-
If you have been following the news, you should be aware that the people of Lebanon have been under a violent bombardment that has recently escalated. Please consider donating to help them if you can or trying to spread word of the fundraiser.
-
Asheville and Western North Carolina at large are in crisis after Helene, please consider contributing to these local organizations and helping the people whose lives have been destroyed.
[Rumor] Sony could have paid for blocking the release of Cult of the Lamb on Game Pass (Gary from Kinda Funny)
- Thread starter lunanto
- Start date
- Rumor Sony Microsoft
- Status
This make no sense lol. So sony bid more than Microsoft to block release on gamepass but they didn't put it on ps plus themselves ?
If true it would mean stuff like this is probably what MS was referring to in that document.
They seemed to have some kind of marketing deal with it didn't they? The trailers were all premiering on PS YouTube.
Our threads on the various trailers were PS YT threads.
www.resetera.com
Our threads on the various trailers were PS YT threads.
Cult of the Lamb - Sermons from the Lamb trailers News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33tPZFXDu-4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhePZqC-4ss
www.resetera.com
They bid more just to stop it going on game pass not to get it themselves which would likely have cost more again. According to this person anyway, its not exactly concrete evidence.
Around 13,000 Steam reviews in a week, I think I saw a suggestion that it's Devolver's second biggest Steam launch (after Fall Guys), so I'm not sure what you mean by "big".
bid more than gamepass though? but not enough to get it on Plus?
Yeah it was going toe to toe with Spider-Man on Steam in launch week. It made a splash.
Well, color me surprised. I didn't see much discussion about it here and in other gaming websites, so I had no idea.
Paying for it not be on gamepass could be a bunch of different things. Sony could've liked the game, marketed it and then made it as part of the marketing agreement that they couldn't put it on gamepass. If it was just a blocking it on gamepass, you'd assume a small indie studio would just take the most money offered.
The twitch integration helps it out I know I'm tempted to grab because of it
Wasn't that always the norm?
MS wouldn't allow their marketing deals day 1 on PS+
OP
OP
No? I think you can perfectly have the marketing rights for a game (trailers, promotion, etc.) without impeding its release on other platforms/services.
I'm sure an exclusion clause would cost less than putting it on a subscription since they can account for increased sales volume as a result. They don't necessarily need to be 1:1.
If a platform holder pays money to have marketing rights, and then that game releases on the competitors service and not theirs, it is a waste of money.
If MS are putting it on GP they need to offer enough to offset the expected lost sales revenue. If someone wanted to only stop that they wouldn't need to offer even the same amount. A smaller amount may be enough because MS would only have been covering what it would have sold.
So the company gets all the expected sales revenue and a little up front bonus for basically nothing.
This is guess work on my part but I assume it works something like this.
They can be released after some time (probably six months or a year), otherwise they would be promoting a competitors service
Assuming it's the case here of course, we have no clue
This is a non-story. It's just Gary doing one of his usual rants because he's probably mad that Cult of the Lamb wasn't on Game Pass so of course blame Sony for it. "Oh someone told me it's Sony's fault it isn't on there." I'm going to need more than a "someone" who probably is just assuming things because they saw that story about Microsoft saying Sony pays for games not to be on Game Pass and is now going to run with that every time a game they want to be on Game Pass isn't.
Last edited:
Can you think of any games that were marketed by Microsoft or Sony and were released day 1 on the others subscription service? MLB aside which is a whole different thing altogether. Not trying to throw a gotcha or whatever I'm seriously drawing a blank. Launch on other consoles sure but not on the sub service when a marketing deal was in place with the competition.
Wasn't this part of a marketing deal ? I remember that game being featured quite a bit on Playstation's Twitter.
Anyway, if Sony or whoever offers "valuable" marketing space in exchange for not putting the "for free" on the competing console service for some number of months (which would undermine the purpose of the marketing deal to being with) I don't see where the issue is exactly. Do we even know if the developer intended to put their game on Gamepass Day 1 ? Do we know if Xbox came after them ?
Anyway, if Sony or whoever offers "valuable" marketing space in exchange for not putting the "for free" on the competing console service for some number of months (which would undermine the purpose of the marketing deal to being with) I don't see where the issue is exactly. Do we even know if the developer intended to put their game on Gamepass Day 1 ? Do we know if Xbox came after them ?
Just yesterday we got the news that indie game Planet of Lana is coming exclusively to Xbox and PC with a Gamepass Day One inclusion. And this one is not even releasing on Playstation at all (yet). I guess Microsoft paid something for it, but strangely I haven't seen many threads here about it.
Yeah imagine if after Cyberpunk was on xboes stage with Keanu Reeves and everything, and then next day playstation advertised it was on Plus. It would be terrible for Microsoft.
I'm fairly sure Sony just has right of first refusal baked into their marketing contracts (Microsoft 99.9% the same thing). You have to offer the game to their service before going to another one. If you can't work out a deal, they can go to a competitor.
In this case, metrics were good, and Devolver would have been stupid to take a deal with either platform (which has bitten them in the ass before - they've mentioned it in an earnings release).
The poor reporting in that other thread is going to poison discussion for a long time to come...
In this case, metrics were good, and Devolver would have been stupid to take a deal with either platform (which has bitten them in the ass before - they've mentioned it in an earnings release).
The poor reporting in that other thread is going to poison discussion for a long time to come...
I assume this is a standard part of any marketing agreement and has been for years. Why wouldn't you include a clause like this? You spend all that money marketing someone's game and then they drop it onto a rival subscription service so people can access it for free? Doesn't make any sense.
How would he have acess to this type of information?
I get that Sony and MS would know about this. How would Gary from Kinda Funny would know?
I get that Sony and MS would know about this. How would Gary from Kinda Funny would know?
I think this is going to happen everytime a game skips gamepass, people are going to assume Sony is paying for it :P They have become the new bogeyman of the games industry.
Marketing agreements that do that have existed for decades and *are* normal. It's nothing new. Like Nintendo buying console exclusivity for MHRise, Microsoft for those tomb raider games, or Sony potentially for this. They all do it.
He doesn't know which is exactly why this shouldn't even be a thread.
It really seems to be part of the marketing deal, but I'm really curious to know if Sony owning 5% of Devolver makes any difference on these deals.
Game Pass money has to be accepted first though. Company might decide that releasing outside subscription service is better + you also get some money for essentially doing nothing different as usual. Basically do just like usual but also get additional money.
This doesn't seem like a very sustainable strategy and seems more like a losing one (if it is true, not saying it is or not)
Like OK....is Sony going to pay every time a big game may potentially go into Game Pass? That seems like it's going to add up and cost Sony a lot in the long run.
Like OK....is Sony going to pay every time a big game may potentially go into Game Pass? That seems like it's going to add up and cost Sony a lot in the long run.
If other insiders claim the same then sure but right now it seems ton of bs. New good indie game not on game pass on release? Probs Sony money is a really bad assumption. Would make sense if it was on plus but it's not. Even then we have lots of games on ps plus that are on gamepass like ubi classics.
Because GP is a good value? Let's be real - people being happy or unhappy with something has all to do with their personal preference and benefits.
The same way Grubb and another guy from KF (forgot the name) who heard about Square Enix acquisition rumors (which arguably nobody should have heard considering the level of those talks) and people started to believe those rumors. So just rumors that are not necessary true.
- Status