• 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.

Phil Spencer: "Not a fan of marketing deals with exclusive content"

Man, this E3 is too much. If anything, it showed me that not only that console stans are alive and kicking, but that people at GAF has insecurity issues (at times myself included, guilty as charged).

This E3 brought out the worst in everyone, even though it was the fullest E3 ever.

Can't blame us, most conferences kinda disappointed compare to last year so we need something to entertain instead lol
 
Totally agreed. Locking away Destiny 2 content for at least one year is disgusting.

sony doesnt seem to care. Its all fine and dandy that hes not a fan but in the meantime, xbox users get fucked over everytime. Its time he starts wearing his big boy pants and stops being mr nice guy
 

Dre3001

Member
A lot of examples are already cited in this thread. Don't make other people do the work for you.


Saw the examples after I made the post. But like others have said, Phil is in no position to speak considering the conference for Xbox was basically full of timed exclusives.

Pot calling the kettle black clearly.
 
Wait, what? Are you sure? This is the first time I hear about this, if it's true then it's fucking disgusting

https://twitter.com/VinceZampella/status/395325209521029120

Always MS exclusive at launch, great partner and focus is good for a startup. EA made a deal for the rest, we only found out recently =(

https://www.polygon.com/2014/4/18/5627670/titanfall-vita-the-final-hours-of-titanfall

Keighley also chronicles the game's path to Xbox console exclusivity. Respawn told the author that its understanding was that Titanfall would be a timed exclusive on Xbox One and PC but that it would later arrive for PlayStation platforms after 13 months. In part, the studio decided to focus on fewer platforms because its size limited its capabilities.

Titanfall publisher Electronic Arts was in charge of negotiating with console manufacturers, and studio co-founder Vince Zampella said that Respawn learned in the summer of 2013 that the game would be an exclusive to Xbox and Windows PC.

https://twitter.com/yusuf_i_mehdi/status/395306671687229440
 

Ushay

Member
I agree on content for simultaneous releases ie Destiny.

Timed exclusivity makes sense for smaller developers that need help to lift off. Sony does this in spades too,dont make me get a list out.

I don't however agree games like Tomb Raider, Dead Rising or Street Fighter (established multiplatform games) should ever get exclusivity of any kind. Those are bullshit cash grabs in my eyes.
 

SOR5

Member
Microsoft must really suck at making deals then when at the first reveal the developers pretended to play on PS4s.

J7n0bNO.jpg

Good catch

Theres definitely some hypocrisy that comes standard with PR here though, some of Microsoft will pretend BC is the greatest thing ever made, some of Sony will pretend BC is just a useless feature. It's all part of the bullshit
 

Tigress

Member
So he's okay with timed exclusives on full game releases but not timed releases on piecemeal content?

This reeks of hypocrisy.

No, it reeks of PR. They can't get the deal so speak badly of it to hopefully at least make it look bad on Sony. Hope people forget when you do it or when you did it (and for past tense say you now changed your mind).
 

Bluenoser

Member
Sure that's true. But I don't think Spencer was talking about timed exclusives in the interview. Even OP talks about permanently locking content out of other platforms, not temporarily. This thread just took a silly turn when people didn't want to understand what was said, it's easier to just make fun of Spencer.



Timed? And not sure if those are still coming to PC at the same time, the wording is bit confusing.

No, we all understood what was said. We were just calling Phil out for his blatant hypocrisy. He advocates taking the high road, detests console wars, and third party deals, yet...

He wears a shirt saying "6>4", and claims Pro is competing with XB1S, and announces timed exclusivity on almost 20 games during their conference.

What he says he's about, and what he actually says and does completely contradict each other. He comes off as a disingenuous fanboy, with a fancy title.
 

Bgamer90

Banned
Ehh... no. There were many timed exclusives (so only exclusive for a couple of weeks or months). A couple of Microsoft (pc and Xbox) exclusives (like.. 3?) and no XboxOne exclusive (as far as i know). Maybe someone has the exact numbers.

Microsoft invested in timed-exclusives this time. Not exclusive content. That's all.

YES. I know. I'm simply stating what they said. They never said 42 games would be exclusive.
 

komaruR

Member
So he dont agree to locking content from competitor for a time frame but agree to locking the whole game from conpetitor for a time frame (console launch exclusive)??
What a hypocrite.
 

Sheroking

Member
Many people aren't entirely cool with it, but personally I'm happy to take later PC ports than nothing at all. At launch would be even better ofcourse.

Well, of course.

But the PC port, or more commonly the PS4 port isn't coming day and date because they payed for it's timed exclusivity. To me it's the same principle as exclusive content in a game only bigger and temporary.
 
I think Phil is speaking from a personal stand point. Does Phil have enough clout to say "I don't agree with this so no more"? There obviously is more involved with these exclusive content deals then Phil shaking hands and making it so.
 

SaucyJack

Member
I agree with Phil Spencer's comment in the OP.

But he is clearly somewhat hypocritical to say so given track record. FUT Legends anyone?
 

SmokedMeat

Gamer™
Phil says one thing, while history reveals the other. It wasn't long ago that they locked Rise of the Tomb down for a year. They nabbed Titanfall. They had CoD DLC on Xbox first for an entire generation.

Now that the shoe is on the other foot it's a different story. Microsoft is getting their ass beat so they try and sing a different tune because they don't have the leverage they did before.
 

jelly

Member
Had.

When Nadella took over, the coffers were shut.

I don't think the coffers were shut, Nadella has no interest in platforms/software that people don't subscribe to, GaaS like or push consumers to other Microsoft services. Nadella wants big returns on a few tent poles, that's it.
 

Bgamer90

Banned

Haha -- it's obvious that reps/PR simply play to the strengths their company and/or console has during a certain point in time and will go the opposite if they lose it. Seeing the change and hypocrisy is amusing but getting literally upset about it is pointless as this is how things will continue to be.
 

MadMod

Member
I guess this is what happens when you get a taste of your own medicine? I like that he probably partially believes in what he's said, but I'd like it more if he actually enforced it.
 
Phil says one thing, while history reveals the other. It wasn't long ago that they locked Rise of the Tomb down for a year. They nabbed Titanfall. They had CoD DLC on Xbox first for an entire generation.

Now that the shoe is on the other foot it's a different story. Microsoft is getting their ass beat so they try and sing a different tune because they don't have the leverage they did before.

To be fair, they were getting their asses kicked even when they had Tomb raider and Titanfall1 as exclusives.

Im ok with this, as long as both parties are doing it. If MS wanna do it, fine do it. But that means Sony should do it too. Personally, i have both consoles and ill always buy both, so im never gonna miss out on anything. If exclusive deals gets me to play the game on their console, theyve done their job. Ultimately, its to get you to buy in. And if MS just sit back, theyll get crushed even more and thats not any better.

If i were him, i would just get more exclusives. I dont care if gamers dont like it. Its a business, not a friendship.
 

e-gamer

Member
Deals with exclusive content are different from deals without exclusive content.

Besides the tomb raider deal was made by Matrick I think.
 
I agree but Phil is the last person that should be saying this. You literally payed for a bunch of games to be timed exclusive to your platform.
 
You've got to love Microsoft whining about something THEY started doing first last gen, all while still having done it numerous times this gen. If they were in the position Sony were in, they'd be even worse with this shit and you'd never hear a peep out of them.
 
He said he's not a fan of it, not that he's never done it. It was refreshing to see no exclusive content on the Microsoft stage. That shit sucks, so hopefully this really means Microsoft are pulling away from it all together
 
Deals with exclusive content are different from deals without exclusive content.

Besides the tomb raider deal was made by Matrick I think.

Kagari stated that the deal was made in the months of TR's E3 reveal in 2014. Mattrick left in 2013.

However, let's assume Mattrick made the deal, for entertainment's sake. The one who decided to lie to consumers about the game's type of exclusivity was Phil.
 

SDR-UK

Member
Anyone remember the other Tomb Raider incident? Tomb Raider Underworld had two exclusive (and from memory kinda sizable) DLCs that were exclusive to XBOX and never saw the light of day on PC or PS3.
 

e-gamer

Member
Kagari stated that the deal was made in the months of TR's E3 reveal in 2014. Mattrick left in 2013.

However, let's assume Mattrick made the deal, for entertainment's sake. The one who decided to lie to consumers about the game's type of exclusivity was Phil.

Even with that the deal didn't include exclusive content...
 
Top Bottom