| Machiavellian said: 1) I am not sure you have this one correct. When Sega removed themselves from the market on hardware there was no Nintendo system at that time Nintendo was still a player. People were still gaming on a Nintendo system. Customers can choose to not upgrade and wait. 2) This is where I do not understand your stance when it comes to business decisions. EGS is not trying to lower Steams cut on games. EGS is trying to entice developers to put their games on their storefront because Epic allows the developers 88% return selling on their storefront and only take a 12% cut. This is in contrast to Valve taking 30% cut. This is a competitive tactic to gain developers and increase games on EGS storefront. Because of this Tactic, Valve must always be aware that they could lose developers support and if so will have to respond by lowering their cut. Yes, Steam still takes 30% but what you do not understand is that Epic provides another storefront for any developer who does not want to pay that price. That is what we call competition. These are very basic stuff and the fact you are defending Valve still charging 30% seems illogical. If you are a developer that is exactly what you want, more storefronts fighting for your game giving you the best chance to maximize your profits. And where you and others fail to understand is it's not needed. Steam offers devs more sales than EGS, the devs make more money by taking less due to Steam's popularity. This is unnecessary competition to break up Steams PC monopoly and divide the market which PC gamers need to happen. I don't want more store fronts, I want less. I don't want to juggle my games from store front to store front. If that's what you want than your opinion is bad for the industry because you are supporting games being taking away from a popular store and force gamers to switch. 3) I would say that Sony absolutely do not care about Bethesda games if they could remove MS from the market. Also if MS give up their hardware, they must come to Sony on Sony terms. That puts MS at an extremely disadvantage where they would need to accept basically whatever Sony offer. Now you tell us all, exactly why would MS put themselves at the mercy of Sony for what gain. If you thought the EU hit MS with concessions, what do you believe Sony would ask for. You would have investors asking you to resign in a heartbeat. So be it, if Sony say no than maybe Nintendo's next system will take Elder Scrolls 6. Less sales for Sony if that's the choice they want to make. I also heavily disagree. Sony have no issue selling Bethesda games on PS to this day. So whay would that change if Xbox hardware isn't a thing anymore? 4) Actually, MS is making deals to put ABK games on streaming platforms. ABK make PC games or we should say ABK games are on consoles and PC so no porting. Those streaming platforms are PC platforms and MS already make their games on PC and console. What MS does not do is make their games on PS or Nintendo. If GP is on PS or Nintendo system, they would either be streaming only which at this time would be a big miss or MS would need to port those games to PS and Nintendo because GP is a download service. Azz, you seem to be missing very basic stuff which is killing your arguments. You are missing my point. MS will support full streaming on all platforms, thats their push, weather gamers like it or not. If Streaming is the only access to their future line up, then gamers will have to adjust. Otherwise, they will be playing Skyrim while the new wave of gamers will be playing ES6. 5) Totally correct, you cannot run a business on assumptions but every argument you have provided are based on assumption. You assume Sony wants MS games, You assume Sony or Nintendo will put GP on their platform. You assume MS want out of the hardware business. You assume that GP can replace MS current revenue stream. You assume XCloud is a replacement for Hardware. I mean your whole argument is based on a lot of assumptions. None of your arguments have anything in them where MS can say, Yes this will happen. It's all a gamble. Its based on business logic. MS will make more money with GP in the future, XCloud is another form of distribution (Replacing hardware) Sony saying no to Xbox games would be one of the stupidest moves a business can make, sure MS will have to abide to Sonys rules, but a board of directors wont say no to more income. Annoucing new games and releasing new games is 2 different things. We already had a number of announcements. While I believe MS will start to get games out the door, nothing is guaranteed to be successful. MS is a long way from having enough successful games to combat Sony or Nintendo. I would say they are a generation behind, not only in games but in customer mindshare. They released zero games last year and 2 this year, one being critically acclaimed and one being a disaster. You cant say they cant compete when they have only released 2 major titles in 2 years. 20+ Studios are all cooking something. You literally believe 20 studios are not doing anything? |
| Pemalite said:
The 7th generation consoles PROVED that Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo. Aka. 3 competitors can thrive in the console market at the same time with the Wii (101~ million), PS3 (87~ million), Xbox (84~ million) all being profitable and highly successful platforms in their own right. PS3 lost Sony $5b and 360 lost MS $3b. Xbox 360 and PS3 losses total $8 billion, ex-Sony employee paints grim future | VG247 As for the rest, I disagree with your Sega analogy. History show shown time and time again that with 3 consoles, 1 gets burnt. --- Pemalite said: 1) I already outlined how the Epic Game Store has influenced and changed Steam. --- You have proven zero benefits customers gain from EGS yet i have supplied reasons why customers don't like EGS. --- Pemalite said: I never made that claim. --- Pemalite said: Microsoft's "deals" are partly to pass a purchase of Activision Blizzard. Yes and i have been saying this, yet it seems this seems to be a arguments case? --- Pemalite said: Your entire argument is based on baseless assumptions. --- Pemalite said: They have been doing that for years... And that's because they havent released anything for 2 years apart from Pentiment and Hi Fi Rush. I hope you dont believe 20+ studios are not just sitting around twiddling their thumbs, otherwise that would require a facepalm. |
LudicrousSpeed said:
No no that’s fine because he bought some Halo GI Joe for $6 that came with a weapon skin DLC, that’s totally the same thing as a very difficult to find toy that unlocks an entirely new difficulty. Fire Emblem also had story stuff and new areas. In Twilight Princess the Wolf Link unlocked an entire dungeon. But it’s cool, “everyone does it” lol. |
Amiibos are made for collectors. If you arent a collector of figurines than its not for you. If you literally believe this is taking advantage of customers while you are paying for online access shows you have your priorities wrong.
I like the Amiibos, I think they are a great addition, you, Norion and Don can disagree all you like. Just because you guys dislike them doesn't mean others have to. I hope they continue the idea with their next console.
Last edited by Azzanation - on 21 May 2023
