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

Forums - Gaming - Microsoft Removes Japanese Batman: Arkham Knight’s Page/The Crew JP Beta Is PS4 Exclusive

starcraft on 10 September 2014
CGI-Quality said:
starcraft said:
I wonder if this will be a 700 post epic with people complaining about moneyhatting ala the Tomb Raider thread?



Doubt it.

What suggests a Sony moneyhat? 

The abrupt transfer to exclusivity? In exactly the same vein as the Tomb Raider arrangement?



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

Around the Network
WagnerPaiva on 10 September 2014
celador said:
Leaving literally dozens of people very disappointed

I was going to do a sarcastic comment, but you satisfied me with this one. thanks and well done. =D



My grammar errors are justified by the fact that I am a brazilian living in Brazil. I am also very stupid.

WagnerPaiva on 10 September 2014
Zanten said:

Man, I can just IMAGINE the immense sum of money that was required to secure that exclusivity from the vibrant Xbox One Japanese install base.

"So, guys, we wanted to talk to you about maybe getting some timed exclusivity in Japan for Arkham Knight, we at Sony would really value the opportunity, and are willing to negotiate a generous-"
"We will do it for fifty bucks."
"...what, really?"
"No, wait!" >.> <.< -A brief huddle, with whispered voices, before one of them pokes his head out from the pile- "...seventy-five bucks."
"Um, okay, I-"
-pointing at something in the Sony representative's hand- "Is that a biscotti?"
"What?" o.o "Oh! Yeah, I didn't have time to grab lunch, so..."
"Throw in the biscotti and we'll make it permanent."
"I... well, it was the last one they had..."
"Throw in half of the biscotti and we'll make it permanent."
"...I will let you smell the biscotti." >.>
<.< "...deal."

In all seriousness though, it does suck when this kind of thing happens, and I have no doubt that people WILL complain about not being able to play Arkham Knight on their platform of choice. ...but since they're all Japanese, and there's likely only a small convention hall full of them, no, we're probably not going to be having the Internet explode over it.

Awesome post.



My grammar errors are justified by the fact that I am a brazilian living in Brazil. I am also very stupid.

starcraft on 10 September 2014
CGI-Quality said:
starcraft said:

The abrupt transfer to exclusivity? In exactly the same vein as the Tomb Raider arrangement?

Definitely not apples-to-apples. The X1 is dead on arrival in Japan, whereas in Tomb Raider's case, it was a direct result of something to put against one of Sony's biggest IPs.

I'll be plainer.

In both cases some sort of incentive will have changed hands. In neither case do we have complete confirmation of what that incentive entails.

One will have required a greater incentivisation than the other.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

ICStats on 10 September 2014

Publishing titles costs money. At a guess, these titles were pulled because XB1 hasn't posted enough sales in Japan to warrant the publishing costs.



My 8th gen collection

Around the Network
starcraft on 10 September 2014
CGI-Quality said:
starcraft said:

I'll be plainer.

In both cases some sort of incentive will have changed hands. In neither case do we have complete confirmation of what that incentive entails.

One will have required a greater incentivisation than the other.

Of course there was some trade of words/actions, but nothing suggests a moneyhat.

I suspect we're applying different definitions. A money hat, in my view, is any financial incentive (it need not be a direct payment) to assist in bringing about exclusivity. Examples include advertising deals, publishing deals, royalty payment discounts, extensive technical support and/or direct payments.

Some of the above have occured in both instances.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

starcraft on 10 September 2014
CGI-Quality said:
starcraft said:

I suspect we're applying different definitions. A money hat, in my view, is any financial incentive (it need not be a direct payment) to assist in bringing about exclusivity. Examples include advertising deals, publishing deals, royalty payment discounts, extensive technical support and/or direct payments.

Some of the above have occured in both instances.

Nah, we're on the same page. I'm just not going to submit to the idea of a moneyhat just because a competing company did it (under totally different circumstances). 

Ok now I am confused. Are you saying that neither this, or Tomb Raider, can be described as a money hat, as we have no conclusive evidence of what incentives were offered in either case?



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

starcraft on 10 September 2014
CGI-Quality said:
starcraft said:

Ok now I am confused. Are you saying that neither this, or Tomb Raider, can be described as a money hat, as we have no conclusive evidence of what incentives were offered in either case?

Hmmm...did you not read the link? Here's another. I'm not sure what else one can make of: "we have a deal", "it has a duration", "we needed something to compete with Uncharted". With the PS4 being the global market leader, what incentive would Microsoft have for Square, outside of money? That's where the suggestion comes from. 

In the case of these games in Japan, there's nothing that indicates the same.

I did read the link, and had read it before. It does not say what you want it to say.

What we do have is similarities in the rapid post-show removal of marketing materials from a rival's website. As you agreed previously, clearly a deal of some sort has been made in both cases. All that will vary is the degree of incentive involved. The amounts differ, the principles are identical. As many point out above, few Xbox One owners will be affected. But affected they will be.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

starcraft on 10 September 2014
CGI-Quality said:
starcraft said:

I did read the link, and had read it before. It does not say what you want it to say.

What we do have is similarities in the rapid post-show removal of marketing materials from a rival's website. As you agreed previously, clearly a deal of some sort has been made in both cases. All that will vary is the degree of incentive involved. The amounts differ, the principles are identical. As many point out above, few Xbox One owners will be affected. But affected they will be.

What exactly do I want it to say? I provided solid links to the Microsoft deal (even editing it with actual quotes). All I've asked is for proof of a moneyhat, as you suggested. You've provided nothing irrefutable, hence my continued inquisitions/posts. 

Seems to me that only one of us wants things to mesh with our beliefs, as I've made no absolute suggestions with nothing to support them.

There is no confirmation of a money hat in the link you provided. There is no confirmation of a money hat in this instance either.

However, we previously agreed (I thought) that there was a deal made in both instances. All we seem to disagree on is whether a deal for exclusivity is interchangable with the term 'moneyhat.' A pretty superfluous distinction.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

ICStats on 10 September 2014
starcraft said:

The abrupt transfer to exclusivity? In exactly the same vein as the Tomb Raider arrangement?

It's right after the XB1 launched there.

Do you a) see this as Sony abruptly getting out their chequebook because they fear the XB1 in Japan, or b) see this as developers abruptly realizing there is no XB1 market in Japan?



My 8th gen collection