By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
twintail said:
The Fury said:

No, true. But I would prefer it that way, SquEnix are not a poor company, not like they need the money to complete development. I'd rather the money be invested internally into new studios and jobs, instead of paying people off. I mean can you imagine how many studios and games you could create with 7 billion? How many jobs?

I hear ya. Would be great if we could get more details into the specifics of the deal. 

sales2099 said:

The news is pretty fresh. Lol “get over it”....I hope people keep that same energy for when Starfield is Xbox exclusive. 

There is I distinct difference between a 1st party dev keeping a game to the one console vs a 3rd party dev that is expected to release on multiple platforms. 2 years is overkill

The time period is fresh, but you know very well I'm talking about the game being a timed exclusive, which has been known for months now.

everyone is expecting Starfield to be exclusive, not that that should prevent ppl from criticising the move if they believe it to be so. As long as ppl are consistent and can see these acquisitions (studio, game, timed or not) for what they are instead of trying to defend their platform holder's choice, then I see no problem here.

I feel like I have to explain the difference: the devs who make Starfield is going to be 1st party. F-I-R-S-T Party. A distinct difference then a 3rd party. Sorry it’s just frustrating seeing people comparing the 2 as if they are relatable. 

Hey, I’m not blind to the business. Timed exclusives will always be a thing. But 2 years? I think we (should) agree that 2 years is overkill. 6 months is acceptable, 1 year is frustrating, 2 years is essentially a full exclusive since people will have moved on years later. Am I not entitled to make that observation? 

Last edited by sales2099 - on 09 December 2020

Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles.