By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
LudicrousSpeed on 30 September 2019
Edit Thread
DonFerrari said:
LudicrousSpeed said:
If we’re holding current discussion responsible for things said years ago, why only now that this practice has sunk to a new low level with Sony and publishers on PS4 is it suddenly zero fault of the platform holder and all on the publisher? People sure weren’t cutting MS any slack when they had 30 day map pack deals with CoD. Or even this gen with the FIFA timed deals. It was all MS’s fault then. But now it’s all Activision, Sony has no choice but to bend over backwards and take these timed exclusive deals that Activision is offering.

It reminds me of charging for online play. You can’t blame Sony for that, Microsoft somehow forced them to partake. Sony would love to not charge for it but MS is making them earn all that revenue by charging. It’s almost as if there is some large double standard here and other places when Sony is involved 🤷🏻‍♂️

The most likely situation is Sony struck the same kind of deal for Calls of Doody that MS had, which is 30 day DLC access. But AFAIK CoD 2k19 is ditching paid map packs and season passes, which means Sony needed something else to market as PS4 exclusive. So instead of 30 day DLC, they got 365 day access to something included in the $60 game. Which, to consumers, is a worse deal.

Instead of bickering about which multi billion dollar company is more to blame for the deal, I’ll just blame both. I also said it was a shitty deal when MS had FIFA content exclusive. I didn’t try to blame EA for making MS take some deal.

Seems like you fail to notice differences.

When MS created the practice on CoD for the month exclusivity, that was something new that they proposed. When right now people say that if Sony don't accept the proposition of Activision they would go to MS and MS would accept you know that is true. So that is what differentiate the criticism and you know it.

Also on the charging for online, MS again created it and sure customers were wrong to accept it. When MS done and got more money with neglible backlash why wouldn't Sony and after Nintendo do the same? So again it is very easy to see why people blame MS for creating much more than they blame who followed.

You’re only proving my point when it comes to the double standard. When MS and Activision got together for exclusive deals, it was because “Microsoft created it”. When Sony and Activision make a deal that is worse for gamers, it’s Activision. MS could have been in the exact same situation you’re guessing that Sony was in, but in Sony’s case you’re willing to absolve them of blame, but MS “created” the issue. It’s just like when MS paid for Tomb Raider to be a timed exclusive. Tons and tons of bitching and criticizing MS, yet people ignored that Sony literally moneyhatted the same franchise earlier. Double standard. 

Same with online play. Nintendo and SEGA had paid online services on SNES/Genesis and the DC also eventually required money for online play. Sure, MS was the first to really make it successful, but if they’re going to receive criticism for online play requiring a fee, anyone who follows suit deserves the same criticism. But Sony not only saw zero criticism in some places but strangely it somehow became Microsoft’s fault that Sony was charging. Bizarre.

Anyways im not about to join in the bickering about which huge corporation is nickel pinching more 👍 Rumors have it the game has seen massive pre-order cancels and IW devs on twitter have already been apologizing like crazy so it seems they know they’re fucking over all gamers here. Nothing else needs to be said really.