• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Imran Khan: "Sony has locked timed exclusivity for some huge and widely known multiplatform games"

Status
Not open for further replies.
gremlinz1982

gremlinz1982

Member
Aug 11, 2018
5,331
orava said:
Sony's getting desperate. Ms is doing something right.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
In as much as Microsoft has changed a lot from the Don Mattrick, Terry Myerson days, the truth is that this is the start of a new generation and as such you have a reset when it comes to sales. Everyone is at zero.

Plus there is a danger that if Lockhart exists and is competitively priced, that it could eat into some of the PlayStation sales. So, yes, Microsoft is doing something right, but it is also an extension of what Sony has done this generation with great success. Not to mention that PlayStation is a far bigger deal to Sony than it has been in previous generations.
 
SuperFakerBros

SuperFakerBros

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,827
Puffy said:
They couldn't throw out the Midi music and speed up combat without the help of Nintendo? Good grief
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If you genuinely think they were gonna add in those improvements later on without the Switch release, I don't know what to tell you. A lot of that stuff could've been handled by them without XIS needing to be a thing and yet they still didn't do it
 
Thorrgal

Thorrgal

Member
Oct 26, 2017
12,331
Vengeance said:
But that's my point. They're gonna have to counter if Sony is out there buying up timed exclusivity to some of these bigger games and MS has a lot more money to spend than Sony.

It doesn't end well regardless of which platform you're playing on.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's the issue here, MS doesn't really want to spend that money, when they totally should.

They have trillions, why not subsidize the Series X and release it at $399?? That extra 100$ would only cost them $2B on the first 20M console sold, and by then the costs would have gone down and you would be the market leader, just like in the 360 era.

It would also remove the need of rhe Lockhar, would have saved money on R&D, marketing, etc

If you are so rich, just release a more powerful console than the PS5, $100 cheaper, and for a meager extra $2-4B you win the generation.
 
MatrixMan.exe

MatrixMan.exe

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,500
SuperFakerBros said:
I don't think I'm being unfair in saying that Sony has a much stronger fanbase that'll defend them than Microsoft does on Era. I didn't specifically look at what each user said in those threads relative to this one but the tone is definitely different
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I don't see it. There's a lot of people angry about this. Look at how mad people are in the 50+ page Spider-Man thread.

The tone doesn't seem any different to Tomb Raider. Bunch of people are happy or don't care. A lot more are angry.
 
gremlinz1982

gremlinz1982

Member
Aug 11, 2018
5,331
Thorrgal said:
That's the issue here, MS doesn't really want to spend that money, when they totally should.

They have trillions, why not subsidize the Series X and release it at $399?? That extra 100$ would only cost them $2B on the first 20M console sold, and by then the costs would have gone down and you would be the market leader, just like in the 360 era.

It would also remove the need of rhe Lockhar, would have saved money on R&D, marketing, etc

If you are so rich, just release a more powerful console than the PS5, $100 cheaper, and for a meager extra $2-4B you win the generation.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
LOL!!!!! Never change.
 
Sid

Sid

Banned
Mar 28, 2018
3,755
Guessing Silent Hill, Tekken, Devil May Cry, Street Fighter and Monster Hunter
 
Sky87

Sky87

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,865
Instead of spending tons of money on shitty deals like this they should invest in a GamePass service of their own. That would actually benefit consumers and justify their #4theplayers tagline.

Locking away content in multiplats serves noone but Sony themselves.
 
SuperFakerBros

SuperFakerBros

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,827
MatrixMan.exe said:
I don't see it. There's a lot of people angry about this. Look at how mad people are in the 50+ page Spider-Man thread.

The tone doesn't seem any different to Tomb Raider. Bunch of people are happy or don't care. A lot more are angry.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Oh there's definitely people angry and criticizing this, won't pretend otherwise, but there's also more of a defense force for this relative to what something like Tomb Raider had
 
upinsmoke

upinsmoke

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
2,566
This is just something we will have to get used to. They (MS and Sony) are both at it. Wether it's Tomb Raider, Final Fantasy, Yakuza....whatever, it's just something which we will have to live with.

As for these rumours around timed exclusives I don't think we are looking at anything like GTA, COD etc. But as others have mentioned FF16 wouldn't be a huge surprise.
 
Nitpicker_Red

Nitpicker_Red

Member
Nov 3, 2017
1,282
bob100 said:
And don't start with it isn't prob consumer bs....there is no such thing
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If you look at a situation overall you can always tell if it's advantageous to the consummers at large or not. You don't need to make up stories to understand if a situation is pro-consumers or anti-consumers, it's just a measure of which side the operation favors, in term of choice, spending, quality.
You can argue at which scale it affects the consumer (if it's unfair practice and require the intervention of consumer protection, or if it's small practices that just dissolve trust in one seller),
but you can't berate consumers for defending their own interests.
 
Ex Libris

Ex Libris

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Nov 1, 2017
287
Thorrgal said:
That's the issue here, MS doesn't really want to spend that money, when they totally should.

They have trillions, why not subsidize the Series X and release it at $399?? That extra 100$ would only cost them $2B on the first 20M console sold, and by then the costs would have gone down and you would be the market leader, just like in the 360 era.

It would also remove the need of rhe Lockhar, would have saved money on R&D, marketing, etc

If you are so rich, just release a more powerful console than the PS5, $100 cheaper, and for a meager extra $2-4B you win the generation.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Somehow we are back to Microsoft's warchest all over again.

Honestly for $2 billion dollars, I rather they spend that expanding their first parties (which they are) and acquiring new studios (Would ya look at that).

The best thing Xbox has been doing lately is acquiring studios. Honestly the price isnt what is gonna get me to switch from Playstation
 

Deleted member 5028

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
9,724
MatrixMan.exe said:
I don't see it. There's a lot of people angry about this. Look at how mad people are in the 50+ page Spider-Man thread.

The tone doesn't seem any different to Tomb Raider. Bunch of people are happy or don't care. A lot more are angry.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Check out the PS OT. Popcorn and champagne glasses clinking all over the show. They love it.
 
TheUnsungHero26

TheUnsungHero26

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,358
Canada
Kemono said:
Is this "MS saved the studio" stuff the new meta? Double Fine made games for 20 years. It wasn't always as financially secure as right now but they made it. Tim Schafer said for years he wanted to stay independent. Ninja Theory had their big independent moment with the big success of Hellblade. They didn't need saving after landing a big hit. Surely they appreciate the financial safety under ms but that doesn't mean they were going bust without their savior.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
A developer not needing saving doesn't mean they don't want (or need) security. Independent developers have to secure funding by pitching their games to publishers. This can be a time consuming process that can result in no deals being made. Employees still need to be paid in between projects. For a company like Double Fine that's located in San Francisco, the cost of paying their employees isn't going to be cheap.
 
Decarb

Decarb

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,643
As long as they announce how long the timed exclusivity is and don't try to be sneaky about it like RotR, I don't really give a fuck. Last time I was annoyed by moneyhat was when RE4 was GC exclusive. Not because it was exclusive, but 2 months after I bought GC for it they announced a PS2 port. In hindsight I was really glad I got GC, but yeah at that time I was annoyed af.
 
IvanSlavkov

IvanSlavkov

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,907
Bulgaria
User Banned (3 days): Hostility, console wars
Sky87 said:
Instead of spending tons of money on shitty deals like this they should invest in a GamePass service of their own. That would actually benefit consumers and justify their #4theplayers tagline.

Locking away content in multiplats serves noone but Sony themselves.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Do you even read what you type? Seriously?
Unlike MS exclusives, Sony ones sell, so gamepass service with day one exclusives is out of the question. Also I prefer Sony's approach, you know having actual quality games to play then a sub service with no real exclusives.
Your last sentence is the most stupid thing I've read today and will even not bother to comment.
 
ianpm31

ianpm31

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,529
These companies are competing for your money and are not your friends. Content will always be king and if one platform has the content they get my money it's that simple. This is nothing new in the game industry and many other mediums.
 
Ayra Sutoraifu

Ayra Sutoraifu

Member
Oct 30, 2017
1,600
orava said:
Sony's getting desperate. Ms is doing something right.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
tenor.gif
 

Deleted member 13077

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,513
It's like people think Phil Spencer walks into a boardroom every month with the MS execs and pulls about a flipchart with 3 points on it;

Priorities
1. Own the Ponies on Era
2. Get Gamepass everywhere and anywhere



3 Maybe make some money
 
arsene_P5

arsene_P5

Prophet of Regret
Member
Apr 17, 2020
15,438
Vengeance said:
This shit is not gonna end well. MS and Sony just moneyhatting one after another. This shit needs to stop.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No lies detected. I was very excited for this gen, because of the powerful consoles we are getting. But that extrem moneyhatting is just sad, even though it's just a rumor for now.
 

mangochutney

Member
Jun 11, 2018
375
Marano said:
MS doesnt seem to be doing nearly the same thing (mostly small games centered around gamepass).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You say that but I would consider buying up a long list of developers in recent years to be much worse from the viewpoint of multi-platform 'lets-make-games-available-to-one-and-all' than making a couple of choice games only available on a single platform for a couple of months.
 
unapersson

unapersson

Member
Oct 27, 2017
661
Sky87 said:
Instead of spending tons of money on shitty deals like this they should invest in a GamePass service of their own. That would actually benefit consumers and justify their #4theplayers tagline.

Locking away content in multiplats serves noone but Sony themselves.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Would that actually be good for anyone?

Big third party games wouldn't then just be competing with a huge library of free games on the XBox, but also on the PlayStation. Lots of multiplats are already being locked away on GamePass as timed exclusives, why would a similar Sony service make that stop? We could just move from console wars to pass wars.

We've still not really seen the longterm effect of GamePass yet, would like to at least see that model run for a while before everyone starts copying it.
 
Puffy

Puffy

Banned
Dec 15, 2017
3,585
SuperFakerBros said:
If you genuinely think they were gonna add in those improvements later on without the Switch release, I don't know what to tell you. A lot of that stuff could've been handled by them without XIS needing to be a thing and yet they still didn't do it
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Exhibit: B

Timeout. What are you doing fam? This isn't morrowind on OG Xbox and QOL updates aren't a herculean task. This is the game square begged the west to buy. You don't think they'd have the incentive to update their game for the sake of prosperity heading in to a digital age or for the betterment of their established customers without a Nintendo moneyhat? Really?

Well thank god for Nintendo then. Looking at the current state of multiplatform XIS, it really seems to have worked out for the best.
 
Thorrgal

Thorrgal

Member
Oct 26, 2017
12,331
Ex Libris said:
Somehow we are back to Microsoft's warchest all over again.

Honestly for $2 billion dollars, I rather they spend that expanding their first parties (which they are) and acquiring new studios (Would ya look at that).

The best thing Xbox has been doing lately is acquiring studios. Honestly the price isnt what is gonna get me to switch from Playstation
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yes, my point is that they DON'T have a warchest, and the proof is in the pudding...
 
Betty

Betty

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
17,604
Sky87 said:
Instead of spending tons of money on shitty deals like this they should invest in a GamePass service of their own. That would actually benefit consumers and justify their #4theplayers tagline.

Locking away content in multiplats serves noone but Sony themselves.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Sony would lose so much money on a Game Pass service it's not even funny.

MS can weather it because they make money mostly elsewhere but gaming is too big for Sony to go the Game Pass route.
 
Stinkinmushroom

Stinkinmushroom

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,708
Kinda Funny behind the scenes: "Yo Imran, can you mention 1 phrase about PS5 in each podcast going forward, so that it's shared every week? Don't worry you can be vague and we won't ask a lot of questions. Don't forget to do it for every podcast, thanks"
 
catashtrophe

catashtrophe

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,111
UK
Guess i'm the only person on Era who has no problems with this

I'm ready for exclusive:

SF6
From Software Next
Sega Rally 4
Virtua Fighter 6
Splinter Cell Next
Ninja gaiden 4
Auto modelista 2
.........

🙃
 
plow

plow

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,650
orava said:
Sony's getting desperate. Ms is doing something right.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

As they where when the PS2 launched and that entire Generation. So desperate, that they sold 150 Million consoles.

This is not Sony being desperate. This is Sony knowing they have power and they can leverage such a move with "low" effort.
 

Johannes

Member
Oct 28, 2017
560
Linus815 said:
didnt a really old "leak" which got several things right claim that gta 6 will have timed exclusivity?
wouldnt surprise me at this point
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If I remember correctly the leak claimed that GTA 6 would be a launch/launch window title for the PS5, which pretty much put the final nail on the coffin for the whole rumor.
 
Alexandros

Alexandros

Member
Oct 26, 2017
17,812
gremlinz1982 said:
Can you imagine an alternate reality where we have a singular gaming hardware, and games are all on that one system? This is the future that some people clamor for.

I agree that there may be better ways to spend money that is paid to get this exclusive content, like making more exclusive titles. Guess what, that is a far harder venture than simply buying some timed exclusivity for what is an established title. A company wants to get more sales, and anything that accomplishes that, especially a strategy with a proven track record is one to be adhered to.

I have been gaming for close to three decades, and having to choose one system over another has been a thing that entire time. I have gone through the Nintendo cartridge age where they exercised their dominance, I have been through the Sony PS1/PS2 generations where they kept content from other platforms for some time, I have been through the 360 generation where Microsoft launched early and then started buying timed exclusive DLC. I have seen Sony do it to the biggest titles this generation and more than any player out there. It works, it is not changing.

As a consumer, you get to choose what platform it is you want to game on, this is not being taken away from you.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I started gaming at the age of six, in 1985, on an Atari 800XL before moving on to an Amstrad CPC and Nintendo Gameboy. "It has always been like this" is a phrase that may be true but it doesn't contain an argument for why it should keep being like this. Progress in every field of human life is made by changing things that were always like this. You have also not made an argument for why the customer should care about what these corporations want.

gremlinz1982 said:
The noise made on this forum is minuscule compared to the amount of dollars that keep supporting this habit. The caveats that this forum would want to put out there when in comes to studio purchases would mean that no single publisher would ever grow apart from starting up new studios.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

If the noise is miniscule there people who share your opinion don't need to bother with trying to stop it, it will go away. If the noise isn't miniscule and it bothers these corporations then it is achieving its goal.

gremlinz1982 said:
Yes. These companies have an obligation to do what is right for their business and their shareholders; this is the sole reason they are in existence. For any consumer to come in and state that they should stop this so that you can enjoy the games on the platform you like, when you like.

If you own a business, or invested in one, or even worked for one, the obligation at the end of the day is to try and make it as successful as possible because your money, or labor is guaranteed a better return. Why should this be different when it comes to companies in gaming? Simples, gamers are entitled and they w
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The counter-argument is simple: Why should I care about the better returns of a corporation and not my own? Why should it be more important to me that the shareholders of a corporation make more money instead of me not having to pay for multiple consoles in order to play the games that I want?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.