Machiavellian said:
First Phil said he was not in favor of doing deals that permanately locks content away from other systems. As been hashed out previously people seem to have their own interpretation of what the term CONTENT means. He never said he did not favor making publishing agreement with 3rd party companies since he has done that for multiple projects not just PUG. As I stated in my post, Many have made reference to his comments and either called him a liar, hypocritical or both based on his tweets and statements. Even the OG of this post made reference to those comments. What is interesting is that this is any news. We know MS makes exclusive contracts with 3rd party developers just like Sony and Nintendo. People believe that this is something new that MS may be in talks extending their publishing agreement with a client especially if the agreement is only for 3 months. Really, if you are going to make an agreement to have a game exclusive on your system for a period of time 3 months seems like nothing. People forget that MS is the publisher for this game on the Xbox system. Meaning that they are probably funding development for the X1 version as well as marketing and other auxiliary items. The same people condemning MS for making a publishing agreement for the game on the X1 are the same ones who would have praised Sony for doing the same thing since they are also in talks to get the game on their system. Also how does this not benefit the Xbox ecosystem. If Sony gets 3rd party exclusives on their console whether they fund them or just because they are Japanese company its all good because they are looking to extend the games on their system. When MS does the exact same thing, they are desperate. All the major players look to get successful games on their platform whether 3rd, 1st or 2nd. It just seems only Sony gets a pass when they do the same thing and everyone else is just greedy. |
Please explain to me how is it worse to keep a skin locked away from a game forever than a full game locked away for 1 year.
Sorry but I'm not one of those people. I don't care about this game and mostly buy Sony 1st party so this practice is neutral to me. I am only pointing out that Phill have a big mouth but is a hypocrite. Show me where is the investiment in first party, showing games only when they are about to release and not locking away content in any way instead of being an appologist to someone that make millions on salary to be a hypocrite.
And you can't see a difference on desperation when Sony is selling 2x LTD, 3 or 4x weekly and a game get released exclusively with sony putting zero money on the game and MS looking into extending exclusivity after the developer said they are looking to release the game on the competitor?
Machiavellian said:
Actually Sunset is not a dead IP. Only the Sunset Overdrive game as its exclusive to the Xbox. They could make Sunset Super Duper Overdrive with extra sause and can publish it on any system they want. They can make a Overdrive 2 and publish it anywhere they want including Sony system. You guys really need to understand how those publishing deals work. |
So show us where is the Sunset Duper Edition on PC and PS4

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."







