Quantcast
Microsoft Is Trying to Keep PUBG Off PS4 for Longer

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Microsoft Is Trying to Keep PUBG Off PS4 for Longer

Sony moneyhats everyone and everything. "Let the Sony flow through you."



Around the Network
flashfire926 said:
VGPolyglot said:

Has that ever been confirmed?

Think about it. Monster hunter is very popular in Japan. The 3DS has 20m+ units sold there. The PS4 has around 5m units there. Switch has sold 1.5m in just 6 months.  Why would Capcom in their right mind have monster hunter on PS4 rather than 3DS and switch? Because Sony gave them money. Infact, capcom is halfway in sony's pocket. Capcom itself doesn't have funds itself to make huge games, and the budget presentation of MvCi is proof of that. Street fighter 5 has much better presentation put into it. Why? Because Sony itself funded the game. Also, what about Okami HD? There is no excuse for that not being on switch. It would easily be the bestselling version if it existed. What about no localization for mhXX for outside Japan? Sony is the one pulling Capcom's strings in the backstage, it's just not visible to us.

Or maybe they want MH to be worldwide seller instead of just in Japan hence why they're releasing on the PS4, X1 and PC?



Soundwave said:
As if Sony is not buying as much content if not more, they are the ones who started this whole business.

Why did Nintendo and Square have to create a shell company just to get a Final Fantasy game on GameCube? Because Sony had an iron clad exclusivity deal to keep content off other platforms.

Same with Devil May Cry, Metal Gear Solid 2/3, etc. etc. MS had to jump through major hoops to get GTA on the original XBox as well. Sony moneyhatted to keep Madden off the Dreamcast as well.

And that continues to this day with things like Monster Hunter World, Final Fantasy VII REMake exclusivity period, Street Fighter V (gimme a break with the "Capcom couldn't afford to develop it" .... SFIV sold millions and millions of copies), and even things like Final Fantasy XII remaster being kept off other platforms largely because Sony negotiates deals to keep that content away from other platforms.

We saw how successful Sony is when they don't have the full backing of the third party community with the Vita, which crashed and burned.

If you want to be mad at MS for this, so be it, but IMO it's a bit hypocritical if you're not also going to knock Sony for it or even more laughably try to claim that Sony is the "white knight of gaming", when they are responsible for locking out more content from other platforms since coming into the industry than anyone else by a country mile.

If Sony had gotten to PUBG first, then the story we'd be fed right now would be "well Sony's just smart, they recognized the game was going to be a big hit, maybe MS should have been smarter".

 

Soundwave said:
BraLoD said:

How old you are and how long you have been following anything matters nothing when what you say is wrong.

Exclusive deals existed in gaming before PlayStation was even a thing.

I'm in my late 30s, I've been following "Playstation" since 1992 when it was announced as the SNES CD-ROM. I think even still have EGM lying around somewhere. 

Refute any of my points, it's well known Sony money hatted things like Final Fantasy in the past (and uh well continues to do so looking at FFVII Remake), why do you think Nintendo and Square had to go to the ridiculous lengths of creating a shell company just to get even a Final Fantasy spin-off? Maybe you should do your research, I've more than done mine. 

Sony is responsible for locking more content out from other systems for no good reason than any other company by a long shot since they've entered the business. They've done it to Sega and continue to do so to Nintendo and MS. 

This guy gets it.


As much as MS has been pulling these kind of Stunts, Sony has also been guilty of pulling moneyhats, keeping games off of other platforms, neither side is a saint nor innocent, but it is amusing to see the echo chamber coming together within this thread to rag on MS for this recent action, yet not whenever Sony has done it.



                                       

twintail said:
Zkuq said:

First, the tweets are from last December, so in that context, it might not have been especially controversial in the first place. Second, it seems like a fairly subjective tweet (because of "doesn't feel") in a thread not visible to his followers by default, so I don't see this as failed PR + damage control anyway. It's an accurate statement, and it's not misleading either. Of course you're free to interpret the motives otherwise.

And this interview was from 4 months ago http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-06-12-the-big-interview-xbox-boss-phil-spencer

  Philly boy said:

"I don’t know what deals get written. I’ve been pretty open about, I’m not a fan of doing deals that hold back specific pieces of content from other platforms. You don’t see that in the deals we’ve done with Assassin’s and Shadow. We’ll have a marketing deal on those, but I don’t say, hey, I need some kind of Strike or skin somebody else can’t play.

I don’t think it’s good for our industry if we got into a point where people are holding back the technical innovation of game developers based on a marketing deal. I don’t know anything about what’s in other people’s deals.

I dont have to interpret his motives. Its pretty obvious if he keeps repeating them.

Uh, to me, this is similar to his 'damage control', so this basically backs up what I said about him personally not liking these things? If your point is still that he should have said so directly in the first place, I must disagree with you. Not everything needs to be spelled out, and in my opinion, this is definitely one of those things that doesn't need to be.



Lawlight said:
flashfire926 said:

Think about it. Monster hunter is very popular in Japan. The 3DS has 20m+ units sold there. The PS4 has around 5m units there. Switch has sold 1.5m in just 6 months.  Why would Capcom in their right mind have monster hunter on PS4 rather than 3DS and switch? Because Sony gave them money. Infact, capcom is halfway in sony's pocket. Capcom itself doesn't have funds itself to make huge games, and the budget presentation of MvCi is proof of that. Street fighter 5 has much better presentation put into it. Why? Because Sony itself funded the game. Also, what about Okami HD? There is no excuse for that not being on switch. It would easily be the bestselling version if it existed. What about no localization for mhXX for outside Japan? Sony is the one pulling Capcom's strings in the backstage, it's just not visible to us.

Or maybe they want MH to be worldwide seller instead of just in Japan hence why they're releasing on the PS4, X1 and PC?

So sacrifice a huge portion of their big Japanese fan base to go for the rather little fan base that exists outside of Japan......great logic for a company if they want to lose money. 



Bet with Intrinsic:

The Switch will outsell 3DS (based on VGchartz numbers), according to me, while Intrinsic thinks the opposite will hold true. One month avatar control for the loser's avatar.

Around the Network
flashfire926 said:
Lawlight said:

Or maybe they want MH to be worldwide seller instead of just in Japan hence why they're releasing on the PS4, X1 and PC?

So sacrifice a huge portion of their big Japanese fan base to go for the rather little fan base that exists outside of Japan......great logic for a company if they want to lose money. 

Well, looking at the Japanese sales of MH games on VGChartz, it seems that the numbers have been trending downwards. We won't be able to judge the MH fan base size outside of the Nintendo systems until MH World is actually released. And we know that owners of those systems buy more games in general and there's a bigger installbase as well.

I think a Switch version will come out next year itself but it makes sense for Capcom to release them on he other systems for now.



Microsoft are desperate. Relying on first party rehashes and tactics like this to try survive. Why can't they use their savings to invest in games, instead of short term exclusivity deals...



flashfire926 said:
Lawlight said:

Or maybe they want MH to be worldwide seller instead of just in Japan hence why they're releasing on the PS4, X1 and PC?

So sacrifice a huge portion of their big Japanese fan base to go for the rather little fan base that exists outside of Japan......great logic for a company if they want to lose money. 

How is it sacrificing a huge portion of their fan base? They've released a tried and tested successful version exclusively for the switch that the Japanese love and they are releasing a more western untested version on the other platforms that have a wider western appeal.

 

Secondly, the game was put into production way before Nintendo announced the switch. Some how you expect Capcom to make a switch version with its own assets etc in no time just so your conspiracy theories can be satisfied?! 



Whoever said life to be like a box of chocolates clearly didn't know what he was talking about. 

Life is more like a game of bumper cars. At every turn there is a possibility you will get screwed.

Alkibiádēs said:

As if Sony has never tried to keep games from rival platforms.

Doesn't anyone else find it suspicious that Capcom isn't releasing Monster Hunter World, Mega Man Legacy Collection 2, Disney Afternoon Collection, Okami HD, etc. on the Nintendo Switch? Either Capcom is the dumbest company in the world or someone is paying their bills.

Both Microsoft and Sony are guilty of this. Maybe even Nintendo, but much less so as they rely on first party much more than any other hardware company. 

Took the words right from my mouth. I love the double standards of the users on this site when it comes to things like this.



Forgetting everything Spencer has said about timed exclusivity, the actions speak for themselves. Timed exclusivity pisses me off whenever anybody does it, but Microsoft makes it more egregious because of either what they've said in the past, or what the property is that they're moneyhatting.

That being said, not trying to lock down extra-long exclusivity for PUBG at this point would be idiocy. You have to see that. Why would you step away from trying to negotiate that kind of deal for your company when you're trying to bring people into your ecosystem and new console? So I can't fault Microsoft for doing it this time.

Still think it's shitty from a consumer point of view though.