Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
It would make more sense to fix what's wrong with the other 20 something studios then to add more to the list, when you can't manage the group you have.
It would make more sense to fix what's wrong with the other 20 something studios then to add more to the list, when you can't manage the group you have.
ND outside Rings of Power and Way of the Warrior has pretty much always been with Sony. Sony only acquired them after years of supporting them, funding them, and sharing their tech with them. Sony built ND completely into what it is. We know factually that Marvel contacted MS in regards to them acquiring Marvel IPS and looking at the time frame that occurred one can surmise that Spiderman was one of those offered properties. MS being classic MS fucked that up. We also know SE approached MS about FF16 but Sony made a better offer. Another classic MS bumble fuck. As to Bungie, knowing what we know now, I'm willing to bet good money Bungie ran to Sony in order to escape MS'S grasp.
Activision were seeking a buyer because we finally had that cunt Bobby Kotick caught for condoning a culture of sexual assaults and harassment. The selling was a way to get Bobby to remain in place and leave on better grounds or, as it seems, give him enough time for the heat to die down.
As it stands that prick will remain in his role no matter what, rather than told to fuck off.
Have you seen the rest of Hufflepuff's rogues gallery. I wouldn't even ride the majority of them into battle.You're proud of having the sparkly vampire?
Sony would of passed, they aren't in a position to be able to purchase A major publisher of that size. That's one of the main reasons they only do timed exclusives and single game exclusivity deals with them.If Microsoft had passed Sony would have been approached next as with Spider-man, you think Sony would pass? and if so would these same peope be angry?
Jim Ryan publicly called out Bobby well before the acquisition was public. I'd hate Jim if he facilitated Bobby's escape.If Microsoft had passed Sony would have been approached next as with Spider-man, you think Sony would pass? and if so would these same peope be angry?
So Microsoft did not spend nearly $80 billion after that email? lmao.Misleading quote. The quote isn't "go spend Sony out of business", but "to be able to go spend Sony out of business".
Isn't that what GAF is screaming as well? That Microsoft has a warchest that is much much larger than Sony's?
So what's the controvercy? If this was the smoking gun, it would have been used. It's a nothingburger.
Thanks Dick.Jim Ryan publicly called out Bobby well before the acquisition was public. I'd hate Jim if he facilitated Bobby's escape.
Sony were never approached as they could never buy them in a million years. From what I remember a few companies (Meta and Google, I think) were contacted and Bobby was told to fuck off.
Sony would of passed, they aren't in a position to be able to purchase A major publisher of that size. That's one of the main reasons they only do timed exclusives and single game exclusivity deals with them.
The actual facts have already been explained. The historical record is clear: Disney asked Microsoft to make an exclusive Spidey game, MS passed up, Disney went to Sony and Sony contracted Insomniac to develop the game.Sony pays large sums of cash to secure exclusives, they paid up for Spider-man.
Jim Ryan publicly called out Bobby well before the acquisition was public. I'd hate Jim if he facilitated Bobby's escape.
Sony were never approached as they could never buy them in a million years. From what I remember a few companies (Meta and Google, I think) were contacted and Bobby was told to fuck off.
So Microsoft did not spend nearly $80 billion after that email? lmao.
If one *timed* exclusive would have killed them, that shows you more internal rot than external factors at play.Yes I'd be happy to.. they were trying to make Starfield exclusive to PS5, this would have destroyed Xbox almost entirely...
you think they were not going to attempt the same move with ES6? Would the same people making a petition against it being Xbox exclusive now do the same if it were PS5 exclusive?
Sony has been buying up all kinds of popular properties over the years and Microsoft just went bigger, that is the only difference is the size and scope of what they are doing.
He would already be gone if not for the lifeline.Bobby will be gone in 5 years tops
If one *timed* exclusive would have killed them, that shows you more internal rot than external facots at play.
The point is that you're trying to frame it as a "thought experiment" that didn’t happen by emphasising the 'able to'. What's the difference otherwise?What's your point?
SonyToo™It’s quite funny to see the reaction to this email. Do you honestly not think Sony have these conversations all the time about Xbox?
I'm more surprised how sloppy they are running this business. Choosing cloud at the expense of Series X stock, considering going on all in mobile gaming, haphazardly choosing devs to buy as if they are kids at a candy store... Without being backed by daddy's credit card there would be no Xbox right now and they wouldn't have jobs.It’s quite funny to see the reaction to this email. Do you honestly not think Sony have these conversations all the time about Xbox?
No you're talking two different things. Starfield was always going to be on Xbox eventually. Activision isn't a game, it's a publisher and if purchased would never be on PlayStation just like Zenimax.I want to remind you that the entire fight here is that it being exclusive to Xbox is going to horribly damage Sony.. or the quote "Put them out of business"
Well yeah MS have "fuck you" money but it's what you do with it. The only company that could outspend Microsoft is Apple (if they take gaming more seriously).
This is obvious and doesn't really need to be said. MS went ahead to purchase Activision/Blizzard for $70 billion or whatever it was. Could you imagine Sony or Nintendo being able to spend that kind of money?
If Microsoft get their shit together then nobody will stand a chance against them.
No you're talking two different things. Starfield was always going to be on Xbox eventually. Activision isn't a game, it's a publisher and if purchased would never be on PlayStation just like Zenimax.
That's an "If" that is the equivalent of you saying "if I hit the lotto I'd..."If they had the funds to make it work, they would have made it work.. MS had the funds and it was a move any company in their position would make.
the goal of every business is to mop the floor with their competition..
I stand firm that this is nothing that Sony is not also engaged in even if they scale it to smaller studios within their budget..
Their goal is to wipe out their competition
And there is nothing wrong with that.
Sony will absolutely survive MS owning Activision.
and Microsoft needs the boost.
…and if MS merely invested in SquEnix, literally no-one would give a shit. Or hell, if they just invested in Activision.It was a publisher looking for a buyer and it found one.
Again like I said before, Sony does more than just 6 month exclusivies..
they own 20% of square enix.. and they are using that small investment to hold major games to their platform.
Sony owns 20% of SE?It was a publisher looking for a buyer and it found one.
Again like I said before, Sony does more than just 6 month exclusivies..
they own 20% of square enix.. and they are using that small investment to hold major games to their platform.
Cool story bro. You didn’t address my point lolI'm more surprised how sloppy they are running this business. Choosing cloud at the expense of Series X stock, considering going on all in mobile gaming, haphazardly choosing devs to buy as if they are kids at a candy store... Without being backed by daddy's credit card there would be no Xbox right now and they wouldn't have jobs.
Exactly anime dude. Both as bad as each other when it comes to this stuff. Fuels console warz and fanboys. Oh wait…..SonyToo™
Your point? Oh... Sony Too. omglol gg.Cool story bro. You didn’t addres my point lol
The only time they do full exclusives is if they directly fund it like Street Fighter 5 or Bloodborne. Those games never would have been made without them.It was a publisher looking for a buyer and it found one.
Again like I said before, Sony does more than just 6 month exclusivies..
they own 20% of square enix.. and they are using that small investment to hold major games to their platform.
I doubt Sony has ever said we can outspend MS. It's a scummy, low effort take on their position in the industry and how much weight they have to throw around. Make great games, nah, let's just buy them all so no one else has them on their platform. Sony at least seems to be focused on what matters the most in gaming. I just wish MS had more interest in bringing new big IP's to the industry. It seems they are doing the bare minimum as far as creating games.It’s quite funny to see the reaction to this email. Do you honestly not think Sony have these conversations all the time about Xbox?
Outbidding Sony on timed exclusivity is not a good investment in their eyes. They won't make a return on it, and it only temporarily boosts their exclusive catalog. Buying the company to permanently deny PlayStation makes much more sense to them.The only time they do full exclusives is if they directly fund it like Street Fighter 5 or Bloodborne. Those games never would have been made without them.
Everything else, the vast majority, is timed and sometimes it is more than 6 months but always ends up on Xbox eventually and since they've spent 80 billion they could have easily outbid those exclusivity deals. They were after all just publishers looking for timed exclusive buyers.
Your Square example is bad, it's nowhere near the size of Activision.
The only time they do full exclusives is if they directly fund it like Street Fighter 5 or Bloodborne. Those games never would have been made without them.
Everything else, the vast majority, is timed and sometimes it is more than 6 months but always ends up on Xbox eventually and since they've spent 80 billion they could have easily outbid those exclusivity deals. They were after all just publishers looking for timed exclusive buyers.
Your Square example is bad, it's nowhere near the size of Activision.
Sony owns 20% of SE?
Or do you mean the below?
Why Sony Sold All its Square Enix Shares Revealed - IGN
It appears Sony's decision to sell all its Square Enix shares isn't down to any bad blood, but rather returning a favour.www.ign.com
Capcom were in a dire place when they had a partnership with Sony over Street Fighter V. Had Sony not funded it, we wouldn't have seen Street Fighter for years later. Capcom used the money from that to concentrate on their main IPs that sold very fucking well. Capcom have now returned to their rightful place and we all now have SF6.Street Fighter would not happen without Sony? really?
And it's not about the size it's about the practice.. it's either bad to spend money making games exclusive to your platform or it isn't.
I personally don't like it
But I refuse to treat what MS is doing any differently than how Sony has operated.
Technically... here. Or what's the point in saying this?
on another note... do people realize that MS are the ones that championed the very practices they are here saying they are fighting Sony for or Sony is doing to try and stifle their growth? Sony is literally playing off MS Playbook.
When PlayStation started, they threw a lot of money around, but how? They did so not by buying content off Nintendo or Sega, but by making sure whatever they didn't own, would also be made available on a Playstation. They basically paid devs/publishers to make a PS version of their game `too`.
MS came and decided its not enough to just have games be on their platform too (yes, they tried to do the same thing sony did), so, they instead started things like securing marketing rights or exclusive Dlc (GTA4)... yes, that was something MS started. Then they took that further by starting the whole timed exclusive thing (tomb raider anyone?), yes, that was also something MS started.
Now, they have decided that all those things don't really work for them, so they have shifted focus to not even buying studios, but buying publishers (this was never done by a platform holder until the last two years). Another new trend they are starting.
And everything I just said... has been going on for the last 17 years. People are here taking shit like whatever MS is ding they just started doing in 2019.
Yeah...Can you share some of those emails, or are you just speculating in a feeble attempt to normalize this? #SonyToo.
It’s quite funny to see the reaction to this email. Do you honestly not think Sony have these conversations all the time about Xbox?
TheoreticalSonyToo™Meanwhile, if Jim said this about Xbox, the users in here would be hooting and hollering.
I'll laugh at him for being delusional in thinking he can outspend Microsoft.Meanwhile, if Jim said this about Xbox, the users in here would be hooting and hollering.