Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Microsoft Has Put Themselves Back In The Game!

As a Playstation fan, i must be honest. With this acquisition of Zenimax, I hope Microsoft keeps all these games EXCLUSIVE! DO NOT put them on Playstation!

THIS is what we needed. This is the Microsoft that i want to see. I want to be pissed off randomly again like i was in the 7th generation with 360 and PS3. Idk wtf Microsoft was doing with the Xbox One.

MS also acquired Obsidian and that studio is the REAL Bethesda(lol). Microsoft has all the main WRPG’S under their branch now. They also have Doom.

KEEP IT ALL ON XBOX, MICROSOFT! I DO NOT WANT TO SEE THESE GAMES ON PLAYSTATION! FORCE ME to buy your console, Microsoft! Be smart!

And to the rumors of Microsoft buying Sega… I HOPE THEY DO! BUY THEM!

PUT THAT PRESSURE ON SONY!

Now….. SONY… WTF are you going to do about it?

Last edited by enditall727 - on 28 September 2020

Around the Network

Errr....

"KEEP IT ALL ON XBOX, MICROSOFT! I DO NOT WANT TO SEE THESE GAMES ON PLAYSTATION! FORCE ME to buy your console"

Why would you want to be forced to buy more hardware to play games on rather than play them on hardware you already have.

The ideal scenario for consumers is all games on every system. Choose the one you want, get everything. No need to shell out money on hardware you don't need.



Multiplatforms should be cherised and protected as much as possible. While I understand and accept the necessity of exclusive games, just taking multiplats and putting them under an exclusivity wall doesn't add value, it takes away from other by limiting the amount of people that can play them. I dread a future where console wars devolve into who buys the most studios.



You know it deserves the GOTY.

Come join The 2018 Obscure Game Monthly Review Thread.

Barkley said:

Errr....

"KEEP IT ALL ON XBOX, MICROSOFT! I DO NOT WANT TO SEE THESE GAMES ON PLAYSTATION! FORCE ME to buy your console"

Why would you want to be forced to buy more hardware to play games on rather than play them on hardware you already have.

The ideal scenario for consumers is all games on every system. Choose the one you want, get everything. No need to shell out money on hardware you don't need.

That might be ideal, but that is simply not how it is going to go. Nintendo in particular will probably never give up their exclusives.

So it is better for companies to give us a reason to buy their consoles, rather than whatever the XB1 was.



Not wanting other people to be able to play games on their platform of choice is a really asshole thing to say.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Around the Network
Barkley said:

Why would you want to be forced to buy more hardware to play games on rather than play them on hardware you already have.

The ideal scenario for consumers is all games on every system. Choose the one you want, get everything. No need to shell out money on hardware you don't need.

but is it? games developed for one specific console regularly end up being the best on the market and I don't think that's all down to first party developers being "more talented"

these games being made as "system sellers" means there is a lot of extra budget and care poured into them, which wouldn't be needed in your scenario

ofcourse developing for countless of different configurations also means a lot of development overhead/development restrictions to ensure compatibility (or the game just not working well on several systems)



vivster said:
Not wanting other people to be able to play games on their platform of choice is a really asshole thing to say.

It's not even other people though. He doesn't want the games on his own platform of choice.



I’d disagree on that. Turning multiplatform games into exclusives isn’t what we want. I gladly wanna see the next Arkane game being exclusive or what the mysterious Roundhouse Studios is doing being an Xbox/PC exclusive. But locking already established franchises on one platform isn’t what we should cheer on. When Sony bought Insomniac Games, Xbox fans didn’t lose Ratchet And Clank or Spider-Man because these games weren’t on the platform in the first place. 

Now I would be totally fine and understand if Microsoft makes the next Doom, Elder Scrolls or Wolfenstein a timed exclusive by at least a year. Both companies do that all the time. But the Hellblade case makes me believe otherwise.



Lafiel said:
Barkley said:

Why would you want to be forced to buy more hardware to play games on rather than play them on hardware you already have.

The ideal scenario for consumers is all games on every system. Choose the one you want, get everything. No need to shell out money on hardware you don't need.

but is it? games developed for one specific console regularly end up being the best on the market and I don't think that's all down to first party developers being "more talented"

these games being made as "system sellers" means there is a lot of extra budget and care poured into them, which wouldn't be needed in your scenario

ofcourse developing for countless of different configurations also means a lot of development overhead/development restrictions to ensure compatibility (or the game just not working well on several systems)

Well in the case of Microsoft they'd already be supporting infinite hardware combinations on PC as well as Series S/X.



ignore this. I forgot how to properly quote

Last edited by enditall727 - on 28 September 2020