• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Tetris Effect removes remote play from PS4 version, Licensing to be the cause

KAL2006

Member
Feb 6, 2009
12,442
2,418
1,345
UK
UPDATE

Okay this was a thread backfire

I have done some further research

Apparently it's nothing to do with Microsoft and something related to the Tetris license, the timing of both events made it look like a Microsoft moneyhat




ORIGINAL OP

Thought this needs it's own thread. Remember consumer friendly Phil Spencer says he doesn't like timed exclusives or exclusive DLC. Yet the Microsoft showcase had a ton of timed exclusives. Well Microsoft went for a low blow and had a Tetris Patch delayed for a launch console Tetris exclusive. But the killer low blow is what needs it's own thread. Microsoft got remote play removed from PS4 version. This is the first time I have heard a moneyhat removes features from a competitor. This is the ultimate form of moneyhatting. What's next Microsoft will send a moneyhat to a developer to cause games to crash on PS4.

Here is the source
 
Last edited:

KAL2006

Member
Feb 6, 2009
12,442
2,418
1,345
UK
When Sony does it (paid so that RE7 VR was not on PC) no one bats an eye. MS does it and everyone loses their minds.

Had no idea Sony removed a feature PC version already had. Can't you just downgrade the version patch on PC.

I tried YouTube the original Resident Evil 7 ore patch removal of VR in PC and can't find it
 

BeardGawd

Member
Dec 16, 2019
794
1,431
485
This is fucking pathetic! Whats next are we going to see in the industry? Giving a platform a full game and other just a half of it?
Didn't Sony do something like this with CoD and Destiny? Exclusive content for over a year or something like that?

Hell Sony purchased full exclusivity of a huge multi platform game like Street Fighter 5 for the entire gen.

I feel like those things are far worse and no one took Sony to task for them. MS has to compete in some way.
 

cormack12

Gold Member
Mar 21, 2013
10,750
28,568
1,550
We haven't heard anything about remote play on PS5 yet so it may be they are winding it down/aging it out. Hoping to push PSNow instead.

Could be anything. Theres a gap that needs filling in before pitchforks are raised.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andodalf

Max_Po

Member
Mar 1, 2015
3,861
5,773
690
Didn't Sony do something like this with CoD and Destiny? Exclusive content for over a year or something like that?

Hell Sony purchased full exclusivity of a huge multi platform game like Street Fighter 5 for the entire gen.

I feel like those things are far worse and no one took Sony to task for them. MS has to compete in some way.


SONY paid for the development of SF5.
 

JSoup

Banned
Jun 20, 2013
4,326
2,449
870
California
What? I thought Remote Play was an OS level feature, so the games didn't have any control about it.

Correct, the newest version update for Tetris Effect down't really remove the feature, it just blocks the game from connecting when you try to start Remote Play. Some people are saying using the version downgrade trick opens it back up.
 

KAL2006

Member
Feb 6, 2009
12,442
2,418
1,345
UK
Didn't Sony do something like this with CoD and Destiny? Exclusive content for over a year or something like that?

Hell Sony purchased full exclusivity of a huge multi platform game like Street Fighter 5 for the entire gen.

I feel like those things are far worse and no one took Sony to task for them. MS has to compete in some way.


Both Sony and Microsoft have had a history of moneyhatting games for full exclusivity, time exclusivity, exclusive features, exclusive DLC which is bad.

The point of this thread is that this is the first time we are seeing a moneyhat for a removal of a feature that already exists on another platform.
 

Zoro7

Banned
Sep 15, 2013
1,877
6,619
690
Has Sony ever paid to remove a feature off from the Xbox version of a game? A feature that was already being used by consumers?
Because that's pathetic and the most anti consumer thing Ive ever heard.
 

phil_t98

Member
Oct 10, 2014
5,052
5,313
735
Thought this needs it's own thread. Remember consumer friendly Phil Spencer says he doesn't like timed exclusives or exclusive DLC. Yet the Microsoft showcase had a ton of timed exclusives. Well Microsoft went for a low blow and had a Tetris Patch delayed for a launch console Tetris exclusive. But the killer low blow is what needs it's own thread. Microsoft got remote play removed from PS4 version. This is the first time I have heard a moneyhat removes features from a competitor. This is the ultimate form of moneyhatting. What's next Microsoft will send a moneyhat to a developer to cause games to crash on PS4.

Here is the source
do you know its because of something Microsoft has done?
 

Max_Po

Member
Mar 1, 2015
3,861
5,773
690
That's what they told you to excuse it. SF4 was hugely successful on all platforms it appeared on. Sony paid for EXCLUSIVITY which obviously covered the development.

Didn't Capcom screwed themself by making SFxT which was a flop, then MvsC3 was a flop.

Hence they needed outside financing or wait for some $$$ roll in and then decide to make the game ?... if that
 

Spukc

Member
Jan 24, 2015
18,979
22,653
970
Eh get fucked removing content post patch.
No streetfighter 4 complete edition on xbox or switch thanks SONY i guess right back at ya
 
  • Like
  • LOL
Reactions: Genx3 and Andodalf

JonnyMP3

Member
May 31, 2020
1,657
5,260
410
The irony that Microsoft who are the originators of money hatting timed exclusives in the PS360 era with their COD maps due to the initial install base, completely lost their ability to money hat COD again with a lesser install base and then had to accept the lesser exclusives that Sony didn't want because they now had all that exclusive COD clout that used to be Xboxes, so now Xbox are left to money hat... Tetris. 😂

How am I not making this all up???
 
  • Triggered
Reactions: Doncabesa

Stilton Disco

Member
Aug 22, 2014
7,041
7,857
870
England
Didn't Sony do something like this with CoD and Destiny? Exclusive content for over a year or something like that?

Hell Sony purchased full exclusivity of a huge multi platform game like Street Fighter 5 for the entire gen.

I feel like those things are far worse and no one took Sony to task for them. MS has to compete in some way.
Neither of those things removed content previously available on another platform. In the case of SF, Sony footed part of the bill too, so it's more akin to Bayonetta 2 and 3 getting made because of the platform exclusivity.

What's more, people did complain and point out that it was shitty behaviour. I know because one of the people calling these things out was myself at the time and I've you seen it pop up again on and off over the years, right up to you disingenuously doing it now.

And neither example is anywhere near as egregious and anti consumer ad what MS is doing with this bollocks.
 

Mista

Banned
Nov 21, 2014
20,414
35,345
1,420
Didn't Sony do something like this with CoD and Destiny? Exclusive content for over a year or something like that?

Hell Sony purchased full exclusivity of a huge multi platform game like Street Fighter 5 for the entire gen.

I feel like those things are far worse and no one took Sony to task for them. MS has to compete in some way.
Not saying this isn’t shitty because it is. But having a timed exclusive content is more forgivable than removing a feature
 
  • Fire
Reactions: Spukc

ultrazilla

Gold Member
Sep 17, 2011
4,467
3,766
1,110
www.scifijapan.com
UPDATE

Okay this was a thread backfire

I have done some further research

Apparently it's nothing to do with Microsoft and something related to the Tetris license, the timing of both events made it look like a Microsoft moneyhat




ORIGINAL OP

Thought this needs it's own thread. Remember consumer friendly Phil Spencer says he doesn't like timed exclusives or exclusive DLC. Yet the Microsoft showcase had a ton of timed exclusives. Well Microsoft went for a low blow and had a Tetris Patch delayed for a launch console Tetris exclusive. But the killer low blow is what needs it's own thread. Microsoft got remote play removed from PS4 version. This is the first time I have heard a moneyhat removes features from a competitor. This is the ultimate form of moneyhatting. What's next Microsoft will send a moneyhat to a developer to cause games to crash on PS4.

Here is the source


 

Miles708

Member
Sep 11, 2019
1,736
2,353
435
That's why I dislike patches and online updates in general: with a "crystalized" product (like a retail disc) these kind of things just can't happen.

In a couple of years, as licences for music, brands and contractual deals begin to expire, a lot of fun "patches" will happen to existing games.
 
Last edited:

JonnyMP3

Member
May 31, 2020
1,657
5,260
410
Lock the thread Mods. OP fucked up!
But as for money hatting... It did used to be that the ultimate contract was COD which was mostly Xbox exclusive and Playstation had the Battlefield exclusivity for BF3.

Anyone else think that once the roles were reversed and PS had COD on the timed exclusiveness which left MS with the Battlefield one that things had changed in the gen?
 

BeardGawd

Member
Dec 16, 2019
794
1,431
485
Neither of those things removed content previously available on another platform. In the case of SF, Sony footed part of the bill too, so it's more akin to Bayonetta 2 and 3 getting made because of the platform exclusivity.

What's more, people did complain and point out that it was shitty behaviour. I know because one of the people calling these things out was myself at the time and I've you seen it pop up again on and off over the years, right up to you disingenuously doing it now.

And neither example is anywhere near as egregious and anti consumer ad what MS is doing with this bollocks.
What planet are you from where removal of a minor feature (probably barely used) is worse than money hatting a huge multi platform game for the entire generation?
 

KAL2006

Member
Feb 6, 2009
12,442
2,418
1,345
UK
I look at shit like Kena and Deathloop and think do people really get sold on time exclusives. Like I'm getting a PS5 and when I see those time exclusives on Series X in like cool ill grab what I like whenever it drops on PS5. I'm guessing same think Series X owners will think with timed exclusives on PS5. I think the time exclusives that make a huge difference in sales are bigger games like Final Fantasy VII Remake. Regardless it's all anti consumer unless that moneyhat helped the indie developers budget to make the game.
 

vkbest

Member
Jan 23, 2017
1,719
1,675
500
What planet are you from where removal of a minor feature (probably barely used) is worse than money hatting a huge multi platform game for the entire generation?

guy don’t be dumb. First is not a minor feature, people can play on their phone or tablet their PS4 games remotely, second imagine all xcloud catalog would be banned on PS4 and PS5 for remote play, do you think is minor?

Would be a minor feature for example, if Sony mone hating all developers for 4K exclusivity?

Apparently it's nothing to do with Microsoft and something related to the Tetris license, the timing of both events made it look like a Microsoft moneyhat

That looks like lame excuse
 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: DarkMage619

Three

Member
Oct 26, 2014
6,583
4,375
620
Okay this was a thread backfire

I have done some further research

Apparently it's nothing to do with Microsoft and something related to the Tetris license, the timing of both events made it look like a Microsoft moneyhat
So what's the license? It says contractual reasons. You can't offer online multiplayer anywhere else?
I bet that's the contract.
 
Last edited:

Agent X

Member
Jun 7, 2004
8,133
1,365
1,720
New Jersey
But the killer low blow is what needs it's own thread. Microsoft got remote play removed from PS4 version. This is the first time I have heard a moneyhat removes features from a competitor. This is the ultimate form of moneyhatting.

I don't know if it was a "moneyhat", because according to a post by Enhance's Mark MacDonald on another forum:

Mark MacDonald said:
I can see how the timing would make it seem like the two things are related, but FWIW, they aren't. Disabling Remote Play is a contractural / legal matter separate from anything between Enhance and Microsoft. (Thanks for the interest in the game!)

In any case, it's peculiar timing.

Also, the real litmus test would be if the Xbox One/Xbox Series X versions support streaming through Xcloud. If that happens, and PS4 Remote Play support isn't reinstated by that time, then yeah, this would be highly suspicious.

What? I thought Remote Play was an OS level feature, so the games didn't have any control about it.

It is an OS level feature, but developers can opt out. They rarely do, but there have been a few instances of it. Most of those are games that released without Remote Play support. This might be the first time that the feature was stripped out of a game that previously supported it.

When Sony does it (paid so that RE7 VR was not on PC) no one bats an eye. MS does it and everyone loses their minds.

So, if Microsoft did do this (which, according to Enhance, they did not), it would be cool with you because of some sense of reciprocation for "Sony too"?

Losing a feature is a sad situation, no matter what the true cause is. I'd love for Enhance to provide a better explanation beyond mere "contractual reasons".
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Andodalf

KAL2006

Member
Feb 6, 2009
12,442
2,418
1,345
UK
So what's the license? It says contractual. You can't offer online multiplayer anywhere else?

Yes the multiplayer patch is a moneyhat. But the removal of remote play isn't a moneyhat. I got this information from Era when a Dev working on the game made a comment in the forum.

Still sucks a multiplayer patch is timed exclusive, but it's nothing new Sony moneyhats DLC it's just bad as that. But my OP was in regards to removal of remote play moneyhat which is a new low, but it's confirmed that that's nothing to do with the moneyhat.
 

Three

Member
Oct 26, 2014
6,583
4,375
620
Yes the multiplayer patch is a moneyhat. But the removal of remote play isn't a moneyhat. I got this information from Era when a Dev working on the game made a comment in the forum.

Still sucks a multiplayer patch is timed exclusive, but it's nothing new Sony moneyhats DLC it's just bad as that. But my OP was in regards to removal of remote play moneyhat which is a new low, but it's confirmed that that's nothing to do with the moneyhat.
So what is the contractual reason? Seems that remote play alows online streaming and that is now xcloud/gamepass exclusive? I don't get why a system level feature would be blocked unless the Tetris guys signed some contract that remote play is now violating. What's the actual reason without having to visit era?
 

jakinov

Member
Nov 19, 2008
1,014
1,152
1,130
I don't know why people would come to this conclusion. That such a silly thing to pay for.
 

DavidGzz

Member
Jan 7, 2018
2,904
3,540
625
Oh man! We can't talk shit about MS anymore. Aww, man! Next thread then.
 
Last edited: