• 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.

Starfield Was Planned For PS5 Prior To Microsoft's ZeniMax Acquisition, FTC Says

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Phill bought Bethesda after hearing the news of exclusive deal between Bethesda and Sony.

Phill is real life Bruce Wayne confirmed


ezgif-1-33132941a1iocq2.gif
 

Kokoloko85

Member
Mass Effect was made by BioWare and published by Microsoft in 2007.

Quantum Break was published by Microsoft and they own the IP.

How does it make sense to you to compare those to Deathloop, Ghostwire and the attempt at Starfield, all games and IP owned and published by Bethesda.

Im technically wrong, but Published or not, they are kinda 3rd party exclusives.
Xbox plastered alot of published by Xbox and Xbox studios even when they don’t own the IP or the team. Like Sunset Overdrive or Dead Rising, Ryse. And didnt have a 1st party team help sometimes.

I’d still class Bloodborne and DeathStranding as 3rd party exclusives even though they were published by Sony and had Guerilla and Japan Studios actually helping development. Id still class them as 3rd party exclusives, like Ronin. Its not the same as Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch or Santa Monica making a game for PS. And not quite the same as Persona 5 or FF7 etc.

Anyway, if you wanna use the published as a reason then what about exclusives like Titanfall and Ark 2? They aren’t published by MS and are 3rd party exclusives. Nintendo, Playstation and Xbox all have 3rd party exclusives. Its been that way for decades.
Xbox is the only one spending billions and billions buying publishers and taking there entire library, a library of games that has fans from all over And taking it away from other platforms.
 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Writes a lot, says very little
Yeah, that's some commitment from MS.

Exactly. First deathloop, then ghostwriter, then starfield for a minimum year exclusivity deal.

Sony was going harder this gen than they did with the ps4 gen even. Microsoft literally decided we can't let this happen and we can't buy these exclusives as it doesn't look to be viable on paper for the cost...so we will just buy them.

They literally did reach fuck it with zenimax. Sony went too hard on Bethesda games exclusivity and with the history between Bethesda and Microsoft I guess they could sign it off. Plus the zenimax owner said he wanted to sell to MS before he passes away.

lol yea doubt.

I think MS bought Zenimax for what they offer in general to fill out those gaps, on top of already having a history with Bethesda. Both Sony and MS have had timed deals in the past, I don't see any of those past deal causing either to spend BILLIONS to buy a publisher lol That sounds fucking odd and simply doesn't really fit any logic tbh

So I just don't see them buying a publisher based on Death Loop and Ghostwire lol A game so fucking forgettable, you misspelled its name yourself

giphy.gif


63f99f8c0d9f8f025ad1f7b3b5a8189a.jpg
 

Moneal

Member
This is amazing and exactly the right analogy.

People have always asked for MS to secure exclusives with companies they have a history with, just like Sony do with square.

Microsoft just committed to Bethesda Zenimax like you said.

I fully expect Sony to buy square at some point and that makes sense.

No one said MS should secure exclusives. They wanted them to create new exclusives, not take games that have been multiplatform and turn them exclusive.
 

DenchDeckard

Moderated wildly
lol yea doubt.

I think MS bought Zenimax for what they offer in general to fill out those gaps, on top of already having a history with Bethesda. Both Sony and MS have had timed deals in the past, I don't see any of those past deal causing either to spend BILLIONS to buy a publisher lol That sounds fucking odd and simply doesn't really fit any logic tbh

So I just don't see them buying a publisher based on Death Loop and Ghostwire lol A game so fucking forgettable, you misspelled its name yourself

giphy.gif


63f99f8c0d9f8f025ad1f7b3b5a8189a.jpg

It was my phones auto spell :D I noticed it and couldn't be assed changing it...that's how forgettable that game was.

i do think youre completely wrong on Bethesda though. As per the court case, and comments from HeisenbergFX4 HeisenbergFX4 who I trust is that Bethesda/Zenimax were shopping themselves around as third party was showing it's strain. They wanted security. MS just ponied up the most.

Phil pretty much confirmed that Sony was after Starfield which completely lines up with what many have heard in the industry and MS just thought fuck it. It was the final straw that made them put a ring on it.
 
Last edited:

SenkiDala

Member
Why is it more damaging that Bethesda games are skipping PlayStation vs pretty much all AAA Final Fantasy titles skipping Xbox?

That’s three in 4 years, if you’re counting.



In the same vein, some future Bethesda games will come to PlayStation. We’ve had releases post purchase, and you can be sure Quake 2 Remaster will be multiplatform.




Same way we’ve seen the damage of timed exclusivity. Both sides are now employing aggressive tactics in competing, but you’re solely focused on pulling one side back.
The FTC and CMA’s job isn’t to fret over Indiana Jones or Starfield being exclusive to Xbox. Their role in this case is to scrutinize the planned merger and determine if that could lead to a monopoly.

I’m not sure what ‘facts’ you say the FTC is putting forward, but they certainly aren’t doing a great job of establishing their case in court at the moment.





The never said COD would be exclusive. Disappointing that you need to lie. Especially when that would have been brought up in court

When you offer a legally binding agreement, the sensible thing to do would be to make it time bound, since it wouldn’t make any sense to sign a contract for perpetuity. They initially offered three years from 2025 which would ensure COD remained on PlayStation until 2028 at the earliest. Then changed to 10 years - a truly long time in gaming - to make the remedy more binding. Not sure why you’re characterizing the offer progression that way, but it does you a disservice.




Sony already tried to bid for Leyou in 2020, and we’ve been seeing threads of their acquisition warchest for years now. So I’m not sure it makes sense to characterize their own buying spree as a ‘fightback’. They’ve largely targeted GaaS providers in recent years to fill a hole in their lineup.
I'm not gonna bother with multi quote shit, but ok let's answer, I'll try to be fast but I'm not good at that.

I'm not lying, yes they didn't say "it'll be exclusive" but they were remaining deliberately vague. Like they did back then with Rise of the Tomb Raider "is it timed or fully exclusive ?", "we didn't buy this exclusive to see it being released on other platforms".

And I'm not pulling one side back. Those companies are here to make money and they're not any gamer's friend, that why fanboyism is dumb.

What I meant is that all this "good guy Phil" shit was ridiculous from the beginning, MS is the subject of my post, that's why I'm focusing on them. And yes timed exclusivity is shit but at the end less "damaging" than full exclusivity. For exemple I don't like the fact that FFVIIR is fully exclusive to Sony consoles (I'm just talking about consoles, I know it's on PC...). Xbox players get Crisis Core but not FFVIIR? Wtf...

I was also against the purchase of Bungie by Sony, even though for now they keep releasing all the content they're making on every platform, including the reboot of Marathon.

They're both fighting with what they have. MS have an almost unlimited wallet, and Sony has very deep / and good relationships with the biggest publishers in the word + they're leader in their field so they can get timed/full exclusives quite easily.

I hate Jim Ryan and most of what he said about gaming, like retro games are useless and nobody wanna play them, for exemple. But on the other side, all those people trying to make Spencer look like a good buddy, is sooo dumb it makes me mad.

The moment I'll be for big acquisitions like Bethesda, Bungie, etc, will be if the ABK deal happens. Then I'll think "fuck that, Sony go ahead and buy Square Enix and MS let's not stop there why not getting SEGA ? The first Xbox was like a Dreamcast 1.5 anyways".
 
Last edited:

Ozriel

M$FT
Im technically wrong, but Published or not, they are kinda 3rd party exclusives.
Xbox plastered alot of published by Xbox and Xbox studios even when they don’t own the IP or the team. Like Sunset Overdrive or Dead Rising, Ryse.

I’d still class Bloodborne and DeathStranding as 3rd party exclusives even though they were published by Sony and had Guerilla and Japan Studios actually helping development. Id still class them as 3rd party exclusives, like Ronin. Its not the same as Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch or Santa Monica making a game for PS.

But Nobody is ever going to accuse Xbox of taking Sunset Overdrive and Mass Effect from PlayStation. Same way nobody is going to accuse Sony of taking away Bloodborne from Xbox.

Anyway, if you wanna use the published as a reason then what about exclusives like Titanfall and Ark 2? They aren’t published by MS and are 3rd party exclusives. Nintendo, Playstation and Xbox all have 3rd party exclusives. Its been that way for decades.
Xbox is the only one spending billions and billions buying publishers and taking there entire library, a library of games that has fans from all over And taking it away from other platforms.

And this is the problem with this argument.

You sit there with a straight face and equate deals for AAA Final Fantasy games to stuff like Ark 2, The Medium etc because you’re happy to ignore scale and scope for deals for 3rd party exclusives, then turn around and complain about scale and scope when it turns to acquisitions.

Seems to me that every party is competing aggressively using their unique advantages to secure exclusive content.
 

Kokoloko85

Member
But Nobody is ever going to accuse Xbox of taking Sunset Overdrive and Mass Effect from PlayStation. Same way nobody is going to accuse Sony of taking away Bloodborne from Xbox.



And this is the problem with this argument.

You sit there with a straight face and equate deals for AAA Final Fantasy games to stuff like Ark 2, The Medium etc because you’re happy to ignore scale and scope for deals for 3rd party exclusives, then turn around and complain about scale and scope when it turns to acquisitions.

Seems to me that every party is competing aggressively using their unique advantages to secure exclusive content.
Ark sold like 10 million, its not a small game, Titanfall was pretty hyped too. Plus there are other games. Its not like PS hasn’t lost alot of IP’s that use to be exclusive to them.
Anyway, If you think thats a cool reason to buy out an entire huge publisher and there library and take them off other platforms forever then ok
 

salva

Member
Phill bought Bethesda after hearing the news of exclusive deal between Bethesda and Sony.

Phill is real life Bruce Wayne confirmed

Can someone redo that video and replace Ben Affleck's face with Phil Spencer and then Henry Cavil and the Flash guy with Jim Ryans. 🤞
 

Corndog

Banned
Exactly, PS bought Studios that they had a long history with, and have very clearly invested in their own. MS are doing the DCU trying to copy Marvel, they want success NOW so they just keep flinging money around instead if carefully building
Sony has a long history with bungie?
 

Corndog

Banned
Sony has supported Bungie's vision for Destiny for 10 years now. Hell, they even closed the PlayStation 4 unveiling event in 2013 with Destiny.
So sony supported a multi platform developer that never made them a single exclusive game? How many exclusive games did bungie make while OWNED by Microsoft?
 

Corndog

Banned
Ark sold like 10 million, its not a small game, Titanfall was pretty hyped too. Plus there are other games. Its not like PS hasn’t lost alot of IP’s that use to be exclusive to them.
Anyway, If you think thats a cool reason to buy out an entire huge publisher and there library and take them off other platforms forever then ok
Maybe Sony shouldn’t have been so aggressive in buying exclusives.
 

Perrott

Member
MICROSOFT LITERALLY OWNED BUNGIE for a decade... and like... Sony did some PR for 2 games 🙃

Bethesda and its studios/IPs had multiple games that were only on Xbox and PC
Microsoft owned Bungie, yes, and then Bungie wanted and managed to get away from that relationship, one that would've had them forever work on Halo, most likely.

Imagine if Naughty Dog as a studio buys back their independency somehow, I don't think that when it comes to discussing the status of their relationship with Sony from that point forwards the fact that they were once a first-party studio of them would matter at all.

Also, apart from Morrowind (which wouldn't have been possible on PS2 hardware anyway), there wasn't a single notable Bethesda game post-2000 to have skipped PlayStation. The PS3 wasn't even out when Oblivion came out, so of course that was going to be an exclusive for the 360 for a while, deal or not, until the PS3 port was eventually released a year later.
 
Last edited:

Perrott

Member
So sony supported a multi platform developer that never made them a single exclusive game? How many exclusive games did bungie make while OWNED by Microsoft?
You think that the amount of times you had sex with your ex-wife over the years are worth anything if at the end of the day she ends up filing for a divorce?
 

01011001

Banned
Microsoft owned Bungie, yes, and then Bungie wanted and managed to get away from that relationship, one that would've had them forever work on Halo, most likely.

Imagine if Naughty Dog as a studio buys back their independency somehow, I don't think that when it comes to discussing the status of their relationship with Sony from that point forwards the fact that they were once a first-party studio of them would matter at all.

Also, apart from Morrowind (which wouldn't have been possible on PS2 hardware anyway), there wasn't a single notable Bethesda game post-2000 to have skipped PlayStation. The PS3 wasn't even out when Oblivion came out, so of course that was going to be an exclusive for the 360 for a while, deal or not, until the PS3 port was eventually released a year later.

Morrowind, Doom 3, Prey, Pirates of the Caribbean, Call of Cthulhu... that's more Xbox/PC exclusives than multiplat games Bungie has on PlayStation...
 
Last edited:

Corndog

Banned
You think that the amount of times you had sex with your ex-wife over the years are worth anything if at the end of the day she ends up filing for a divorce?
Bungie never quit making games for Xbox. So I guess that ex wife wasn’t quite an ex.
 

John Wick

Member
Maybe Sony shouldn’t have been so aggressive in buying exclusives.
It's got nothing to do with Sony buying up timed exclusives at all. You fell for that flat out lie? MS could out buy Sony easily.
MS are being MS which is to stifle competition and buy their way to success. Eliminate competition is their Modus operandi.
That's why companies like MS need to be investigated thoroughly.
 
It's got nothing to do with Sony buying up timed exclusives at all. You fell for that flat out lie? MS could out buy Sony easily.
MS are being MS which is to stifle competition and buy their way to success. Eliminate competition is their Modus operandi.
That's why companies like MS need to be investigated thoroughly.

It's amazing this needs to be repeated so many times in this thread. Lol, jesus christ it's quite amazing to see.
 

Chukhopops

Member
It's got nothing to do with Sony buying up timed exclusives at all. You fell for that flat out lie? MS could out buy Sony easily.
MS are being MS which is to stifle competition and buy their way to success. Eliminate competition is their Modus operandi.
That's why companies like MS need to be investigated thoroughly.
That’s funny coming from someone who keeps cheering for Sony to buy FROM, Square Enix and even Capcom.

Some people have a consistent position against consolidation and I respect that. In your case it seems to be only bad when one company does it and that’s just hypocritical.
 

John Wick

Member
That’s funny coming from someone who keeps cheering for Sony to buy FROM, Square Enix and even Capcom.

Some people have a consistent position against consolidation and I respect that. In your case it seems to be only bad when one company does it and that’s just hypocritical.
Oh I'm sorry are MS only allowed to buy massive publishers/devs? It wasn't Sony who bought Bethesda and are now trying to buy ABK? If MS left 3rd party publishers alone then we wouldn't want Sony to counter those moves with their own purchases. Pottle Kettle Black in your case.
 

Chukhopops

Member
Oh I'm sorry are MS only allowed to buy massive publishers/devs? It wasn't Sony who bought Bethesda and are now trying to buy ABK? If MS left 3rd party publishers alone then we wouldn't want Sony to counter those moves with their own purchases. Pottle Kettle Black in your case.
I’m saying it’s hypocritical to cheer for one company’s acquisitions while seeing the other’s as damaging for the competition. Like I said, some people are consistent in their perception of consolidation, some are not.

I don’t remember saying it’s bad that Sony acquires publishers or developers. In fact I think consolidation is inevitable simply because platform holders have an interest in controlling the entire vertical from development to distribution.
 

John Wick

Member
I’m saying it’s hypocritical to cheer for one company’s acquisitions while seeing the other’s as damaging for the competition. Like I said, some people are consistent in their perception of consolidation, some are not.

I don’t remember saying it’s bad that Sony acquires publishers or developers. In fact I think consolidation is inevitable simply because platform holders have an interest in controlling the entire vertical from development to distribution.
Of course you don't think it's bad if Sony aquires publishers because you know full well Sony can't compete financially with MS. MS started this because they wanted to buy their way to success rather than innovate and earn it.
 
Timed exclusives are bad, but they're nowhere near as bad as exclusives (when it wasn't really your exclusives before), which is what Microsoft is essentially doing when they spend 7.5 billion and 70 billion on companies. They're trying to win their way to the top because they have way more money than anyone else. They're removing certain audiences and forcing that audience to buy their Game Pass or console when they shouldn't have to due to them having those previous titles.

Microsoft has proved that it can't compete with Sony or Nintendo because they don't release that many decent first-party titles. Spending 77 billion on both Bethesda and Activision is their quick way of competing. If anyone believes that they won't eventually make those games all exclusive is living in denial. And if they do put some of those titles on other platforms, you best believe they'll make Sony and Nintendo sign contracts with hidden agendas. In other words, I don't believe Microsoft.

Microsoft has lied before and they'll most likely lie again. This 70 billion merger is not a good idea.
 
Last edited:

Chukhopops

Member
Of course you don't think it's bad if Sony aquires publishers because you know full well Sony can't compete financially with MS. MS started this because they wanted to buy their way to success rather than innovate and earn it.
How is a Capcom acquisition (market cap 8.5bn) or a Square acquisition (market cap 5.6bn) a good, desirable thing while a Bethesda acquisition (7.5bn) is bad?

Where is the difference exactly since you seem to have an issue with one while you cheer for the other?
 

Ozriel

M$FT
Oh I'm sorry are MS only allowed to buy massive publishers/devs? It wasn't Sony who bought Bethesda and are now trying to buy ABK? If MS left 3rd party publishers alone then we wouldn't want Sony to counter those moves with their own purchases. Pottle Kettle Black in your case.

You forgot when Sony was trying to buy Leyou? Months before the Bethesda acquisition.

A publisher is really a collection of developers, so I’m not sure if fundamentally there’s a major difference between buying Bethesda vs (Haven + Bungie + Bluepoint + Housemarque + Firewalk + FireSprite + Savage Game Studios + Nixxes)


But we already know for you it’s not really about ‘consolidation’, but which party does the consolidation.
 

MarkMe2525

Gold Member
Wait wait wait but isnt this the guy who said high quality single player games wont help xbox sell more....then why make them exclusive you coke snorting machine
Well that wasn't what was said. “It’s just not true that if we go off and build great games then all of a sudden you’re going to see console share shift in some dramatic way."
 

John Wick

Member
You forgot when Sony was trying to buy Leyou? Months before the Bethesda acquisition.

A publisher is really a collection of developers, so I’m not sure if fundamentally there’s a major difference between buying Bethesda vs (Haven + Bungie + Bluepoint + Housemarque + Firewalk + FireSprite + Savage Game Studios + Nixxes)


But we already know for you it’s not really about ‘consolidation’, but which party does the consolidation.
There were multiple buyers for Leyou and I wouldn't be surprised if MS didn't have a look either. But are you seriously trying to compare Leyou to Bethesda and ABK? World of difference in quality, devs and most importantly IP.
Of course to certain plastic box owners a collection of mainly small and not very well known separate devs is the same as a massive publisher with great and well known IP and experience etc.
Oh so now because PS players want Sony to buy some big publisher in return it's not about consolidation but about who is doing it eh?
It wasn't like that when you were cheering 12 tera, power of the cloud and then MS war chest?
 

John Wick

Member
How is a Capcom acquisition (market cap 8.5bn) or a Square acquisition (market cap 5.6bn) a good, desirable thing while a Bethesda acquisition (7.5bn) is bad?

Where is the difference exactly since you seem to have an issue with one while you cheer for the other?
So when did the acquisition lists start? After Bethesda. Hardly anyone was cheering any publisher purchases before that. Same way how some of the shills seem to forget how when it suited them MS didn't want to entertain crossplay.
So if it's good for the goose then it's good for the gander.
 

Osaka_Boss

Member
People forget How Microsoft has already bought Full exclusivities in the past. They literally bought ALL Konami and Namco release lineups for the ps3/360. Namco had to make false sequels so as to go around these deals and release on PS3 such as Ridge Racer 6 becoming Ridge Racer 7 on PS3. Some even remained exclusive, like Ace Combat 6. Why do people forget this?


And ofc, Microsoft plays the victim when in reality they could've outbid every deal made by Sony, like they did to Tomb Raider. It looks like they were Just trying to set up a scenario to justify their moves to possible regulatory trials. People like to inject sentiments to faceless companies, when, in reality, It is ALL corporate chess. Just like leaving games on sonys console so as to use It as argument after they on their own decided to keep them. Like wtf
 
Top Bottom