ManaByte
Gold Member
The game looks like ass anyway. Will wait for beta impressions and a digital foundry breakdown before I go anywhere near this steaming pile.
You'll get beta impressions before the beta arrives.
The game looks like ass anyway. Will wait for beta impressions and a digital foundry breakdown before I go anywhere near this steaming pile.
Sony is paying for Xbox and PC players to get less content for the exact same amount of money on a game they can buy the exact same day. That’s in no way comparable to a game being exclusive.
PS fans don’t have to pay 60$ to not get the medium. PC and Xbox fans will have to pay 60$ for the honor of not getting Spidey.
There is a hell of a difference in a playable character and an entire game mode too. Point is, if I take this just a tad more serious, is these companies (all three of them) only care about getting our dollars and are willing to make deals to get them. Fanatical hatred or defense for any of them goes well beyond silly.
Just had a read of the xbox thread on LOLchartz. Holy shit they're having a breakdown, on one hand giving out about Sony deals while on the other praying MS get WB. Full on panic mode about how xbox will compete next year and the year after. You'd think they'd realise by now that their platform of choice can't compete with PlayStation.
Nobody HAS to pay anything. They're luxury products.
If the Spiderman DLC wasn't free, would that fix the problem in your opinion?
Like having Link exclusive to the GC version of Soul Calibur II.I hate this type of practice. It has to vanish ASAP.
Like having Link exclusive to the GC version of Soul Calibur II.
The home versions of the game feature Necrid, a new character created by Todd McFarlane, and one of three platform-exclusive characters: Heihachi Mishima from Tekken only on the PlayStation 2, Link from The Legend of Zelda only on the GameCube, and Spawn from the comic book series of the same name by McFarlane only on XBOX
The game with less content should be cheaper, by law.
Go do some research before you keep talking bullshit!
They own film, comic and game rights to Spiderman, they struck a deal with Marvel and Disney to share Spiderman - They still own the rights! Share, the operative word is share, they did not sell the rights, they offered to 'share' Spiderman!
Show me the proof where they don't own Spiderman rights? Spiderman is a fictional character, so when someone says 'own' they mean the rights to that property.
Some moronic people on GAF I tell ya!
Go do some research before you keep talking bullshit!
They own film, comic and game rights to Spiderman, they struck a deal with Marvel and Disney to share Spiderman - They still own the rights! Share, the operative word is share, they did not sell the rights, they offered to 'share' Spiderman!
Show me the proof where they don't own Spiderman rights? Spiderman is a fictional character, so when someone says 'own' they mean the rights to that property.
Some moronic people on GAF I tell ya!
So if Sony changed it so that Playstation users had to pay to use Spider-Man instead of getting it for free, you would consider that more pro-consumer?
Sony really lucked out with that Spider-man deal. Movies are currently dead so Marvel isn't getting much out of it but video games are bigger than ever. Even if it's Miles, the Spider-man game can probably carry the PS5 launch by itself.Regardless of whether they have licensing rights to the video game Spiderman, they have the licensing rights to movie Spiderman. And since Marvel wants to use Spiderman in the MCU (and he should never leave it ever), that gives Sony tremendous leverage over video game Spiderman.
I'm gonna wait to see before agreeing, but yeah I do suspect you will be proven correct about carrying launch.Sony really lucked out with that Spider-man deal. Movies are currently dead so Marvel isn't getting much out of it but video games are bigger than ever. Even if it's Miles, the Spider-man game can probably carry the PS5 launch by itself.
you should make the game cheaper for the people who have an incomplete game.
Why even release it on PC and Xbox at all?
The leaked contract between Sony and Marvel that ANYONE can read and educate themselves. I'm banking on people reading that and not being ignorant. Why would I post that if I didn't want people to read it?
Here's something your Goddess is wrong on. I'll let you guess how she's wrong on this.
As to your question, Sony moneyhatted to have Spider-man exclusively. Don't overcomplicate it. That is VERY smart on their part as it gives people the impression that you are having (i.e. they own the character).
Sony also moneyhatted to have Iron man exclusive game. Does it mean they own the Iron man character? EA moneyhatted to have SW license, does it mean they own them?
Sony is paying for Xbox and PC players to get less content for the exact same amount of money on a game they can buy the exact same day. That’s in no way comparable to a game being exclusive.
PS fans don’t have to pay 60$ to not get the medium. PC and Xbox fans will have to pay 60$ for the honor of not getting Spidey.
Because the content is timed and gamers in those platforms will just have to wait for it?
Yes but by increasing the price of the game with all the content, the one with less content would therefore be cheaper. And guessing by your response, you wouldn't be ok with that, which means your issue isn't with people paying the same amount not getting the same amount of content.
Making a claim about how this limits consumer options would probably be a better argument.
Yes, lets not even bother releasing a game on platforms because they don't have early access to a shitty costume that nobody will even fucking wear because it probably looks like trash. How could these people even live without early access to a Legendary Emote™.Why even release it on PC and Xbox at all?
The PS Plus stuff isn't timed.
Yes, lets not even bother releasing a game on platforms because they don't have early access to a shitty costume that nobody will even fucking wear because it probably looks like trash. How could these people even live without early access to a Legendary Emote™.
More time will be spent talking about these things than anyone will use in game. Most pre-order stuff is absolute garbage.
Why should you increase the price of the complete game instead of making the incomplete game cheaper?
It would be like a store having fake discounts.
Also, you do want to give the idea the game is inferior, you do that by selling the game cheaper than average, not by making the other more expensive.
That would just lead to everybody starting a bidding war over cut content to artificially raise prices.
I'm not saying they should do anything.
The logic in the post I was originally quoting was to paraphrase:
"If two people spend the same amount on different versions of the game then they should get the same amount of content as each other"
My point was if Sony charged extra for Spider-Man for PlayStation users, then the criteria in that logic has been fulfilled. No one gets more content than another person unless they've paid more money. So if this isn't seen as a viable solution than you need to readjust your argument.
no, you’re ignoring the point. The point is, waiting a few months for content isn’t that big of a deal. But if you are paying a company to literally never let some gamers play it, that’s scummy. That doesn’t benefit anyone. You’re trying to say Microsoft does the same thing, but they don’t, not recently, anyway. Paying to keep content off other platforms forever is something only Sony does.
This is a very important question... Also, how do these deals work? Does Sony pay for the development of exclusive content? Or they negotiate a smaller cut on sales?One question that I have about this whole thing is was this exclusive content going to be available for all platforms or did Sony approach SE to create it for them?
This is a very important question... Also, how do these deals work? Does Sony pay for the development of exclusive content? Or they negotiate a smaller cut on sales?
One question that I have about this whole thing is was this exclusive content going to be available for all platforms or did Sony approach SE to create it for them?
In the topic of exclusivity, these comments are so funny to me. Why don't you just say that you can't afford the game at full price instead of saying this? Getting the game at a sale doesn't affect what goes on in it, nor does it justify your feelings 6 months or so post release lol.
this question can be answered by very simple logic.
let's formulate it a bit differently:
"did Square Enix plan to release the, by far, most popular super hero as part of their game, before Sony came to them and gave them that brilliant idea?"
the answer is: OF FUCKING COURSE did they plan to put Spider-Man into their freaking Avengers game... IT'S SPIDER-MAN!
if you make a marvel super hero themed game Spider-Man will always be one of the first characters that will come up in the planning stages.
Who owns the right to Spiderman though as I'm still confused by this.
Marvel, they license it out to game publishers.
Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 had Spider-Man in it for example, and that was a Nintendo published game