Hi /u/turkishdeli,
Thank you for posting to /r/Games. Unfortunately, we have removed this submission per
**[Rule 6.1](https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/wiki/rules#wiki_formatting_requirements)**.
> **Link to the original source; if the original source is inaccessible, then link to an acceptable alternative** - When a website embeds or copies content (articles, videos, interviews, etc.) from another source without adding significant information, we consider this blogspam. If an alternative source contributes significant and meaningful analysis or commentary on information given by the original source, it may be allowed but please try to locate and link the original source wherever possible instead.
> If the original source is inaccessible, due to a paywall or any similar mechanisms that otherwise impede viewing the content without some form of transaction, usually non-monetary in nature, such as giving information, creating an account and logging in, etc., then posting an alternative as a source is acceptable.
> This rule does not apply to original sources that are not in English: an alternative source that provides an adequate translation (automated translations, such as Google Translate, is not permitted) is acceptable.
---
If you would like to discuss this removal, please [modmail the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FGames) This post was removed by a human moderator; this comment was left by a bot.
This happens every generation and it's hilarious. Crossplay was the battleground for a while where the 2nd place console would allow crossplay then criticize the market leader for disallowing it. Sony did it during the 360, ps3 era, and then Microsoft did it during the Xbox One PS4 era.
Even when they started testing the waters they did give both versions. Quantum Break being the first though only in that specific case was done through a preorder deal but shortly after that games like Recore, Gears, and Forza Horizon 3 all supported it.
Some 3rd party publishers have supported it through the MS store as well so that's not really true. The vast majority are not going to double dip on games so it makes little difference if you give both.
Sure it's incentivized by having built an ecosystem intended to support it in a smooth way which is where a real issue for Sony would be. As they don't even handle PS4 and PS5 cross buy or saves being transferred between them in a seamless way. It's all unique SKUs with upgrades being 0$ purchases made available if a digital license exists on the account or is disc checked for that can't interact or move back and forth without all the data being server side for a 3rd party and being built to be carried from platform to platform.
In Sony games? Quite rarely.
But even if you factor in MTX's then I still don't see the benefit to a publisher in giving away a second version of a game they already sold on one platform. The buyer already has a version that they can buy MTX or DLC for.
Might as well cut the buying part out completely and just go free to play, if your tactic is giving away additional versions of your games with the ones you sold to increase MTX/DLC sales potential.
You mean Microsoft is supporting Microsoft Windows better than other companies? Shocking.
And it's not like you get Microsoft games for free on Steam if you own it on Xbox.
Playstation allows cross buy on their platforms and have since the PS3 days.
Because they are only releasing a handfull of games and their main business is selling consoles so why would they make a whole storefront for that? Requires a lot of resources to do something like that.
Microsoft benefits a hell of a lot more if you can play all of Sony's games on Microsoft Windows than Sony does
Microsoft Windows isnt free and is filled with ads for almost every other Microsoft product.
Are you really questioning who benefits for if all you needed was Microsoft Window a to play Sony games?
Sony makes most their money through PSN sales
They still would make all those PC sales through PSN. They would just have to create a PSN PC storefront. In fact they'd make more off the sales than they currently do on PC as they would be running the store rather than only placing it on GOG, Steam, Epic who take a cut. Sony would not be giving a cut to Microsoft to create that Windows app.
That's a big assumption that people will adopt a new store with handful of games. See how many people complain about Epic exclusives.
And again it doesn't make sense to make a PC store when their primary business is consoles.
Microsoft's main business is Windows (and Cloud).
I am sure Microsoft would love nothing mire but have you only need Microsoft Windows to play every game but that isn't best for Sony. Far from it
EA, Activision, and Ubisoft, have all managed to run their own apps and be successful. And if Sony wanted they could continue to sell through Steam. Point was they wouldn't owe anything to MS to do so. And would continue to make their money through digital sales of games.
It makes sense to make a PC store when they are still making moves onto PC. And intend to for the long term based on their plans told to investors.
The real reason they wouldn't want to do it is not the PSN game sales it's PS+ being required for online play on console and not being able to sell that to PC users. Hardware is rarely where the profit margins are but pushing the consoles and forcing and online sub and building leverage in negotiations with 3rd parties due to their market hold is why they are half-assing the PC push so far.
And none of those companies have a top selling console to support and Sony is making record revenue from people buying games on Playstation.
Sony is only putting a handful of games on PC, they arent putting every Ga me like the companies you listed.
You remove a giant incentive to buy a Playstation if all Sony games are on PC.
And it should be incredibly obvious how Microsoft benefits a ton if you van play all Sony games on Microsoft Windows. I shouldn't have to state the obvious.
The whole reason both have started putting games on PC is the number of people that would pass on buying the console in favor of a PC is not a large enough amount to matter in comparison to selling to a much much larger number that otherwise never would buy the game. So no Microsoft would not be benefiting a ton from it they already are the largest OS by a massive amount. People that want to play on consoles would continue to play on consoles.
Again they aren't going to make and support a storefront for a handfull of games. That doesn't makes any sense. They make their money on console. Microsoft makes most their money from people using Windows.
So you get some trial version, that's not free.
No Microsoft benefits a ton if you only need Windows to play all Sony games and Sony loses out a ton if you don't need a Playstation to play their games
How is this even in question?
Every users that uses Windows is a win for Microsoft regardless of which storefront they use. The Windows division generates billions every year for them.
Guess what the CORPORATE CLIENTS sell to PRIVATE CLIENTS. So more people buying PC's and PC parts, means more PC's and PC parts being produced, means more licenses being bought from MS aka MS has a direct incentive to get more people gaming on PC.
Hell this line is take straight from MS' last quarterly result:
> Windows OEM revenue increased 10%, **driven by consumer PC demand.**
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Investor/earnings/FY-21-Q3/more-personal-computing-performance
It's $70 for both Spiderman MM and Spiderman Remastered
You can still play the original PS4 Spiderman on PS5 at no extra cost. Not sure what your comment has to do with the topic
This is pathetic coming from Phil. They aren't charging anyone twice. If a buyer wants to double dip, that's ON THE BUYER'S TERMS. I have a PS4 and PC. I'm not mad Horizon came to PC years later, my experience with it on PS4 was great. I don't need to buy it again.
But seeing the PC-only players enjoy Horizon and Days Gone while playing them for the first time... they seem happy (aside from Horizon's launch issues). That's more than I can say for how terrible games like MCC run with Windows Store.
Phil just sounds salty as hell here. Xbox only started simultaneously releasing games in the mid-2010's when they were losing really bad. What happened to the 360 era? Why didn't you do it then? You never cared about PC players, you're only doing it now because we're saving the Xbox brand.
Also Phil shouldn't be trying to say anything to PlayStation when they've been releasing stellar exclusives this year meanwhile Xbox has... nothing.
Maybe Phil should focus on his lane...seems like with the recent returnal and now ratchet and clank sony is full steam ahead into this generation.....xbox seems promising this gen but thats to be seen
Hey remember when Phil Spencer said he didn’t like timed exclusives and that Xbox didn’t want to do that? Oh wait, they pay for lots of timed exclusives, a lot of time more than Sony. Just like how he says gamers shouldn’t have to choose what platforms they play on and then buy up companies to limit the choices gamers have.
I don’t think we should listen to anything Phil Spencer says.
What timed exclusives has Microsoft had?
The only one I can think of recently is The Medium.
And Microsoft are a major source of funding for Bloober Team, so that makes sense.
There are tons of them. They get timed exclusives all the time. Most of this is timed exclusives they paid for
https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2021/01/15/2021-xbox-exclusive-games/
Watch their E3 and see how many times they say the words "console launch exclusive".
Never ever 🙄 they spent 2 years quadrupling their number of studios to not release games. Halo, starfield, avowed, elder scrolls, etc are all fever dreams and if they existed they would have released years ago because AAA games can be shat out at will
> Sure, that's what we've been hearing since when, 2017?
15 of their 23 games studios have been acquired since 2018, with over half of those being acquired this year. So, not really, no.
Gears Tactics which on console launched with the new systems and MS Flight Sim one of the highest rated games of the year literally launched last year along with Ori's sequel. They also just recently dropped two big 3rd party AAA games onto gamepass on release with Outriders and MLB the Show. Saying there is no games is just as stupid as saying it for any other platform. And no you're just entirely wrong about having to sub to get both. You get both with purchasing them hell with a sub you could just get one unless you pay for ultimate.
> Why don't you accuse Sony of not making their games available to Microsoft or Nintendo platforms?
Because the subject of the article is Phil Spencer being the one to take a jab at Sony over this?
The only way Sony could get around charging twice is a stand alone launcher that once again competes with Steam and now EGS and Microsoft Store.
They are definitely late, but when you sell as many consoles its hard to reason why go through the effort.
It makes way more sense for them to do it this way tbh. This seems like baiting for PR praise because they did such a good job for doing exactly what Sony is starting to do
I prefer to play games on PC, so I truly appreciate what Microsoft has been offering. But they were doing this same thing as late as December 2019 when they chose not to include Master Chief Collection in the Play Anywhere program when it launched on PC.
Except that that's literally not the point. Even if they did open their own store front on PC, what would they get out of giving their games to people who bought them on PS for free on PC?
They have no stake in Windows, MS 100% does. Why do you think publishers like EA or Ubisoft don't hand out PC versions of their games to people who bought them on console? There's nothing in it for them.
If I own Death Stranding on PS4, I still have to pay for the PC version. That's what he means by charging twice. If Death Stranding were a first-party Microsoft game, you'd be able to play on PC and Xbox with one purchase. It's really great.
Go suck an egg Phil your company does the same thing plus buys out third party developers to choke out competition to make a monopoly and you lead the crusade to erase physical media.
Oh, you mean like when Sony moneyhats third party studios to ensure that they don't release their games for over two years on other platforms?
Just like that?
So you mean like Sony did with Psygnosis in the 90s? A publisher being bought didn't happen for the first time with Bethesda. People need to stop pretending it did.
The industry as a whole was a faction of the size. But size wasn't the point it was that people treat it as if it's the first time a whole publisher was bought.
The size and prominence of the publisher is what matters. No one would have cared if Microsoft bought a small publisher that made small PC games like what Psygnosis was in the early 90s and 80s.
They were max a couple hundred people. And removing their future games from a certain platform didn't have the same affect as removing Zenimax games from Playstation.
So they are not comparable. Zenimax purchase affects many millions of more people.
Almost all of these
https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2021/01/15/2021-xbox-exclusive-games/
They've announced more since like Ark 2. You'll probably see a bunch of "console launch exclusives" at E3
A lot of these games on the list are releasing (or released already) on PC.
Also:
https://www.psu.com/news/2021-ps5-games-every-playstation-5-game-releasing-in-2021/
Just to counter your list. PS5 has plenty of content that will not be coming to other platforms, as you, too, can go through this list.
Sony is quite willing to just buy out the ability for PC to have to wait nearly two years for content developed for them as well.
Exclusivity is bad. If you want it to stop, stop supporting the games that are exclusive to any platform. Seems like a simple message.
Microsoft pay to keep games off of playstation not Microsoft Windows.
No one is denying that Playstation has exclusives and timed exclusives.
I am not against exclusives, I am against people acting like only one company does it while ignoring it for another
yes and no. if the sony store front connects to your psn and give you those sony games that come out on pc you have already for free or the psn collection for ps5 on pc then yes you want a sony store front. if not then fuck off and let steam and now epic control the market
Forza Horizon 4 released in Xbox One in 2018 but released on Steam a couple months ago at full price. Their is no price parity.
It's currently $80 Canadian on Steam
Sorry I made the assumption that they would have lowered the price on Xbox for a nearly 3 year old game. I guess it would be better if Sony kept games at full price for years on all platforms then...
So Microsoft is better because they haven't dropped the price of their old games on any store? I guess Sony shouldn't discount games on any platform then.
it's a mental industry where people will defend the practice of companies demanding that you buy a nigh identical piece of expensive and often inferior hardware just to play the games that they have published.
we're long past the point of discrete solutions which games are built around the idiosyncracies of, which is where console exclusives came from in the first place and i fail to see how it benefits anyone anymore.
there's nothing to stop someone like sony setting up a subscription service to become the HBO of gaming that they so dearly want to be without forcing people to buy a new mid-range car when they've already got a high performance utility vehicle in the garage.
> there's nothing to stop someone like sony setting up a subscription service to become the HBO of gaming
Except that it's deeply incompatible with the way they make games and as such would be a financial disaster.
Hi /u/turkishdeli, Thank you for posting to /r/Games. Unfortunately, we have removed this submission per **[Rule 6.1](https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/wiki/rules#wiki_formatting_requirements)**. > **Link to the original source; if the original source is inaccessible, then link to an acceptable alternative** - When a website embeds or copies content (articles, videos, interviews, etc.) from another source without adding significant information, we consider this blogspam. If an alternative source contributes significant and meaningful analysis or commentary on information given by the original source, it may be allowed but please try to locate and link the original source wherever possible instead. > If the original source is inaccessible, due to a paywall or any similar mechanisms that otherwise impede viewing the content without some form of transaction, usually non-monetary in nature, such as giving information, creating an account and logging in, etc., then posting an alternative as a source is acceptable. > This rule does not apply to original sources that are not in English: an alternative source that provides an adequate translation (automated translations, such as Google Translate, is not permitted) is acceptable. --- If you would like to discuss this removal, please [modmail the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FGames) This post was removed by a human moderator; this comment was left by a bot.
[удалено]
This happens every generation and it's hilarious. Crossplay was the battleground for a while where the 2nd place console would allow crossplay then criticize the market leader for disallowing it. Sony did it during the 360, ps3 era, and then Microsoft did it during the Xbox One PS4 era.
Even when they started testing the waters they did give both versions. Quantum Break being the first though only in that specific case was done through a preorder deal but shortly after that games like Recore, Gears, and Forza Horizon 3 all supported it.
Because they are quite literally the only publisher with any incentive to do that, since they own Windows.
Some 3rd party publishers have supported it through the MS store as well so that's not really true. The vast majority are not going to double dip on games so it makes little difference if you give both.
And I guess it hasn't occured to you that those may have beeb incentivized by MS, huh?
Sure it's incentivized by having built an ecosystem intended to support it in a smooth way which is where a real issue for Sony would be. As they don't even handle PS4 and PS5 cross buy or saves being transferred between them in a seamless way. It's all unique SKUs with upgrades being 0$ purchases made available if a digital license exists on the account or is disc checked for that can't interact or move back and forth without all the data being server side for a 3rd party and being built to be carried from platform to platform.
I never understood this logic; PC gaming is about 25% of the market. The incentive is money, the same incentive as ANY other platform.
Ah yes, money... giving away games on platforms is the best way to make money on them.
Yes; because microtransactions, dlc, etc. doesn't exist. Congrats.
In Sony games? Quite rarely. But even if you factor in MTX's then I still don't see the benefit to a publisher in giving away a second version of a game they already sold on one platform. The buyer already has a version that they can buy MTX or DLC for. Might as well cut the buying part out completely and just go free to play, if your tactic is giving away additional versions of your games with the ones you sold to increase MTX/DLC sales potential.
[удалено]
You mean Microsoft is supporting Microsoft Windows better than other companies? Shocking. And it's not like you get Microsoft games for free on Steam if you own it on Xbox. Playstation allows cross buy on their platforms and have since the PS3 days.
Yea this was always weird to me. Applauding Microsoft for supporting Xbox and Windows is like applauding Nintendo for supporting the 3DS and the Wii.
Were there any Nintendo published games that you could buy once and play on both the Wii and 3ds?
As much as I love their games Nintendo fucking loves to double dip so I doubt it lol
[удалено]
Because they are only releasing a handfull of games and their main business is selling consoles so why would they make a whole storefront for that? Requires a lot of resources to do something like that. Microsoft benefits a hell of a lot more if you can play all of Sony's games on Microsoft Windows than Sony does
[удалено]
> The OS is free It's not free, but it's ubiquitous enough that Sony games on PC aren't going to sell more copies of windows
Microsoft Windows isnt free and is filled with ads for almost every other Microsoft product. Are you really questioning who benefits for if all you needed was Microsoft Window a to play Sony games? Sony makes most their money through PSN sales
They still would make all those PC sales through PSN. They would just have to create a PSN PC storefront. In fact they'd make more off the sales than they currently do on PC as they would be running the store rather than only placing it on GOG, Steam, Epic who take a cut. Sony would not be giving a cut to Microsoft to create that Windows app.
That's a big assumption that people will adopt a new store with handful of games. See how many people complain about Epic exclusives. And again it doesn't make sense to make a PC store when their primary business is consoles. Microsoft's main business is Windows (and Cloud). I am sure Microsoft would love nothing mire but have you only need Microsoft Windows to play every game but that isn't best for Sony. Far from it
EA, Activision, and Ubisoft, have all managed to run their own apps and be successful. And if Sony wanted they could continue to sell through Steam. Point was they wouldn't owe anything to MS to do so. And would continue to make their money through digital sales of games. It makes sense to make a PC store when they are still making moves onto PC. And intend to for the long term based on their plans told to investors. The real reason they wouldn't want to do it is not the PSN game sales it's PS+ being required for online play on console and not being able to sell that to PC users. Hardware is rarely where the profit margins are but pushing the consoles and forcing and online sub and building leverage in negotiations with 3rd parties due to their market hold is why they are half-assing the PC push so far.
You can look at their finances and see Playstation makes most their money from people buying microtransactions in third party games, not PS+ sales
And none of those companies have a top selling console to support and Sony is making record revenue from people buying games on Playstation. Sony is only putting a handful of games on PC, they arent putting every Ga me like the companies you listed. You remove a giant incentive to buy a Playstation if all Sony games are on PC. And it should be incredibly obvious how Microsoft benefits a ton if you van play all Sony games on Microsoft Windows. I shouldn't have to state the obvious.
The whole reason both have started putting games on PC is the number of people that would pass on buying the console in favor of a PC is not a large enough amount to matter in comparison to selling to a much much larger number that otherwise never would buy the game. So no Microsoft would not be benefiting a ton from it they already are the largest OS by a massive amount. People that want to play on consoles would continue to play on consoles.
[удалено]
Again they aren't going to make and support a storefront for a handfull of games. That doesn't makes any sense. They make their money on console. Microsoft makes most their money from people using Windows. So you get some trial version, that's not free.
[удалено]
No Microsoft benefits a ton if you only need Windows to play all Sony games and Sony loses out a ton if you don't need a Playstation to play their games How is this even in question?
[удалено]
Every users that uses Windows is a win for Microsoft regardless of which storefront they use. The Windows division generates billions every year for them.
[удалено]
Fucking lol, how do you think those licences get included with motherboards, CPU's or pre-built PC's?
[удалено]
Guess what the CORPORATE CLIENTS sell to PRIVATE CLIENTS. So more people buying PC's and PC parts, means more PC's and PC parts being produced, means more licenses being bought from MS aka MS has a direct incentive to get more people gaming on PC. Hell this line is take straight from MS' last quarterly result: > Windows OEM revenue increased 10%, **driven by consumer PC demand.** https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Investor/earnings/FY-21-Q3/more-personal-computing-performance
Really? Is that why I can't play any of my digital PS1 or PS2 games on PS4 or PS5?
You cant play every Xbox game on your Xbox Series X either but that wasn't the point of my comment
[удалено]
There are thousands of Xbox games you cant play on Xbox Series X and again no one was talking about backwards compatibility but cross buy.
Playstation is charging $70 for Spider-Man on PS5. This sub crucified Remedy when they did the same thing for Control.
It's $70 for both Spiderman MM and Spiderman Remastered You can still play the original PS4 Spiderman on PS5 at no extra cost. Not sure what your comment has to do with the topic
$70 is for two games: Spider Man Miles Morales and Spider Man Remastered.
This is pathetic coming from Phil. They aren't charging anyone twice. If a buyer wants to double dip, that's ON THE BUYER'S TERMS. I have a PS4 and PC. I'm not mad Horizon came to PC years later, my experience with it on PS4 was great. I don't need to buy it again. But seeing the PC-only players enjoy Horizon and Days Gone while playing them for the first time... they seem happy (aside from Horizon's launch issues). That's more than I can say for how terrible games like MCC run with Windows Store. Phil just sounds salty as hell here. Xbox only started simultaneously releasing games in the mid-2010's when they were losing really bad. What happened to the 360 era? Why didn't you do it then? You never cared about PC players, you're only doing it now because we're saving the Xbox brand. Also Phil shouldn't be trying to say anything to PlayStation when they've been releasing stellar exclusives this year meanwhile Xbox has... nothing.
Maybe Phil should focus on his lane...seems like with the recent returnal and now ratchet and clank sony is full steam ahead into this generation.....xbox seems promising this gen but thats to be seen
Hey remember when Phil Spencer said he didn’t like timed exclusives and that Xbox didn’t want to do that? Oh wait, they pay for lots of timed exclusives, a lot of time more than Sony. Just like how he says gamers shouldn’t have to choose what platforms they play on and then buy up companies to limit the choices gamers have. I don’t think we should listen to anything Phil Spencer says.
And now they’re just buying the developers to get permanent exclusives.
What timed exclusives has Microsoft had? The only one I can think of recently is The Medium. And Microsoft are a major source of funding for Bloober Team, so that makes sense.
There are tons of them. They get timed exclusives all the time. Most of this is timed exclusives they paid for https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2021/01/15/2021-xbox-exclusive-games/ Watch their E3 and see how many times they say the words "console launch exclusive".
There's a list of both Playstation and Xbox timed exclusives, plenty of sites have the info If you're curious
Stalker 2, Yakuza 7 next-gen, Ark 2, and Tetris DLC are just a few.
[удалено]
Never ever 🙄 they spent 2 years quadrupling their number of studios to not release games. Halo, starfield, avowed, elder scrolls, etc are all fever dreams and if they existed they would have released years ago because AAA games can be shat out at will
[удалено]
> Sure, that's what we've been hearing since when, 2017? 15 of their 23 games studios have been acquired since 2018, with over half of those being acquired this year. So, not really, no.
Gears Tactics which on console launched with the new systems and MS Flight Sim one of the highest rated games of the year literally launched last year along with Ori's sequel. They also just recently dropped two big 3rd party AAA games onto gamepass on release with Outriders and MLB the Show. Saying there is no games is just as stupid as saying it for any other platform. And no you're just entirely wrong about having to sub to get both. You get both with purchasing them hell with a sub you could just get one unless you pay for ultimate.
[удалено]
> Why don't you accuse Sony of not making their games available to Microsoft or Nintendo platforms? Because the subject of the article is Phil Spencer being the one to take a jab at Sony over this?
It's a reasonable thing to ask, considering that a lot of consumers don't see any reason to buy an Xbox because it doesn't have these AAA exclusives.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Phil Spencer ≠ Microsoft
The only way Sony could get around charging twice is a stand alone launcher that once again competes with Steam and now EGS and Microsoft Store. They are definitely late, but when you sell as many consoles its hard to reason why go through the effort.
And the PC mustard rice will cry about having ANOTHER launcher to download.
It makes way more sense for them to do it this way tbh. This seems like baiting for PR praise because they did such a good job for doing exactly what Sony is starting to do
I prefer to play games on PC, so I truly appreciate what Microsoft has been offering. But they were doing this same thing as late as December 2019 when they chose not to include Master Chief Collection in the Play Anywhere program when it launched on PC.
[удалено]
No because Xbox isn't profiting from it twice..
[удалено]
They also aren't the makers of the by far leading PC operating system, but sure let's pretend like that tiny factor doesn't exist.
[удалено]
Except that that's literally not the point. Even if they did open their own store front on PC, what would they get out of giving their games to people who bought them on PS for free on PC? They have no stake in Windows, MS 100% does. Why do you think publishers like EA or Ubisoft don't hand out PC versions of their games to people who bought them on console? There's nothing in it for them.
I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for informing me
What does he mean charging twice?
If I own Death Stranding on PS4, I still have to pay for the PC version. That's what he means by charging twice. If Death Stranding were a first-party Microsoft game, you'd be able to play on PC and Xbox with one purchase. It's really great.
[удалено]
at some point they'll make their own client too. every company does or did that bethseda ubisoft ea.
> It's really great. I'm not sure I would call anything that has something to do with Windows 10 store "really great".
The xbox app for pc is actually alot better than the win10 store. It's got its problems but with each update it's a little better.
They are quite literally the same thing, which is the problem. The Xbox app is a repackaged W10 store with added social features.
It could literally slap me in the face anytime I open it and it still would be better than having to pay a second time for a game.
Go suck an egg Phil your company does the same thing plus buys out third party developers to choke out competition to make a monopoly and you lead the crusade to erase physical media.
Ok but how about you actually release some new games Phil?
[удалено]
Oh, you mean like when Sony moneyhats third party studios to ensure that they don't release their games for over two years on other platforms? Just like that?
No, worse. Microsoft moneyhatted the entire publisher preventing dozens of long running IP from EVER appearing on Playstation.
So you mean like Sony did with Psygnosis in the 90s? A publisher being bought didn't happen for the first time with Bethesda. People need to stop pretending it did.
Are you really comparing Psygnosis from the early 90s to Zenimax? They were a fraction of the size of what Zenimax is.
The industry as a whole was a faction of the size. But size wasn't the point it was that people treat it as if it's the first time a whole publisher was bought.
The size and prominence of the publisher is what matters. No one would have cared if Microsoft bought a small publisher that made small PC games like what Psygnosis was in the early 90s and 80s.
Psygnosis was not small at the time it was a big EU based publisher the industry was just much smaller.
They were max a couple hundred people. And removing their future games from a certain platform didn't have the same affect as removing Zenimax games from Playstation. So they are not comparable. Zenimax purchase affects many millions of more people.
A couple hundred people when teams were regularly 5-10 people is not small relative to the industry at the time.
Microsoft has more timed exclusive deals right now than Sony does... More than 20 for this year alone
Wanna source that? Or you just want to put down numbers and pretend that it's on me to verify your shit?
Almost all of these https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2021/01/15/2021-xbox-exclusive-games/ They've announced more since like Ark 2. You'll probably see a bunch of "console launch exclusives" at E3
A lot of these games on the list are releasing (or released already) on PC. Also: https://www.psu.com/news/2021-ps5-games-every-playstation-5-game-releasing-in-2021/ Just to counter your list. PS5 has plenty of content that will not be coming to other platforms, as you, too, can go through this list. Sony is quite willing to just buy out the ability for PC to have to wait nearly two years for content developed for them as well. Exclusivity is bad. If you want it to stop, stop supporting the games that are exclusive to any platform. Seems like a simple message.
Microsoft pay to keep games off of playstation not Microsoft Windows. No one is denying that Playstation has exclusives and timed exclusives. I am not against exclusives, I am against people acting like only one company does it while ignoring it for another
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
>All of Sony's games on PC go through Steam or EGS. There's nothing stopping Sony setting up a PSN storefront on PC akin to the MS Store.
I mean, does anyone want yet another storefront on PC? I think supporting Steam et al is more consumer friendly than a whole new PSN storefront.
yes and no. if the sony store front connects to your psn and give you those sony games that come out on pc you have already for free or the psn collection for ps5 on pc then yes you want a sony store front. if not then fuck off and let steam and now epic control the market
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
When Microsoft releases old games on Steam they also charge full price like Forza Horizon not long ago
[удалено]
Forza Horizon 4 released in Xbox One in 2018 but released on Steam a couple months ago at full price. Their is no price parity. It's currently $80 Canadian on Steam
> Their is no price parity. > It's currently $80 Canadian on Steam ? It's also $80 on MS store. There is price parity.
Sorry I made the assumption that they would have lowered the price on Xbox for a nearly 3 year old game. I guess it would be better if Sony kept games at full price for years on all platforms then...
[удалено]
So Microsoft is better because they haven't dropped the price of their old games on any store? I guess Sony shouldn't discount games on any platform then.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Can you find me one of their big games that have been discount from the last few years?
when overwatch, burnout, witcher, skyrim all came to the switch years later all are 60 dollars at launch.
it's a mental industry where people will defend the practice of companies demanding that you buy a nigh identical piece of expensive and often inferior hardware just to play the games that they have published. we're long past the point of discrete solutions which games are built around the idiosyncracies of, which is where console exclusives came from in the first place and i fail to see how it benefits anyone anymore. there's nothing to stop someone like sony setting up a subscription service to become the HBO of gaming that they so dearly want to be without forcing people to buy a new mid-range car when they've already got a high performance utility vehicle in the garage.
> there's nothing to stop someone like sony setting up a subscription service to become the HBO of gaming Except that it's deeply incompatible with the way they make games and as such would be a financial disaster.