• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Iron Eddie

Banned
Nov 25, 2019
9,812
Brilliant post, you should make a thread of it.
Won't make much difference, that thread would turn into what this thread has. People will still see things the way they want out of their own interests.

Bayonetta showed that xbox fanboys hate it too when games get taken away.

If you are a one platform gamer then that is always going to be a problem, isn't it?

lol Nobody is ignoring it, it's just that it's so far from reality that nobody is acknowledging it. It's basically him justifying MS grabbing as many studios/publishers as they can. If you agree with that, more power to you, but don't get defensive when others as well as people in the industry share their concern. Consolidation is a negative whether Sony, MS, Nintendo, etc. do it.

Consolidation was going to happen regardless. The reality is some don't want to own all the systems to play every game they want, same as before,. Difference is it was an easier decision before to get away with maybe one or two platforms.

Here is one. Huge fan of Sony getting timed exclusives, stating Microsoft first party even after their haul had issues and needed to get better, mocked the fabled war chest.

Microsoft spends and viola they are messing the industry. All of this is avoidable if one actually argued out of principle.
Yes, it is very clear we have double standards. Everything from who had closer relationships, to only building within, to them having a monopoly, to Sony must react in order to survive. Most of these comments of outrage were never fans of anything Microsoft does.
 

Perzeval

Prophet of Truth
Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
10,533
Sweden
Microsoft's plan isn't to exclude players though. They're pushing for play on console, pc, phone, tablet and tv. That's pretty damn diverse and inclusive.
 
Last edited:

Dogui

Member
Oct 28, 2017
8,784
Brazil
Still think it's unlikely, but MS getting Sega would mean not only Atlus, but stuff like Phantasy Star, Shining Force, Panzer Dragoon Saga and a lot of potential stuff to make MS a Jrpg powerhouse if they want. And all of this coming to Game Pass and Xcloud.
 

dlauv

Prophet of Truth - One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,509
Mikami directed house of the dead spinoff let's go
 

Iron Eddie

Banned
Nov 25, 2019
9,812
Still think it's unlikely, but MS getting Sega would mean not only Atlus, but stuff like Phantasy Star, Shining Force, Panzer Dragoon Saga and a lot of potential stuff to make MS a Jrpg powerhouse if they want. And all of this coming to Game Pass and Xcloud.
Some don't want to hear it but many would pay up to $19.99 per month to have access to all those games, plus Bethesda titles, plus all the other studios who will have games coming out. Just look and compare to what EA and Ubisoft are offering for $14.99 per month now. Or you can just buy the games as one normally does, but I could see price hikes as they build more studios.
 

Deleted member 1003

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,638
Some don't want to hear it but many would pay up to $19.99 per month to have access to all those games, plus Bethesda titles, plus all the other studios who will have games coming out. Just look and compare to what EA and Ubisoft are offering for $14.99 per month now. Or you can just buy the games as one normally does, but I could see price hikes as they build more studios.
Oh the PPM will definitely go up. $19.99 pm would still be an incredible value.
 

gremlinz1982

Member
Aug 11, 2018
5,331
Timed exclusives are timed. They expire. The games come to everyone eventually. They suck, and they don't benefit anyone except shareholders, but they have an end date. You likely wouldn't be seeing nearly as much rage out of people if these deals were just timed exclusives. Instead Microsoft is saying "no, you can't ever have these games" - are you shocked that people who are being told they're just outright excluded forever find that a worse outcome than saying "sorry, you have to wait"?

Like I said before - if Amazon or Tencent bought Rockstar Games tomorrow and made GTA and Red Dead permanently exclusive to their own platforms, taking them off of XBOX and PC forever, y'all would be furious. You know you would. I would be too. Hell, everyone would be.
1. I was there when Rise of the Tomb Raider was timed exclusive. The angst, even from gaming media was a sight to behold; nothing has been replicated since. It is almost as if it was not the practice that people were against but the party perpetrating it.

2. I am never furious. I move where games I want to play are and it has always meant playing on at least two consoles. Gamers should normalize doing this.

3. Anyone deciding that they only want to play on one console locks himself to that console. It may be that you do not have the funds to get more than one console, and that is fine. It may be that you do not, under any circumstance want to game on another console because of platform loyalty, and this is also fine (your funds, your choice). Whatever the case, that is a personal issue and must remain a personal issue. You should not be shocked that you will be missing out on some games, or that some games you are used to getting no longer make it to your preferred platform.
 
Oct 27, 2017
12,975
User banned (1 Week): Trolling/Platform Warring with History of similar
Those desperately begging and hoping for Microsoft to fail are amusing.

Makes me want to see more acquisitions just for this fact alone.
 

Betty

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
17,604
Those desperately begging and hoping for Microsoft to fail are amusing.

Makes me want to see more acquisitions just for this fact alone.

Microsoft just had a record earnings despite having a fairly lacking year of games and a very soft launch line-up, as soon as their studios and acquisitions start bearing fruit they'll be sitting prettier than ever.

Hard to see how they don't become the defacto dominant force by next gen if they keep up the buying spree.
 
Oct 28, 2017
925
Still think it's unlikely, but MS getting Sega would mean not only Atlus, but stuff like Phantasy Star, Shining Force, Panzer Dragoon Saga and a lot of potential stuff to make MS a Jrpg powerhouse if they want. And all of this coming to Game Pass and Xcloud.
Would they be able to make a new Outrun? Or is that in licensing hell somewhere else

That would be dope. And Daytona USA.
 

Prine

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
15,724
The amount of wishful thinking on this thread yikes

just be honest and say you're looking for an excuse to be happy about more acquisitions
Very happy about Bethesda, would like to see Sega also benefit from the financial might of MS, would be nice to see Sega hardware make a return (possible as a strategy for MS in asia).
 

ShaggyLobo

Member
Jan 25, 2021
254
Very happy about Bethesda, would like to see Sega also benefit from the financial might of MS, would be nice to see Sega hardware make a return (possible as a strategy for MS in asia).

People say that a lot, but apart from a brief, virtua fighter-fueled moment early in the 5th gen, sega consoles have never actually sold well in japan.
 

pappacone

Member
Jan 10, 2020
3,139
I think people should at least wait to see the new studios games before claiming they want to see MS "benefits" on other studios
 

mojo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,963
Very happy about Bethesda, would like to see Sega also benefit from the financial might of MS, would be nice to see Sega hardware make a return (possible as a strategy for MS in asia).
I don't think anyone buying sega is going to revive sega hardware or revive your favorite dead franchise with a big budget. But at least you're being honest
 

Simon-chan

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,044
Italy
You people can try rationalizing this all you want, but ultimately it doesn't matter.
Corporate consolidation is bad. Less indipendence in the industry is bad.
It doesn't benefit the consumer in any way.
Making something exclusive will ALWAYS result in fewer people playing it, simply because the number of people who'll renounce playing on a specific platform will always be superior to those who'll jump ship.
I seriously don't get how many of you fail to realize this. That's the "fuck you, got mine" sentiment at its finest.
 

GamerJM

Member
Nov 8, 2017
15,608
Yeah, people loved buying a Wii U for Bayonetta 2, lol.

Could they seriously not find any other Wii U exclusives they cared about, including Platinum's own Wonderful 101?
No one gets established in the gaming business without leveraging money from elsewhere. Sony had to spend their way in, Microsoft had to spend their way in. Google has the infrastructure, but to get exclusive content that will bring people into their ecosystem will require spending from their ad revenue business.

Epic wants to establish a PC store, and guess what, they are spending their way to try and establish themselves as an alternative to Steam.

Gaming requires those building ecosystems to eat a loss early, and sustain those losses before critical mass is achieved.

Microsoft needs to cultivate competitive gaming studios is nonsense by the way. Microsoft has traditionally had a small first party studio organization, and it is something that Sony had too up until the PS3 generation where they lost exclusivity with a lot of titles going multiplatform; releasing day and date on other consoles.

Microsoft was dumb. It was in gaming without ever committing fully to the venture. This is how they came into this generation with 5 studios, one making a game that was available on everything. This was how they got into proper relationships with developers, but never ever solidified those relationships by acquiring Angel Studios, BioWare, DICE, Double Helix, Bizarre or even trying to get Team Ninja.

They sat around as reliable partners were swallowed up, or saw some developers move in another direction because the parent company was working in its own interest. They also got into deals where they got games but did not own the IP. They published Sunset Overdrive, did not own the IP, they published Gears of War, did not own the IP. They published Ryse, and they do not own that IP. Where on earth have you seen a game being a cornerstone of a platform, published by the platform holder and not owned by it?
Microsoft was extremely careless around talent and IP.

The moment I see people state that games are being taken away from a user base, I honestly cringe. You are a singular user being asked to make a decision as to what platform you would want to invest in. The only way any party becomes a factor is when they offer something compelling to users. In short, the people that are against purchases most of time simply do not want to make another purchase. They are usually the same users that have disproportionately benefited from Sony doing what every business in a position of strength does i.e. perpetuate dominance.

So these moves, tend to be viewed from a pro Sony lens despite the fact that we now have a divergence in business models. Microsoft needs content to fuel Game Pass, and they are not going to get to where they need to be by buying a studio here, a studio there. They need to accelerate that timeline and the easiest way to really make a case to consumers is by getting the talent and recognizable IP. Today, you cannot play a Final Fantasy game on Nintendo systems or Street Fighter for that matter because there is a party that pays to keep them off other systems. You could play the Xeno games on PlayStation, and today you have to get a Nintendo console to play that because Nintendo bought Monolith.

I was never going to get the original Xbox up until it was announced that Dead or Alive 3 was going to release exclusively on it. A third party title that had been on PlayStation and Sega systems. No brand loyalty, just a gamer moving to where a must have game had moved. I was similarly willing to miss the XB1 generation if Microsoft did not make changes to what they presented at E3 in 2013. It is amazing how simple life becomes when people worry about the decisions they can make.

Platforms taking games away from others is normal. Platforms keeping games away from others, even for some time, is normal. Publishers being bought out is also normal, albeit infrequent. My advice, if you want games on PlayStation, there is something out there for you. If you desire what Microsoft is doing with Game Pass or their exclusives, they have multiple entry points for you. The persistent moaning about how stuff is being taken away is entitlement that needs to end seeing that it is common place.

I once asked whether there were people that were allergic to getting games on anything that is not PlayStation, and going through threads, there are those that have platform loyalty that is hard to explain. The world will move on as these complain.

So as someone who's not particularly happy about these acquisitions, let me offer a short counterpoint. As a personal, singular consumer, I don't really care that these games are going to be exclusive to different platforms. Much like you I just go where the games are. I'll probably own a Switch Pro, a PS5, and a high end gaming PC in a couple years, which will allow me to play everything. I didn't get mad when sequels to some of my favorite Gamecube games like Tales of Symphonia and Soul Calibur II were on the PS2 and then 360/PS3, and I won't get mad here for this reason as well. Like 90% of the people in this topic expressing disappointment are this way, and it's a combination of silly/funny/sad to read. I guess it makes sense if you're strapped for cash and can only buy one console, but like, not atypical for the industry, and if you wanted to play Sega games and Persona 2 in 2000 you would have had to buy a PS1 and a DreamCast back then too.

What does concern me is that the gaming industry could inevitably become monopolized by a few companies, which could have drastic impacts on things like game prices and the types of games that get made. We've seen this in the movie industry. Disney controls a significantly higher percentage of the industry than 20-40 years ago, and the result we got was them bullying theaters into devoting a certain number of screenings to Avengers: Endgame and the Lion King. They effectively pushed certain types of films out of theaters and onto streaming. They make movies that are clearly driven by studio plans over the initiative of talented creative directors. It's played a part in blockbusters becoming these big bloated things that pander to nostalgia rather than inventive new ideas. Some of my film-minded friends think this has straight up ruined the modern film industry, especially as far as middlebrow stuff goes, and while I wouldn't go that far it's had a negative effect on the industry as a whole. I'm worried we could see similar effects in the gaming industry as well. And monopolies are just objectively always worse for consumers.
 

mjc

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
5,879
No one gets established in the gaming business without leveraging money from elsewhere. Sony had to spend their way in, Microsoft had to spend their way in. Google has the infrastructure, but to get exclusive content that will bring people into their ecosystem will require spending from their ad revenue business.

Epic wants to establish a PC store, and guess what, they are spending their way to try and establish themselves as an alternative to Steam.

Gaming requires those building ecosystems to eat a loss early, and sustain those losses before critical mass is achieved.

Microsoft needs to cultivate competitive gaming studios is nonsense by the way. Microsoft has traditionally had a small first party studio organization, and it is something that Sony had too up until the PS3 generation where they lost exclusivity with a lot of titles going multiplatform; releasing day and date on other consoles.

Microsoft was dumb. It was in gaming without ever committing fully to the venture. This is how they came into this generation with 5 studios, one making a game that was available on everything. This was how they got into proper relationships with developers, but never ever solidified those relationships by acquiring Angel Studios, BioWare, DICE, Double Helix, Bizarre or even trying to get Team Ninja.

They sat around as reliable partners were swallowed up, or saw some developers move in another direction because the parent company was working in its own interest. They also got into deals where they got games but did not own the IP. They published Sunset Overdrive, did not own the IP, they published Gears of War, did not own the IP. They published Ryse, and they do not own that IP. Where on earth have you seen a game being a cornerstone of a platform, published by the platform holder and not owned by it?
Microsoft was extremely careless around talent and IP.

The moment I see people state that games are being taken away from a user base, I honestly cringe. You are a singular user being asked to make a decision as to what platform you would want to invest in. The only way any party becomes a factor is when they offer something compelling to users. In short, the people that are against purchases most of time simply do not want to make another purchase. They are usually the same users that have disproportionately benefited from Sony doing what every business in a position of strength does i.e. perpetuate dominance.

So these moves, tend to be viewed from a pro Sony lens despite the fact that we now have a divergence in business models. Microsoft needs content to fuel Game Pass, and they are not going to get to where they need to be by buying a studio here, a studio there. They need to accelerate that timeline and the easiest way to really make a case to consumers is by getting the talent and recognizable IP. Today, you cannot play a Final Fantasy game on Nintendo systems or Street Fighter for that matter because there is a party that pays to keep them off other systems. You could play the Xeno games on PlayStation, and today you have to get a Nintendo console to play that because Nintendo bought Monolith.

I was never going to get the original Xbox up until it was announced that Dead or Alive 3 was going to release exclusively on it. A third party title that had been on PlayStation and Sega systems. No brand loyalty, just a gamer moving to where a must have game had moved. I was similarly willing to miss the XB1 generation if Microsoft did not make changes to what they presented at E3 in 2013. It is amazing how simple life becomes when people worry about the decisions they can make.

Platforms taking games away from others is normal. Platforms keeping games away from others, even for some time, is normal. Publishers being bought out is also normal, albeit infrequent. My advice, if you want games on PlayStation, there is something out there for you. If you desire what Microsoft is doing with Game Pass or their exclusives, they have multiple entry points for you. The persistent moaning about how stuff is being taken away is entitlement that needs to end seeing that it is common place.

I once asked whether there were people that were allergic to getting games on anything that is not PlayStation, and going through threads, there are those that have platform loyalty that is hard to explain. The world will move on as these complain.

This is a 10/10 post and should be stickied tbh
 

Gold Arsene

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
30,757
Do we even know that they'd prevent Sega from releasing stuff on multiple platforms?

It's not like Minecraft is Xbox exclusive now.
 

Flame Lord

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,795
You people can try rationalizing this all you want, but ultimately it doesn't matter.
Corporate consolidation is bad. Less indipendence in the industry is bad.
It doesn't benefit the consumer in any way.
Making something exclusive will ALWAYS result in fewer people playing it, simply because the number of people who'll renounce playing on a specific platform will always be superior to those who'll jump ship.
I seriously don't get how many of you fail to realize this. That's the "fuck you, got mine" sentiment at its finest.

There's a lot of industries where consolidation and a lack of competition are bad for numerous reasons that actively make life harder for everyone. If MS buys Sega you might have to buy an Xbox... I think these concerns are a tad overblown.
 

ShinAmano

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,841
Do we even know that they'd prevent Sega from releasing stuff on multiple platforms?

It's not like Minecraft is Xbox exclusive now.
Why does this pop up? No MS won't release games on other platforms when they are first party aside from maybe a case by case basis. That said I didn't see that MS actually bought sega so it doesn't matter.
 

Jaded Alyx

Member
Oct 25, 2017
35,350
No one gets established in the gaming business without leveraging money from elsewhere. Sony had to spend their way in, Microsoft had to spend their way in. Google has the infrastructure, but to get exclusive content that will bring people into their ecosystem will require spending from their ad revenue business.

Epic wants to establish a PC store, and guess what, they are spending their way to try and establish themselves as an alternative to Steam.

Gaming requires those building ecosystems to eat a loss early, and sustain those losses before critical mass is achieved.

Microsoft needs to cultivate competitive gaming studios is nonsense by the way. Microsoft has traditionally had a small first party studio organization, and it is something that Sony had too up until the PS3 generation where they lost exclusivity with a lot of titles going multiplatform; releasing day and date on other consoles.

Microsoft was dumb. It was in gaming without ever committing fully to the venture. This is how they came into this generation with 5 studios, one making a game that was available on everything. This was how they got into proper relationships with developers, but never ever solidified those relationships by acquiring Angel Studios, BioWare, DICE, Double Helix, Bizarre or even trying to get Team Ninja.

They sat around as reliable partners were swallowed up, or saw some developers move in another direction because the parent company was working in its own interest. They also got into deals where they got games but did not own the IP. They published Sunset Overdrive, did not own the IP, they published Gears of War, did not own the IP. They published Ryse, and they do not own that IP. Where on earth have you seen a game being a cornerstone of a platform, published by the platform holder and not owned by it?
Microsoft was extremely careless around talent and IP.

The moment I see people state that games are being taken away from a user base, I honestly cringe. You are a singular user being asked to make a decision as to what platform you would want to invest in. The only way any party becomes a factor is when they offer something compelling to users. In short, the people that are against purchases most of time simply do not want to make another purchase. They are usually the same users that have disproportionately benefited from Sony doing what every business in a position of strength does i.e. perpetuate dominance.

So these moves, tend to be viewed from a pro Sony lens despite the fact that we now have a divergence in business models. Microsoft needs content to fuel Game Pass, and they are not going to get to where they need to be by buying a studio here, a studio there. They need to accelerate that timeline and the easiest way to really make a case to consumers is by getting the talent and recognizable IP. Today, you cannot play a Final Fantasy game on Nintendo systems or Street Fighter for that matter because there is a party that pays to keep them off other systems. You could play the Xeno games on PlayStation, and today you have to get a Nintendo console to play that because Nintendo bought Monolith.

I was never going to get the original Xbox up until it was announced that Dead or Alive 3 was going to release exclusively on it. A third party title that had been on PlayStation and Sega systems. No brand loyalty, just a gamer moving to where a must have game had moved. I was similarly willing to miss the XB1 generation if Microsoft did not make changes to what they presented at E3 in 2013. It is amazing how simple life becomes when people worry about the decisions they can make.

Platforms taking games away from others is normal. Platforms keeping games away from others, even for some time, is normal. Publishers being bought out is also normal, albeit infrequent. My advice, if you want games on PlayStation, there is something out there for you. If you desire what Microsoft is doing with Game Pass or their exclusives, they have multiple entry points for you. The persistent moaning about how stuff is being taken away is entitlement that needs to end seeing that it is common place.

I once asked whether there were people that were allergic to getting games on anything that is not PlayStation, and going through threads, there are those that have platform loyalty that is hard to explain. The world will move on as these complain.

4abf56d73f0a51cf353320a113110f2a.gif
 

slothrop

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Aug 28, 2019
3,875
USA
There's a lot of industries where consolidation and a lack of competition are bad for numerous reasons that actively make life harder for everyone. If MS buys Sega you might have to buy an Xbox... I think these concerns are a tad overblown.
You never have to buy any console. You can just choose to not play the games.
 

Geode

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,455
If Microsoft bought Sega I would buy an Xbox Series X that same day. I can't live without my Sonic games!!!
 

Gold Arsene

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
30,757
If Microsoft bought Sega I would buy an Xbox Series X that same day. I can't live without my Sonic games!!!
Swap Sonic for Persona but same for me.

Like I'd be annoyed because I have a bunch of digital games and movies on my PS4 but I just won't sell my PS4 is all.

Plus hey I can finally see what the big deal about Phantasy Star Online is.
 

Iron Eddie

Banned
Nov 25, 2019
9,812
What does concern me is that the gaming industry could inevitably become monopolized by a few companies, which could have drastic impacts on things like game prices and the types of games that get made. We've seen this in the movie industry. Disney controls a significantly higher percentage of the industry than 20-40 years ago, and the result we got was them bullying theaters into devoting a certain number of screenings to Avengers: Endgame and the Lion King. They effectively pushed certain types of films out of theaters and onto streaming. They make movies that are clearly driven by studio plans over the initiative of talented creative directors. It's played a part in blockbusters becoming these big bloated things that pander to nostalgia rather than inventive new ideas. Some of my film-minded friends think this has straight up ruined the modern film industry, especially as far as middlebrow stuff goes, and while I wouldn't go that far it's had a negative effect on the industry as a whole. I'm worried we could see similar effects in the gaming industry as well. And monopolies are just objectively always worse for consumers.

There is concern no matter what.
There is concern the AAA space is not sustainable.
Major publishers have also closed shop in the past. Remember THQ and Midway?

As for movies the viewing habits is what has changed. Years ago it was very expensive to recreate the theater in your home. Now we have 4K TV's that are over 70" and affordable sound systems. What's going on with Disney has fast tracked what was already occurring but COVID-19 accelerated that. Now movies like Mulan are day and date on Disney +. HBO is also getting involved, same with Netflix and funding 100 million plus dollar movies.

You either adapt or die. Gaming is no different, it too will change in the way we play games. Microsoft is betting on a Netflix style of gaming habits with a subscription based model and using Game Pass as its main attractor. To do that you need content.

The old way was buying multiple boxes to play content. So no matter how you look at it it was always fractured and always expensive.

The thing is we now have more software being made than we did in the 90's but people are freaking out about what's going to happen and are worried about losing content? I don't get it. Look at movies and TV for example, we have too much to watch now. Every month we have new games to play. People need to relax.
 

Sandfox

Member
Oct 25, 2017
24,743
Sega could do anything and you'd have people saying it's because MS is going to acquire them lol
 
Jun 23, 2019
6,446
Bayonetta showed that xbox fanboys hate it too when games get taken away.

I wouldn't know because I was too busy with the shitty PS3 port that ran like ass. 😭


You people can try rationalizing this all you want, but ultimately it doesn't matter.
Corporate consolidation is bad. Less indipendence in the industry is bad.
It doesn't benefit the consumer in any way.
Making something exclusive will ALWAYS result in fewer people playing it, simply because the number of people who'll renounce playing on a specific platform will always be superior to those who'll jump ship.
I seriously don't get how many of you fail to realize this. That's the "fuck you, got mine" sentiment at its finest.

Well said.
 

Guerrilla

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,235
No one gets established in the gaming business without leveraging money from elsewhere. Sony had to spend their way in, Microsoft had to spend their way in. Google has the infrastructure, but to get exclusive content that will bring people into their ecosystem will require spending from their ad revenue business.

Epic wants to establish a PC store, and guess what, they are spending their way to try and establish themselves as an alternative to Steam.

Gaming requires those building ecosystems to eat a loss early, and sustain those losses before critical mass is achieved.

Microsoft needs to cultivate competitive gaming studios is nonsense by the way. Microsoft has traditionally had a small first party studio organization, and it is something that Sony had too up until the PS3 generation where they lost exclusivity with a lot of titles going multiplatform; releasing day and date on other consoles.

Microsoft was dumb. It was in gaming without ever committing fully to the venture. This is how they came into this generation with 5 studios, one making a game that was available on everything. This was how they got into proper relationships with developers, but never ever solidified those relationships by acquiring Angel Studios, BioWare, DICE, Double Helix, Bizarre or even trying to get Team Ninja.

They sat around as reliable partners were swallowed up, or saw some developers move in another direction because the parent company was working in its own interest. They also got into deals where they got games but did not own the IP. They published Sunset Overdrive, did not own the IP, they published Gears of War, did not own the IP. They published Ryse, and they do not own that IP. Where on earth have you seen a game being a cornerstone of a platform, published by the platform holder and not owned by it?
Microsoft was extremely careless around talent and IP.

The moment I see people state that games are being taken away from a user base, I honestly cringe. You are a singular user being asked to make a decision as to what platform you would want to invest in. The only way any party becomes a factor is when they offer something compelling to users. In short, the people that are against purchases most of time simply do not want to make another purchase. They are usually the same users that have disproportionately benefited from Sony doing what every business in a position of strength does i.e. perpetuate dominance.

So these moves, tend to be viewed from a pro Sony lens despite the fact that we now have a divergence in business models. Microsoft needs content to fuel Game Pass, and they are not going to get to where they need to be by buying a studio here, a studio there. They need to accelerate that timeline and the easiest way to really make a case to consumers is by getting the talent and recognizable IP. Today, you cannot play a Final Fantasy game on Nintendo systems or Street Fighter for that matter because there is a party that pays to keep them off other systems. You could play the Xeno games on PlayStation, and today you have to get a Nintendo console to play that because Nintendo bought Monolith.

I was never going to get the original Xbox up until it was announced that Dead or Alive 3 was going to release exclusively on it. A third party title that had been on PlayStation and Sega systems. No brand loyalty, just a gamer moving to where a must have game had moved. I was similarly willing to miss the XB1 generation if Microsoft did not make changes to what they presented at E3 in 2013. It is amazing how simple life becomes when people worry about the decisions they can make.

Platforms taking games away from others is normal. Platforms keeping games away from others, even for some time, is normal. Publishers being bought out is also normal, albeit infrequent. My advice, if you want games on PlayStation, there is something out there for you. If you desire what Microsoft is doing with Game Pass or their exclusives, they have multiple entry points for you. The persistent moaning about how stuff is being taken away is entitlement that needs to end seeing that it is common place.

I once asked whether there were people that were allergic to getting games on anything that is not PlayStation, and going through threads, there are those that have platform loyalty that is hard to explain. The world will move on as these complain.
Good post
 

gremlinz1982

Member
Aug 11, 2018
5,331
Could they seriously not find any other Wii U exclusives they cared about, including Platinum's own Wonderful 101?


So as someone who's not particularly happy about these acquisitions, let me offer a short counterpoint. As a personal, singular consumer, I don't really care that these games are going to be exclusive to different platforms. Much like you I just go where the games are. I'll probably own a Switch Pro, a PS5, and a high end gaming PC in a couple years, which will allow me to play everything. I didn't get mad when sequels to some of my favorite Gamecube games like Tales of Symphonia and Soul Calibur II were on the PS2 and then 360/PS3, and I won't get mad here for this reason as well. Like 90% of the people in this topic expressing disappointment are this way, and it's a combination of silly/funny/sad to read. I guess it makes sense if you're strapped for cash and can only buy one console, but like, not atypical for the industry, and if you wanted to play Sega games and Persona 2 in 2000 you would have had to buy a PS1 and a DreamCast back then too.

What does concern me is that the gaming industry could inevitably become monopolized by a few companies, which could have drastic impacts on things like game prices and the types of games that get made. We've seen this in the movie industry. Disney controls a significantly higher percentage of the industry than 20-40 years ago, and the result we got was them bullying theaters into devoting a certain number of screenings to Avengers: Endgame and the Lion King. They effectively pushed certain types of films out of theaters and onto streaming. They make movies that are clearly driven by studio plans over the initiative of talented creative directors. It's played a part in blockbusters becoming these big bloated things that pander to nostalgia rather than inventive new ideas. Some of my film-minded friends think this has straight up ruined the modern film industry, especially as far as middlebrow stuff goes, and while I wouldn't go that far it's had a negative effect on the industry as a whole. I'm worried we could see similar effects in the gaming industry as well. And monopolies are just objectively always worse for consumers.
Digital distribution has done a lot for a lot of industries. Disney is huge, but today, there is more money getting into the movie industry and more independent films coming out. Better tech means that people do not have to spend that much on equipment, and you do not have to partner with a big distributor to get product out.

It is the same with book publishing. When you look at games, gaming has never been bigger or more accessible. Sure, we are losing at the top end where publishers are playing it safe, but the indy scene is absolutely bonkers. Music, movies, Series, E-books all benefited from digital distribution and the opportunities that opened up. XBLA, PSN, digital storefronts have done that for gaming.

Entertainment is so huge that it cannot be absorbed by a few players. Each year we see more consolidation, but each year we also see new studios coming up and some really shining through. Every few years we see smaller publishing units rise up and take on AA titles, types of games that bigger publishers will shun, or AA developers coming up and making the jump.

Microsoft will gobble up the whole gaming industry is fear mongering, or that a few tech companies will absorb majority of gaming. They wont even if they wished they could because there is a finite market and you also do not want to have more content than you otherwise would. There is also only so much staff you can also absorb.
 

leder

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,111
On the one hand I don't want Sega to be acquired, on the other hand, the fact that we could get a new Sega console...
 

Hope

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
2,065
Lets see if all these fanboys will also cheerleading when ms is fireing all these redundant publisher staff. As long as gamepass gets better it's all good I supposse.
 

Dust

C H A O S
Member
Oct 25, 2017
32,161
Yeah, could be potentially massive. If this is going to MS, then MS is officially done with playing around and will buy anyone they can, considering their infinite money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.