Quantcast
Microsoft Is Trying to Keep PUBG Off PS4 for Longer

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

zero129 said:
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.

I like how you guys come up and are sure of these conspiracy theories surrounding Sony, even though MH W is coming to PC and Xbox One as well. So Sony would spend millions just to keep it off one platform, or would it make more sense to spend a bit more and make it exclusive altogether.

Also why would they spend money on collections of old games and remasters of very niche titrles? More like Cpacom wasn't expecting Switch to be a success. Stop with your tin foils folks.



Around the Network
GOWTLOZ said:
zero129 said:

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.

I like how you guys come up and are sure of these conspiracy theories surrounding Sony, even though MH W is coming to PC and Xbox One as well. So Sony would spend millions just to keep it off one platform, or would it make more sense to spend a bit more and make it exclusive altogether.

Also why would they spend money on collections of old games and remasters of very niche titrles? More like Cpacom wasn't expecting Switch to be a success. Stop with your tin foils folks.

Im not only talking about monster hunter world. If you honstly believe that Sony doesnt buy exclusives then im sorry but i cant be of help.

I guess all them devs in the PS1 days just wanted to trow themselfs at Sony....



zero129 said:
GOWTLOZ said:

I like how you guys come up and are sure of these conspiracy theories surrounding Sony, even though MH W is coming to PC and Xbox One as well. So Sony would spend millions just to keep it off one platform, or would it make more sense to spend a bit more and make it exclusive altogether.

Also why would they spend money on collections of old games and remasters of very niche titrles? More like Cpacom wasn't expecting Switch to be a success. Stop with your tin foils folks.

Im not only talking about monster hunter world. If you honstly believe that Sony doesnt buy exclusives then im sorry but i cant be of help.

I guess all them devs in the PS1 days just wanted to trow themselfs at Sony....

Some of them did. Nintendo was known to crush independent developers when they were market leaders by limiting the number of cartridges that could be produced for third party games which also killed many developers.

Also games like Final Fantasy VII couldn't fit on a cartridge and needed the storage size of discs so they were made exclusively for PS1.

Moneyhatting wasn't always the only good reason for third parties to make exclusives.



Ganoncrotch said:
vivster said:

Yep, it's a lot better to do both. Create games and then keep those games forever away from rival platforms. That way you can keep players out for eternity and not just a few measely months.

If you mean a Sony or Nintendo created game being on a machine that they manufacture is in line with this? Surely you understand the difference between creating a game on a platform for your audience and just taking measures to prevent a game created by someone else from going to a rival platform?

One of the above scenario's creates a game, the other one creates nothing.

One of the things creates a game deliberately only for a tiny portion of consumers, the other slightly delays a product that can be enjoyed by all consumers. Both things' sole purpose is to make money.

Both is equally shitty, I just don't buy into the narritive of the benevolent game creator that just wants to make exclusive games for us. Manufactured exclusivity is a terrible thing no matter how it's done.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Its on PC for those Xbox Boycotting gamers. Just get it on PC. Screw Console Exclusives. There bad for the Industry. TR, SF5, Titanfall, Noih etc. Aslong as you support consoles you are supporting this practice. It wont stop and with MS helping out on the visual improvement (Water effects) they have every right to extend this deal unfortunately.



Around the Network
GOWTLOZ said:
zero129 said:

Im not only talking about monster hunter world. If you honstly believe that Sony doesnt buy exclusives then im sorry but i cant be of help.

I guess all them devs in the PS1 days just wanted to trow themselfs at Sony....

Some of them did. Nintendo was known to crush independent developers when they were market leaders by limiting the number of cartridges that could be produced for third party games which also killed many developers.

Also games like Final Fantasy VII couldn't fit on a cartridge and needed the storage size of discs so they were made exclusively for PS1.

Moneyhatting wasn't always the only good reason for third parties to make exclusives.

Some is not all. The was also the 3DO console, The Sega Saturn etc. If so many devs wanted to escape Nintendos grasp they had options even before Sony came along.

FF7 would of fitted since the was also the 64DD add on that was being released. Also look at Resident Evil 2 that game needed 2 discs on PS1.

Moneyhatting is how Sony got in this industry.



zero129 said:
GOWTLOZ said:

Some of them did. Nintendo was known to crush independent developers when they were market leaders by limiting the number of cartridges that could be produced for third party games which also killed many developers.

Also games like Final Fantasy VII couldn't fit on a cartridge and needed the storage size of discs so they were made exclusively for PS1.

Moneyhatting wasn't always the only good reason for third parties to make exclusives.

Some is not all. The was also the 3DO console, The Sega Saturn etc. If so many devs wanted to escape Nintendos grasp they had options even before Sony came along.

FF7 would of fitted since the was also the 64DD add on that was being released. Also look at Resident Evil 2 that game needed 2 discs on PS1.

Moneyhatting is how Sony got in this industry.

Sega Saturn and 3DO never took off. PS1 was selling decently and was actually a viable alternative to Nintendo.

64dd add on came out only in Japan, in 1999, two years after FF VII released. Most games wouldn't have fit even on two N64 cartridges that could fit on just one PS1 disc. Also CD had way better audio output which was important in games like Metal Gear Solid. And after a while as Sony pulled ahead there was no need to consider developing for the N64 anyways. Business one o one.

Sony got in the industry for not holding back technology and developers like what Nintendo was doing.



Zkuq said:
twintail said:

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

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.

He doesn't like these things but is very specific to point out that they ('we' - Microsoft) don't do those things and that he ('I' - Phil) doesn't make those deals. Not only is he flat out saying what they do, but he phrases it as a contrast to what the competition is doing (aka making deals). But here we are with MS making a deal even though Phil was pretty explicit that neither MS nor himself make deals that limits a game from another audience.

He doesn't need to spell it out, but he did.



GOWTLOZ said:
zero129 said:

Some is not all. The was also the 3DO console, The Sega Saturn etc. If so many devs wanted to escape Nintendos grasp they had options even before Sony came along.

FF7 would of fitted since the was also the 64DD add on that was being released. Also look at Resident Evil 2 that game needed 2 discs on PS1.

Moneyhatting is how Sony got in this industry.

Sega Saturn and 3DO never took off. PS1 was selling decently and was actually a viable alternative to Nintendo.

64dd add on came out only in Japan, in 1999, two years after FF VII released. Most games wouldn't have fit even on two N64 cartridges that could fit on just one PS1 disc. Also CD had way better audio output which was important in games like Metal Gear Solid. And after a while as Sony pulled ahead there was no need to consider developing for the N64 anyways. Business one o one.

Sony got in the industry for not holding back technology and developers like what Nintendo was doing.

Sony went deep pockets with PS1. They even bought Tomb Raider to not appear on other consoles back then. And they did it this gen with exclusive content for Destiny, "helped with developing SF5" and hurt VR as a whole when they bought timed exclusivity for BATMAN VR and RE7VR.



"Exclusives sells consoles"



Pocky Lover Boy!