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

Forums - Gaming - Why is moneyhatting frowned upon?

curl-6 on 13 August 2014
ICStats said:

No, people will be shamed by this.  

Most game devs aren't fanboys, they won't lose any sleep over whether the game they're making is for MS or Sony.



Around the Network
binary solo on 13 August 2014
Blob said:
Azerth said:
its only frowned upon if its Microsoft that did the moneyhatting


Sometimes it does feel this way. Microsoft made a power move to differentiate their console, its not sony only gamers god given right to have every game just because their console is selling the most.

Playing the innocent victim card eh?

Seems that, with a great deal less justification, there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth from MS fans (and PS fans) when Bayo 2 was announced as Wii U exclusive. So it's simply untrue that people only complain when its MS. It's just that in the last 3 generations MS has done it far more than Nintendo (who didn't need to with Wii) and Sony (who couldn't afford to with PS3). So when you're the bigger moneyhatter, at any given time, then you're going to attract more negative attention.

Also, it appears to me that there are still many bitter and twisted people who would see Sony die a gruesome and painful death for the way it moneyhatted Sega into oblivion (hardware-wise). So it's a bit precious of people to say MS is the victim of irrational hate for moneyhatting when in fact Sony has been and will always be the object of the most intense hate for its historical moneyhatting ways.

Not that Sony has truly reformed, they just don't have the money to do it and probably won't for many years to come. But if they ever amass a several billion dollar war chest I'm confident they will start buying exclusives once again.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

Teeqoz on 13 August 2014
IamAwsome said:

They opened a dozen new studios over the years. They're working on something. Microsoft also has new stuff like Scalebound, Sunset Overdrive, and Project Spark. There isn't a shortage of new projects at Microsoft Studios. 

The Wii U's first party games aren't enough to power it past the PS4. Microsoft knows you need more than first party games to sell, and this is why they moneyhat. 


Sunset Overdrive isn't developed by a MS studio, and neither is Scalebound, and neither is Project Spark. Tgey are 3rd party exclusives.



Cobretti2 on 13 August 2014

money hating and parity clause are both equal. So they are either bad or good depending on your view.



 

 

weaveworld on 13 August 2014

The obvious reason for all of you to frown upon moneyhatting like used on TR is that us gamers are the ones that lose.
This time it's Sony's gamers, next time it will be MS or Nintendo.

WE. ALL. LOSE.



Around the Network
DeduS on 13 August 2014

Why is moneyhatting frowned upon? Because it's basically spending money to take content away from gamers.

A lot of people seem to be confused about the differences between moneyhatting and funding a game.

Bayonetta 2 or Sunset Overdrive = funding = creating games that wouldn't have existed otherwise = good

Tomb Raider or additional WD/Destiny content = moneyhatting = taking content away from gamers = bad

The money spent on moneyhatting could actually be used to create a new IP or revive an old one, instead it's wasted on preventing gamers from accessing certain content/games.

 

Let's take this whole TR-situation as an example:

Option 1: MS pays for TR exclusivity => XBox gamers get to enjoy TR, nobody else gains anything

Option 2: MS takes TR-exclusivity-money and spends it on funding a new game => everybody gets to enjoy TR, XBox gamers get an additional game

Unless you get some kind of weird enjoyment from withholding games from other people, I don't get how Option 1 would be in any way preferable.

 



 

LTric1979 on 13 August 2014
IamAwsome said:
AnthonyW86 said:

Could someone give me an example of Nintendo or Sony moneyhatting an established multi platform franchise to become exclusive? I really can't think of any.

Edit: I just thought of RE4 but that more like an exclusive switching systems.

Nintendo moneyhatting the 3 Sonic games for Wii U and Monster Hunter 4. 



they piss me, especially monster hunter 4 part, i was expecting to play next MH on better resolution than PSP (Vita that's it) and Nintendo killed my wish. And 3DS' 240p is definitely a step down from PSP 272p



IamAwsome on 13 August 2014
Aerys said:

Because :

 

 

 

and

So MS didn't invest in over a dozen studios last gen?



IamAwsome on 13 August 2014
Teeqoz said:
IamAwsome said:

They opened a dozen new studios over the years. They're working on something. Microsoft also has new stuff like Scalebound, Sunset Overdrive, and Project Spark. There isn't a shortage of new projects at Microsoft Studios. 

The Wii U's first party games aren't enough to power it past the PS4. Microsoft knows you need more than first party games to sell, and this is why they moneyhat. 


Sunset Overdrive isn't developed by a MS studio, and neither is Scalebound, and neither is Project Spark. Tgey are 3rd party exclusives.

And I'm guessing the new studios don't exist?



Lafiel on 13 August 2014
IamAwsome said:

Why on earth is moneyhatting frowned upon? Google "moneyhatting dirty" and you will see what I mean, so what's wrong with it? Is it a BAD thing to secure games for your console, and get sales? Now we all know about Microsoft's parity clause. THAT is truly dirty (and probably the reason Sony doesn't moneyhat often). I understand it can be an annoyance, but all the hate surrounding it isn't necessary. 

If your favorite console was the victim of an opponent's moneyhatting, suck it up. It's called healthy competiton. 

I think it can be very good if a project is picked up early by one of the console manufacturers (especially if it would be dropped otherwise due to be not being mainstream enough), but what just leaves a bad taste in my mouth is when a game is announced for many platforms and receives a lot of attention and then a first party shows up with a big money bag and picks it up.