By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kyuu on 05 April 2023
Edit Thread
Machiavellian said:
Kyuu said:

It might never happen but platform-exclusivity for big titles has been much less common compared to the old days, you'd think it makes everyone a bit more happy but nope, some cried rivers over any moneyhatted Sony exclusive and are now justifying the "response" of the competition regardless of the scale of it. Gamers aren't consistent with their own little philosophies, and may adjust to whatever their favorite company does and say it's the right thing.

In the end, Microsoft is doing both unprecedented acquisitions that aren't necessary, and timed exclusives for bigger sellers than what Sony has moneyhatted (albeit for shorter periods of time), yet not many on the Xbox side hold them accountable or call Phil Spencer out on his "games should be available for everyone" bullshit. In addition to Valheim, Series XS is also getting Ark 2 as an exclusive, the sequel to another game that sold over 16 million copies as of August 2019. Where is the outrage?

The truth is... Sony's meager moneyhatting has nothing to do with Playstation's dominance or why MS is doing what it's doing. The dominance is simply the result of right decisions and a compelling 1st party lineup that complements an excellent library of multiplatform games that gamers associate with the Playstation brand. But Microsoft's fans have invented an "ethical reason" that justifies major acquisitions that should have never happened, and this will only escalate to Sony grabbing more companies and by extension making more unnecessary exclusives, and we all lose. The fanbase that would cry the loudest over a SquareEnix acquisiton would be Nintendo's lol.

That is the point right.  Its an escalation war.  Sony uses their market dominance to do 3rd party deals, MS decides to take players off the table for those deal.  Sony moneyhatted 2 games from Bethesda and was in negotiation for a third.  MS made a much bigger and better offer and took that company out of the mix.  All I keep hearing is people complain about the response but as a business that would be the response when you got the pockets.  You want better investment on your money not throw it away.  MS cannot match moneyhat deals at the same cost as Sony but they can remove successful companies from their reach who also strengthen and grow your business.  It really does not matter about the term of a agreement, its about which strategy works. There was always this chance that Sony could wake the sleeping giant because MS always had the money but it appears the time is now as publishers come up for sale.

For your second paragraph, I believe you are missing a very important business point.  You believe that Sony is making these money hat moves as meager but as a business the moves are made to sustain and keep their marketshare.  Its an advantage that Sony has and they are using it which they should. In a competitive market all business use their advantage to gain marketshare and sell their product.  I have no issue with Sony doing this because its good business.  Sony has also made purchases for good Studios because its good business to bring them under their system and continue to make exclusive games. The thing is, there needs to be no excuses made for either tactic, its good business.  

Its also good business for MS to purchase any publisher who comes to them and want to sell especially if they are successful. It would be dumb for either Sony or MS to turn down opportunity because Xbox gamers or Sony gamers are going to be butt hurt about it.  You are basically doing the same thing you say Xbox gamers are doing justifying one tactic over another because personally you do not like it.  In reality, both tactics are valid because as a business they all equal opportunity.  MS has the funds to purchase publishers and they damn well better do it if a publisher comes up for sale and their IP and products help them to expand and grow.  Sony is justified in making as many 3rd party exclusive deals as they can because they have the contacts, marketshare to do it at a price they can afford over their competitor.

Neither company is making these moves to please gamers, they make the moves as a business to sustain and grow their business.

Anything goes in the business world I'm not interested in discussing this and don't disagree with the core of your argument. I explained/justified Microsoft's acquisitions from a business perspective in my response to Chakkra which you read and quoted. Microsoft overpaying for big Japanese exclusives would be poor business, what they're doing obviously makes a lot more sense.

The gamers' reaction to it however is a separate topic. When I see too much blatant bullshit, hypocrisy, and false equivalences, sometimes I feel like pointing them out. MS's louder fans complained non stop about Sony's meager (And they're definitely meager or just shy of meager. The numbers don't lie but agree to disagree) exclusivity deals and just won't act the same way when Microsoft does it 10-100 times worse. Even excluding acquisitions, ARK 2 and Valheim are an order of magnitude bigger than the games you mentioned (Deathloop and Ghostwire Tokyo which both were untested new IP's from less relevant developers). From the PS360 generation onward, most platforms exclusivity deals were "fucked up" within reason. You can no longer say this with where this industry is heading. And no... it's not "Sony's fault". If someone's not happy about where things are going... blame Microsoft and Microsoft alone. The standard/fair/typical response to Sony from an "ethical standpoint" is to make similar deals.

Otherwise I get it. Ethics have no place in business, and if MS gathers that major 3rd party acquisitions is the only way for Xbox to return to relevance (provided they stick with the PC day and date approach), then it makes sense for them to take this route. It also makes sense for Sony to try to combat or challenge it.