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

Forums - Microsoft - Phil Spencer criticizes buying exclusive content/DLC

Whole lot of crazy going on in this thread...

On the one hand it is funny to see the head of the Xbox division, the division that famously started this paid DLC exclusivity deal thing last gen, talk about it as though it is this horrible thing. That said, we do know that MS has done a lot less exclusivity in this gen.

Now a lot of people in here are assuming it is a funding thing. What if it actually is a Phil thing? Guy could just be saying no to doing the exclusive DLCs/missions/packs at this point because he genuinely believes what he is saying. Could be funding, could be Phil, could be an outbidding thing. We aren't in the room, we don't know. What we do know is that coincidentally (or not?) the company doing the big 3rd party DLC exclusives has led in the US last gen and thusfar this gen.



Around the Network
Neodegenerate said:
Whole lot of crazy going on in this thread...

On the one hand it is funny to see the head of the Xbox division, the division that famously started this paid DLC exclusivity deal thing last gen, talk about it as though it is this horrible thing. That said, we do know that MS has done a lot less exclusivity in this gen.

Now a lot of people in here are assuming it is a funding thing. What if it actually is a Phil thing? Guy could just be saying no to doing the exclusive DLCs/missions/packs at this point because he genuinely believes what he is saying. Could be funding, could be Phil, could be an outbidding thing. We aren't in the room, we don't know. What we do know is that coincidentally (or not?) the company doing the big 3rd party DLC exclusives has led in the US last gen and thusfar this gen.

I'd say what was far more important for Microsoft last gen was launching a year earlier at a lower price. Not sure that exclusive DLC can win generations as you might be suggesting.



Chazore said:
Ganoncrotch said:

I would think the comment was just as daft if Kaz said it or anyone else on the Sony side of things given that we've had SFV being PC/PS4 and a bunch of other games either kept on the PS4 for longer than made sense or with dlc only on the Sony platform, like I said my issue isn't with the practice here, it is the fact that if Phil and his department didn't like the practice, they should really stop doing it at least before making the tweet.

TBH I don't think this tweet is going to change what console is wrapped up under peoples Tree's for the 25th very much now anyways be it a Sony or an MS machine!

And if they stopepd doing it, what then?. Sony would still be doing it and no one would bat much as an eye.

I'm not following that last part though.

I think you're not following the whole aspect of what I'm saying Chaz mate, it could be that I'm fucking up writing it I'm pretty destroyed tired (48 hours sans sleep)

I just mean that with 2 kids fighting and one crying out to mom to stop the fighting... it's hard to sympathis with the kid who crys out that it isn't fair. Nothing about either company doing or not doing it.

Heck when Sony and MS were at each others throats for Titanfall and Street Fighter V, Nintendo stepped in and nabbed Bayonetta 1+2 for the Wii-U,  companies always going to try to secure games for their platforms, and deals to keep those games or content for them on that system as a selling point for the console.

 

But yeah my only point is that I think Phil isn't in a position where he can say that particular tactic is a bad one as of right now at least. I would also suggest give people the benefit of the doubt though as to what will happen in the future, there is a lot of "if Sony did X people would love it, or not complain" can't really know for sure unless you got a Crystal ball as an early Christmas Pressie :)

 

Again, sorry if the post doesn't make as much sense as it does in my head man, I'm running on caffine fumes here while getting the last of my work done before Xmas. Don't mean to cause annoyence as always and hope you and all others on here have a good Holiday!



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

Jazz2K said:
Pemalite said:

On a more important note... Did anyone notice that he is using an Original Xbox logo as his profile picture?
Original Xbox backwards compatability confirmed? :P


***

Exclusive DLC is crap. It only hurts the consumer and fans of the game. (I don't buy DLC unless I *really* like the game.)

Good observation... I really hope 2017 brings Original Xbox games to X1. Seeing Voodoo Vince remastered makes me believe they want those Xbox games back.

#Blinx2017



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

aLkaLiNE said:
Neodegenerate said:
Whole lot of crazy going on in this thread...

On the one hand it is funny to see the head of the Xbox division, the division that famously started this paid DLC exclusivity deal thing last gen, talk about it as though it is this horrible thing. That said, we do know that MS has done a lot less exclusivity in this gen.

Now a lot of people in here are assuming it is a funding thing. What if it actually is a Phil thing? Guy could just be saying no to doing the exclusive DLCs/missions/packs at this point because he genuinely believes what he is saying. Could be funding, could be Phil, could be an outbidding thing. We aren't in the room, we don't know. What we do know is that coincidentally (or not?) the company doing the big 3rd party DLC exclusives has led in the US last gen and thusfar this gen.

I'd say what was far more important for Microsoft last gen was launching a year earlier at a lower price. Not sure that exclusive DLC can win generations as you might be suggesting.

I am not suggesting it can win gens, I am suggesting it can win a specific territory in that gen.

Xbox launching a year early doesn't give it a 20 million console lead or whatever it had in the US.  I think having the exclusivity on big ticket FPS games like CoD did more for that than the early launch did.



Around the Network
Neodegenerate said:
aLkaLiNE said:

I'd say what was far more important for Microsoft last gen was launching a year earlier at a lower price. Not sure that exclusive DLC can win generations as you might be suggesting.

I am not suggesting it can win gens, I am suggesting it can win a specific territory in that gen.

Xbox launching a year early doesn't give it a 20 million console lead or whatever it had in the US.  I think having the exclusivity on big ticket FPS games like CoD did more for that than the early launch did.

You're putting too much stock in that over the multiple other reasons the 360 sold so well. 



Ganoncrotch said:

I think you're not following the whole aspect of what I'm saying Chaz mate, it could be that I'm fucking up writing it I'm pretty destroyed tired (48 hours sans sleep)

I just mean that with 2 kids fighting and one crying out to mom to stop the fighting... it's hard to sympathis with the kid who crys out that it isn't fair. Nothing about either company doing or not doing it.

 

 

But yeah my only point is that I think Phil isn't in a position where he can say that particular tactic is a bad one as of right now at least. I would also suggest give people the benefit of the doubt though as to what will happen in the future, there is a lot of "if Sony did X people would love it, or not complain" can't really know for sure unless you got a Crystal ball as an early Christmas Pressie :)

 

Again, sorry if the post doesn't make as much sense as it does in my head man, I'm running on caffine fumes here while getting the last of my work done before Xmas. Don't mean to cause annoyence as always and hope you and all others on here have a good Holiday!

No, I do understand, I just don't agree with your pov. The one who is pointing out that it's bad should stop yes, but most definitely should the other one stop, and that's not what's being adressed at all. "if" (because we may as well use the big ol "if") MS were to stop, do you think Sony would?, would you be on their case 24/7 till the cows come home if they carry on doing the same gig?. I know you're likely to say "yes", but I'm not really feeling it, what with your focus on Phil, the one who spoke up and not the one who stayed silent.

Grab some Z's man, you need them =P.



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.

Oh, Phil! Testify!
I've always seen him as very genuine. He must love his job, but also kind of hate it sometimes :(



AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Neodegenerate said:

I am not suggesting it can win gens, I am suggesting it can win a specific territory in that gen.

Xbox launching a year early doesn't give it a 20 million console lead or whatever it had in the US.  I think having the exclusivity on big ticket FPS games like CoD did more for that than the early launch did.

You're putting too much stock in that over the multiple other reasons the 360 sold so well. 

I never said it was the only reason it sold well.  And I don't think I am putting too much stock in it.  Think of how many people there are, especially seemingly in the US, that buy a system just to play their annual sports and FPS games.  You see the shift already in CoD numbers to the PS4 this gen over the XB1 (the decline in CoD itself is of course another discussion) and yet the install base isn't nearly as lopsided so you would think if it wasn't a big factor you wouldn't see a large discrepancy.  That alone tells me that the exclusivity can move a good amount of units for a company.



April the first gets earlier every year.