kitler53 said:
LudicrousSpeed said:
...
Well just to correct you, AFAIK the ACIV missions aren't ever going to be available on other platforms, so there's a pretty big difference right there. Another good example of DLC like that is the PS3 Medal of Honor DLC stuff, it never came to other consoles.
To correct you again, the timed exclusive DLC inside of the Destiny DLC would exist whether MicroSony wrote checks or not. I can easily tell you I had no problem with Ass Creed but do with Destiny. In fact I think the post you quoted even says as such. Help me understand why you are confused here.
As for the bold, what exactly am I "making up in my head"? And where did I ever say Xbone owners are entitled to anything, let alone "Sony commissioned content", whatever the heck that is LOL. I mean.. is there a point anywhere in that paragraph? So you're telling me Sony paid Activision a chunk of money for a window of exclusive access to part of a DLC pack that both consoles will get. Well gee golly mister thanks for explainin' business! All this time I figured Activision just likes the color of the PS4 more. The content is going to the other platforms, at a later date. Which is what makes the "Sony commissioned content" all the more hilarious.
Thanks, friend, but I understand Sony paid for first access. I don't even care that side A gets first access to this or that side B gets first access to that. My problem is its another lower level of exclusive content shenanigans that we haven't seen yet and I hope it doesn't spread to other games. But hey, I also like gaming on Xbox platforms as well as my Sony ones. That must mean I was on here making a thousand threads gloating about CoD (which I played on PS3) and Fallout (PC) and Skyrim (PS3) and whatever else you fools are generalizing about LOL. Entertaining thread.
|
..but you don't know that to be true. to be fair, i don't know it to be untrue but that's the problem of video games having not even the slightest definition for "complete". complete is whatever ships or at leasts that's the closest definition anyone could make.
what get's me is how the slightest little variations on the idea of "platform exclusivity" get such different responses. like really, how can you not be upset about the assissin's creed senario?! are you really telling me that you'd feel better about the entire destiny situation if the content just never came to xbox? how silly of a perspective is that?! how silly is it that you'd feel better about missing a part of the game entirely than getting the entire experience eventually.
i'm not saying platform exclusive content isn't dumb,.. it's dumb. i wish this trend never started. ...but there is nothing about the destiny situation that is any more inferiating than the other dozen or so games with platform exclusive content launching in the next 12 months.
|
No, we can pretty much guarantee that to be true. There is no logical reason anyone could come up with to believe that Activision was not going to put out DLC for Destiny or that now they suddenly decided due to this Sony partnership that there should be MORE multiplatform DLC. The Ass Creed stuff is Sony exclusive so its a whole different ball game. Would that exist without Sony monies? Who knows. Either way, Sony paid for it, so if I wanted the game I would buy it on their console and get it or another and deal. Or not at all. I chose not at all, but not for DLC reasons.
Another example of my point of view is Bad Company 2. It locked content on the disc for the online pass owners. I sold it soon after release because I got tired of what they had unlocked. There was a Phantasy Star Online game on PS2 that did the same thing. No thanks. If I pay for content, I want the content. I don't want it locked away for whatever reason. This reason being because Sony wrote a check.
