bender
What time is it?
...and it scared MS from ever doing it again.
...and it scared MS from ever doing it again.
I am all for exclusives. The more the better. I am just against hypocrisy.
When MS got Tomb Raider as an exclusive, do you remember the absolute smashing they got from the media and Sony fans for taking the game away from Sony?
It was a bloodbath, and it scared MS from ever doing it again.
Now that Sony has been doing it, they got praised for getting those games for their players.
It might upset some people that MS has deep pockets and could buy Sony tomorrow with Cash and not lose a night's sleep, but stiff shit. That's the reality, and MS should do all the buying of studios they can for their console.
I don't give two fucks if Sony can't match them. Sony should do what they are good at, and if they do a good job, they will be successful.
shhhh he says he is against hypocrisy but conveniently ignores all the third-party exclusive games Xbox has done over the years.You keep talking about Sony and their smaller deals.
You do realize an acquisition at this magnitude (for anyone) is unprecedented, right?
Also, you just admitted MS first dabbled with 3rd party exclusives. That gives Sony all the free reign to respond with their own, does it not?
This isn’t about individual 3rd party exclusive deals, though, is what you’re missing.
This is a (‘nother) “publisher” we’re talking about.
As been established in almost every day of this trial..Phils nose is growing exponentially. He is a sad human being.It has been decided, but Phill Spencer said he couldn't recall if it was.
It was a bloodbath, and it scared MS from ever doing it again.
Well he also said he is not paying for timed exclusive games, and we know that is not true.Doesn't this email sort of contradict Spencer's testimony the other day about ES6 platforms being undecided/unknown? Did the man just lie to the court?
I am all for exclusives. The more the better. I am just against hypocrisy.
When MS got Tomb Raider as an exclusive, do you remember the absolute smashing they got from the media and Sony fans for taking the game away from Sony?
It was a bloodbath, and it scared MS from ever doing it again.
Now that Sony has been doing it, they got praised for getting those games for their players.
It might upset some people that MS has deep pockets and could buy Sony tomorrow with Cash and not lose a night's sleep, but stiff shit. That's the reality, and MS should do all the buying of studios they can for their console.
I don't give two fucks if Sony can't match them. Sony should do what they are good at, and if they do a good job, they will be successful.
Wait, are we lying through our teeth?
I mean, the easy answer for journos is ‘We’re aware of the acquisition, but these decisions are made by Xbox/Microsoft’.
Bethesda were bought out by Microsoft so I’m pretty sure it’s not really their business and they’re just looking for answers to satisfy their own curiosity.
Try to keep up.Ahahah are you serious dude?
Keep dreaming, keep sorry.
Didn't scared Microsoft, simply didn't work for them.
Nothing on the scale of Tomb Raider. TR was a massive franchise, one of the biggest in gaming actually.Xbox has many timed exclusive games after Tomb Raider, both big and small.
You guys are so quick to defend Microsoft without making any logical sense whatsoever.
You're lying. And Phil also lied. Let's stop acting as if Phil didn't say the exact opposite when it came to Bethesda games.Zenimax-Bethesda games don't have that power. That is why its acquisition was approved without conditions.
In the case of Activision, only COD would have that category and what this email proves is that MS's intention is for the game to continue to be multiplatform and to be released on PS.
Ark sold 20 million copies, thats a bigger game in terms of sales than Tomb Raider.Nothing on the scale of Tomb Raider. TR was a massive franchise, one of the biggest in gaming actually.
You obviously went around back then an have no memory about the stink it caused.
People Are Pissed That Tomb Raider Is An Xbox Exclusive
This morning's biggest Gamescom news was that Rise of the Tomb Raider, the next big console installment in Lara Croft's adventures, will be an Xbox exclusive. And people are pissed.kotaku.com
Pretty sad that someone at Bethesda doesn't understand the basics of the console war.
The difference is they don't have to and they need exclusives to compete, it's not rocket science and embarrassing that email was even written.
Again, you seem to be confused. Microsoft isn't limited to what it can acquire because Sony is limited.You keep talking about Sony and their smaller deals.
You do realize an acquisition at this magnitude (for anyone) is unprecedented, right?
Also, you just admitted MS first dabbled with 3rd party exclusives. That gives Sony all the free reign to respond with their own, does it not?
This isn’t about individual 3rd party exclusive deals, though, is what you’re missing.
This is a (‘nother) “publisher” we’re talking about.
So the fact he is running Xbox 1st party studios is irrelevant?It really doesn't matter what he thinks or what he wants explained tho. He's not the person making those decisions.
Nothing on the scale of Tomb Raider. TR was a massive franchise, one of the biggest in gaming actually.
You obviously went around back then an have no memory about the stink it caused.
People Are Pissed That Tomb Raider Is An Xbox Exclusive
This morning's biggest Gamescom news was that Rise of the Tomb Raider, the next big console installment in Lara Croft's adventures, will be an Xbox exclusive. And people are pissed.kotaku.com
Whats embarrassing is the MS Execs didn't communicate with Bethesda as to why Activision would be treated differently than them.
???You're lying. And Phil also lied. Let's stop acting as if Phil didn't say the exact opposite when it came to Bethesda games.
Again, you seem to be confused. Microsoft isn't limited to what it can acquire because Sony is limited.
Just because Sony hasn't bought a company as big as ABK doesn't mean MS can't.
Sony bought big publishers years ago. They have purchased the vast amount of their game studios, just like MS have. Infact, Sony only has two more studios they built from the ground up than MS has (6-4).
Sony doesn't dictate the rules of how game companies can be ran, or how they can grow.
It doesn't matter if Sony fans think MS buying a big publisher isn't "fair". It doesn't matter that Sony doesn't have the ability to match MSs wallet.
And let's be honest here, of Sony could afford to buy ABK, and they had the opportunity, do you honestly think they wouldn't? You do realize the same Sony who doesn't do that sort of thing offered about 40-50 billion for Fox yeah?
Don't kid yourself. And, if Sony did buy ABK, the same people here saying how bad it is that MS is doing it, would all suddenly be touching themselves in their dirty spots about it.
Hey, it sucks when things don't go your way. It sucked as an xbox gamer when Sony was getting all the exclusive content and Xbox didn't. But you didn't mind then, so now that Xbox is getting exclusive content that PS isn't, you again shouldn't mind.
In the words of my PS friends, want to play the exclusives? Buy an xbox.
You are going hard for the intellectually dishonest competition or what????
Are you talking or is it your obfuscation?
1- You may like it or not but, according to the regulators, only COD is an IP that can cause damage to its exclusivity in the current situation of the console market. I correct, only the FTC because the rest have already ruled it out.
I don't know where you see the lie in a fact...
2- P. Spencer said many things. What he never said is that Bethesda games were going to keep coming out on PS forever. Among other things because, unlike what happens with COD, it did not have the same economic incentive and the regulators approved in full without conditions.
The bigger point is that for sure Starfield and especially TES VI were going to make good numbers on multiple PlayStation generations (see Skyrim). MS came in and to the public they said “we are not here to remove games from PlayStation, we want to bring more games to more people” and internally said “we do not give enough of a shit to really oversee things, see Redfall, but stop anything going to PlayStation consoles we can get away with it, renegotiate contracts if you must”.Lol Pete. CoD and Starfield are not the same. Sure Starfield is going to be a much better game, but CoD has a much bigger audience.
That's not what that email says at all... You are making assumptions based on an interpretation of something you have nothing to do with. If you only focus on what is actually written, it's mostly that he's confused Zenimax titles are exclusive and CoD won't be.The bigger point is that for sure Starfield and especially TES VI were going to make good numbers on multiple PlayStation generations (see Skyrim). MS came in and to the public they said “we are not here to remove games from PlayStation, we want to bring more games to more people” and internally said “we do not give enough of a shit to really oversee things, see Redfall, but stop anything going to PlayStation consoles we can get away with it, renegotiate contracts if you must”.
You are going hard for the intellectually dishonest competition or what?
another email that isn't interesting. Keep them coming.
LOL. Another email without substance.
Pete Hines wondering how he should respond to the press asking why ABK games are going to come out on PS5 and Bethesda games are not.
In any case, it is an email that reinforces MS's intention that COD is not going to be exclusive.
Pete needs to get with the MS program or find a new job I think.
While he was the decision maker at Bethesda, he was busy selling exclusive content to Sony and planned on more like Starfield, so he has some internal hypocrisy he needs to deal with.
That's the thing. FTC fine with Sony having exclusives but not MS.Microsoft should just commit to release all their games on Playstation (in addition to PC and Xbox) and then government should just force Sony to do the same. No more buying unnecessary redundant boxes just to play some games.
That's the thing. FTC fine with Sony having exclusives but not MS.
They fine if Japanese company dominate American market with 3rd party deals, but they cant let American company do the same in America.
I seriously wonder what kind of people work in FTC
If Sony tried to buy a publisher there would be opposition to the deal as well. If 56-44 is dominating then yikes. Why does it matter if Sony are Japanese?That's the thing. FTC fine with Sony having exclusives but not MS.
They fine if Japanese company dominate American market with 3rd party deals, but they cant let American company do the same in America.
I seriously wonder what kind of people work in FTC