• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

News Phil Spencer further clarifies the nature of Bethesda exclusivity

FrankWza

Member
Feb 14, 2013
1,774
448
550
the narrative that xbox exclusives are selling poorly is misleading due to gamepass. They designed the game from the ground up to be on gamepass so it is unfair and inaccurate to measure the success by game sales alone. Subscriptions to gamepass matter much more at this point and at 15 million subscribers if gamepass maintains these numbers or improves them over time, it more than makes up for it.

Even so, I believe a game like Gears 5 still sold upwards of 3 million copies. So that on top of gamepass subs...I would hardly call it a failure.

I know it's hard for people to understand, so I don't expect people to agree when measurements have been done a certain way for so long. Others just seem to want to toss Microsoft in the same competitive ring as Sony when they are doing 2 very different things.
its not a matter of poor sales or not. It’s more good to great. Being that the exclusives are a must release for them contractually, when they do release, and PS5 console sales are in the 30-40 million range, that’s a big install base to ignore. It’s an interesting issue to see how they handle it. If those 2 exclusives sell an insane amount of copies then it’s a tough thing to explain exclusivity on IPs that traditionally have not been.It’s not like they’re putting halo on a Ps system. So the deathloop and ghost wire exclusivity gives them a back door excuse, if they want it, to change course and release the other older IPson PS. Tough to ignore if each game sells 4-5 million as PS exclusives. Even 2-3 mil.
 

Jigsaah

Gold Member
Jan 31, 2018
4,838
4,693
660
God, him HAVING to release deathloop and ghost wire exclusively on PS5 must be killing him. Oooof. And if he ends up holding back the other games it will look further obvious. It’s a tough spot. Especially if the PS5 exclusives sell well. That’ll be hard to rationalize. We’ll see
He didn't HAVE to do anything. He chose to. Be thankful. It's the equivalent of letting the ant crawling across the kitchen floor live to see another day.
 

Andodalf

Gold Member
Oct 20, 2013
3,913
4,517
840
23
Earth
its not a matter of poor sales or not. It’s more good to great. Being that the exclusives are a must release for them contractually, when they do release, and PS5 console sales are in the 30-40 million range, that’s a big install base to ignore. It’s an interesting issue to see how they handle it. If those 2 exclusives sell an insane amount of copies then it’s a tough thing to explain exclusivity on IPs that traditionally have not been.It’s not like they’re putting halo on a Ps system. So the deathloop and ghost wire exclusivity gives them a back door excuse, if they want it, to change course and release the other older IPson PS. Tough to ignore if each game sells 4-5 million as PS exclusives. Even 2-3 mil.
Spider Man wasn't an exclusive franchise and Sony Passed up 40 Mil Xboxes as well as millions of PC gamers. I wonder why? Same logic should apply right?
 

FrankWza

Member
Feb 14, 2013
1,774
448
550
He didn't HAVE to do anything. He chose to. Be thankful. It's the equivalent of letting the ant crawling across the kitchen floor live to see another day.
no. He HAS to. If he didn’t, he wouldn’t. And there’s no way it’s not gonna stick in his craw if he doesn’t end up releasing any other games on PS. Tough situation.

Spider Man wasn't an exclusive franchise and Sony Passed up 40 Mil Xboxes as well as millions of PC gamers. I wonder why? Same logic should apply right?
no. It’s owned by Sony. Wasn’t purchased after multiple IPs were released across many consoles for many years. Bad comparison.
 
Last edited:

_Spr_Drnk

Member
Sep 4, 2014
635
240
450
London
The sad thing about this for me is that XBox utterly shit the bed this gen, and instead of growing their studios organically and producing exclusives (a perfectly reasonable thing for them to do by the way) to sway people to XBox/PC/Gamepass they've just gone to the mothership (it's definitely not the gaming divisions profits) and spent a boatload of cash to buy a whole bunch of studios. These studios have a lot of beloved IP that have been cross platform for some time now, but there's a strong chance they won't be moving forward. Well done XBox, this scheme will work, but it gives the whole enterprise no merit whatsoever. Good for XBox/PC fans I suppose, but the gloating hasn't really been earned. Enjoy!
 

quickwhips

Member
Jan 26, 2009
7,564
2,665
1,215
39
The sad thing about this for me is that XBox utterly shit the bed this gen, and instead of growing their studios organically and producing exclusives (a perfectly reasonable thing for them to do by the way) to sway people to XBox/PC/Gamepass they've just gone to the mothership (it's definitely not the gaming divisions profits) and spent a boatload of cash to buy a whole bunch of studios. These studios have a lot of beloved IP that have been cross platform for some time now, but there's a strong chance they won't be moving forward. Well done XBox, this scheme will work, but it gives the whole enterprise no merit whatsoever. Good for XBox/PC fans I suppose, but the gloating hasn't really been earned. Enjoy!
Cry moar.
 

FrankWza

Member
Feb 14, 2013
1,774
448
550
The sad thing about this for me is that XBox utterly shit the bed this gen, and instead of growing their studios organically and producing exclusives (a perfectly reasonable thing for them to do by the way) to sway people to XBox/PC/Gamepass they've just gone to the mothership (it's definitely not the gaming divisions profits) and spent a boatload of cash to buy a whole bunch of studios. These studios have a lot of beloved IP that have been cross platform for some time now, but there's a strong chance they won't be moving forward. Well done XBox, this scheme will work, but it gives the whole enterprise no merit whatsoever. Good for XBox/PC fans I suppose, but the gloating hasn't really been earned. Enjoy!
I don’t agree with this entirely. There is something to be said about developing and nurturing talent. Like in sports, it’s definitely more satisfying to draft players and have homegrown stars win than it is free agents win you a championship. But winning is the goal. I think a healthy mixof both is necessary and ok. They’re both businesses after all, so money has a lot todo with success. That’s why my point about the exclusives rings so true. Just to know that they have to put out those 2 games, especially one from the father of resident evil, must be rough on them. If they were coming out on both consoles day 1, not as big a deal. But an exclusive that can sell better potentially than any of the IPs that will not be released on PS5 later is a tough one. It just is.
 
Last edited:

Andodalf

Gold Member
Oct 20, 2013
3,913
4,517
840
23
Earth
no. He HAS to. If he didn’t, he wouldn’t. And there’s no way it’s not gonna stick in his craw if he doesn’t end up releasing any other games on PS. Tough situation.



no. It’s owned by Sony. Wasn’t purchased after multiple IPs were released across many consoles for many years. Bad comparison.
Sony doesn’t own Spider-Mans IP or game rights lol. They have an agreement with Disney as apart of spidey being in the mcu. And More Tes games have been Xbox console exclusive than spider man games have been ps exclusive.
 

FrankWza

Member
Feb 14, 2013
1,774
448
550
Sony doesn’t own Spider-Mans IP or game rights lol. They have an agreement with Disney as apart of spidey being in the mcu. And More Tes games have been Xbox console exclusive than spider man games have been ps exclusive.
I think they do. And it’s the other way around isn’t it? Sony let Spider-Man be in MCU? Either way, he still has to release those 2games exclusively on PS5 and there won’t be a Spider-Man game on next gen Xbox. It’s known as a Sony game. Most of the games in the 7.5 billion purchase are not known or tied to a specific console.It remains a bad comparison on your part

edit: I guess Disney could try to publish A Spider-Man game for Xbox but it won’t be Insomniacs version since they ARE owned by Sony.
 
Last edited:

Batiman

Danger: male feminist
Feb 11, 2020
1,297
1,458
570
God, him HAVING to release deathloop and ghost wire exclusively on PS5 must be killing him. Oooof. And if he ends up holding back the other games it will look further obvious. It’s a tough spot. Especially if the PS5 exclusives sell well. That’ll be hard to rationalize. We’ll see
Aren’t they timed?
 

FrankWza

Member
Feb 14, 2013
1,774
448
550
Aren’t they timed?
Console exclusives.
Just PS5 and then after the window they can release on PC. They may both do huge numbers depending on where they fall in the release schedule. deathloop had a chance at making launch window before a slight delay. Both set for 2021 though.
 

Andodalf

Gold Member
Oct 20, 2013
3,913
4,517
840
23
Earth
I think they do. And it’s the other way around isn’t it? Sony let Spider-Man be in MCU? Either way, he still has to release those 2games exclusively on PS5 and there won’t be a Spider-Man game on next gen Xbox. It’s known as a Sony game. Most of the games in the 7.5 billion purchase are not known or tied to a specific console.It remains a bad comparison on your part

edit: I guess Disney could try to publish A Spider-Man game for Xbox but it won’t be Insomniacs version since they ARE owned by Sony.
Long Ago Marvel owned all rights to Spider-man, as well as the IP. They licensed out the film rights, essentially in perpetuity, to Sony. This is just film production/distribution rights, nothing else. A while later, they give Activision the license to make games. This expires in 2014. Around this time, Sony and Disney (who now owns Marvel) are hammering out a deal to get Spidey in the MCU. We don't know the specifics, but the rights to make console games that feature Spidey seems to have been a bargaining chip in these negotiations. This almost certainly doesn't mean they gave them the license outright, but more likley that they have an agreement in principle to allow Sony to produce and Distribute any Spider-Man games they want to, exclusively, but only on a game by game basis for the duration of the MCU partnership. Spidey still appears in mobile games, and in console titles where he isn't the marquee character, such as Marvel vs. Capcom and Ultimate Alliance 3. Sony does own the rights to the Game they created, I'm fairly confident.

TL: DR Disney/Marvel has always owned Spider-Man's game rights, they licensed them to Activison in the past, and now have an agreement with Sony about them, but still retain them wholly.

Console exclusives.
Just PS5 and then after the window they can release on PC. They may both do huge numbers depending on where they fall in the release schedule. deathloop had a chance at making launch window before a slight delay. Both set for 2021 though.
The games are 100% coming to Xbox, and always were. Its just timed exclusivity.
 
Last edited:

scalman

Member
Feb 6, 2019
2,364
1,394
365
yes makes those exclusive, like pc exclusive, so all could play it . and then look pout that it wont be hacked.. ouch
i mean if you chose PC+PS5 you will have all games still as before, so nothing changes you just get more games witch is good
 
Last edited:

Batiman

Danger: male feminist
Feb 11, 2020
1,297
1,458
570
Console exclusives.
Just PS5 and then after the window they can release on PC. They may both do huge numbers depending on where they fall in the release schedule. deathloop had a chance at making launch window before a slight delay. Both set for 2021 though.
I’m pretty sure they’re both coming to Xbox at a later date. MS just honoured their timed exclusivity
 

FrankWza

Member
Feb 14, 2013
1,774
448
550

Long Ago Marvel owned all rights to Spider-man, as well as the IP. They licensed out the film rights, essentially in perpetuity, to Sony. This is just film production/distribution rights, nothing else. A while later, they give Activision the license to make games. This expires in 2014. Around this time, Sony and Disney (who now owns Marvel) are hammering out a deal to get Spidey in the MCU. We don't know the specifics, but the rights to make console games that feature Spidey seems to have been a bargaining chip in these negotiations. This almost certainly doesn't mean they gave them the license outright, but more likley that they have an agreement in principle to allow Sony to produce and Distribute any Spider-Man games they want to, exclusively, but only on a game by game basis for the duration of the MCU partnership. Spidey still appears in mobile games, and in console titles where he isn't the marquee character, such as Marvel vs. Capcom and Ultimate Alliance 3. Sony does own the rights to the Game they created, I'm fairly confident.

TL: DR Disney/Marvel has always owned Spider-Man's game rights, they licensed them to Activison in the past, and now have an agreement with Sony about them, but still retain them wholly.



The games are 100% coming to Xbox, and always were. Its just timed exclusivity.
[/QUOTE]

the movie rights in perpetuity and owning insomniac means that Spider-Man is staying as a PS game.Still a bad comparison on your part.

and those games(deathloop and ghost wire) are console exclusives for PS5. I’ve never seen anything about Xbox. Just pc
 

Andodalf

Gold Member
Oct 20, 2013
3,913
4,517
840
23
Earth
Long Ago Marvel owned all rights to Spider-man, as well as the IP. They licensed out the film rights, essentially in perpetuity, to Sony. This is just film production/distribution rights, nothing else. A while later, they give Activision the license to make games. This expires in 2014. Around this time, Sony and Disney (who now owns Marvel) are hammering out a deal to get Spidey in the MCU. We don't know the specifics, but the rights to make console games that feature Spidey seems to have been a bargaining chip in these negotiations. This almost certainly doesn't mean they gave them the license outright, but more likley that they have an agreement in principle to allow Sony to produce and Distribute any Spider-Man games they want to, exclusively, but only on a game by game basis for the duration of the MCU partnership. Spidey still appears in mobile games, and in console titles where he isn't the marquee character, such as Marvel vs. Capcom and Ultimate Alliance 3. Sony does own the rights to the Game they created, I'm fairly confident.

TL: DR Disney/Marvel has always owned Spider-Man's game rights, they licensed them to Activison in the past, and now have an agreement with Sony about them, but still retain them wholly.



The games are 100% coming to Xbox, and always were. Its just timed exclusivity.
the movie rights in perpetuity and owning insomniac means that Spider-Man is staying as a PS game.Still a bad comparison on your part.

and those games(deathloop and ghost wire) are console exclusives for PS5. I’ve never seen anything about Xbox. Just pc
[/QUOTE]


Tes was exclusive to xbox and then wasn't. So it going back makes since now that MS owns it.

Spidey was never exclusive. It isn't owned by Sony Even now. By your logic, there is far more reason for Spidey to go multiplat than Tes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Forsythia

FrankWza

Member
Feb 14, 2013
1,774
448
550
the movie rights in perpetuity and owning insomniac means that Spider-Man is staying as a PS game.Still a bad comparison on your part.

and those games(deathloop and ghost wire) are console exclusives for PS5. I’ve never seen anything about Xbox. Just pc

Tes was exclusive to xbox and then wasn't. So it going back makes since now that MS owns it.

Spidey was never exclusive. It isn't owned by Sony Even now. By your logic, there is far more reason for Spidey to go multiplat than Tes.
[/QUOTE]

you were referring to insomniacs games. At least that’s what I assumed and not Spider-Man on ps2. But ok.
 

sublimit

Member
Aug 28, 2009
19,473
6,396
1,310
- he flat out says yes to the fact they can afford not to bring the games to ps5
He says they can afford it but that doesn't mean they will. That are two completely different things.

For example i can afford to stay without work for one year because i might have income from other sources as well. That however doesn't mean i will not work.

- he says we didn't go out to "keep games" from gamers - this is his way of trying to not look bad / evil corp, thier target was to add games to their ecosystem
He's just being Phil Spencer always trying to look and sound nice. It's just PR. I don't see how that particular quote can mean anything.

- he says they want to focus on the platforms that xbox supports (and even goes on to say specifically that is xbox, pc and xcloud)
And they will. But i still don't see where he said that they will not let Bethesda's games coming to PS and Nintendo. Focusing on their platforms means these games will all be on Gamepass day one and they will heavily promote them. That however doesn't prove that they will deny the money they'd get from Sony's and Nintendo's platforms.

He literally couldn't make it much clearer.
Umm yes he could? He could easily have said that these games will never come to an ecosystem other than Microsoft's. See? That was easy. Did he say it? No he didn't.

As to why he leaves this subject open for speculation well...that is a discussion that needs its own thread IMO.
 
Last edited:

Hey Blinkin

Member
Jun 12, 2019
50
57
215
For arguments sake, let's split hairs over what he said.

“I don’t want to be flip about that,” he added. “This deal was not done to take games away from another player base like that."
To me this implies that the acquisition wasn't made only to keep PS5 players from playing these games.

Nowhere in the documentation that we put together was: ‘How do we keep other players from playing these games?’ We want more people to be able to play games, not fewer people to be able to go play games.
And he confirms that with this statement.

But I’ll also say in the model—I’m just answering directly the question that you had—when I think about where people are going to be playing and the number of devices that we had, and we have xCloud and PC and Game Pass and our console base, I don’t have to go ship those games on any other platform other than the platforms that we support in order to kind of make the deal work for us. Whatever that means.”
He's saying that they have plenty of ways for you to play these games, expect on the PS5.

He's telling you that if you want to play them, you're going to do it on the next gen Xbox, xCloud, or PC, because those are the platforms they currently support.

If Sony allows Game Pass on the PS5, then and only then will you get to play Bethesda games on that platform.

That's it. That's the only sliver of hope for these IPs owned by Microsoft to be played on the PS5.

If you want them, harass Sony for Game Pass or play them on any of the other supported platforms these games will be on!
 

Brofist

Member
Jun 15, 2004
10,632
446
1,665
He says they can afford it but that doesn't mean they will. That are two completely different things.

For example i can afford to stay without work for one year because i might have income from other sources as well. That however doesn't mean i will not work.



He's just being Phil Spencer always trying to look and sound nice. It's just PR. I don't see how that particular quote can mean anything.



And they will. But i still don't see where he said that they will not let Bethesda's games coming to PS and Nintendo. Focusing on their platforms means these games will all be on Gamepass day one and they will heavily promote them. That however doesn't prove that they will deny the money they'd get from Sony's and Nintendo's platforms.



Umm yes he could? He could easily have said that these games will never come to an ecosystem other than Microsoft's. See? That was easy. Did he say it? No he didn't.

As to why he leaves this subject open for speculation well...that is a discussion that needs its own thread IMO.
Sure you can interpret it that way, wouldn't hold you breath on it though. But hey strangers things are happening (Sony games on PC)
 

M16

Member
Jul 19, 2020
65
91
170
And they will. But i still don't see where he said that they will not let Bethesda's games coming to PS and Nintendo. Focusing on their platforms means these games will all be on Gamepass day one and they will heavily promote them. That however doesn't prove that they will deny the money they'd get from Sony's and Nintendo's platforms.
actually, putting them on other platforms is what will deny them money. a gamepass sub potentially pays exponentially more than selling a single copy. and lets not forget about the fact physical copies can be resold multiple times without microsoft seeing a single dime. why keep a playstation gamer a playstation gamer and make 30 bucks off of them, instead of enticing them with these games and making hundreds and hundreds of dollars.
people still not getting that microsoft has a different business model now.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CatLady

FrankWza

Member
Feb 14, 2013
1,774
448
550
I doubt they would want unnecessary litigation in which they'd easily lose.
dont you know? They’re just being nice by letting the games be on PS5 out of the goodness of their hearts. Just those 2 though...out of the goodness of their hearts. ;)

it’s killing him that he HAS to have those game go to PS5 exclusively.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: The_Mike

sublimit

Member
Aug 28, 2009
19,473
6,396
1,310
actually, putting them on other platforms is what will deny them money. a gamepass sub potentially pays exponentially more than selling a single copy. and lets not forget about the fact physical copies can be resold multiple times without microsoft seeing a single dime. why keep a playstation gamer a playstation gamer and make 30 bucks off of them, instead of enticing them with these games and making hundreds and hundreds of dollars.
people still not getting that microsoft has a different business model now.
Yes but wouldn't a potential Playstation/Nintendo release underline Gamepass value that everyone (including MS) continues to reiterate? Everyone says how much more value Gamepass offers when compared to Playstation's and Nintendo's 70$ games. Well if that's the case then what there is to be afraid off? If anything it will be free advertising that you can play the games for "free" on Gamepss instead of having to pay 70$ and also not leave a huge part of the market's (PS5/Switch) money on the table. They may get these money on a later date (as timed exclusives) but money will still be money and MS never said no to more money (see Minecraft).
 
Last edited:

Dodo123

Neo Member
Oct 12, 2020
10
6
135
I hope that Microsoft can keep it up. Next gen has the potential to be a lot more exciting than the current one. Especially that PS has a history of being to cocky after winning.

For me his answer shows the confidence he has in their plan. A lot of ways to gather people around their games. The Xbox marketing is really good too.
 

sublimit

Member
Aug 28, 2009
19,473
6,396
1,310

Pretty spot-on if you ask me. I agree 100% about what he says (including what he says about the Playstation fanboys).

NSFW btw (language).
 
Last edited:

Porcile

Member
Oct 23, 2012
4,898
788
620
What about back catalogue? Will we only ever see Doom re-releases on Xbox and PC from now? That's the scary thing for me if MS ever got their hands on Sega. 30 years of games controlled entirely by Microsoft.
 
May 27, 2018
66
70
285
He literally couldn't make it much clearer.
“As part of this acquisition, all future Bethesda/Zenimax games not already planned to release on other platforms will be exclusive to Xbox and PC.”
There. That’s what he could have said. Zero ambiguity, GamePass platform strengthened, Xbox desirability increased.

“We have no plans to release games on PlayStation or Nintendo consoles as part of this acquisition.” Some wiggle room, message is still super-clear.

“We have made this acquisition so that we can bring fantastic exclusive content to Xbox and PC, including future Elder Scrolls, Fallout and Doom titles along with the exciting new Starfield IP, with games available Day 1 on GamePass.” Focusing on the positives for Xbox while dropping the word “exclusive” to make the plan crystal clear.

Hell, even something like “we’re happy for Sony to jump on board with GamePass and give all gamers a way to play these great games on their chosen console,” would be positive and inclusive while signalling the exclusivity of the games to Xbox.

There. Four different things he could have said that would have been clearer and would have forestalled all of these conversations and made Series S/X a more attractive purchase.

He hasn’t said these thing because he doesn’t want to commit to this idea just yet. He doesn’t want to alienate players. Sony benefits from polarising the playerbase, discouraging people from switching. Maybe this is the reasoning. Maybe Phil / MS just want everyone to feel like a “gamer” first and a PS/Xbox user second so that they are more comfortable switching platforms, something that MS obviously stands to benefit from more than Sony. But to read and hear what Phil says and think that he’s being as clear as he possibly could be is either naive or disingenuous.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Andodalf

devilNprada

Member
May 2, 2019
624
729
330
That you are ignoring all the other reasons? Also Minecraft was already on all platforms including Nintendo's Wii U. So your argument holds no water. There is nothing that equates to Zenimax games.
Nope wrong again minecraft came to WIi u December 2015 purchase by MS was a year earlier.
 
  • Triggered
Reactions: Hendrick's

dvdvideo

Report me for SonyGAF. SonyBots, fanboys > 04/27
Sep 15, 2005
889
662
1,615
“As part of this acquisition, all future Bethesda/Zenimax games not already planned to release on other platforms will be exclusive to Xbox and PC.”
There. That’s what he could have said. Zero ambiguity, GamePass platform strengthened, Xbox desirability increased.

“We have no plans to release games on PlayStation or Nintendo consoles as part of this acquisition.” Some wiggle room, message is still super-clear.

“We have made this acquisition so that we can bring fantastic exclusive content to Xbox and PC, including future Elder Scrolls, Fallout and Doom titles along with the exciting new Starfield IP, with games available Day 1 on GamePass.” Focusing on the positives for Xbox while dropping the word “exclusive” to make the plan crystal clear.

Hell, even something like “we’re happy for Sony to jump on board with GamePass and give all gamers a way to play these great games on their chosen console,” would be positive and inclusive while signalling the exclusivity of the games to Xbox.

There. Four different things he could have said that would have been clearer and would have forestalled all of these conversations and made Series S/X a more attractive purchase.

He hasn’t said these thing because he doesn’t want to commit to this idea just yet. He doesn’t want to alienate players. Sony benefits from polarising the playerbase, discouraging people from switching. Maybe this is the reasoning. Maybe Phil / MS just want everyone to feel like a “gamer” first and a PS/Xbox user second so that they are more comfortable switching platforms, something that MS obviously stands to benefit from more than Sony. But to read and hear what Phil says and think that he’s being as clear as he possibly could be is either naive or disingenuous.
Let me rephrase - within the confines of not wanting to sound like a greedy corp who wants to restrict gameplayers in the Sony ecosystem after touting "we want games for everyone", and not boxing them in 1000% percent, he let the interviewer and audience know the intention of ms is to keep the games in thier ecosystem alone. That's it.

Everything else being stated here about him saying games will be on ps5 is just extreme hopeful thinking that he might of meant something else 99% more ambigious than what he actually stated. Especially when you combine his answer with just basic common sense as to what 99% of people think they would do once acquiring an exclusive ip software company like this in the wake of a lack of exclusive software.
 

THEAP99

reposts tweets from kids about console wars
Mar 16, 2020
1,525
3,345
615
Ehh I wouldn't be so sure about that. I don't think the bigger titles like Starfield will, but I think the smaller games from like Arkane will. I mean I just can't see a lot of those games being ugly successful without the big PS-5 install base.

It will depend a lot on how many Series X & S's they sell. Which I don't think will be many tbh. As I've said many times before I think they'll be done with consoles quite soon.
 

Brofist

Member
Jun 15, 2004
10,632
446
1,665
What the fuck does that have to do with what I said... Someone stated mis information I corrected it I made no argument....
You've repeated that Minecraft shit 1000x like a bot over the last month it's hard to keep track of your motives for each time.
 
Last edited:

Gavon West

Member
Jan 12, 2018
2,100
2,289
375
its not a matter of poor sales or not. It’s more good to great. Being that the exclusives are a must release for them contractually, when they do release, and PS5 console sales are in the 30-40 million range, that’s a big install base to ignore. It’s an interesting issue to see how they handle it. If those 2 exclusives sell an insane amount of copies then it’s a tough thing to explain exclusivity on IPs that traditionally have not been.It’s not like they’re putting halo on a Ps system. So the deathloop and ghost wire exclusivity gives them a back door excuse, if they want it, to change course and release the other older IPson PS. Tough to ignore if each game sells 4-5 million as PS exclusives. Even 2-3 mil.
Let it go man. Seriously. If games were going to hit PlayStation or Nintendo, Phil would've said so already. He was upfront about the Minecraft deal; that it would remain oon all platforms -- that includes Sony and Nintendo. He didn't say it this time. And he won't, cause that just won't be the case.
 

Gavon West

Member
Jan 12, 2018
2,100
2,289
375
no. He HAS to. If he didn’t, he wouldn’t. And there’s no way it’s not gonna stick in his craw if he doesn’t end up releasing any other games on PS. Tough situation.



no. It’s owned by Sony. Wasn’t purchased after multiple IPs were released across many consoles for many years. Bad comparison.
He really didn't have to though. They could've bought out the exclusive contracts for those two games and that would be the end of Sony getting GW or DL. Phil simply decided to allow them over to Sony per the agreements. That's the reality.
 

Gavon West

Member
Jan 12, 2018
2,100
2,289
375
Console exclusives.
Just PS5 and then after the window they can release on PC. They may both do huge numbers depending on where they fall in the release schedule. deathloop had a chance at making launch window before a slight delay. Both set for 2021 though.
Both titles are timed exclusives.
 

Gavon West

Member
Jan 12, 2018
2,100
2,289
375
He says they can afford it but that doesn't mean they will. That are two completely different things.

For example i can afford to stay without work for one year because i might have income from other sources as well. That however doesn't mean i will not work.



He's just being Phil Spencer always trying to look and sound nice. It's just PR. I don't see how that particular quote can mean anything.



And they will. But i still don't see where he said that they will not let Bethesda's games coming to PS and Nintendo. Focusing on their platforms means these games will all be on Gamepass day one and they will heavily promote them. That however doesn't prove that they will deny the money they'd get from Sony's and Nintendo's platforms.



Umm yes he could? He could easily have said that these games will never come to an ecosystem other than Microsoft's. See? That was easy. Did he say it? No he didn't.

As to why he leaves this subject open for speculation well...that is a discussion that needs its own thread IMO.
Maybe if people wouldn't be so hung up on what Phil is saying and instead listen to what he ISNT saying. When asked if games will come over to PS or Nintendo, he doesn't say yes. He even stated that its not sustainable to bring Xbox games to Nintendo or Sony without having Live and GP somewhere.

Even though he isn't out right coming out and saying it, he's still saying, no.
 

Njocky

Member
Aug 10, 2020
135
128
215
The sad thing about this for me is that XBox utterly shit the bed this gen, and instead of growing their studios organically and producing exclusives (a perfectly reasonable thing for them to do by the way) to sway people to XBox/PC/Gamepass they've just gone to the mothership (it's definitely not the gaming divisions profits) and spent a boatload of cash to buy a whole bunch of studios. These studios have a lot of beloved IP that have been cross platform for some time now, but there's a strong chance they won't be moving forward. Well done XBox, this scheme will work, but it gives the whole enterprise no merit whatsoever. Good for XBox/PC fans I suppose, but the gloating hasn't really been earned. Enjoy!
No video game manufacturer has grown all their studios organically. It takes decades of track record for a studio to add value to a manufacturer's brand. Turn 10, 343 and the Initiative were all started by Microsoft and we can all agree that the last 2 still have a lot to prove. And by the way, Bend, Insomniac, Guerilla, etc.. were not always Sony studios. I don't think it makes much sense to criticize MS for doing what is a global industry practice unless you have a strong device war affiliation. Amazon and Stadia were most certainly lined up to do the exact same thing as MS if they hadn't outbid them. Sony was not wealthy enough, that's all.