| S.T.A.G.E. said:
MS has been moneyhatting games and has not stopped and it was them who started the DLC war. Sony isnt going to fight them for exclusives in their current position. Who forced Sony to better their first party because MS kept moneyhatting? Microsoft. The problem isnt not in the fact that a game was moneyhatted. Games get moneyhatted all the times but when MS moneyhats they go straight for the nuts. They went for an established franchise which only survived based on combined sales of five different platforms to be exclusive to theirs. Eidos sites domination as the main reason why they were glad to be with Playstation. Xbox Ones are selling half what the PS4 is selling 2:1 in sales man. MS screwed not just Sony gamers but PC gamers. Everyone just because they admitted they dont have an Uncharted nor could they make one. |
Sony can't moneyhat because they don't have money. If Sony could moneyhat like they could in the PS1-PS2 era they would. In fact, Final Fantasy XV was almost moneyhatted, but Sony likely couldn't afford it.
See, Microsoft is getting nailed for moneyhatting but this is what Sony did all the time. When Sony does it, it's OK and excuses come out for them (PlayStation was the best selling console! It used CD-ROMs!). When Microsoft does it they are evil and want to destroy everything. Eidos "sites" domination as the main reason, but we all know the main reason - money. It's always been about the money.
If Sony moneyhatted Rise of the Tomb Raider no one would care, but now that MS did it, everyone cares. As I said, I don't think moneyhatting is a problem if it gives the console a competitive advantage.
