Support NeoGAF

[NEbeast]

If Sony had bought Bethesda tge xbox fans would be a screaming anti-consumer , there are so many hypocrites in this thread. All the crying after spiderman exclusivity, now you're trying to act like it's fine.

 

[dalekjay]

Now at least Sony may be more consumer friendly, every time Sony has the upper hand Jim Ryan types start making decisions, and we want and like Yoshida days

 

[CeeJay]

It's funny how the narrative around the term exclusive has changed over the last year or so. Not so long ago Xbox had no games because they were also available on PC. Jump forward to today where Sony have been putting their exclusives on PC and Xbox have bought Zenimax and now we are talking about these console/PC games being exclusive again.

Either Sony fanboys moved the goalposts or it was all a lie? Pick one...

 

[DJT123]

Because Sony are game hoarding grinches. If there's one Platform holder with monopolistic tendencies its them.

 

[Roufianos]

I'm not angry at MS for buying Bethesda though I do think deals like Tomb Raider and the recent Deathloop one are kind of scummy.

Paying to artificially limit a title from being released on another console for a year is infinately more anti-consumer than purchasing a studio and funding the games yourself. No doubt about it.

Of course, not all 3rd party exclusive deals are bad. See Sony actually funding SFV, a game that wouldn't have been made otherwise.

 

[oldergamer]

If sony bought them they would be playstation exclusive. They already went to all major publishers and tried to buy exclusivity. No gaurentee the games would release on pc at all if not years later. This is anti competitiveness

MS buys them and they still honor the exclusive deals sony paid for ( ms doesnt have to do that). They have talked about a desire for game pass on PlayStation).

The games will release on pc and xbox same day and date. They will be available on game pass for pc or console without an xbox. They say games could still appear on other consoles on a game by game basis. MS Is the only console maker putting games on competing platforms. Even mobile! Sony refuses to do this and releases on pc years later.

How is MS anti competitive??? If an independent developer says, "we could support ps5 but decided to make game x and y for other platforms". Is that anti competitive? No its not. If ms pays for development, they can choose where to put it. Not the same as paying to temporarily keep a game off a platform.

 

[Journey]

Sony moneyhat SFV just so Xbox wouldn’t have, I always have all consoles Psn is crappy for online fighting game and I had to buy a Pc just for SFV

These type of shitty moves go unnoticed or considered fair practice when Sony does it. Smdh

 

[Stilton Disco]

There's short sighted, selfish arsehole fans of everything.

I broadly hate buy-outs of almost any kind, with a few specific circumstances being exceptions (studio about to go under or long history of collaberative efforts and obvious synergy of target audiences. Obsidian to MS and Insomniac to PS being good examples).

If a studio or publisher is surviving on their own, then platform holders should be spending the money on creating new studios and IP's instead. I don't care who they are, adding to the industry is good, contracting it is bad, end of.

 

[El Sueño]

You can't have it all. That's a principle in life, and so it is in videogames. You put your money where your favorite games are. That's all. If you have the money to have all the plataforms good for you because that means you don't have to chose. Bathesta and xbox fans will be fine with Doom, Elder and others, and Sony fans will get their GoW and alikes in this generation.

 

[Derktron]

I think you've misunderstood. For the whole generation, Xbox has been calling Sony anticonsumer because phill Spencer deliberately instilled that idea into their heads with his usual PR. Now the shoe is on the other foot, Sony fans are taking the opportunity to show how hypocritical Spencer and his fans are.

Ohh I understand completely, Fanboys wanted Microsoft to play aggressively because they have no games, yet when they do get those games. They start bitching about it. Saying it’s anti-consumer. But if Sony had the damn chance no one would be flipping tables.

 

[Derktron]

Thanks for the totally revolutionary insight. Gaf hasn't discussed this enough I guess.

It does need to be discussed, it’s not my fault you get salty enough to not want to talk about it. If you don’t want to all you had to do is ignore this topic and be done with it. But since you wanted attention you had to say something to get yourself attention.

 

[Derktron]

No...it was great when Xbox did it back then. It just all changed when PlayStation did it.... cause people listen to Phil like he is the Pope or a world leader or something....

Again, if Sony had done this, we had a damn parade for Sony in celebrating. That’s my main point. It’s true that’s anti-consumer for any company but let’s not pretend there’s bias when it comes to Microsoft just because of its previous history.

 

[ethomaz]

What world are you living?

Everything Sony does is anti-consumer, arrogant, evil, etc in internet or forum.
There are dozen of threads here about Spider-man exclusive that is way minor case.

Said that I don’t think neither MS or Sony did are anti-consumer.

Just the Xbox fab narratives are getting old already lol

 

[ethomaz]

No one from XBox or MS has called Sony anti consumer...the fuck is this nonsense?

Just do a search

There are like 5 Sony anti-consumer threads to each MS thread.

Phil talk talk is doing everything right while arrogant Sony is back with all the anti-consumer practices.

 

[ethomaz]

Sony moneyhat SFV just so Xbox wouldn’t have, I always have all consoles Psn is crappy for online fighting game and I had to buy a Pc just for SFV

How do you can play in place where most of players creating artificial lag is out of my mind.

There is a good reason SFV players turn off cross-pay with PC.

 

[ethomaz]

Just like the Sony fanboys here were applauding FFXVI exclusivity last week, they would have done the exact same thing if Sony had made this purchase. Sony fans only consider it anti-consumer when it’s Xbox.

Sony fans doesn’t talk about anti-consumer it was a thing created by Xbox side to try find something bad to talk about Evil Sony.

 

[Tripolygon]

I think you meant to say Cerny

Post one quote from Mark Cerny that has the word anti consumer in it. Or any comment at all that says anything about exclusives being bad for consumers.

 

[Wizz-Art]

Sony anti-consumer bad Evil Sony.

No lies detected!

 

[sn0man]

So if the tables were turned and Sony had somehow bought Bethesda, would Sony fans would not be acting this way and saying it’s anti-consumer. They would be celebrating the fact that Sony would definitely put ALL Bethesda games exclusive and took away the gaming deals that Microsoft has and took away support for online games like ESO and Fallout 76. Overall I don’t know why people online are complaining about this deal when it was them who forced Microsoft to be aggressive over getting studios and games. (Even though in my opinion they should do it differently even if it takes them years. But at some point they had to act aggressively)

I am not a fan of Microsoft for two reasons.

1.) since the xbone in 2013 with online requirements for creating profiles and save games

2.) after Windows 8/10 requiring telemetry data I don’t use them for my personal computer unless Linux can’t run something. Then I boot into the game, play the game, then boot back to Linux when done.

Based on Microsoft I’ve become a PlayStation, Switch, PC gamer only.

Nevertheless:
Objectively it would be worse for Sony to own Zenimax. I love to play id Software IP with a mouse and keyboard. Sony wouldn’t help me there. Same with enjoying buying a video card and tweaking settings to get a maxed out graphical experience.

I get you OP and you seem reasonable so hence my responding. But for me personally the truth is I’d rather neither studio buy them and have timed exclusives.

 

[sn0man]

When people angry they throw "anti-consumer" even if it doesn't make sense in that context...because they simply angry.

You guys want to talk about actual anti-consumer? its when Sony sometimes decides to censor some Japanese games and as their costumer its effecting my enjoyment of those games......why? just because to make people who has no interest in those type of games in the first place happy.....now that being "anti-consumer".

Or Microsoft’s online requirements. Very anti-consumer.

 

[Terce]

'Y'all' must be eradicated.

How do you feel about "All Y'all"?

 

[Maxwell Jacob Friedman]

Simple, i dont give a fuck. Its was a power move and a good one, why? Because id rather have bathesds fall into the hands of MS than into the hands of Amazon or Google and be a colossal failure, they still have a chance at failing with MS if they dont get their shit together, but prove me otherwise.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

MS is in a different path. It's due to MS's own decisions and statements that people question the exclusivity; it would never be questioned if it was a Sony acquisition.

I think it has been cleared up however, seems obvious that their big games will be on PC/Xbox only.

Yeah; now I think Starfield might still come to PS5, because if Sony were trying to get timed exclusivity then a PS5 version must've been far along. Enough to where I can see MS considering letting it be finished if the costs aren't too high, just to maximize the sunk costs (although those earlier funds would've came from Zenimax's previous investors, not MS, so it's not really "their" sunk costs that'd be lost in not releasing a PS5 version).

But even that would be PS5 - at best - getting it probably a year later. And that's the only massive IP outside of maybe the MMORPG stuff (Elder Scrolls Online) I see ever hitting a Sony platform going forward unless Sony allows Gamepass on the PS5, which would be complicated enough, moreso than Apple (note about Amazon's Luna: the reason it's on iOS is because it's not really on iOS; they basically abstract access through a website so Luna isn't installed as a native iOS app. Sounds less performant to me tbh, but we'll see).

 

[sainraja]

And again if you can get some of those games in the future - if not all - on PC or through Xcloud and some will be on Nintendo Switch and even mobile - wich to everyone who has some understanding is what case to case refers to - this technically isn't exclusivity, it only means they will never be on PS. There are many many pro's to that and almost none cons.

Uhh....what? lol

 

[Redlancet]

Again, if Sony had done this, we had a damn parade for Sony in celebrating. That’s my main point. It’s true that’s anti-consumer for any company but let’s not pretend there’s bias when it comes to Microsoft just because of its previous history.

Yeah if because you have only a if, this thread its the gift that keeps giving

 

[FranXico]

Yeah; now I think Starfield might still come to PS5, because if Sony were trying to get timed exclusivity then a PS5 version must've been far along. Enough to where I can see MS considering letting it be finished if the costs aren't too high, just to maximize the sunk costs (although those earlier funds would've came from Zenimax's previous investors, not MS, so it's not really "their" sunk costs that'd be lost in not releasing a PS5 version).

But even that would be PS5 - at best - getting it probably a year later. And that's the only massive IP outside of maybe the MMORPG stuff (Elder Scrolls Online) I see ever hitting a Sony platform going forward unless Sony allows Gamepass on the PS5, which would be complicated enough, moreso than Apple (note about Amazon's Luna: the reason it's on iOS is because it's not really on iOS; they basically abstract access through a website so Luna isn't installed as a native iOS app. Sounds less performant to me tbh, but we'll see).

If MS decides to let Bethesda release anything on PS, it will be a few years later, like Sony does to PC releases. That would be fair, all things considered.

 

[Manwithoutfear]

I’m sorry but before I begin my argument here, I want to point out. I’m in no way offending or acting in a fanboyish way. I’m only stating the facts (opinion) in what I see. (So if the mods think it’s too much then by all means close this thread)

Many online are in rage that Microsoft purchasing Bethesda is anti-consumer only because Microsoft could potentially make Bethesda games exclusive for their ecosystem. Which is absurd to even think that it’s not fair when Bethesda and Sony have an exclusivity deal for two games to stay on PS5 for a year or two. (In which Microsoft will still honor that deal). So if Microsoft had not purchased Bethesda how would that be fair for Xbox players and let’s not forget that allegedly Sony tried to bid Starfield as an exclusive deal for their console. (Timed). So if the tables were turned and Sony had somehow bought Bethesda, would Sony fans would not be acting this way and saying it’s anti-consumer. They would be celebrating the fact that Sony would definitely put ALL Bethesda games exclusive and took away the gaming deals that Microsoft has and took away support for online games like ESO and Fallout 76. Overall I don’t know why people online are complaining about this deal when it was them who forced Microsoft to be aggressive over getting studios and games. (Even though in my opinion they should do it differently even if it takes them years. But at some point they had to act aggressively)

What are your thoughts about this, do you think it would be fair for Microsoft to make future Bethesda games potentially exclusive to Microsoft’s ecosystem?

put bloodborne, demons soul, ratchet and clank, god of war, horizon, and infamous on xbox then we can talk about putting bethesda games back on sony platform ( you can keep tlou).

 

[Redlancet]

Paying to artificially limit a title from being released on another console for a year is infinately more anti-consumer than purchasing a studio and funding the games yourself. No doubt about it.

In this case elders scrolls and starfield. Were funded by bethesda

 

[MoreJRPG]

In this case elders scrolls and starfield. Were funded by bethesda

Last I checked those games are still in development and in the case of Elder Scrolls very early development.

 

[Sweep14]

I'm a Playstation gamer and I would not had welcome such an acquisition because having multiplatform games definitively becoming exclusives is not a good thing especialy knowing that my platform of choice would have got those games even without this buyout. I'd rather see creation/ investments in new studios or developping the ones already owned.

 

[Redlancet]

Last I checked those games are still in development and in the case of Elder Scrolls very early development.

And still being funded by them, these games dont required any financial help from ms

 

[Sweep14]

When Sony acquired Insomniac, robbing Xbox gamers from ever getting a sequel to Sunset Overdrive, it was called a Megaton and a win for Sony. Zero fucks given by Sony fans, absolutely no concern whatsoever, in fact they defended the idea. No mind reading required to figure out if Sony bought ZeniMax, we would see a celebration

Insomniac games released 3 games on Xbox (Fuse, Sunset Overdrive, Song of the Deep)

Insomniac games released... 23 games on Playstation. They've always been, at heart, a Sony studio.

 

[CrysisFreak]

I think we can all agree that timed exclusives are pretty shit. Doesn't matter who does it, cause no one wants to be on the shit end of a timed exclusive, and having to wait to finally be able to play said game.

Waiting is better than never playing it, as said 9000 times.

 

[LisaMariaMartin]

Yeah; now I think Starfield might still come to PS5, because if Sony were trying to get timed exclusivity then a PS5 version must've been far along..

Epic had a fully working Gears of war 3 build on PS3 that was scrapped because MS bought the franchise. Not a good argument imo.

 

[Journey]

Insomniac games released 3 games on Xbox (Fuse, Sunset Overdrive, Song of the Deep)

Insomniac games released... 23 games on Playstation. They've always been, at heart, a Sony studio.

Bethesda release almost all their games on Xbox. Guess it makes sense if their new home is Xbox haha

 

[Snake29]

I’m sorry but before I begin my argument here, I want to point out. I’m in no way offending or acting in a fanboyish way. I’m only stating the facts (opinion) in what I see. (So if the mods think it’s too much then by all means close this thread)

Many online are in rage that Microsoft purchasing Bethesda is anti-consumer only because Microsoft could potentially make Bethesda games exclusive for their ecosystem. Which is absurd to even think that it’s not fair when Bethesda and Sony have an exclusivity deal for two games to stay on PS5 for a year or two. (In which Microsoft will still honor that deal). So if Microsoft had not purchased Bethesda how would that be fair for Xbox players and let’s not forget that allegedly Sony tried to bid Starfield as an exclusive deal for their console. (Timed). So if the tables were turned and Sony had somehow bought Bethesda, would Sony fans would not be acting this way and saying it’s anti-consumer. They would be celebrating the fact that Sony would definitely put ALL Bethesda games exclusive and took away the gaming deals that Microsoft has and took away support for online games like ESO and Fallout 76. Overall I don’t know why people online are complaining about this deal when it was them who forced Microsoft to be aggressive over getting studios and games. (Even though in my opinion they should do it differently even if it takes them years. But at some point they had to act aggressively)

What are your thoughts about this, do you think it would be fair for Microsoft to make future Bethesda games potentially exclusive to Microsoft’s ecosystem?

I see this as they are buying themselves into the market, then really being creative. There's a big difference between buying studios you've had a good relationship with, and whose games only came out on your platform, then buying a publisher that was always multiplatform.

 

[Sweep14]

Bethesda release almost all their games on Xbox. Guess it makes sense if their new home is Xbox haha

No because Bethesda released almost all their games on Playstation too... There's no such discrepancy between platforms releases as there was with Insomniac

 

[Oddvintagechap]

Just Business, dont take it personally.

Companies can do whatever they want with their property. Only Xbox game I have cared about was Cuphead. I never played a singlw bethesha game. Even though they are in my library.

 

[Roufianos]

And still being funded by them, these games dont required any financial help from ms

Nope but they're being funded from MS from here on out so nobody can complain if they're kept off other systems.

 

[DonJuanSchlong]

Waiting is better than never playing it, as said 9000 times.

That's why I said timed exclusives suck. Think about it for a second. A timed exclusive means that the game will eventually be on both consoles. Why not just release both at the SAME time? Timed exclusives have never been beneficial to the customer.

 

[VincentMatts]

The only thing Sony can buy are smaller devs. They cant afford to spend billions on 3rd parties like MS, google or Amazon do.

 

[Orky]

I'm not angry at MS for buying Bethesda though I do think deals like Tomb Raider and the recent Deathloop one are kind of scummy.

Paying to artificially limit a title from being released on another console for a year is infinately more anti-consumer than purchasing a studio and funding the games yourself. No doubt about it.

Of course, not all 3rd party exclusive deals are bad. See Sony actually funding SFV, a game that wouldn't have been made otherwise.

I think by far the worst is paying to have a game mode or having a game character exclusive to a platform. Ridiculous. Why pay money for this crap? As if someone would sell his console because of a single character.

 

[mikefrails]

Some people just can't fathom buying an Xbox and it's so funny.

 

[VincentMatts]

Some people just can't fathom buying an Xbox and it's so funny.

The hate is real.

 

[Trogdor1123]

Pro-consumer, anti-consumer, whatever. I just care about what games I personally get to play.

 

[Journey]

No because Bethesda released almost all their games on Playstation too... There's no such discrepancy between platforms releases as there was with Insomniac

It was a joke! saying Insomniac released a lot of PlayStation titles makes it Ok to purchase them is an even bigger joke

 

[CrysisFreak]

That's why I said timed exclusives suck. Think about it for a second. A timed exclusive means that the game will eventually be on both consoles. Why not just release both at the SAME time? Timed exclusives have never been beneficial to the customer.

I do not have any understanding for your position in this discussion.
Played ROTR on PS4 Pro when it came out a year later, no problem.
Being forced to play TES VI on PC now is a problem for my preference.

Playing a game a year later on Xbox after PlayStation, no problem.
Not playing Nioh 2, Persona 5 or FF7R (potentially) ever on Xbox, big problem.

Timed exclusives are worse than full exclusive. Worse as in "worse", relatively.
Don't know why waiting trigger you so much, timed exclusives suck but they're the lesser evil lmao.

In any case it does not matter in the very end.

 

[MiguelItUp]

People saying it's "anti-consumer" are just being ridiculous. Whether it's fanboy nonsense, or not. Companies making these decisions has been around for forever. If anything, it's smart, depending on who it is they pick up.

The industry is full of companies wanting to make money and be successful. It's all business.

 

[sainraja]

It's funny how the narrative around the term exclusive has changed over the last year or so. Not so long ago Xbox had no games because they were also available on PC. Jump forward to today where Sony have been putting their exclusives on PC and Xbox have bought Zenimax and now we are talking about these console/PC games being exclusive again.

Either Sony fanboys moved the goalposts or it was all a lie? Pick one...

If you start looking at everything people are saying without your console war lens, it will start to make sense. There is no point in grouping people up based on what their likes/dislikes or preferences are.

I mean, if you want to keep doing that, then before the Bethesda acquisition, exclusives didn't matter to the Xbox fans...it was all about being device agnostic.