SE dont dont own the character. spiderman itself is a property. you cant use just because you are making a avenger game. how hard is to understand
-
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.
Marvel's Avengers Team Addresses Spider-Man's PlayStation Exclusivity (Will Be Only Console Exclusive Character)
- Thread starter Deleted member 18944
- Start date
- News
I don't think I've ever related less to a controversy on this forum. Like, the gulf between my level of concern and that of the community could not be more significant.
That's the most likely scenario, Sony just strongarmed Disney in this deal to put SM in the mcu again while also getting some Video game rights. The use of "rights" in this statement is pretty telling.
Wonder what the actual arrangement is here between Sony and Marvel. I can't imagine it would give full access to the most popular superhero in the world to Sony exclusively for video games. Especially with how the film deal has been a bit of a thorn in the side for Marvel's movie division.
Would be a real shame if this impacts other things too, similarly to how we didn't really see X-Men/F4 in much non-comics media for a while.
Would be a real shame if this impacts other things too, similarly to how we didn't really see X-Men/F4 in much non-comics media for a while.
Yeah this just annoys me even more to be honest, they could at least lower the price on PC, Xbox, Stadia to show that they understand how they're making these versions look now.
Yeah, I see no dimension in which Marvel signed away permanent gaming rights to Sony for the character. It's pretty clear this Avengers situation is something Sony and Marvel worked out for this game in particular not on a general level.
sony does not own the video game rights to spiderman. that's ridiculous. specially since marvel has gotten into so much trouble for selling to movie rights to sony years ago, why would they wholesale sell the rights to one of their biggest characters to one company for use in video games?
this is a basic moneyhat, nothing more, nothing less.
this is a basic moneyhat, nothing more, nothing less.
No marvel games or characters should be exclusive to any platform but that's on marvel not Sony. There is no reason that marvel couldn't of hired insomniac to make a spiderman multi platform game instead exclusive to Playstation. I was probably going to buy this game on pc but this left a bad taste in my mouth.
How would you define this sway? Do you believe that Sony could refuse the inclusion of Spider-man in the game?
It doesn't ultimately make any difference. It's the same outcome for both scenarios. However I would say even if this is a huge deal for the PS versions of the game I wouldn't have made the deal knowing it would upset the rest of your customers. They must have projected sales being lopsided to PS platforms or they didn't think it would cause so much uproar.
Exactly, it's such jumbled non-speak it reads like a Trump parody written by someone giving him a bit more intelligence than he posses.
I don't even know why the specifics of who owns what even matters. Consumers don't need to understand that. What they know is that they'll pay the same $60 and have an objectively worst experience purely because of business reasons. Companies are free to choose the check over customer experience -- but they also have to accept that people on 2/3 of your supported platforms are going to be (rightfully) pissed.
The thing that makes this so odd is he never comes out and says point blank that Sony has the rights to Spider-Man in games. Instead he says "that's a relationship question that PlayStation absolutely has the rights to" which means... god, who knows what that means? Does it mean they get to approve appearances in other games? Or they get first chance of exclusivity? Or is it just that since Sony has SOME rights to Spider-Man that they felt it best to not jeopardize the relationship?
We know that Activision had contractual rights to produce Spidey games and it expired in 2014. We know Sony announced THEIR Spider-Man game at E3 2016 and he appeared after that in MvC:I, Lego Marvel Super Heroes 2, and MUA3. We also know that Sony and Marvel renegotiated movie rights in 2019, so MAYBE that negotiation also involved the character in games?
It'd be nice if someone just came out and straight up said it, not sure why this needs to be a secret. Unless, of course, it was just down to money and none of the parties want to straight up say that because of bad PR.
We know that Activision had contractual rights to produce Spidey games and it expired in 2014. We know Sony announced THEIR Spider-Man game at E3 2016 and he appeared after that in MvC:I, Lego Marvel Super Heroes 2, and MUA3. We also know that Sony and Marvel renegotiated movie rights in 2019, so MAYBE that negotiation also involved the character in games?
It'd be nice if someone just came out and straight up said it, not sure why this needs to be a secret. Unless, of course, it was just down to money and none of the parties want to straight up say that because of bad PR.
This isn't how things happened. Marvel went to Sony to make a first party game based on one of their IPs and Sony picked Insomniac as the developer. They then asked Insomniac which hero they wanted to work on and Insomniac requested Spidey.
I think there's a confusion here over ownerships of rights, and licensing of rights.
Nobody is saying Sony outright owns the rights in the game space.
There's the suggestion that Sony obtained the license to those rights. As long as that contract is in term, Sony may well have say over the IP's use within the parameters specified in those contracts. While the contract is in term, 'they have those rights'.
I mean - in the case of Spiderman for example - do we really think Sony licensed the rights for that game without some exclusivity to that use? If they didn't, what would stop Marvel licensing the rights to every other pub to make spiderman games, and devalue Sony's investment potentially?
The question becomes, what the parameters of the exclusivity are. Is it total, is it partial, where the lines are. Again, per Amos, in the context of this game, it seems it overlapped on Sony's license.
Ditto - by the way, and I think as outlined/suggested by another poster above - their contract for Iron Man may well grant similar exclusive rights in specified contexts.
No they don't. But there's absolutely a chance that these kind of exclusivity was offered to sweeten the MCU movie deal.
"Co produce your films with us and you can use MCU shit in your movies, plus you we'll let you use Spider-Man in videogames on your console exclusively"
It's during an interview (made by Comicbook ?) but maybe I have missed an official statement about it.
edit : it has appeared on Newsweek before
Crystal Dynamics Head Talks Spider-Man Exclusivity in 'Marvel's Avengers'
While Peter Parker arriving in the Square Enix superhero game is news in of itself, the announcement that Spidey will only be available for PlayStation owners caused a divisive debate in the gamer sphere.
www.newsweek.com
Last edited:
"So the beauty of Spider-Man, and what Spider-Man represents as a character, and as a world is... Again, it comes back to the relationship with PlayStation and Marvel,"
Nailed it. The first thoughts that enter my head when I think about what Spider-Man represents is the relationship between PlayStation and Marvel. That is where the heart is.
Nailed it. The first thoughts that enter my head when I think about what Spider-Man represents is the relationship between PlayStation and Marvel. That is where the heart is.
why would marvel sell the video game rights to spiderman to sony, when they obviously regret selling the film rights to sony years ago?
how did sony find themselves in a situation when they have a say over spiderman being in video games?
So we're definitely never getting anything from the spiderman universe in avengers hopefully. I doubt these cosmetics are the only things playstation has moneyhatted.
Don't you remember the whole Marvel/Sony arguement about them not being in the MCU anymore. I wanna say the one thing sony got from that was video game rights.
Don't you remember the whole Marvel/Sony arguement about them not being in the MCU anymore. I wanna say the one thing sony got from that was video game rights.
I mean being that Marvel's most popular character was never shown in the game until now really makes it seem like they weren't going to include him. Anyone saying this is a normal money hat is ignoring some of the pretty direct wording in that statement. Marvel is always involved in roster discussion and clearly there are some limits when it comes to Spiderman. People quoting MUA3 are ignoring that game was announced in December 2018 and the new Sony Marvel agreement was reached in September 2019. If that new agreement had different character stipulations then it would not have effected MUA3.
So at the end of the day, you just want your own exclusive character? lol
People are still in denial if they don't think Sony has the legal right to flex here regarding Spider-Man's usage. They have the legal right to do so and would be insane not to do so to make their version more appealing.
Does that suck for other players? Sure. But business is business.
Does that suck for other players? Sure. But business is business.
Who knows, but Marvel approached Sony to make a Marvel IP game, which ended up being Spider-Man. Given Spider-Man PS4 is touted by Sony as a first party game, presumably they funded it too.
It's not out of the realm of possibility that as part of that arrangement Sony asked for some say on the characters inclusion in other games, at least in the console/PC space. Afterall, Sony is essentially the banner carrier for Spider-Man in the console gaming space, and have put in the work and marketing to make the game, and thus the IP, stronger today in this segment.
Guessing the way the game was received, coupled with its record breaking sales, probably helped whatever clout they had with Marvel regarding Spider-Man.
I think something extra went down when Tom Holland got Sony and Marvel/Disney back to the table. This was after Spider-Man PS4 did well right?
So this whole thing is shitty for xbox and pc players, and while I can understand them being mad about it, I'm going to assume that with sony still actively making spider-man games for playstation as an internal exclusive, they would have at some level in the corporate chain been worried about the idea that another publisher was making an avengers game which could include spider-man in a way that may confuse casual gamers. Not saying it's a good reason but I can understand just based on how many people I know who play games actively but know fuck all about the industry and are confused by the idea of different takes on characters etc being out at the same time or whatever, and with spider-man being one of the biggest ps4 games, I doubt sony wanted to take chances with anyone playing or seeing avengers and then assuming any part of what was done story or character wise was a part of their franchise and risk any damage to their brand as they see it.....as I said still shitty but people are dumb and sony I'm sure were more than happy to pay a huge sum to have some control over how spider-man was used in this game.
Sony aren't concerned with how other platforms are effected by this as long as their platform isn't hurt by it, only time will tell if it actually hurts them but based on how big playstation is worldwide I don't think sony will care at all.
Sony aren't concerned with how other platforms are effected by this as long as their platform isn't hurt by it, only time will tell if it actually hurts them but based on how big playstation is worldwide I don't think sony will care at all.
That's how I've always seen it. Obviously nobody on here knows so it's all conjecture but I imagine any deal between Sony and Marvel with the use of Spider-man in games has loads of complex outs, loopholes and clauses. Maybe there's an exception where he can be used in existing game franchises like Ultimate Alliance and Marvel vs Capcom, maybe it only stays in effect if Marvel keep making Spider-man movies frequently enough. Maybe it only pertains to console games. Nobody knows.
Perhaps Sqaure weren't allowed to use Spider-man because of the deal and Sony worked out an agreement where they can as long as he stays on Playstation.
I'm not saying that's any better but it's possible that's what happened.
Or maybe Sony just said "we want Playstation to be the only place you can play as Spider-man next gen" and threw a big sack of cash at Square Enix.
I'd love to know the real answer.
That game was in development before the last round of Disney Sony negotiations. If something changed with character rights it would have been after September 2019.
Who said they sold it? Licensing agreements are a thing, you know?
They also had this crazy super successful PS4exclusive a couple years back and renegotiated their deal with Disney last year and nobody knows exactly what went into it. It's not far fetched to think that some control of Spider-Man in video games was a part of it.
Look, Amos is telling you himself right there. You think homie is just lying? Lmao
Spider-Man sold very well. Wouldn't shock me if they work out more deals, or even get into conversations to make other exclusive games using other hero's.
Licensing agreements can be negotiated differently depending on the parties involved and what they each want. There isn't some standard, stock "Video game licensing agreement" template that every company uses. EA has the NFL video game license. This doesn't mean they "own" the NFL. This doesn't mean they control the NFL. This does however give them certain rights over the license for purposes of video games. It doesn't mean the NFL can't also license out to any number of mobile games. It also doesn't mean that the NFL can't license themselves out to 2K for an "arcade" football game.
Is it totally out of both realm of possibility that Sony and Marvel have some sort of negotiated deal that would give Playstation brand certain rights over Spiderman video games that would also allow for him to appear in things like MUA3 or MvC but not in a game like Avengers that they may feel encroaches, for whatever reason, too closely on their Spiderman PS4/PS5 games? Is this impossible to believe? And again, moreover, in the argument over whether or not the practice of locking out Spiderman from other platforms, does it matter enough to get this heated over? Does it really impact whether or not you are okay with Spiderman being exclusive to Playstation?