By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Azzanation said:
DonFerrari said:

You have to remember that somehow it is worse that Sony pick a new IP that no one knows will be good or sell well and pay for it to have timed exclusivity than MS buying in a single year 15 studios and keeping the whole portfolio forever. Get on with times.

And of course Sony picking up this timed exclusivity will force MS answer into buying another 8 studios.

Don, not sure if you are with the times on this one, however when MS buys studios they aren't entirely forced exclusives or not guaranteed anyway, we have seen examples of this. Now if Sony brought Zenimax, you could bet your entire house and family that Sony would keep everything as a forced PS exclusive. MS have not ruled out future Bethesda games coming to PS or Nintendo for that matter.

The 2nd point is quite easy to avoid, stop poking the bear and they wont have to buy more studios. Doesn't Sony have a good portfolio of 1st party developers and games? Why do they need to lock up 3rd party games for there system if they have a monster library of games and studios to work with??

Sony is porting some games to PC and even Xbox/Switch, but sure we can say it would be more likely that their titles would be kept exclusive. But sure pretend you aren't using two different standards here and that you are very neutral.



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."