Any guy with a blog can get verified on twitter these daysDamn, well they are verified on twitter.
Thought it would obvious it was? It is associated with Playstation.
Fine with me if true, but I don't always think the people running the blogs know everything. Could also be timed exclusive as well. Would be nice to have clarity.
Yeah, CTR (presumably) wasn't part of the co-publishing deal with Universal, so it's the one and only Crash game that Acti doesn't own.
Iirc, while Sony doesn't own Crash as in the IP, they own the actual PSone games and their code.
But I could be wrong about that too. Anyone else know more?
I didn't even know there was a PlayStation Ireland - and I live in England.
Less people are going to buy and play the game, Nice!
The main three games were. Crash has had a couple of games on other platforms under Activision.
I don't subscribe to the notion that every game should be on every system, it's one of the reasons I'd never buy an Xbox anymore now that Microsoft has done away with exclusives.
What a shame for all those Crash fans on PC and Xbox and Nintendo?
How many times do we have to go through this?
So many games go through this, and then we end up seeing "it was only timed" a few months later. Parties never go out of their way to specifically state what they are.
The weid thing is that this sounds like a good thing yet you paint it like a bad thing
Without dedicated exclusives, there'd be a lot less incentive to get their systems and join that ecosystem, especially Nintendo's. They're not stupid.
Interesting, though there isn't much Sony can do with that as they don't own the IP.
I didn't even know there was a PlayStation Ireland - and I live in England.
I was hoping to get a Switch version, but PS4 version it is. Y'all better buy this game!
Any guy with a blog can get verified on twitter these days
What a shame for all those Crash fans on PC and Xbox and Nintendo?
We've gotten two confirmations that it's exclusive. If anything, I'd expect it to be a PS4 timed exclusive, and come to PC later, but not Xbox One or Switch.
More than a couple. ^^
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Crash_Bandicoot_video_games
(I'm counting the spin-offs though since those have plenty in common with the mainline games IMO)
There are quite a few Crash games on Nintendo platforms. In addition, its not unheard of for people to use multiple and/or different gaming platforms over timeWhat a shame for all those Crash fans on PC and Xbox and Nintendo?
I still don't see how this would be a bad thing.
Acti and only Acti is listed as the copyright claimant at the end of the announcement trailer, plus it's successful enough that it'd have no reason to accept a co-funding deal and in doing so relinquish at least some ownership of the product, so I'd think not. Remedy sunk all of its Max Payne money into the development of Alan Wake before partnering with Microsoft to finish the game and as a result it (the game, not the IP) is jointly owned by both of them, for instance.
Obnoxious portbeggars do not mean Sony and Nintendo should compromise their potential profit. Exclusives have always been huge draws for both of them. Horizon is just coming out next week, for example.
👊I'd support this even if it was on the N-Gage.
And PlayStation got 5 exclusive games, and are the ones people actually liked.You are aware that Nintendo systems did get 4 exclusive Crash games?
Literally I am not.You are aware that Nintendo systems did get 4 exclusive Crash games?
Less incentive to join Sony or Nintendo's ecosystem without them. It'd be incredibly shortsighted and I'm glad Shu and co. don't listen to the small minority of vocal port beggars. Nintendo and Sony know very well how to get gamers to want their platform, and have been doing so to great success for literally decades at this point.
I have no reason, as a Nintendo or Sony fan, to wish that Valve or somebody else could get a ~30% cut. I buy physical, so retailers get a cut, but why would I actively want Sony and Nintendo to compromise their ecosystem? Why should I want them to pay a competitor for the privilege of undermining their ecosystem? I say lolno to that. It's called dedicated hardware for a reason, it's so they can collect licence fees and not have to pay one for simply putting the game on the platform themselves.
It makes good business sense. I don't see any reason to compromise that for a tiny minority of obnoxious people who want the system's exclusive features and products, can generally afford a more expensive system (as they own a decent PC), and yet think they're entitled to that system's exclusive features and products. Too bad.
There's nothing more to say so I'll leave it at that.
To be honest I think Microsoft is the most based 1st party company right now precisely because they're giving their customers options as to how they want to play their games, rather than forcing an Xbox One on everyone (and also allowing their audience to go back and forth as they desire to play their games however)I don't subscribe to the notion that every game should be on every system, it's one of the reasons I'd never buy an Xbox anymore now that Microsoft has done away with exclusives.
Less incentive to join Sony or Nintendo's ecosystem without them. It'd be incredibly shortsighted and I'm glad Shu and co. don't listen to the small minority of vocal port beggars. Nintendo and Sony know very well how to get gamers to want their platform, and have been doing so to great success for literally decades at this point.
I have no reason, as a Nintendo or Sony fan, to wish that Valve or somebody else could get a ~30% cut. I buy physical, so retailers get a cut, but why would I actively want Sony and Nintendo to compromise their ecosystem? It's called dedicated hardware for a reason, it's so they can collect licence fees and not have to pay one for simply putting the game on the platform themselves.
It makes good business sense. I don't see any reason to compromise that for a tiny minority of obnoxious people who want the system's exclusive features and products, can generally afford a more expensive system (as they own a decent PC), and yet think they're entitled to that system's exclusive features and products. Too bad.
There's nothing more to say so I'll leave it at that.
The difference in this case though is Horizon is from a first party Sony owned studio. There is no expectation for a first party game to ever appear on anything but a Sony platform.
In the case for Crash however, Activision owns the rights to the IP they are effectively under no obligation to restrict its release to a single platform. So your comparison with a first party release is not apples to apples in this regard.
So in other words, you don't actually care about your own perspective as a consumer and just want a million dollar company you subscribed yourself as a consumer to, to make money? Alright.
Oh I know, but I think the fact that this is the first time they have referred to it as an exclusive and that acti have been shy about confirming it either way makes me think it won't be exclusive forever.
I could easily see it being a year, though.
What a shame for all those Crash fans on PC and Xbox and Nintendo?
My perspective as a consumer is simple: Fuck portbegging.
Didn't you heard that it would be a perfect fit for the switchThought it would obvious it was? It is associated with Playstation.
Nah, I don't buy it.