Iced Arcade
Member
H i l a r i o u s
-
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.
[Windows Central] Microsoft and Xbox announced 'Marvel's Blade' at The Game Awards — but could it also be coming to PlayStation?
- Thread starter 3liteDragon
- Start date
- Platform
ChorizoPicozo
Member
well, that's the point:
The lack of clarity and consistency in their messaging.
I will remind you of the masterclass in buffoonery from Phil Spencer in that Xcast damage control interview
He said something about reviewing internal processes, dev assistance and bringing Zenimax and Xbox in the same page. About how being FIRST PARTY HAS DIFFERENT EXPECTATIONS.
this reveal just re-confirms how xbox is full of clowns executives. And as Rand said, the conversation around this game is going to be about it's exclusivity.
The more time it passes the more damage this uncertainty is going to produce to the game's discourse itself.
the other thing is that this game is going to be another Fable, Project Dark, State of decay, Hellblade 2, etcetera....Revealed way too early. In other words; we are going to have the same situation of "wait for next year".
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
He also posted about sony's imminent acquisitions of Bandai and CDPR.
Not the most reliable tool in the shed.
Last edited:
Topher
Identifies as young
Post it here
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Mozzarella
Member
Arkane is dead to me, i can tolerate a failure due to mistake, but what i have been seeing from this studio for the past 5 years is nothing that gives hope, you could assume that one bad game is because of mistake but everything they have shown and they will show is proving to me that this developer has lost the plot.
Blade will probably be the game that will break them, either way unless it reviews really really good and the word of mouth is very positive im avoiding it.
Blade will probably be the game that will break them, either way unless it reviews really really good and the word of mouth is very positive im avoiding it.
Topher
Identifies as young
Eh....fair enough, I guess. He seemed to be drawing conclusions from "talks" happening between Sony and others. Either way, those were just a couple of months ago. Time will tell if he is full of shit or not.
ChorizoPicozo
Member
This is why the messaging is problematic.
One of those dudes thought this was going to be a Play Station exclusive (how many "normies" are going to think the same way) also, this Blade game is going to be talked along side the Spider-Man, Wolverine games. (Just like the main dude did). So, the expectations naturally are going to be for this game to release on Play Station too (From the "normies"/ outside the gaming bubble). And again, MS is going to continue with their PR shitstorm around their games.
Someone with that history I doubt is even what they say they are (exSonydev)
PD.LOL. Twitter is a clown factory bigger than a circus
Not that it clarifies anything about whether the game is multiplatform or not, but look like are emerging reactions and tweets like this reaffirming the relationship of the announcement with XBOX with objective of at least help mitigate reactions (among user communities and even, embarrassingly, even media) that believe or conceive the announcement as if it were a PS5 exclusive
Either because of a legal strategy against the FTC, or because it is multiplatform but they want to wait for the announcement for a better time, or because Marvel prohibits the announcement of exclusivity, or because it has not been decided yet.... In none of those cases do these prevent MS to proclaim the relationship of the Blade proyect with Xbox. That is surely why Aaron G. is being more active in this regard after seeing reactions
(Axios) Interview with a Disney boss where he may be shedding some light on the discussion about Blade's multipath or not. According to him, it seems that Bethesda (ergo MS) has the last word.
Regarding the conversion of Indiana Jones to an Xbox exclusive... that the market of Xbox users (Xbox console+PC+cloud) Is OK from a financial point of view.
PS.There are more about other games in the interview
Regarding the conversion of Indiana Jones to an Xbox exclusive... that the market of Xbox users (Xbox console+PC+cloud) Is OK from a financial point of view.
PS.There are more about other games in the interview
Astray
Member
And Bethesda refuses to comment.
What an amazing marketing mind that thought this confusing messaging was better than just revealing what platforms it's coming to during the 100m viewed TGA.
Greenberg should be teaching courses at Harvard.
FTC legal strategie (the same reason why ABK games are not in Gamepass) can be de more plausible at this point in the movie for a game years away Of his launch.
Last edited:
Astray
Member
FTC can't use any new evidence in this appeal. Maybe if they win it and proceed to their administrative court, but that's a long shot.
Even if new evidence is usable, Microsoft can still use their new deal with Sony to indicate that they are now on board with the deal.
The FTC is not why we're not finding this out yet.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Not that it clarifies anything about whether the game is multiplatform or not, but look like are emerging reactions and tweets like this reaffirming the relationship of the announcement with XBOX with objective of at least help mitigate reactions (among user communities and even, embarrassingly, even media) that believe or conceive the announcement as if it were a PS5 exclusive
Either because of a legal strategy against the FTC, or because it is multiplatform but they want to wait for the announcement for a better time, or because Marvel prohibits the announcement of exclusivity, or because it has not been decided yet.... In none of those cases do these prevent MS to proclaim the relationship of the Blade proyect with Xbox. That is surely why Aaron G. is being more active in this regard after seeing reactions
Greenberg found out it's not exclusive so he's changed his PP
You can see in his facial expression he's just managed to calm down
Robochobo
Member
Greenberg found out it's not exclusive so he's changed his PP
You can see in his facial expression he's just managed to calm down
Blade's exclusivity may not be used as new evidence but is introduced into the allegations to influence a decision. The priority right now for MS is to avoid any possibility, no matter how small, that the FTC will be successful.
Therefore, yes, it is a plausible possibility and even more so if you look at how the arrival of ABK to Gamepass and other Bethesda announcements and even MS's own cloud strategy has changed or is paralyzed.
Astray
Member
You can't introduce any new info in an appeal!
That's literally the entire point of an appeal, to see if Judge Corley should have done differently given the EXACT SAME INFO.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
"FTC is useless; they have no case, and they should just drop it already instead of wasting tax-payer money."
Also
"Xbox is not revealing Blade exclusivity because of FTC."
This doesn't make any sense whatsoever considering games like Redfall, Hi-Fi Rush, and Starfield have been launched as exclusives. And games like TOW2 and Hellblade 2 are scheduled to launch exclusively as well.
Not that it clarifies anything about whether the game is multiplatform or not, but look like are emerging reactions and tweets like this reaffirming the relationship of the announcement with XBOX with objective of at least help mitigate reactions (among user communities and even, embarrassingly, even media) that believe or conceive the announcement as if it were a PS5 exclusive
Either because of a legal strategy against the FTC, or because it is multiplatform but they want to wait for the announcement for a better time, or because Marvel prohibits the announcement of exclusivity, or because it has not been decided yet.... In none of those cases do these prevent MS to proclaim the relationship of the Blade proyect with Xbox. That is surely why Aaron G. is being more active in this regard after seeing reactions
Not sure I follow. you're sayin Aaron added the pfp due to reactions of it being multiplatform or that he removed it due to reactions of it being associated with xbox?
Because that profile picture thing was removed less than a day later for whatever reason. It's probably to drive their engagement bullshit to get people talking because I refuse to believe the head of marketing is running around like a headless chicken with regards to marketing for this game.
You have not then pursued the appeal to the 9th Circuit. Otherwise you would know what the entirety of the FTC's arguments have been based on, which, in their entirety, has been Bethesda and how MS is making everything exclusive and how that will be their treatment with ABK games. It is clear that MS does not want to give any option for the appeal to achieve something because that would mean having to at least agree to new measures with the FTC and delay the strategy over time. You could say the same about the reason why the arrival of the ABK games has been postponed to 2024 without a specific date when nothing prevents them from already being there. Even more so when ABK games have reached other third-party services (GForceNow).
If you want to deny any possibility that that may be one of the reasons OK, but there is certainly a lot of basis for, at least, taking it into account as a possibility.
P.S. Indiana Jones is judicially confirmed exclusive, but however there is no official announcement of platforms or exclusivity. What is your reason to explain it?
Daneel Elijah
Member
If it is in Bethesda hands, then maybe they made the contract before the merger with Xbox. Xbox would then made a deal with Marvel about Indiana Jones, who was already in production, but waited for whatever reason( not sure to do this game for example) for Blade. Then after some time they go back to marvel and find them more greedy than expected?
IF true, the fact that Marvel don't mind about the Xbox+PC is good to hear.
This is the link for the interview for those who want to see it.
This is the parts that for me are the most relevant to this thread, but the interview should have a separate thread as it has more info than just that.
Going back to Blade, I think that they are still negociating. It was probably easy to negociate for Indiana Jones because loosing the Playstation but gaining the PC would mean not that much of a loss, and that Xbox probably gave them a good deal to make them accept fast. But Microsoft would feel less inclined to "overpay" again for Blade, a weaker IP. And Marvel can see the huge PS5 userbase and want more, and if they already made a contract with Bethesda a few years ago it would be Xbox fault to not secure exclusivity back then. Of course if they just don't want to say so for now, it would be logical for Marvel to wait for their partners to talk first. But that would be weird if true.
IF true, the fact that Marvel don't mind about the Xbox+PC is good to hear.
This is the link for the interview for those who want to see it.
This is the parts that for me are the most relevant to this thread, but the interview should have a separate thread as it has more info than just that.
And, but earlier in the article:
It was Bethesda and Tod Howard who made a good pitch about Indiana Jones. This made me even more interested in this project.
Going back to Blade, I think that they are still negociating. It was probably easy to negociate for Indiana Jones because loosing the Playstation but gaining the PC would mean not that much of a loss, and that Xbox probably gave them a good deal to make them accept fast. But Microsoft would feel less inclined to "overpay" again for Blade, a weaker IP. And Marvel can see the huge PS5 userbase and want more, and if they already made a contract with Bethesda a few years ago it would be Xbox fault to not secure exclusivity back then. Of course if they just don't want to say so for now, it would be logical for Marvel to wait for their partners to talk first. But that would be weird if true.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
If your argument is that "so the court doesn't know" then it's useless from MS's POV because the court already knows. That's how we came to learn about Indiana Jones' exclusivity in the first place.
They haven't publicly announced it yet because they haven't shown the game since they revealed it before the acquisition. The next time it appears -- the first time it appears the first time since Xbox's acquired Bethesda -- it will have the exclusive tag for sure.
What I believe is that these movements even fit with the possibility that they are "subjected" to the legal strategy against the FTC. They do not want or are in a position to talk about exclusivity but they also do not want the idea to spread that the game is not connected to Xbox, that it cannot be on or even that it was exclusive to PS5 as it has been possible to read and hear among communities of casual and even media users.
Indiana Jones is exclusive and there is no official confirmation either.
That said, my question for you then is whether you rule out the judicial situation with the FTC as a reason or whether you rule out the possibility of exclusivity. Because it's curious that you only question when that possibility is speculated and not the rest
.. P.S. Idas de Era has a great post explaining and pointing out the effects that the judicial process has had on the entire strategy of the gaming business, starting with game announcements.
If MS does not declare the exclusivity of Blade then the FTC cannot include this situation in its alegations . Easy to understand.
If you followed the court hearing, you will remember how that argument even caught the attention of one of the judges who asked MS's lawyer to respond to whether it was true that MS intended to make Bethesda games exclusive and harm Playstation users. ...It was the moment where the MS lawyer was most hesitant in his response and limited himself to distinguishing between SP games and massive MP games as a basis for deciding exclusivity or not.
What MS does not want right now is to put at risk that the judges of the 9th Circuit may agree or even partially agree with the FTC and that the process will be delayed. Not only thinking about this appeal, but also the FTC process itself from January and subsequent ones....
Again, as Idas summarizes in his ERA post, there are many indications that the judicial process has changed MS's strategy in many ways to mitigate or nullify the FTC's arguments or the idea that the acquisition will produce imminent negative effects. to the consumer. To list:
-ABK games have not reached Gamepass and there is no date for them to do so other than the vague "2024".
-ABK games reaching 3rd services before the Gamepass itself.
-Bethesda game announcement delay.
-Indiana Jones without official confirmation of exclusivity.
What is your reason for explaining these situations? Do you deny the possibility that there is any connection?
As I said, if you deny the possibility that there is a basis for not ruling out that possibility and you only see that the game is multiplatform, then OK for you, but of course that basis exists whether you like it or not.
Last edited:
wtf are you talking about? Where have I only speculated one way? I've even put forth evidence that it is not out of the ordinary for it to be related to the ftc if you look at my reply to GHG regarding this subject. Are you trying to get some engagement out of me with this crap or what?That said, my question for you then is whether you rule out the judicial situation with the FTC as a reason or whether you rule out the possibility of exclusivity. Because it's curious that you only question when that possibility is speculated and not the rest
Last edited:
SEGAvangelist
Member
So if this is true (extremely doubtful), Insomniac's output will need to be on Xbox. Good trade if so.
Bro, I can't try to get you to commit to what you call "this crap" when it's something you've already done by participating in this thread and questioning the opinions, arguments and speculations that are being made.
1- You are linking to a thread other than this one. Of course I am not following every thread or every comment that is made.
2- It is curious that you insist so much on questioning people who speculate in that sense when you yourself, supposedly, give certain possibilities to that reasoning and meanly you dont want "engage with this crap" .
Topher
Identifies as young
So if this is true (extremely doubtful), Insomniac's output will need to be on Xbox. Good trade if so.
These days I’d say anything is possible.
SaucyJack
Member
So if this is true (extremely doubtful), Insomniac's output will need to be on Xbox. Good trade if so.
Except those games were licensed prior to 2022 so this would not apply to the "information" that he shared.
Last edited:
IDKFA
I am Become Bilbo Baggins
So if this is true (extremely doubtful), Insomniac's output will need to be on Xbox. Good trade if so.
Don't Sony have Disney by the balls with Spider-Man because they still hold the film rights? Wasn't the Spider-Man game part of the deal to bring Spider-Man into the MCU, or did I dream this?
SEGAvangelist
Member
If you think they're gonna stop at Spider-man 2 and Wolverine, you're crazy.
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
No it won't. It's not apples to apples. Sony has a large install base and the base buys $70 games in large quantities. If Blade is Xbox/PC exclusive, it would only sell probably about a million or two on steam with most of the rest playing on GamePass. Different equation for the pocketbooks.So if this is true (extremely doubtful), Insomniac's output will need to be on Xbox. Good trade if so.
NickFire
Member
It is entirely possible that the FTC case makes them slow walk announcing exclusivity as soon as they could. I have seen comments about not introducing new evidence in appeals. Those comments are valid, but the appeal relates to the injunction that was denied. The FTC can still go after the merged entity separate from the appeal. By no means am I saying they should or would win. Just saying they haven't completely gone away and MS could be keeping its house in order in case they don't.
All of that said, does it really matter at this point? Slapping an IP onto a game doesn't mean much.
SEGAvangelist
Member
Dude posted ALL Marvel games. I still don't think it's true, but it this case it would in fact be apples to apples.
bxrz
Member
You 4 couldn't have been anymore wrong.
.
Last edited:
SaucyJack
Member
What are you talking about? The guy is talking about NEW licensing.
Sony's licensing re Spider-Man predates Disney's ownership of Marvel and gives them a unique negotiating position.
SEGAvangelist
Member
You're assuming they've already licensed more than 3 Spider-man games and 1 Wolverine game.
Varteras
Member
You 4 couldn't have been anymore wrong.
Oh no. Good thing my conversation was hypothetical, huh?
SaucyJack
Member
No, I’m not.
Sony outright owns the movie rights to Spider-Man, OWNS not licenses, and Spider-Man is by a long way the most popular Marvel character. This is the basis for their negotiating position in gaming.
The fact that their games also sell in the tens of millions does no harm to their position.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
I actually really hope it's on every platform possible after this.
It's the best way the game gets a fair shake. If it's xbox exclusive after this mess it's going to get dragged becuase of microsofts stupid messaging again, the conversation won't be about the game and it won't catch any positive traction.
If its on every platform I'm sure there will be plenty of "lolz" and laughing at xbox but it willmgive the game the best chance to be discussed in genuine excitement and not anger.
It's the best way the game gets a fair shake. If it's xbox exclusive after this mess it's going to get dragged becuase of microsofts stupid messaging again, the conversation won't be about the game and it won't catch any positive traction.
If its on every platform I'm sure there will be plenty of "lolz" and laughing at xbox but it willmgive the game the best chance to be discussed in genuine excitement and not anger.
SEGAvangelist
Member
I was responding to a tweet about ALL Marvel games.
Varteras
Member
Personally, I think those that invested in Xbox deserve a chance at a great exclusive. I just don't know what the situation is that Microsoft isn't offering any clarity here.
You've lost me. "This crap" is referring to your idea that I'm speculating only one way and dismissing any other theory when that's not true.
So you decided to jump to stupid conclusions instead. Got it.
I don't want to engage with your nonsense argument that I'm dismissing any theory. Nothing else. So have a nice day.2- It is curious that you insist so much on questioning people who speculate in that sense when you yourself, supposedly, give certain possibilities to that reasoning and meanly you dont want "engage with this crap" .
I repeat, in order not to want to get into this crap, it is clear that it is not that you are doing your part to avoid it. Because OK, you say that you are not positioning yourself towards one theory or another but it is clear towards whom you emphasize your questions more...
LoL. In this thread you have only questioned the theories in one sense and with important emphasis..... Look at yourself and assess if there is no fault of yours in this situation.So you decided to jump to stupid conclusions instead. Got it.
I repeat again, you say you don't want to do it, but of course as you enter the thread and question it they certainly say the opposite. It's not my fault that you regret it later.
I wish you the same.
Last edited: