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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Is Moneyhatting so bad?

Machiavellian on 22 August 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Machiavellian said:
badgenome said:
Depends on what you mean by moneyhatting. If you mean, as in the case of Titanfall, throwing tens of millions of dollars at a third party publisher to stop development of the game for your competitors' consoles... then I think it's a crap practice because it doesn't add to your platform. It merely takes from others'. The moneyhatting of exclusive DLC is in some ways even more reprehensible because it's so utterly stupid and meaningless. No one really gives a shit if the PS3 version of Arkham Origins lets you play as '60s Batman.

But you seem to be confusing moneyhatting with the legitimate functions of a publisher. What Sony does for indies, or what Nintendo is doing for Bayonetta 2, or Microsoft for Sunset Overdrive isn't moneyhatting to me because without the first parties' involvement those games would either not exist at all, or might exist but only in a diminished form.

I know you state it as fact but is that what happen.  Do you know or have any proof that MS paid to have a PS4 version not made or did Respawn come to them and they made a agreement for exclusive rights both companies will do something for the other.  MS give Respawn dedicated servers, money for a year exclusive and Respawn put their game on all of their hardware.  Could this deal end up being like the one between MS and Epic.  A partnership that added greatly to both companies.  By all accounts, the deal between MS and Respawn is legitimate.

So essentially moneyhatting and the deal isnt between Microsoft and Respawn its EA and Microsoft. We're not dumb, bro. Microsoft has been paying EA through the teeth to have the edge on Sony Europe and America with the annualized titles and Titan Fall. Microsoft was was also providing EA with the dedicated servers via the cloud servers so EA wouldnt have to pay out of pocket. Last but not least the final deal was screwing gamers and specifically Gamestop with DRM, which is why EA dropped online passes. The needed the online pass to profit off of those who bought used games and thought Microsoft would succeed. I fear that their loss of spreading DRM into next might affect Sonys chances of getting TitanFall but we all know how EA likes to make money and the game is a potential money maker.

Why don't you go read the article before making comments.  Do you people actually read the links you post 

""Titanfall is an example of that. It's a product that came in through our EA Partners group, it's a partnership with Respawn, and there was an opportunity for Microsoft, EA and Respawn to create a tactical opportunity to make Titanfall exclusive to Microsoft."

MS pays anyone who will take their money on any time of exclusive deal they can manage.  Its not just EA as UBi just signed someting, Capcom and a host of others.  Big deal, 

As for screwing gamestop, so what. I rather have a steam setup for consoles where game prices dropped then purchase another game from gamestop or any retail store.  I am sure one of the partners for resell of digital content would have been gamestop but thats neither here or there and now the whole issue has been turned to fuel edge fanboys swords which missinformation.



Around the Network
badgenome on 22 August 2013
Machiavellian said:

Here is a quote from the very article you posted

""Titanfall is an example of that. It's a product that came in through our EA Partners group, it's a partnership with Respawn, and there was an opportunity for Microsoft, EA and Respawn to create a tactical opportunity to make Titanfall exclusive to Microsoft."

So yes, if EA is the publisher then they will be in the negotiations that’s  clear but as mentioned Respawn contract is a EA Partners group and thus they do not own, direct or have a say in how Respawn run their business.  EA only publish and distribute their game and you just proved what I said..  In interviews Respawn said they went to Sony and MS and MS was the one that showed the most interest and came back with a plan to allow them to make the game they are making.  You are crying about them making a PC and outsource a 360 game which it seems you are forgetting that its a MS exclusive deal.  Meaning they had a talk about if we are giving you 50 million dollars to go exclusive how else can we benefit from this deal. Is it so hard for you to believe that if a company is paying 50 million dollars that they might want some extra carrots on their plate.

I'm not crying about shit. Titanfall looks like the same old same old FPS I grew tired of in the first half of this endless console generation. It's Section 8 with prettier graphics, and Microsoft can keep it exclusive forever as far as I'm concerned. I just think that moneyhatting is a crummy practice, and Titanfall is the most blatant recent example of it, which is why I mentioned it. You, meanwhile, seem to be arguing that Microsoft both did and did not moneyhat the game. So I honestly don't know what your point is here.

"All EA is doing is publishing the game"? Uh, yeah. And that is exactly what puts them in a position to tell Respawn what to do. Respawn retains ownership of the IP, but you seem to think that EA is just going to let them do whatever they want with the game they are paying them to make. That is complete nonsense. All it means is that when their contract is up, Respawn can shop their games around to other publishers or make a Titanfall movie or whatever. Until then, EA is paying the piper so they call the tune. And when EA has made it perfectly clear that the deal is between them and Microsoft, I really don't care what Respawn has to say about the matter. They can blather about cloud processing or how much Microsoft loves them until they turn blue, but it will come out on Gameboy Advance if EA tells them it will.



Machiavellian on 22 August 2013
badgenome said:
Machiavellian said:

Here is a quote from the very article you posted

""Titanfall is an example of that. It's a product that came in through our EA Partners group, it's a partnership with Respawn, and there was an opportunity for Microsoft, EA and Respawn to create a tactical opportunity to make Titanfall exclusive to Microsoft."

So yes, if EA is the publisher then they will be in the negotiations that’s  clear but as mentioned Respawn contract is a EA Partners group and thus they do not own, direct or have a say in how Respawn run their business.  EA only publish and distribute their game and you just proved what I said..  In interviews Respawn said they went to Sony and MS and MS was the one that showed the most interest and came back with a plan to allow them to make the game they are making.  You are crying about them making a PC and outsource a 360 game which it seems you are forgetting that its a MS exclusive deal.  Meaning they had a talk about if we are giving you 50 million dollars to go exclusive how else can we benefit from this deal. Is it so hard for you to believe that if a company is paying 50 million dollars that they might want some extra carrots on their plate.

I'm not crying about shit. Titanfall looks like the same old same old FPS I grew tired of in the first half of this endless console generation. It's Section 8 with prettier graphics, and Microsoft can keep it exclusive forever as far as I'm concerned. I just think that moneyhatting is a crummy practice, and Titanfall is the most blatant recent example of it, which is why I mentioned it. You, meanwhile, seem to be arguing that Microsoft both did and did not moneyhat the game. So I honestly don't know what your point is here.

"All EA is doing is publishing the game"? Uh, yeah. And that is exactly what puts them in a position to tell Respawn what to do. Respawn retains ownership of the IP, but you seem to think that EA is just going to let them do whatever they want with the game they are paying them to make. That is complete nonsense. All it means is that when their contract is up, Respawn can shop their games around to other publishers or make a Titanfall movie or whatever. Until then, EA is paying the piper so they call the tune. And when EA has made it perfectly clear that the deal is between them and Microsoft, I really don't care what Respawn has to say about the matter. They can blather about cloud processing or how much Microsoft loves them until they turn blue, but it will come out on Gameboy Advance if EA tells them it will.

Can we keep the discussion on the deal not the personal opinion of the game which only matters to you

Its a partner contract, EA does not have the power to tell Respawn what to do.  Instead they just have pub righs.  Its really that simple.  Respawn is free to make partnerships with any other company on any other types of deals that they want.  IF you want to go back and read the whole crap when Vince and company left Activision and their setup with EA you can.  One of the main things they asked for is to create, own and set their own course for their games.  Also EA did not PAY Respawn to make a Titan fall, they payed for exclusive rights to PUBLISH Respawn games for a certain time period.  Really, can you just go and research this stuff instead of just making guesses.  Paying to publish a company games is not PAYING FOR THE GAME and EA has no SAY ON WHAT Respawn makes.  They have no control of the IP or anything.  

I did not see anywhere in your link where EA made it clear it was Just them and MS.  It clearly says its a partnership with Respawn, MS and EA.  How can you go from that to clearly being a  agreement only between EA and MS.  It really seem you are doing selective reading and just throwing out anything that does not support your opinion.



badgenome on 22 August 2013
Machiavellian said:

Also EA did not PAY Respawn to make a Titan fall, they payed for exclusive rights to PUBLISH Respawn games for a certain time period.  Really, can you just go and research this stuff instead of just making guesses.  Paying to publish a company games is not PAYING FOR THE GAME and EA has no SAY ON WHAT Respawn makes.  They have no control of the IP or anything. 

So you don't think that EA is funding the development of Titanfall? They're just paying for the privilege of having their name on the box? Oookay...

Well, maybe you'll listen to Respawn when they tell you otherwise:

Q: Where has the finance come from to form and run Respawn Entertainment?

Jason West: It's part of the EA Partners deal, they've provided us with capital and a publishing deal and money to start hiring and get our team together.

So no EA deal = no Respawn = no Titanfall. Whatever other offers they might have gotten, EA was really the only viable alternative to Activision and so had all the leverage in this deal. So if Microsoft slapped down $50 million to kill the Playstation version, it didn't matter what Respawn thought about it. For what it's worth, I'm sure Respawn is genuinely as happy as they profess to be about being able to focus on just two three one platforms for their first game as a studio. But that has absolutely nothing to do with why they're not making Titanfall for PS4.

And once again, we are not talking about the Titanfall IP. We are talking about one specific game called "Titanfall". It is entirely possible for EA to own that game but not the IP.

Which is entirely beside the point. EA took Microsoft's money, and now Titanfall is a "Microsoft exclusive". That is a moneyhat. I think it's a bad practice for gamers. Period. End of discussion.



errorpwns on 22 August 2013

Only Sony can moneyhat. If anyone else moneyhats it is the end of the world. Or so fans would have you believe. 



Around the Network
naruball on 22 August 2013

What's with all the attacks against Sony fans? Following some folks' logic, only ms and ninty fans can criticize. When Sony fans do, it's wrong. When Ms/Ninty fans do, they're right. There're hypocrites from both sides. Let's not kid ourselves, eh?



Machiavellian on 22 August 2013
badgenome said:
Machiavellian said:

Also EA did not PAY Respawn to make a Titan fall, they payed for exclusive rights to PUBLISH Respawn games for a certain time period.  Really, can you just go and research this stuff instead of just making guesses.  Paying to publish a company games is not PAYING FOR THE GAME and EA has no SAY ON WHAT Respawn makes.  They have no control of the IP or anything. 

So you don't think that EA is funding the development of Titanfall? They're just paying for the privilege of having their name on the box? Oookay...

Well, maybe you'll listen to Respawn when they tell you otherwise:

Q: Where has the finance come from to form and run Respawn Entertainment?

Jason West: It's part of the EA Partners deal, they've provided us with capital and a publishing deal and money to start hiring and get our team together.

So no EA deal = no Respawn = no Titanfall. Whatever other offers they might have gotten, EA was really the only viable alternative to Activision and so had all the leverage in this deal. So if Microsoft slapped down $50 million to kill the Playstation version, it didn't matter what Respawn thought about it. For what it's worth, I'm sure Respawn is genuinely as happy as they profess to be about being able to focus on just two three one platforms for their first game as a studio. But that has absolutely nothing to do with why they're not making Titanfall for PS4.

And once again, we are not talking about the Titanfall IP. We are talking about one specific game called "Titanfall". It is entirely possible for EA to own that game but not the IP.

Which is entirely beside the point. EA took Microsoft's money, and now Titanfall is a "Microsoft exclusive". That is a moneyhat. I think it's a bad practice for gamers. Period. End of discussion.

The bolded part is pure opinion and speculation.  The developer told you why they went with MS.  They never had a PS4 version.  As a partnership program with EA, Respawn still takes all the risk because they have to pay EA back the money funded.  So yes, as a small independent developer they would be silly not to take money from any of the console makers to go exclusive to reduce the risk in a new IP.  Also as they stated, they have a small team and can only spread their resources so far.

Do you know what a partnership is.  Do you even know what the EA partners program is.  Let me help you out with this one.  Its a partnership for helping out independent developers with contract based publishing services.  The partner program means that  EA give the dev some cash for pub rights.  The Dev make the game and is required to pay EA back the funded money (with some sauce on it like a loan).  Here is a quote from Carmack when they used EA to publish their game

, Carmack stressed that EA Partners deal "isn't really a publishing arrangement. Instead, they really offer a menu of services—Valve takes one set of things, Crytek takes a different set, and we're probably taking a third set".[58]

Pretty much everything you have stated is from an opinion.  You have no clue about the arrangement between Respawn and EA and you appear to have no clue about how the EA partner program works.  Your Ideal of EA role goes along a more traditional pub but thats not how EA Partner works.  Its one of the main reason why EA was going to drop it because they do not control the company, IP or anything.  They just pub and distribute.

 

As to your last point, EA and Respawn took MS money.  I know its convenient to leave Respawn out to support your opinion but never was it said that its only EA and MS so to assume this deal is only MS and EA is pure guessing with no evidence to back it up.



Moren on 22 August 2013
naruball said:
What's with all the attacks against Sony fans? Following some folks' logic, only ms and ninty fans can criticize. When Sony fans do, it's wrong. When Ms/Ninty fans do, they're right. There're hypocrites from both sides. Let's not kid ourselves, eh?

Nah. It's more noticeable on certain sides than others.



naruball on 22 August 2013
morenoingrato said:
naruball said:
What's with all the attacks against Sony fans? Following some folks' logic, only ms and ninty fans can criticize. When Sony fans do, it's wrong. When Ms/Ninty fans do, they're right. There're hypocrites from both sides. Let's not kid ourselves, eh?

Nah. It's more noticeable on certain sides than others.

Don't you think both sides would argue the same? Who decides who's right? Pretty sure everyone thinks they're right. 



DieAppleDie on 22 August 2013

dont know if its good or bad but its the very base of this industry