Stiflers Mom
Banned
It's not like xbox gamers get to play games by Insomniac and Naughty Dog as well, do they?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Why is no one complaining about MS being "anti-consumer"?
- Thread starter pixelation
- Start date
Stiflers Mom
Banned
Just wait for two years, mate.
GrayFoxPL
Member
Yeah, the clowns that screamed murder about PS exclusives are in some kind of euphoria of ignorance now when MS is devouring whole companies.
Rhazer Fusion
Member
Technically it's the same thing. One is keeping software off your system with a contractual deal for a limited time and the other just buys the entire company who makes the games which can keep the developers and all the games off competing systems permanently. Microsoft isn't buying dormant companies or anything. They are buying "active" studios who currently make games for literally ALL platforms. Bethesda, Tango Works, IO Interactive and Ninja Theory to name a few were making games on multiple platforms including PlayStation. Again, concept except one is on a much grander scale.
I doubt Sony would be able to secure as many deals if Xbox owners actually bought and supported their games. Did anyone care about Battletoads? Bleeding Edge? How about Outer Worlds? Most people on my friends list don't play games, but watch plenty of movies and YouTube. The reason Sony can secure exclusives near effortlessly is because most developers and companies find success on their platforms and the user base usually supports their games.
Last edited:
Shmunter
Member
People need to read between the lines. MS is moving towards breadth, they want every numpty to buy. Currently they are balancing hardware with software, but it's obvious the end goal.
$7.5 billion is not just to be thrown at gamepass, this is part of the breadth strategy, those games will be released everywhere. Gamepass will just bring value for those that choose it. For PS5, expect even VR versions of Fallout and Skyrim, etc. just like Minecraft.
Print bury,
$7.5 billion is not just to be thrown at gamepass, this is part of the breadth strategy, those games will be released everywhere. Gamepass will just bring value for those that choose it. For PS5, expect even VR versions of Fallout and Skyrim, etc. just like Minecraft.
Print bury,
Last edited:
D.Final
Banned
Actually, we need to see a Playstation pro consumer first
yet_another_alt
Member
It's fair. I didn't give a shit about platforms buying exclusives before and I don't give a shit now. TBH if I had Microsoft's fuck you money and I'd be even more aggressive than they are.
because so far they havent done anything anti consumer regarding zenimax? theyve just become a big publisher at this point.
FranXico
Member
You're right. The buyout is worse. The end result for consumers is much worse, instead of at least waiting a bit longer for a game, the game will never be available at all on the chosen platform.
danielJackson
Banned
So you are saying that MS doesnt charge 70$ / game?
IMO game pass is epicly anti-consumer, it is disguised to be "OMG incredible value!", but in reality it is fuck you! to people whom buy their games physical / digital and want to own them.
a) not all games come to GP = now you pay expensive subscription + 70$ for some games
b) MS states that games are worth of 0.1 - few dollars, because they can give them out in GP, but also asking full price from people without GP
c) so it is "get our subscription service or get fucked"
They should drop physical/digital prices to 10-20$ on launch, to make it fair.
All access for 24 months costs 815€ here, which is 953$
for same money you can get series x 509€, 2 years of gold (im assuming it is the same as ps+) for 90-100€ and have 200-220€ left for games that you can OWN.
For 7 year gen GP will cost 815€ + 5x 12.99€ (on sale now) = 815+779,4 = 1594€ = 1863$, then add lets say 10 games that dont come to gp = max 700$
And after that you dont own any games.
So how is paying 1863 - 2500$ so pro-consumer, when it leaves only the old console to you, and maybe those 10 games you bought?
for that gamer could build big library of physical/digital games, specially if they are smart and buy used / from sales.
For reference
my cost of ps4 + 7 years ~399€ console, 7x35€ ps+, 80-100 physical games average 20€, ps4 pro 499€, some digital games 100-150€
around 3200€, but I have also sold old ps4 when trading to pro + sold / traded games for around 1000-1500e = 1700-2200€, and I still own 50-60 physical games including some special editions that would still sell for 300-500€ each.
Add to that all ps+ games, so hundreds of games in the library for price of ps+, kind of what game pass offers without new games. (all dont have years of ps+, i know)
So in the end I have maybe paid little more, but own games and could sell them to be under the price of 7 years of game pass.
My point is, that in the long run GP isnt "incredible value" compared to smart way of buying physical games
And it is kind of "fuck you" to xbox gamers whom like physicals
People whom look monthly payments, like "oh this car is only 200$ month, cheap" are silly, always look what the total cost is and compare that to other options.
Last edited:
CrysisFreak
Banned
As if MS is less SJW, if anything they are more SJW hahaha.
Tomeru
Member
Relativ9
Member
Look as concerned as I am about MS potentially obtaining a monopoly position in the market if they keep gobbling up companies (though they still have quite a way to go in that regard). There is a bit of a ethical difference between overseeing, funding, and nurturing a game from conception to launch for your platform, to paying a company just to not release their game which you previously had nothing to do with on a competitors platform.
As far as purchasing up companies goes, the only "bad" thing you could argue MS is doing is taking long established franchises and making them exclusive (which we don't know if they're doing yet, could be a Minecraft situation) instead of building up new franchises (in new studios) from the ground up. The more "anti-consumer" thing MS does these days is the Series S and the naming conventions.
As far as purchasing up companies goes, the only "bad" thing you could argue MS is doing is taking long established franchises and making them exclusive (which we don't know if they're doing yet, could be a Minecraft situation) instead of building up new franchises (in new studios) from the ground up. The more "anti-consumer" thing MS does these days is the Series S and the naming conventions.
kuncol02
Banned
It's not same thing. With one you literally pay to keep games from competition and with other you take financial risk of making new games that could or could not sell well.
One is showing middle finger to players on other consoles (and PC) and second is investment (in one of most unpredictable businesses).
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
People keep using Minecraft as an example, but MS didn't officially buy Mojang and the Minecraft IP until after the PS4 version had been released. They've continued to support it, although there was a break when Sony was blocking crossplay, but since the acquisition they've only released the Switch port and they clearly view the Switch in a different light when it comes to direct competition.
sid2vicious
Banned
Every time I see a thread like this from a dumbass fanboy, it make me want to do this...
phil_t98
#SonyToo
but Sony bought studios so that other consoles wouldn't get games from them, remember wipeout on the Saturn? sunset overdrive on xbox? neither of these games will get played again outside of Sony's platform
Mhmmm 2077
Member
Microsoft releases games on all platforms. Minecraft and Minecraft Dungeons are everywhere (including Sony consoles), some of their games are on Nintendo Switch (both Ori games, Cuphead). Most of their games are on PC.
I think you misspelled "pro-consumer".
phil_t98
#SonyToo
well as you Sony fans been banging on about for years is exclusives and that Microsoft had none
Bryank75
Banned
Nobody had an issue with them buying developers, in fact that was great...they needed it and it benefited the studios greatly as well as MS.
However Xbox already had a shooter and 3 RPG teams..... why do they need another RPG team and another big shooter?
This is just moving things quickly towards attempted monopolization. They feel if they can buy most of the RPG studios and limit selection on other platforms of shooter etc that people will be forced to buy Xbox.
That is not choice, that is not pro-consumer. That is anti-competitive.
Silent Viper
Banned
You guys humiliated craig too much. So get ready to suffer
Bryank75
Banned
Xbox already had these games.... nothing new came to Xbox.
Fulcizombie
Banned
Because I will get an XSX day one and will have a ton of games to play , either enhanced BC with no extra charge or gamepass games. On the ps5 front I would have to pay 80€ for a ps5 remake of a ps3 game and a Ps5 remaster of a ps4 game with an expansion.
Last edited:
Insert Disk Two
Member
I have been playing Playstation games since the PS1, never owned a Microsoft console. When I read that games are €80 (nearly USD94) it became obvious to me that it is time to switch (and I don't really want to go back to physical games). Gamepass is incredible value, especially if they keep adding studios like they are. Ghost Wire Tokyo was a game I was looking to buy on the PS5, now I am sure it will come "for free" with Gamepass.
One more thing, it is easy to buy Xbox game codes for cheap form 3rd party vendors. With Playstation you are pretty much locked to the store. In the end I am interested in getting good games AND value. If I will miss Sony first parties because you can't have value on PS5, then so be it.
One more thing, it is easy to buy Xbox game codes for cheap form 3rd party vendors. With Playstation you are pretty much locked to the store. In the end I am interested in getting good games AND value. If I will miss Sony first parties because you can't have value on PS5, then so be it.
phil_t98
#SonyToo
but now they exclusive and Sony dont so xbox has games
Bryank75
Banned
No they don't they would have had these games anyway....
It has changed nothing on Xbox, it only changed PlayStation.... a console you never probably intended to buy. This is the epitome of anti-consumer and anti-competitive.
Rean no Kiseki
Banned
Pro consumer/anti consumer L O L.
There's no such company or business, they're all out to get your money by using different baits each and everytime.
There's no such company or business, they're all out to get your money by using different baits each and everytime.
Redlancet
Banned
i love how people used the word free XD
and for the questions op is asking,usa games media have a clear double standars with ms,and its gonna be always like that,i dont expect microsft cultists to be honest about this,this is like sports,if my team does shit,i look elsewhere,nothing new here
Last edited:
phil_t98
#SonyToo
lol quite the assumption there, I have a xbox x a ps4 and a switch. I will buy a PS5 and if you read my post history you will see me praising many Sony games. it has changed things because they are exclusive now
Bryank75
Banned
They are on PC. That's not exclusive. That is just not on PlayStation.
There is only one major platform they are not coming to....
PlayStation still has the best games, even if Xbox bought another 3 publishers... PS would still have better games. They don't seem to get it.
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
We just couldn't get through the first page without fanboy war, and we were this close.
What a shame.
Dibils2k
Member
thread should have ended after this post
there is no hypocrisy, now you know Bethesda is a MS developer, just like you know Naughty Dog is a Sony developer.
Its not a matter of buying a game but getting less because of some exclusive content to one system (but pay same price for the game)
Last edited:
cireza
Member
I don't see a problem with buying studios. Sony bought studios and it was fine.
Buying a studio demonstrate the fact that you want to build something, accept them in your ecosystem and help them reach higher grounds. That's a great thing to do.
Moneyhatting third party content that was multiplatform before is quite shitty however.
Buying a studio demonstrate the fact that you want to build something, accept them in your ecosystem and help them reach higher grounds. That's a great thing to do.
Moneyhatting third party content that was multiplatform before is quite shitty however.
Bryank75
Banned
My apologies. Director Krennic!We just couldn't get through the first page without fanboy war, and we were this close.
What a shame.
HighResTomato
Member
What a lot of people are ignoring is that, yes MS fucked in 2013. And at points Sony was almost leading 3-1 consoles.
Microsoft then initiated a change at Xbox and was super friendly for the last 7 years.
Sony misjudged MS their resolve as all they have done is try to exclude Xbox from through various exclusivity deals and even worse 1 year timed exclusivity. Barring developers to even discuss or mention Xbox.
They business strategy was aggressive and with only 1 goal in mind. Squeeze Xbox out of the market.
PS4 dominated heavily and as with the rumours, Sony went out to third parties to try and kill Xbox this generation.
I would love to have been a fly on the wall at Sony Corp when the news broke.
You did too much Sony.
Rhazer Fusion
Member
Both are still keeping games from the competition, just in a different manner. One is more long term or even permanent compared to the other and you will most likely be missing out on other games as well. Just because you are doing an acquisition doesn't necessarily mean you are going to get new games and take risks with them. In fact, most of the time companies want their familiar games and popular intellectual properties to justify the costly procurement.
So it's better if Nintendo procure Rockstar and all of their offerings exclusive to their console than getting a timed exclusive for one game like GTA6? I know the timed exclusives can seem like a despicable and annoying tactic, but I figure an acquisition would be much more detrimental to a consumer who has no interest in the competing platform then a timed exclusive that will most likely eventually come to their console.
Sybrix
Member
Its not anti-consumer, Sony now has to up their game to beat what the Xbox this gen has to deliver.
We all know that Sony killed it with the PS4 in terms of 1st Party content, after the PS5 Briefing everyone on here was so 'YAY SONY!!! FTW PS5!!!', as soon as the XBOX/Bethesda news comes out... the people raving about Sony previously are now seeing that some of their favourite games may not be coming to PS5. This can only mean a response from Sony which needs to be more and better games, that can only be good for the PS5 customer.
We all know that Sony killed it with the PS4 in terms of 1st Party content, after the PS5 Briefing everyone on here was so 'YAY SONY!!! FTW PS5!!!', as soon as the XBOX/Bethesda news comes out... the people raving about Sony previously are now seeing that some of their favourite games may not be coming to PS5. This can only mean a response from Sony which needs to be more and better games, that can only be good for the PS5 customer.
Last edited:
Rhazer Fusion
Member
That's the interesting thing. I think they are exclusive, but judging by what I read and heard, I'm not sure if they are truly exclusive or not. Paying that type of money, they SHOULD be, but they have to recoup costs I'm insinuating, so I'm wondering what's going to happen. IF these games are still multiplatform, Microsoft will make more money and the consumers probably won't gain anything to be brutally honest. Bethesda even said, business as usual. We'll see.
Last edited:
Farawayfromhell
Member
RafterXL
Gold Member
Right, because Sony fanboys only exist on this forum. Twitter, Reddit, here, ERA, they're everywhere and they've gleefully accepted Sony pulling this type of stuff for years but wanna cry foul when they are on the shit end of the stick.
If you keep poking someone and they punch you in the nose I don't wanna hear about you being a victim.
But, yeah, this is my one, and only account...nice try, though.
CeeJay
Member
Minecraft will probably come to the PS5 as well though no?
Minecraft is different though you are right there, it was on everything when MS bought it and it will continue to be on everything, that is part of it's USP. There is an expectation of an evergreen title such as this amongst it's fanbase. MS have never tried to kill it and create a sequel because that just wouldn't work for Minecraft, similar to how there will probably not be a Fortnite 2.
But, The Zenimax games are sequel oriented and that's a whole different thing. Don't expect those new Zenimax games to be appearing on PS5 because Minecraft!
SlicedBread3
Member
There's still a financial risk to the first one. The idea is get consumers to buy the version of the game for your platform. If you "money-hat" a game that doesn't do well anyway. That's money down the drain.
Nikana
Go Go Neo Rangers!
So you are saying that MS doesnt charge 70$ / game?
IMO game pass is epicly anti-consumer, it is disguised to be "OMG incredible value!", but in reality it is fuck you! to people whom buy their games physical / digital and want to own them.
a) not all games come to GP = now you pay expensive subscription + 70$ for some games
b) MS states that games are worth of 0.1 - few dollars, because they can give them out in GP, but also asking full price from people without GP
c) so it is "get our subscription service or get fucked"
They should drop physical/digital prices to 10-20$ on launch, to make it fair.
All access for 24 months costs 815€ here, which is 953$
for same money you can get series x 509€, 2 years of gold (im assuming it is the same as ps+) for 90-100€ and have 200-220€ left for games that you can OWN.
For 7 year gen GP will cost 815€ + 5x 12.99€ (on sale now) = 815+779,4 = 1594€ = 1863$, then add lets say 10 games that dont come to gp = max 700$
And after that you dont own any games.
So how is paying 1863 - 2500$ so pro-consumer, when it leaves only the old console to you, and maybe those 10 games you bought?
for that gamer could build big library of physical/digital games, specially if they are smart and buy used / from sales.
For reference
my cost of ps4 + 7 years ~399€ console, 7x35€ ps+, 80-100 physical games average 20€, ps4 pro 499€, some digital games 100-150€
around 3200€, but I have also sold old ps4 when trading to pro + sold / traded games for around 1000-1500e = 1700-2200€, and I still own 50-60 physical games including some special editions that would still sell for 300-500€ each.
Add to that all ps+ games, so hundreds of games in the library for price of ps+, kind of what game pass offers without new games. (all dont have years of ps+, i know)
So in the end I have maybe paid little more, but own games and could sell them to be under the price of 7 years of game pass.
My point is, that in the long run GP isnt "incredible value" compared to smart way of buying physical games
And it is kind of "fuck you" to xbox gamers whom like physicals
People whom look monthly payments, like "oh this car is only 200$ month, cheap" are silly, always look what the total cost is and compare that to other options.
If only they gave options to the consumer to spend money how they wanted to and have options to purchase games!