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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Microsoft Is Trying to Keep PUBG Off PS4 for Longer

The Fury said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

The program is much further along on Xbone than PS4. That's probably why PUBG is coming to Xbox timed exclusive in the first place.

Don't get me wrong, I can understand why ($$$$ and more $) but prefer a finished product which is updated, not an unfinished product which is finished later.

If I'm interested in a game, I don't mind. It's usually cheaper to buy in during the early access phase, and I can play it while they get it ready for release.

I haven't seen one yet that didn't offer a free trial before you buy.



Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
couchmonkey said:

i don't think you know what decimating means...plus, PS4 is doing great.

Buuuut, I'd be the first to argue Sony shoukd be very, very afraid of Switch. PS5 could be in trouble.

@OT, MS mocking tined exclusives and tgen trying to add more is very funny, but it's been like 9 montgs sice Spencer made tge comments.  what this really receals is Spencer is probabky a very frustrated guy right now since he kniws timed exclusives are a sad tactic but Xbone has almost nothing else going for it.

Yes I do. Is basically to kill people to a point only 10% of the original numbers remain.

So Sony is so afraid that Switch will kill the not announced PS5 that they are moneyhatting a game for PS4?

flashfire926 said:

Xone and PC have a non existent MH fanbase compared to PS4. Those versions being there or not doesn't affect the PS4 version one bit. No, obviously if they paid for it than it shouldn't be on switch, so Nintendo doesn't take all the benefits. I get that. I'm just trying to get across the point that Sony DID pay for it. 

So considering both have a non-existent MH fanbase then Sony wouldn't have to pay much for it to be full exclusive, which would give it much more spotlight. Ok you don't make sense...

Even more when you say Capcom doesn't have money to develop the game, but that Sony only paid for marketing and keep Nintendo out.

You try to make an inexistent point fending it precisely in a way that you try to make sense.

And sorry to put it this way... but when you pay to help development you aren't paying to keep it out of other platforms (like ROTR) but for it to exist in the first place (SF V).

And on your point that 3 years ago WiiU was ahead of PS4, do you really think MHW would be playable on WiiU? And you also ignore the point that possibly Capcom is looking at a WW scenario not only Japan. Also on the localizing there have been a plethora of companies that have limited localizing and inconsistent policies.

At this point I'm just arguing with a brick wall of ps loyalists, so I might as well just not continue this argument. Thank you and have a good day.

edit: the guy who left the site left because of all this, and I don't blame him.



Bet with Intrinsic:

The Switch will outsell 3DS (based on VGchartz numbers), according to me, while Intrinsic thinks the opposite will hold true. One month avatar control for the loser's avatar.

like 90% of PUBG players play it on PC, a PS4 release won't change it. Look at Overwatch, the console versions are somewhat ghost towns, all the majority bulk of OW players are on PC, mainly because the esport scene is only available on PC.



LOL Overwatch is extremely popular in consoles. Nothing remotely close to "ghost towns".



LudicrousSpeed said:
LOL Overwatch is extremely popular in consoles. Nothing remotely close to "ghost towns".

I was gonna say! I've been playing Overwatch on PS4 for almost half a year and I'm always finding games.



Around the Network
RJ_Sizzle said:
flashfire926 said:

Maybe I am making assumptions. if so, then I'm sorry. I'm just a bit miffed about how Microsoft gets shitted on when they do this, while nobody bats an eye Sony for doing very similar things.

Why get mad on a company's behalf? People tend to get angry when Microsoft does it because of their low market position. People buy a PS4 expecting to get these games due to the huge userbase. Considering that Xbox games aren't even exclusives, these keepaway moves with assumed multis tend to look more spiteful than anything else. And in the case of games like Tomb Raider, they don't seem to be gaining them mindshare. MS really don't help themselves much when they come off as "woe is me" like they're not a company with a half a trillion dollar market cap when they get blowback.

So when Sony gets all these 3rd party exclusives, how do you think they occur.  Do you believe that MS made no effort to get these games on their system or do you believe these business out of the goodness of their heart just decide to only develop on the PS system ignoring revenue on other systems.  When MS pay a studio to make a game for them, its MS nothing having a strong First Party system, when Sony does it, its smart business.  The real key is that there is a lot of hypocritical statement from gamers because they do not even see they have fallen into Fandom.  They pick a side and they ignore the practices of that side and see a corporation as benevolent.

This is the industry and maybe Phil should not said he doesn’t favor doing what he has to do in the industry because that is how the game is played.  We can find many statements from corporate execs where they probably wish they just kept their mouth shut because gamers latch onto those statements, twist them to their own purpose or just totally misrepresent what is stated.  Right now in this thread you have a bunch of people calling Phil a liar because he said he doesn’t favor doing these types of moves as if he stated he doesn’t do them.  Not liking something but having to do it anyway because that is how the game is played is totally different.



Machiavellian said:
RJ_Sizzle said:

Why get mad on a company's behalf? People tend to get angry when Microsoft does it because of their low market position. People buy a PS4 expecting to get these games due to the huge userbase. Considering that Xbox games aren't even exclusives, these keepaway moves with assumed multis tend to look more spiteful than anything else. And in the case of games like Tomb Raider, they don't seem to be gaining them mindshare. MS really don't help themselves much when they come off as "woe is me" like they're not a company with a half a trillion dollar market cap when they get blowback.

So when Sony gets all these 3rd party exclusives, how do you think they occur.  Do you believe that MS made no effort to get these games on their system or do you believe these business out of the goodness of their heart just decide to only develop on the PS system ignoring revenue on other systems.  When MS pay a studio to make a game for them, its MS nothing having a strong First Party system, when Sony does it, its smart business.  The real key is that there is a lot of hypocritical statement from gamers because they do not even see they have fallen into Fandom.  They pick a side and they ignore the practices of that side and see a corporation as benevolent.

Seriously? Up until the Switch popped up, PS4 was the place to put your AAA games in Japan, often with a PC port. It's less of a Famicom vs Master System situation, where Nintendo was locking games up in their corner, and more of a PS1 vs Saturn situation, where one system fell off fairly quick and the other garnered the userbase. You're tilting at windmills here.

Sony has deals out there like this one. What makes this case annoying to people is:
1. MS always goes after high profile titles in this manner. The most high profile case I can think of this gen for Sony is Destiny DLC.
2. The Xbox figurehead talks like they are above this sort of thing for good PR when they're obviously not.
3. The money devoted to this temporary measure could have been allocated to something more permanent, like a new game.

I don't have a dog in this race, but this thread just keeps going and the responses just keep getting sadder. This is nothing new; if "the gaming community" wants to castigate the MS for anything right now, it sounds like their adding of lootboxes to Forza 7 would be a better place to start.



MS is just playing Sonys textbook



flashfire926 said:
DonFerrari said:

Yes I do. Is basically to kill people to a point only 10% of the original numbers remain.

So Sony is so afraid that Switch will kill the not announced PS5 that they are moneyhatting a game for PS4?

So considering both have a non-existent MH fanbase then Sony wouldn't have to pay much for it to be full exclusive, which would give it much more spotlight. Ok you don't make sense...

Even more when you say Capcom doesn't have money to develop the game, but that Sony only paid for marketing and keep Nintendo out.

You try to make an inexistent point fending it precisely in a way that you try to make sense.

And sorry to put it this way... but when you pay to help development you aren't paying to keep it out of other platforms (like ROTR) but for it to exist in the first place (SF V).

And on your point that 3 years ago WiiU was ahead of PS4, do you really think MHW would be playable on WiiU? And you also ignore the point that possibly Capcom is looking at a WW scenario not only Japan. Also on the localizing there have been a plethora of companies that have limited localizing and inconsistent policies.

At this point I'm just arguing with a brick wall of ps loyalists, so I might as well just not continue this argument. Thank you and have a good day.

edit: the guy who left the site left because of all this, and I don't blame him.

Yes we Sony loyalist are incapable to accept rumor and wishes as hard cold evidence.

Machiavellian said:
RJ_Sizzle said:

Why get mad on a company's behalf? People tend to get angry when Microsoft does it because of their low market position. People buy a PS4 expecting to get these games due to the huge userbase. Considering that Xbox games aren't even exclusives, these keepaway moves with assumed multis tend to look more spiteful than anything else. And in the case of games like Tomb Raider, they don't seem to be gaining them mindshare. MS really don't help themselves much when they come off as "woe is me" like they're not a company with a half a trillion dollar market cap when they get blowback.

So when Sony gets all these 3rd party exclusives, how do you think they occur.  Do you believe that MS made no effort to get these games on their system or do you believe these business out of the goodness of their heart just decide to only develop on the PS system ignoring revenue on other systems.  When MS pay a studio to make a game for them, its MS nothing having a strong First Party system, when Sony does it, its smart business.  The real key is that there is a lot of hypocritical statement from gamers because they do not even see they have fallen into Fandom.  They pick a side and they ignore the practices of that side and see a corporation as benevolent.

This is the industry and maybe Phil should not said he doesn’t favor doing what he has to do in the industry because that is how the game is played.  We can find many statements from corporate execs where they probably wish they just kept their mouth shut because gamers latch onto those statements, twist them to their own purpose or just totally misrepresent what is stated.  Right now in this thread you have a bunch of people calling Phil a liar because he said he doesn’t favor doing these types of moves as if he stated he doesn’t do them.  Not liking something but having to do it anyway because that is how the game is played is totally different.

The point of this thread isn't calling Phil a liar, but a hipocrite.

He said they are investing in 1st party, talked against exclusivity deals and that it's bad to put up games on stage that will take a long time to release... and he have done all 3 very short after he said those. Nothing about MS doing their best to secure content they think will drive sales for them.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

zero129 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Microsoft had third party carrying them. Their launch was pretty much even with Sony, but Sonys first and third party pulled away with the exclusive count as the years go by. At this point they arent even in the same league. Nintendo has even beaten Microsoft for most exclusives within the span of two years. Nintendo definitely beat both of them for best first year in general with exclusives.

No Sony blow MS out of the water right out of the gate way before they got more better exclusives. What AAA exclusives did the PS4 have in its first 3 months?.

They launched with first party with killzone.