badgenome said:
No, what I am basically stating is that I think moneyhatting is a terrible practice because we wind up with situations like this one where, instead of taking $50 million and greenlighting some interesting new projects that are in need of a publisher, Microsoft takes a shine to a game that already has a publisher, and which is already coming out on their console anyway, and they spend that $50 million to make the version of that game for their competitors' console go away. So Xbox owners don't have any more games to show for it, and Playstation owners only have one fewer game available for their system. Nothing new was created. That might be a fine strategy for a company, but it's bad for gamers. And I don't care what company does it. |
This is my point, the only evidence you have given is that money changed hands. Thats not enough to suggest anything more about a deal than that. The developer stated their case, you choose to be believe something else but it doesn't make your rendition any more true. You have no clue how the deal was made who asked who or what. It could easily been Respawn looking for more funding for their game and they went to MS. In the interview it pretty much stated they went to Sony and MS. It doesn't matter who the publisher of the game is as Respawn charts their own course. Why would MS turn down an opportunity to get a exclusive game from a proven developer if the option is on the table. That sounds like very bad business and from the love Titanfall is getting, it looks like very smart business that MS made the deal.
