DonFerrari said:
J_Allard said:
In what way could they have explained the situation without making it seem as if Sony didn't step up to the plate? By not giving Microsoft the credit and recognition they deserve, THAT would be biting the hand that feeds, since Microsoft is actually the hand feeding them right now. What you're proposing is they kind of downplay the role MS had in order to appease a company they used to make exclusive games for.
We don't really know what happened behind the scenes, but from all accounts it seems MS was willing to step up with more money and not take control of the IP. Doesn't Sony know this also? It's not like they'd read these comments and be shocked. They know Insomniac came to them with the idea for the game and that they (Sony) did not give Insomniac a good enough offer.
|
The way of truth would help a little, as you said MS footed the bill and asked for exclusivity (the terms we don't know), wasn't just because MS is terrific partner... As I said the problem is more on the phrasing than on what happened. And as someone mentioned if we consider they could be butthurt on Sony for not freeing their IPs or against EA for lefting them on the ground because of Fuse flop then it makes sense. But the way they answered the direct question puts the conotation I said in the OP.
|
They did tell the truth. MS was a better partner for this project. Not only a better partner, but a "terrific partner" according to Insomniac. Again, seems you want them to kind of soften their wording for Sony's sake. Why would they do that?
