Volta Mars
Banned
For being a hypocrite?
Apparently. It's hilarious.
For being a hypocrite?
Phil you shouldn't be making marketing deals in the first place. How about turning over every dime your division gets to spend and fucking worry about some first party games instead ?
In Phil's defense, the overwhelming majority of that damage was already done by Mattrick in the Kinect era.Phil needs to go. Not only does he seem to be full of shit, he has also only hurt xbox and xbox first party further then had already been done by time he got there. Of course he doesn't like exclusives, look at what hes done to the first party lol.
He tells like it is.
I believe in Spencer.
Hello Pot, meet Kettle.
I'm shocked
You got anymore of that Kool-Aid left, guys?
Ive always been one of the more vocal critic around this deal. But not the exclusivity deal itself. Timed exclusives has been a thing since multiple console generations ago, and while I think its a poor decision on Squares part to do this for TR, its ultimately their decision to accept MSs money.
But there is one thing about this deal that I found personally very revolting, and that was the concentrated attempt to pretend like this was more than a timed-exclusive, with the usage of mixed messaging, clever PR spins and very carefully selected language.
Lets look at the overall chronology of how this exclusivity story came about :
1. Multiple indie games were announced at Gamescom as First on Xbox. There was very clear implication that the exclusivity of said games were timed.
2. ROTR was announced as Exclusive on Xbox, launching Holiday 2015. There was massive confusion from the get-go, because Point (1)s language was used to announced timed-exclusives, but ROTR had a different language that implied bonafide exclusivity.
So, from the get-go, through the manipulation of the different exclusivity language used, MS tried to pretend ROTR wasnt a timed-exclusive, however :
3. Games media didnt immediately buy into the announcement. When MS PR was pressed for a statement on the matter, folks like Geoff, etc clarify that MS refused to budge from the very fixed statement of Exclusive on Xbox, launching holiday 2015.
At this point, people were already guessing its likely timed, however :
4. Crystal Dynamics posted an article explaining the exclusivity, except they called it an exclusive, ( without the holiday 2015 line and no PR-safe terminology), which immediately prompted fans to suddenly get confused over the state of the games exclusivity.
5. Whats worse was that in the same post, CD effectively threw shade at Playstation/PC fans by saying Dont worry, Temple of Osiris for yall to play!, pissing off a larger majority of the TR audience.
6. Aaron Greenberg also referred to the post by CD to imply that ROTR is an actual exclusive, to further add fuel to fire.
At this points, the outrage was at a fever high. Mixed-messaging on both sides, one side acting like its timed, the other acting like its actually exclusive, and fans demanded to know the actual truth of the story :
7. Come Phil Spencer interview where he had to respond to the queries.
This was an interview that was referenced by both sides of the camp, those who believe its a timed exclusive, and those who believe its a bonafide Xbox-exclusive that will only come to PC later, never PS4. Why was this interview so polarising to that extent?
8. In said interview, Phil defended his purchase of ROTRs exclusivity, making references to Uncharted, etc. He also used terms like I didnt buy the franchise, I dont own the IP in perpetuity and compared the deal, calling it similar to Ryse/Dead Rising 3, both games that are never coming to PS4, because it was fully funded by MS. He ultimately ended it by saying the deal has a duration
So basically, Phil basically admitted it was a timed-exclusive, but used very clever PR-language, referring the Tomb Raider IP (instead of referring to just the game) when talking about the exclusivity deal and saying the deal is similar (similar =/= same) to Dead Rising and Ryse, knowing full well those 2 games are never coming to PS4.
9. In respect to the interview above, Crystal amended its original post, but they said Phil Spencer confirmed that ROTR is a timed-exclusive.
10. Not too long later, the same post above is amended from timed-exclusive to the deal has a duration.
Everything from point (1) to point (10) was an extremely concerted effort to pretend like ROTR wasnt a timed-exclusive. And I think its a pretty pathetic display from MS/Square.
12-months exclusivity for a AAA-game like TR is a huge win on MSs side. Sure, youll piss off PS-fans by doing it, but admitting it from the get-go will absolve you of all the drama that occurred, and have fans being more trustworthy of you.
Personally, this whole deal has left me with a higher degree of scrutiny when it comes to anything thats spoken out of Phil Spencer/MSs mouth. And I hate having to swim through a sea of PR bullshit to reach the truth in messaging.
And I didnt even go into the hilarity like Microsofts Passion for Tomb Raider, etc etc, which, while foolish, isnt part of the exclusivity subterfuge, but just hilarious justification of why this deal happened in the first place.
I respect him even more after saying that.
Fun fact, Metro DID do an interview with Phil where they repeatedly put him on the spot.To call them journalists makes a mockery of the term. They need to keep on games companies good side to keep access.
Love to see the likes of the BBC or Metro have an interview as I doubt they'd turn a blind eye to the most obvious retorts.
ps3ud0 8)
How is timed exclusivity of a full game any better?
But they do both lol
MS has done this in years past plenty of times so there is hypocrisy here, but that is a very different thing than full games. For major games these deals typically allow devs to focus optimizing for one machine and the console partner often brings in new funding options for the game's development. Plus other stuff like helping with online infrastructure and testing etc.
So there they basically step in and try to pay in exchange for focusing on their sku and making it as good as possible. That is materially quite different than stuff where it is clear that the content is likely being artificially blocked. I doubt the Destiny 2 PvP level or the strike or the gear/weapon are items that benefit one bit from Sony's cooperation.
Lol so if someone changes for the better its bad now? Do you honestly believe they wouldnt get exclusive stuff for mordor and ac? Sure a big Part of the reasoning behind this is because the deals are more expensive, but its good that they dont do this stuff anymore. If they go backwards on this, then we should give them shit for it.
That just reads as him not being a fan because he can't get any.
lm a bad boy. I deserve it.If he took a dump on his desk you would defend him
OH, the thread is just for shit posting and knee jerk reactions them? Ok guys, have fun!
But yet Jim Ryan keeps taking the punches when he takes interviews from Metro...Fun fact, Metro DID do an interview with Phil where they repeatedly put him on the spot.
He never returned to that joint. That stuff was fantastic.
I agree but I don't see how it's any worse than launch exclusives. That's just as anti consumer.
Phil needs to go. Not only does he seem to be full of shit, he has also only hurt xbox and xbox first party further then had already been done by time he got there. Of course he doesn't like exclusives, look at what hes done to the first party lol.
Don't worry, if they lose the funding from MS to pay for any marketing deals anymore Phil will decide that they didn't like that either. The man is an amazing liar, I think some people are starting to catch on to it now though.
I fail to see the comparision between marketing deals and launch exclusivity.
I mean, are you guys criticizing sony for having third party exclusivities too?
This is where it reaches a really ridiculous level. No doubt alot of that stuff is just on the disc too. Both nasty examples of it this year come from Activision, very telling.
This guy is constantly full of shit.
It was rumored to be a year but I'm sure people don't care for it after seeing the quality of it.People keep bringing up Tomb Raider, but, it also happened just a few months ago with Dead Rising 4. Or is that never coming to PS4?
People keep bringing up Tomb Raider, but, it also happened just a few months ago with Dead Rising 4. Or is that never coming to PS4?
But yet Jim Ryan keeps taking the punches when he takes interviews from Metro...
)
I fail to see the comparision between marketing deals and launch exclusivity.
I mean, are you guys criticizing sony for having third party exclusivities too?
People keep bringing up Tomb Raider, but, it also happened just a few months ago with Dead Rising 4. Or is that never coming to PS4?
But Xbox still gets that strike... a year later, sure but they still get it.Launch exclusive = you get the game a month or so later
Content exclusive = you never get it
It's the difference in getting a call of duty map 30 days later vs never getting a destiny strike (a huge part that game).
But shit works so it's not going to stop.
There's a difference between funding a game's development and asking for exclusivity in exchange, rather than paying a small sum for 6 months of exclusivity. If Microsoft was fully funding these games and allowing them to vastly improve upon their vision for the game, that would be one thing. But they arent, so there is really no benefit to the consumer to the exclusivity window.I fail to see the comparision between marketing deals and launch exclusivity.
I mean, are you guys criticizing sony for having third party exclusivities too?