real issue.
MS buying who they have does not stop Sony from being able to complete. They can buy more studios, or create as many more studios as they wish.

You are looking at it through the eyes of a loyal Sony customer.
You know what? I as a customer of mobile cell phone Company A, shouldn't have to change to cell phone company B if I want reception in one area over another. I should be able to buy a phone and service from one company, and then be able to use all the cell Towers of all the companies so that my phone works better.
Bad luck. If Company B has invested more money in exclusive cell tower sites, and spent more money with backhauling fibre for data speeds, then put up with Company As product, or change to Company B.

This was a reply to Fingerbang.
 
Last edited:
In Cold Blood

In Cold Blood

Banned
lh032 said:
"Microsoft should acquire more multiplatform publishers and make it exclusive, while doing nothing for their first party studio, that should show Sony whos the king, Xbox best gaming platform!!!
Click to expand...
Here's a reality check. When MS purchases other studios and publishers, they then become MS first party studios.
Are you saying Bluepoint, Naughty Dog, Insomniac, GG etc arnt Sony first party?
Oh that's right, because Sony bought them it's ok, but not MS.

You do know Sony was also bidding to buy Zenimax yeah? You do know that Sony was also in the hunt for WB games when they were looking to sell?
You think Sony wouldn't have made them exclusive? Of course they would.
The only difference is MS can pay more than Sony. That's it.

If Sony had of bought Zenimax, the front page on GAF would be full of posts about how it was a power move, and a Sony stroke of genius. It is all over for Xbox, they should become their party ( I mean, we still have threads saying that now.)

Reality is a bitch, and in this time, MS has invested more into gaming than Sony has.
Maybe Sony should have used more of those PlayStation profits to buy and build more studios for all those years, instead of using it to prop up their other failing business units?
 
lh032

lh032

I cry about Xbox and hate PlayStation.
In Cold Blood said:
Here's a reality check. When MS purchases other studios and publishers, they then become MS first party studios.
Are you saying Bluepoint, Naughty Dog, Insomniac, GG etc arnt Sony first party?
Oh that's right, because Sony bought them it's ok, but not MS.

You do know Sony was also bidding to buy Zenimax yeah? You do know that Sony was also in the hunt for WB games when they were looking to sell?
You think Sony wouldn't have made them exclusive? Of course they would.
The only difference is MS can pay more than Sony. That's it.

If Sony had of bought Zenimax, the front page on GAF would be full of posts about how it was a power move, and a Sony stroke of genius. It is all over for Xbox, they should become their party ( I mean, we still have threads saying that now.)

Reality is a bitch, and in this time, MS has invested more into gaming than Sony has.
Maybe Sony should have used more of those PlayStation profits to buy and build more studios for all those years, instead of using it to prop up their other failing business units?
Click to expand...
Bluepoint, Naughty Dog, Insomniac, GG makes most games exclusive for Sony before they are bought.

dont try to spin here.
 
In Cold Blood

In Cold Blood

Banned
bitbydeath said:
Ever wondered the difference between a troll and a gamer? Look no further.
Click to expand...
No, that's what someone who believes in more exclusive content between the two consoles the better.
I am happy for Sony to buy Square and make it PS5 exclusive. They buy Take Two and make GTA exclusive, not a problem.
I can afford to buy both consoles and all the games on both I like. Try and find a post from me saying it's not fair Sony got Silent Hill or Spiderman exclusive, you won't.

I come from the Sega vs Nintendo days where you couldn't have more exclusive differences between both consoles. They both had very different feels and catalogues. Same goes for Sega and Sony. The Saturn and Dreamcast had a very different feel and appeal than the PS1 and PS2 did. No one back then was crying because they couldn't play VF on the PS.

I would be happy to see a situation where there was 50% exclusives vs multiplat on both consoles.
I would love to see a situation where the Playstation was geared towards JRPGs, Action Adventure and Superhero games, while the Xbox was heavy on WRPGs, shooters and Car games.

Now, if that's what you call a troll, then I guess it's no big deal.
 
In Cold Blood

In Cold Blood

Banned
lh032 said:
Bluepoint, Naughty Dog, Insomniac, GG makes most games exclusive for Sony before they are bought.

dont try to spin here.
Click to expand...
Just because Sony bought studios that they had done prior buisness with (by paying them money for that exclusive business, don't forget that) doesn't mean the aquisition is any different to MS buying a company like Ninja Theory where they didn't.

Using your logic, if MS goes to Rockstar and pays them 5 billion to make GTA6 exclusive, and then pays them some more billions to make another game exclusive to Xbox, if they then buy Rockstar in a few years after that, then it's a good aquisition where MS bought a company they have a close relationship with?
No, it makes no difference. The bottom line here is that money is what makes the relationship. MS or Sony paying a company to make exclusive content prior to the purchase, doesn't make the aquisition any different.
You want to know the real reason Sony bought those studios? First, they wanted more control and the entire profit from those studios work on their console. Second, they bought them so another company couldn't. Insomniac had worked with Xbox exclusively with Sunset, so they were happy to work for who had the right $$.
Money underpins every single thing that goes on in gaming. There is no better aquisition than another, and both Sony and MS are buying who they are because they believe it will push their product and profits forward.
 
E

El Pistolero

Banned
In Cold Blood said:
As it should be.
I'm glad MS had the balls to do what they needed to, and I hope after 10 years if COD is still massive, they make that exclusive as well.
The more competition between MS and Sony, the better for everyone, and the more exclusives on each console, the better.
Click to expand...

Yes, and they should buy Ubi, Larian, CDPR, SEGA and Square, as to make their titles exclusives...because competition! What an idiotic, meaningless statement. In a functionning competitive market, MS would have abondonned by now. They survive by subsidizing and outrageously outspending.
 
N

Nubulax

Member
In Cold Blood said:
Here's a reality check. When MS purchases other studios and publishers, they then become MS first party studios.
Are you saying Bluepoint, Naughty Dog, Insomniac, GG etc arnt Sony first party?
Oh that's right, because Sony bought them it's ok, but not MS.

You do know Sony was also bidding to buy Zenimax yeah? You do know that Sony was also in the hunt for WB games when they were looking to sell?
You think Sony wouldn't have made them exclusive? Of course they would.
The only difference is MS can pay more than Sony. That's it.

If Sony had of bought Zenimax, the front page on GAF would be full of posts about how it was a power move, and a Sony stroke of genius. It is all over for Xbox, they should become their party ( I mean, we still have threads saying that now.)

Reality is a bitch, and in this time, MS has invested more into gaming than Sony has.
Maybe Sony should have used more of those PlayStation profits to buy and build more studios for all those years, instead of using it to prop up their other failing business units?
Click to expand...
"invest more into gaming than sony has" ya only gave the xbox division a small tiny loan of... oh ya.. about the size of ALL OF SONY of 80 BILLION DOLLARs. Xbox on its own would have been buried in the dirt years ago after failing for 15+ years

They didnt create Halo, they bought it, they didnt create Gears, they bought it, they didnt create minecraft they bought it. 2/3 of the Halo, Gears, Forza trifecta they didnt even make
 
Last edited:
E

El Pistolero

Banned
In Cold Blood said:
Just because Sony bought studios that they had done prior buisness with (by paying them money for that exclusive business, don't forget that) doesn't mean the aquisition is any different to MS buying a company like Ninja Theory where they didn't.

Using your logic, if MS goes to Rockstar and pays them 5 billion to make GTA6 exclusive, and then pays them some more billions to make another game exclusive to Xbox, if they then buy Rockstar in a few years after that, then it's a good aquisition where MS bought a company they have a close relationship with?
No, it makes no difference. The bottom line here is that money is what makes the relationship. MS or Sony paying a company to make exclusive content prior to the purchase, doesn't make the aquisition any different.
You want to know the real reason Sony bought those studios? First, they wanted more control and the entire profit from those studios work on their console. Second, they bought them so another company couldn't. Insomniac had worked with Xbox exclusively with Sunset, so they were happy to work for who had the right $$.
Money underpins every single thing that goes on in gaming. There is no better aquisition than another, and both Sony and MS are buying who they are because they believe it will push their product and profits forward.
Click to expand...

No. One of the two players is banking on creating new IPs to succeed; The other one is counting on depriving its rival of 3rd Party titles. Simple, basic common sense, and yet, the statement is deemed controversial by some!
 
In Cold Blood

In Cold Blood

Banned
El Pistolero said:
Yes, and they should buy Ubi, Larian, CDPR, SEGA and Square, as to make their titles exclusives...because competition! What an idiotic, meaningless statement. In a functionning competitive market, MS would have abondonned by now. They survive by subsidizing and outrageously outspending.
Click to expand...
You honestly think MS in any world is going to buy Ubi, Lariat, CDPR, Sega and Square? Honestly?
No one wants to buy Ubi. They are too top heavy. They have 20,000 employees to feed, and fuck all good games in the pipeline.
MS and Sony just don't buy every company they see. As I said, money and profit dictates all. Why would MS buy Ubi with those overheads? Ubi has more employees than ABK, Zenimax and all of Xbox Game Studios combined. We saw with Embracer what happens when you have too many employees for the output.

The cries of consolidation are always overhyped. Both Sony and MS have needs and wants for what they acquire. MS has two excellent car franchises in Forza Horizon and Forza Motorsport. They really dont want another car game under their first party, as there is no benefit in having too many of those. Sony also has GT.
When Codemasters came up, neither MS nor Sony wanted to buy them. If it was just about buying everyone, surely MS would have grabbed them? Well, they didn't as they don't have a need.
MS already has a ton of WRPGs, and if ABK goes through then they would have Blizzard, Bethesda, Obsidian, InXile etc who do them. Why would they buy Larian?

Just look at all the recent aquisitions and ask why MS didn't buy them all.
Why didn't MS buy 4A Games? They makes awesome shooters. Metro rocks. Maybe they think they have enough shooters now?

You see, MS can't and won't buy everyone. It's not feasible nor good buisness.
MS will continue to acquire until they have what they think they need to supply Gamepass and Xbox with the exclusive content required to make it what they want it to be.

Moving forward, everything MS buys will be strategically important. They might buy studios like Asobo, Certain Affinity, CD etc where they rely on them to develop some of their first party games.
Then, I think they will pick a few more studios that will offer the diversity they require for GP and Xbox. This would mean some Japanese ones, and maybe a few good IPs that fit a need, and maybe some more mobile ones.
 
In Cold Blood

In Cold Blood

Banned
El Pistolero said:
No. One of the two players is banking on creating new IPs to succeed; The other one is counting on depriving its rival of 3rd Party titles. Simple, basic common sense, and yet, the statement is deemed controversial by some!
Click to expand...
Huh? Avowed is a new IP. Starfield is a new IP. Redfall was a new IP. Clockwork Revolution, South of Midnight, Indiana Jones, Contraband, Sea Of Thieves, Grounded, Pentament, Hi Fi Rush and Everwild are new IPs.
Fable, Forza MS, Gears 6, Forza Horizon 6, State of Decay 3, Perfect Dark and Halo are all long time MS IPs.

So you will miss out on Hellblade 2, The Outer Worlds 2, Elder Scrolls 5 and Fallout 5?
I mean, I played Spiderman on Xbox before Sony bought the rights.
You are going to miss out on one existing IP in 2024(Hellblade 2), one in 2025 (TOW2), one in 2026 (TES) and one maybe one 2030 (Fallout 5).
Is that really a big deal? Seriously?
 
Last edited:
E

El Pistolero

Banned
In Cold Blood said:
You honestly think MS in any world is going to buy Ubi, Lariat, CDPR, Sega and Square? Honestly?
No one wants to buy Ubi. They are too top heavy. They have 20,000 employees to feed, and fuck all good games in the pipeline.
MS and Sony just don't buy every company they see. As I said, money and profit dictates all. Why would MS buy Ubi with those overheads? Ubi has more employees than ABK, Zenimax and all of Xbox Game Studios combined. We saw with Embracer what happens when you have too many employees for the output.

The cries of consolidation are always overhyped. Both Sony and MS have needs and wants for what they acquire. MS has two excellent car franchises in Forza Horizon and Forza Motorsport. They really dont want another car game under their first party, as there is no benefit in having too many of those. Sony also has GT.
When Codemasters came up, neither MS nor Sony wanted to buy them. If it was just about buying everyone, surely MS would have grabbed them? Well, they didn't as they don't have a need.
MS already has a ton of WRPGs, and if ABK goes through then they would have Blizzard, Bethesda, Obsidian, InXile etc who do them. Why would they buy Larian?

Just look at all the recent aquisitions and ask why MS didn't buy them all.
Why didn't MS buy 4A Games? They makes awesome shooters. Metro rocks. Maybe they think they have enough shooters now?

You see, MS can't and won't buy everyone. It's not feasible nor good buisness.
MS will continue to acquire until they have what they think they need to supply Gamepass and Xbox with the exclusive content required to make it what they want it to be.

Moving forward, everything MS buys will be strategically important. They might buy studios like Asobo, Certain Affinity, CD etc where they rely on them to develop some of their first party games.
Then, I think they will pick a few more studios that will offer the diversity they require for GP and Xbox. This would mean some Japanese ones, and maybe a few good IPs that fit a need, and maybe some more mobile ones.
Click to expand...

They can not do it, not because they do not want to, but even the useless EU would oppose any other big acquisition. Make no mistake, if MS could buy EA and Take Two, they would. MS is a monopoly seeking entity, which tends to abondon markets that escape its grip. They are just not good when it comes to B2C.
Still, I expect them to buy a Sega sized publisher.
MS has proven to be unable to create IPs that sell...They are inferior to both Nintendo and Sony when it comes to nurturing their brand, marketing it, and making games for it. Their solution: Buy everything up to force players to transition.
 
In Cold Blood

In Cold Blood

Banned
El Pistolero said:
They can not do it, not because they do not want to, but even the useless EU would oppose any other big acquisition. Make no mistake, if MS could buy EA and Take Two, they would. MS is a monopoly seeking entity, which tends to abondon markets that escape its grip. They are just not good when it comes to B2C.
Still, I expect them to buy a Sega sized publisher.
MS has proven to be unable to create IPs that sell...They are inferior to both Nintendo and Sony when it comes to nurturing their brand, marketing it, and making games for it. Their solution: Buy everything up to force players to transition.
Click to expand...
Nah, it also has to be a cost benefit to it.
There is a case of having too much content, and it not helping you.
This year there has been, and will be, a number of excellent games released on Xbox Hogwarts, Starfield, HiFi Rush, Diablo 4, COD WM3, Forza MS, Lies of P, Resident Evil etc, and one of the complaints by Xbox gamers I know is that there is too many good games to play, and not enough time to play them.
If MS puts too much content into GP then they run the risk of not getting the engagement they want for them.
We all only have so much time to play, and we all have our game preferences. Already with the games being released, and the Xbox exclusives like Starfield and Forza coming up, I just can't see myself getting to other games that I also want to play.

MS know this. They would have data and analytics for everything. If they see a game they spent X on getting, but it was only getting Y amount of people playing the game, they won't want many more games like X for awhile.
This is why MS isn't just going to buy everything. They have enough shooters to supply the Shooter players on Xbox. Doom, Halo, Wolfenstien, Gears, COD, any more and they would just start to cannibalise each other. Each game would get less engagement time from each gamer. We are limited by the time we have.

MS knowing this will then want to bring more content from other genres that people who like those games will go to Xbox to play.
Currently Xbox doesn't cater to the Japanese type gamer very well. This is something they will invest in, so expect a few Japanese aquisitions like Platinum, Sega or Capcom.

The only other area MS doesn't have alot of is the third person adventure game. They could make purchases of say IO, Edios and Asobo to get these types of games.

The cries of MS buying everything for their exclusives is so overhyped.

The bit where you shitposted about MS not being as good as Sony or Nintendo, I won't reply to. I learnt my lesson Mods.
 
In Cold Blood

In Cold Blood

Banned
dotnotbot said:
Embracer's problem is money, meanwhile Microsoft can keep throwing money at problems like they always do.
Click to expand...
Sure, but you don't make the money MS does, by having business units that lose money like Embracer did. MS would never buy Embracer or Ubi. They arnt worth the cost to buy, nor the ongoing costs to keep them running.
 
drganon

drganon

Member
In Cold Blood said:
Nah, it also has to be a cost benefit to it.
There is a case of having too much content, and it not helping you.
This year there has been, and will be, a number of excellent games released on Xbox Hogwarts, Starfield, HiFi Rush, Diablo 4, COD WM3, Forza MS, Lies of P, Resident Evil etc, and one of the complaints by Xbox gamers I know is that there is too many good games to play, and not enough time to play them.
If MS puts too much content into GP then they run the risk of not getting the engagement they want for them.
We all only have so much time to play, and we all have our game preferences. Already with the games being released, and the Xbox exclusives like Starfield and Forza coming up, I just can't see myself getting to other games that I also want to play.

MS know this. They would have data and analytics for everything. If they see a game they spent X on getting, but it was only getting Y amount of people playing the game, they won't want many more games like X for awhile.
This is why MS isn't just going to buy everything. They have enough shooters to supply the Shooter players on Xbox. Doom, Halo, Wolfenstien, Gears, COD, any more and they would just start to cannibalise each other. Each game would get less engagement time from each gamer. We are limited by the time we have.

MS knowing this will then want to bring more content from other genres that people who like those games will go to Xbox to play.
Currently Xbox doesn't cater to the Japanese type gamer very well. This is something they will invest in, so expect a few Japanese aquisitions like Platinum, Sega or Capcom.

The only other area MS doesn't have alot of is the third person adventure game. They could make purchases of say IO, Edios and Asobo to get these types of games.

The cries of MS buying everything for their exclusives is so overhyped.

The bit where you shitposted about MS not being as good as Sony or Nintendo, I won't reply to. I learnt my lesson Mods.
Click to expand...
suck-wwe.gif
 
E

El Pistolero

Banned
So declaring the obvious, that MS has proven incapable of making its consoles, Xbox brand, marketing and games line-ups as performing as Sony's and Nintendo's...is shitposting? Well, I'll be damned. 🤷‍♂️
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Elder Scrolls 6 Teaser Is Now 6 Years Old — and Even Todd Howard Paused to Say, ‘Oh Wow That Has Been a While’
40
3K
SHA replied
The Elder Scrolls VI seems to be taking place in Hammerfell, as Bethesda employee concepts leak
Rumor 2
61
4K
Pagusas replied
  • Locked
Phil Spencer says they haven't decided if TESVI will be a console exclusive "We look at it on a case by case"
Game Dev
20
2K
Robb replied
Elder Scrolls 6 revealed early due to fans’ “pitchforks and torches”
News Game Dev 2
70
8K
Torrent of Pork replied
Rumor: Elder Scrolls 6 is coming out in 2026, Microsoft lawyer says
Rumor 2
58
5K
hyperbertha replied
Top Bottom