Support NeoGAF

[Fare thee well]

Wow, had no idea devs posted here, but I'm ultimately a newbie who just wanted a fresh gaming forum. I genuinely know little about the resetera vs GAF history. I always assume forums are some hole in the wall somewhere .

Journalists sort of take solitary statements and signal them without any of the context, nuance, and wiggle-room of interpeting human language. I empathize with that. I wouldn't want to make a public statement for a gaming journalist either.

 

[jufonuk]

Isn't the game an homage to super Metroid ? So about the fear of change comment ?

 

[RCU005]

Your goal as a platform holder should be that these games play the best on your box, not that you force people to buy your box cause you're creating an artificial barrier for other players out there who won't be able to afford the system you're making.

I completely disagree with this. Platform holder business (being Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony) is exactly about making people buy their own console, not the competition.

This is BS! Yes, some games are meant to play by everyone on every platform, but not all of them! It's the exclusive games that incentive consumers to their business of choice. If you have a business, be it whatever it is, you'd want your product/service to be the one consumers pick over anything else. It's just basics.

 

[SteelCurtain 59]

Now see here, this is the legitimate criticism of Phil Spencer. Not this pathetic nonsense talk about how all Xbox games should come to PS and Nintendo. I do think taking an established franchise from a large userbase is pretty shitty.

To be fair though, the Bethesda purchase was announced prior to preorders for Xbox/PS5 being possible, and it was clear to most people that it would mean they weren't appearing on Playstation. So every single person who bought a PS5 had an opportunity to not be excluded. And when you combine that with Xbox's strategy of Day 1 PC releases and now xCloud, the only people that are having an established franchise "taken away from them" are people who are

A. 100% dead set on on getting a Playstation and never wanting to touch an Xbox in their lives
B. Don't have a PC capable of playing any modern games even on minimum settings
C. Don't have an internet capable device to play on xCloud

The people in the first group I have no sympathy for their self inflicted "loss", and the people in the other two groups, while very sad, are likely a very small minority of gamers today (especially the type of gamers who play games like Elder Scrolls), and they are almost certainly dwarfed by the new people that will be able to play these franchises for the first time via xCloud

 

[Big-G]

To be fair though, the Bethesda purchase was announced prior to preorders for Xbox/PS5 being possible, and it was clear to most people that it would mean they weren't appearing on Playstation. So every single person who bought a PS5 had an opportunity to not be excluded. And when you combine that with Xbox's strategy of Day 1 PC releases and now xCloud, the only people that are having an established franchise "taken away from them" are people who are

A. 100% dead set on on getting a Playstation and never wanting to touch an Xbox in their lives
B. Don't have a PC capable of playing any modern games even on minimum settings
C. Don't have an internet capable device to play on xCloud

The people in the first group I have no sympathy for their self inflicted "loss", and the people in the other two groups, while very sad, are likely a very small minority of gamers today (especially the type of gamers who play games like Elder Scrolls), and they are almost certainly dwarfed by the new people that will be able to play these franchises for the first time via xCloud

Sure, I agree with you more or less. What you just stated about X-cloud, GamePass, and Xbox games on PC, all make Xbox games extremely accessible to more people. However, some people still don't have a dedicated PC to play games (myself included), and I'm not sure my internet connection could stream games better on the cloud than playing on my console.

 

[SteelCurtain 59]

Sure, I agree with you more or less. What you just stated about X-cloud, GamePass, and Xbox games on PC, all make Xbox games extremely accessible to more people. However, some people still don't have a dedicated PC to play games (myself included), and I'm not sure my internet connection could stream games better on the cloud than playing on my console.

But it's not about playing "better" than console. It's still possible to play those games via streaming. People that are refusing to play games via streaming aren't having games taken away from them, they're just being picky. I don't really have a ton of sympathy for people that would rather not experience a game as opposed to playing via streaming. I'm not saying Playstation fans can't or shouldn't be mad, but they have every ability to play every one of these games, they just can't play using their preferred method

 

[DarkMage619]

Sony ONLY had a first party license. MLB was making their own third party, but then realize making good games is hard. They were shopping around the third party license at around the time Sony was up for renewal, and instead of letting EA snag it up and jump in with the MUT/FUT when The Show already has their successful version in DD, they chose the lesser of two evils which then works out for more revenue for them and one of the best baseball games ever made for more gamers to enjoy.

Not everything always has to be a negative spin for your less than favorite brand.

Now waiting on the PC version, because the mods will be off the chain. Especially with the already robust uniform/team/stadium creator in the game now.

Who said it was negative? I said it was great that The Show bolstered up Game pass. It was a win across the board.

Sony is the IP holder.

Microsoft they had more than 15 years to put the team together

Again, they own the IP

We're all waiting for proof that MLB DEMANDED Sony make the show multiplat and not that Sony chose to make it available rather than let EA or another company into the market.

So Sony owns the MLB license? I'm going to need to see the receipts. If they do own the IP what was the reason Sony ended their exclusivity? Figured they'd keep it exclusive as to always was.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Who said it was negative? I said it was great that The Show bolstered up Game pass. It was a win across the board.


So Sony owns the MLB license? I'm going to need to see the receipts. If they do own the IP what was the reason Sony ended their exclusivity? Figured they'd keep it exclusive as to always was.

That was only positive, after the sea of painting Sony on the ropes.

You know what, I'm not going to get into the with you. You know what you do, it's seen.

 

[DarkMage619]

That was only positive, after the sea of painting Sony on the ropes.

You know what, I'm not going to get into the with you. You know what you do, it's seen.

Who said Sony was on the ropes? You have stop listening to the voices in your head bro. I think The Show is a good game and I'm glad it's on Game pass. I know what you do as well.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Who said Sony was on the ropes? You have stop listening to the voices in your head bro. I think The Show is a good game and I'm glad it's on Game pass. I know what you do as well.

Figure of speech, bb boi.

Keep the PR stronk

 

[DarkMage619]

Figure of speech, bb boi.

Keep the PR stronk

From the guy defending the hive and keeping Sony 'off the ropes'. Fight on soldier!

On topic it's pretty obvious who has done more to remove artificial barriers when it comes gaming platforms so its laughable to be criticizing MS here.

 

[dcmk7]

We're all waiting for proof that MLB DEMANDED Sony make the show multiplat

We still not seen this yet?

Wonder why the guy keeps making these unsubstantiated claims and passing them off as fact?

 

[Lucifers Beard]

Microsoft is a business at the end of the day and it's absolutely about making money. Xbox are trying to find a good balance here and I think they're on the right track. They have 'evolved' Xbox into more than just a singular device, it's now a platform split between many devices.

They are now releasing games day one on PC which they've never done before and have been keen on allowing cross play between eco-systems.

Releasing Halo and other first party games on competing platforms is a risky move and one that I don't think any other business would take.

 

[FrankWza]

Who said it was negative? I said it was great that The Show bolstered up Game pass. It was a win across the board.


So Sony owns the MLB license? I'm going to need to see the receipts. If they do own the IP what was the reason Sony ended their exclusivity? Figured they'd keep it exclusive as to always was.

The show is the IP. Any of the 3 console manufacturers could have made an MLB game. There was no Sony exclusivity. A license is a license, Not an IP. All 3 majors had MLB games on their platforms but The Show belongs to Sony. If Microsoft didn't think it was worth producing their own game as you said, then why would MLB go to Sony to demand something? What did Sony stand to lose that they were supposed to be so afraid of this supposed demand you keep referring to?

 

[Tams]

I think that Thomas just posted a wall of text (admittedly with an attempt to use numbered bullet points, but failed to see the very obvious option in the text editor and clearly just copied and pasted that comment) says it all.

Look Thomas, you are just an indie developer (more than what I am, but neither of us are making these massive financial decisions that console makers are). You clearly don't and don't need to care about all the features any given console has. But other developers do and the the walled gardens created by console makers ensures that they have a sizeable audiences that will have standardised and exactly the same hardware (especially when it comes down to controls). And in the case of Nintendo, they clearly see that being so big of a console maker and developer.

And as for why they bother making their own walled gardens, with their own specific hardware? Well, we have a great example with SEGA. They quite the hardware business and have been reduced to a mere shadow of their former selves. They have far less say in how their games are developed and how they do because they don't control their own hardware. Sure, of course, there's more to their downfall than just not having their own platform, but it has been a major reason why they haven't grown to anything near what they once were.

 

[Sacred]

Microsoft paid for the game and let it release on Steam as you requested Mahler. Then you are going to bitch because they wouldn't let you release it on everything else on a public forum. If you have a problem take it up with the publisher, don't bitch to the media like a whiny fuck boy.

 

[FrankWza]

Figure of speech, bb boi.

Keep the PR stronk

We still not seen this yet?

Wonder why the guy keeps making these unsubstantiated claims and passing them off as fact?

What's crazy is, he supposedly has a PS5. I just don't get why you would spend your time on a console that you loathe when there should be plenty for any adult to play, given our limited free time, on any one console. I understand people wanting all consoles but why bother when you hold the company that makes it in contempt? There's too many games as is.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

We still not seen this yet?

Wonder why the guy keeps making these unsubstantiated claims and passing them off as fact?

Because it's the most likely explanation for what happened.

 

[FrankWza]

Because it's the most likely explanation for what happened.

Sony being the major representation of MLB in video games for 15 years and then being forced to put their game on another console, or else, is more likely than:

Hey Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo have had 15 years to put out a product with the license and can't or won't. We want to expand and the only way is, you develop the show for other platforms or we will have to allow 3rd party devs like EA into the mix so a quality MLB product can reach more customers. ?

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Sony being the major representation of MLB in video games for 15 years and then being forced to put their game on another console, or else, is more likely than:

Hey Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo have had 15 years to put out a product with the license and can't or won't. We want to expand and the only way is, you develop the show for other platforms or we will have to allow 3rd party devs like EA into the mix so a quality MLB product can reach more customers. ?

That's literally what people mean by "forced". Basically make the game multiplatform or we'll give the license to other publishers. Sony, not wanting any potential competition, complied with the request.

 

[FrankWza]

That's literally what people mean by "forced". Basically make the game multiplatform or we'll give the license to other publishers. Sony, not wanting any potential competition, complied with the request.

Based on that rationale, couldn't we make the same assumption that Microsoft and Nintendo were incapable of putting out a quality MLB game of their own? They had 15 years and access to the license as well. Why are we assuming that MLB forced anything but we're not assuming Microsoft and Nintendo lacked the studio to make a quality MLB title? Because the only one forced to do anything at that point is MLB. They were forced to give their license to 3rd party devs because 1st party, besides Sony, wasn't capable and utilizing the license to the extent that they wanted.

 

[dotnotbot]

I swear most of you can't read. Calling this guys opinion bitching or complaining is just annoying. The amount of shit you are throwing at him because he isn't positive about your favourite brand disgusts me.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Based on that rationale, couldn't we make the same assumption that Microsoft and Nintendo were incapable of putting out a quality MLB game of their own? They had 15 years and access to the license as well. Why are we assuming that MLB forced anything but we're not assuming Microsoft and Nintendo lacked the studio to make a quality MLB title? Because the only one forced to do anything at that point is MLB. They were forced to give their license to 3rd party devs because 1st party, besides Sony, wasn't capable and utilizing the license to the extent that they wanted.

Not sure why that matters. What happened is Sony and MLB entered talks about extending the license. Apparently, one core requirement of the license extension was that the game had to be multiplatform from now on. Sony accepted this requirement. That's all we know.

 

[FrankWza]

Not sure why that matters. What happened is Sony and MLB entered talks about extending the license. Apparently, one core requirement of the license extension was that the game had to be multiplatform from now on. Sony accepted this requirement. That's all we know.

Sony didn't have the license. All first party had the license. Microsoft and Nintendo could have made an MLB game of their own at any time. This was about 3rd party coming in.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Sony didn't have the license. All first party had the license. Microsoft and Nintendo could have made an MLB game of their own at any time. This was about 3rd party coming in.

Source for Microsoft and Nintendo having the license?

 

[bushwookie]

Based on that rationale, couldn't we make the same assumption that Microsoft and Nintendo were incapable of putting out a quality MLB game of their own? They had 15 years and access to the license as well. Why are we assuming that MLB forced anything but we're not assuming Microsoft and Nintendo lacked the studio to make a quality MLB title? Because the only one forced to do anything at that point is MLB. They were forced to give their license to 3rd party devs because 1st party, besides Sony, wasn't capable and utilizing the license to the extent that they wanted.

That's a weird way to paint that picture. You start off by saying "Based on that rationale", and then immediately abandon any kind of rationale completely.

Your premise is based entirely on the assumption that Nintendo and MS have been desperately trying to develop a MLB game the last 15 years, but just couldn't manage to do it because try as they might... Only Sony had the dev studio capable of doing so.

That's so far out into fanboy territory, there's not even a map for it. Lol

 

[FrankWza]

Source for Microsoft and Nintendo having the license?

Been this way since 2006.

That's a weird way to paint that picture. You start off by saying "Based on that rationale", and then immediately abandon any kind of rationale completely.

Your premise is based entirely on the assumption that Nintendo and MS have been desperately trying to develop a MLB game the last 15 years, but just couldn't manage to do it because try as they might... Only Sony had the dev studio capable of doing so.

No weirder than painting the picture as darkmage and berned are painting it. They're both assumptions but mine has facts behind it. Otherwise, what were they doing for 15 years? If it's so easy, why didn't they just make a game? They were allowed to. When 3rd party had the license, do you think there were 5 or 6 good baseball games every year? There was one. It was MVP baseball and EA gave that up so they could have the NFL license.

That's so far out into fanboy territory, there's not even a map for it. Lol

more than MLB forcing Sony to allow their game on Xbox and Switch or else? Did they hold anyone hostage? How big was the fully fueled jet? What did they ask for for lunch? Who screamed Attica! Attica!?

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Been this way since 2006.

 

[FrankWza]

.

 

[Sacred]

I swear most of you can't read. Calling this guys opinion bitching or complaining is just annoying. The amount of shit you are throwing at him because he isn't positive about your favourite brand disgusts me.

Absolutely nothing to do with it. It's about entitled game developers that think they can have their cake and eat it to. You enter a contract, honor the damn contract and don't go crying to the media afterwards that you wanted more.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

You gotta show proof if you're claiming that Microsoft and Nintendo have been paying for the MLB license for the past 15 years but have never done anything with it. Super bold claim lmao

 

[FrankWza]

You gotta show proof if you're claiming that Microsoft and Nintendo have been paying for the MLB license for the past 15 years but have never done anything with it. Super bold claim lmao

No I don't. It's been that way since 2006. The bold claim is saying MLB forced Sony to do anything when they never had sole exclusivity. My information is easily found on the internet. Also, if Sony had the MLB license to themselves how did MLB publish RBI and put it on xbox and switch?

 

[Bernd Lauert]

No I don't. It's been that way since 2006. The bold claim is saying MLB forced Sony to do anything when they never had sole exclusivity. My information is easily found on the internet.

 

[FrankWza]

.

if Sony had the MLB license to themselves how did MLB publish RBI and put it on xbox and switch?

 

[Bernd Lauert]

if Sony had the MLB license to themselves how did MLB publish RBI and put it on xbox and switch?

That's a weird pivot. MLB can publish whatever they want, it's their IP after all.

 

[bushwookie]

Been this way since 2006.

No weirder than painting the picture as darkmage and berned are painting it. They're both assumptions but mine has facts behind it. Otherwise, what were they doing for 15 years? If it's so easy, why didn't they just make a game? They were allowed to. When 3rd party had the license, do you think there were 5 or 6 good baseball games every year? There was one. It was MVP baseball and EA gave that up so they could have the NFL license.

more than MLB forcing Sony to allow their game on Xbox and Switch or else? Did they hold anyone hostage? How big was the fully fueled jet? What did they ask for for lunch? Who screamed Attica! Attica!?

What facts are there behind your assumptions?

 

[FrankWza]

That's a weird pivot. MLB can publish whatever they want, it's their IP after all.

There's no pivot. It's the point of the conversation. You and darkmage claim Sony was demanded to do something or they would lose the LICENSE. The IPs here are RBI and The Show. If Sony has the EXCLUSIVE license to MLB then how is it possible there's any other MLB game on PlayStation, xbox and Nintendo before this year?

What facts are there behind your assumptions?

See above. EA has the exclusive NFL license with madden. There's no other simulation style NFL licensed game.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

There's no pivot. It's the point of the conversation. You and darkmage claim Sony was demanded to do something or they would lose the LICENSE. The IPs here are RBI and The Show. If Sony has the EXCLUSIVE license to MLB then how is it possible there's any other MLB game on PlayStation, xbox and Nintendo before this year?

See above. EA has the exclusive NFL license with madden. There's no other simulation style NFL licensed game.

Again, Sony was "forced" to turn their exclusive 1st party game into a multiplatform game. We don't know what would've happened otherwise, but Sony complied with MLB's request.

 

[FrankWza]

Source for Microsoft and Nintendo having the license?

That's so far out into fanboy territory, there's not even a map for it. Lol

That's a weird pivot. MLB can publish whatever they want, it's their IP after all.

What facts are there behind your assumptions?

Again, Sony was "forced" to turn their exclusive 1st party game into a multiplatform game. We don't know what would've happened otherwise, but Sony complied with MLB's request.

MLB The Show is the longest running baseball video game series. There have been annual installments of the game -- all only available on PlayStation -- since 2006 when it officially became branded as The Show. Other franchises, such as EA Sports' MVP Baseball series, existed until 2005 when MLB exclusively licensed the rights to their games to Take-Two interactive and the main console manufacturers - Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. That forced EA to stop making MLB games.

Redirect Notice

 

[FrankWza]

Now
Bernd Lauert DarkMage619 B bushwookie

we want to see proof of MLBs demands of Sony. Don't we guys?

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Now
Bernd Lauert DarkMage619 B bushwookie

we want to see proof of MLBs demands of Sony. Don't we guys?

When you're so desperate for a gotcha that you can't engage in a conversation like a normal person.

So apparently, the deal was from 2006 to 2012, and only Sony used the license to actually make a game out of it. But 2012 was also almost ten years ago, so not sure what your point is.

As for proof for MLBs demands, see the license extention that happened in 2019.

 

[FrankWza]

When you're so desperate for a gotcha that you can't engage in a conversation like a normal person.

You were saying something about normal conversation?^^^^^
Let's see a link to an article saying MLB Demanded of Sony. I provided you with proof.

 

[FrankWza]

So apparently, the deal was from 2006 to 2012, and only Sony used the license to actually make a game out of it. But 2012 was also almost ten years ago, so not sure what your point is.

As for proof for MLBs demands, see the license extention that happened in 2019.

 

[DeepEnigma]

It's always funny that "you have to show proof" but the mud slung in the other direction doesn't need any proof.

Fucking console warring baby nuts shit.

 

[Barrier Island Dweller]

From the looks of it they wont be next time

Exclusives have always been apart of the industry, i dont have a problem with them. Once upon a time exclusives were used to show off or fully exploit what your platform was capable of and not just for sake of lists. But i have to kind of agree with him you cant make comments like spencer is making and then do something totally different, it just looks silly IMO and as if youre just speaking to media sources for clout. I dont think anyone would ridicule him for keeping exclusives as Nintendo and Sony have there own very successful stuff, So why speak on it at all if youre not walking the walk to match the talk?

Spencer would have no problem putting those games on those other systems.

But it has to be through gamepass

 

[SEGAvangelist]

Thomas seems like a good dude. He wants all games to be played everywhere, but business-wise that just doesn't make sense. He's also good at being critical without being personal about it. I don't see bad blood or anything in this post.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Spencer would have no problem putting those games on those other systems.

But it has to be through gamepass

So then he has a problem, innit.

 

[bushwookie]

MLB The Show is the longest running baseball video game series. There have been annual installments of the game -- all only available on PlayStation -- since 2006 when it officially became branded as The Show. Other franchises, such as EA Sports' MVP Baseball series, existed until 2005 when MLB exclusively licensed the rights to their games to Take-Two interactive and the main console manufacturers - Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. That forced EA to stop making MLB games.

Redirect Notice

I'm afraid your source isn't completely accurate.

Under the agreement, which takes effect in the spring of 2006, Take-Two will be the only independent game developer allowed to make games using the official baseball brand.

The deal still allows makers of video game consoles, like Sony with the PlayStation 2 or Microsoft with the Xbox, to reach licensing agreements with Major League Baseball.

Pro Baseball and Take-Two Make a Deal (Published 2005)

Take-Two Interactive Software has licensed rights from Major League Baseball and its players' association to market games using major-league teams, players, uniforms and stadiums; agreement takes effect in spring of 2006; industry executive places deal's value at $200 million to $250 million (M)

www.nytimes.com

While Microsoft and Nintendo could have negotiated with MLB to reach a Licensing agreement, they chose not to. Sony did. When it came time to renegotiate their contract, it was decided that the game would no longer be a Playstation exclusive, as MLB wanted to increase it's exposure and brand beyond just the Playstation platform. Sony has even referenced as much in release stating that MLB wanted to reach as many fans as possible, and that the decision to release on Gamepass day one was made at MLBs sole discretion.

Sony says it was MLB's decision to bring The Show to Game Pass

www.destructoid.com

This narrative that you've put together that Microsoft and Nintendo were paying for MLB licensing, and apparently trying to make a MLB game for some 15 years is out there. Almost as much as your reasoning that despite trying for well over a decade... That neither Microsoft's or Nintendo's dev studios were capable of even making a baseball game, but Sony could obviously churn one out every 12 months in all their developmental wisdom. As well I suppose that you assume Sony was just feeling charitable when they decided to make the very un-Sony move to make The Show for other platforms.

I'm just saying... It's pretty thick. I wouldn't run with it, but you do you.

 

[FrankWza]

While Microsoft and Nintendo could have negotiated with MLB to reach a Licensing agreement, they chose not to.

So. They had an opportunity with a team ready and waiting for a chance to create a baseball game and they decided not to? Not, they couldn't make a game or didn't consider it an option? They just decided they didn't want an MLB game. Then they let 2k put games on their platforms until they stopped making a game. And then they allowed the horrible RBI baseball on their platforms in order to have something, anything to represent an mlb sim on their consoles.and now they're doing Sony a favor by letting them make the show available to them because MLB forced Sony?
I have one question. Who's writing the screenplay? I think Sorkin is all booked up for the next decade.

 

[Ezquimacore]

This dude is a total bitch. Reminds me of the Fish, yeah you know which Fish. Phil Fish.