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

Machiavellian on 05 October 2017
DonFerrari said:
Machiavellian said:

Interesting you should say you never buy DLC because neither do I but if I did want to purchase DLC, I would feel cheated if a developer created content for another platform and locked it away permananty.  I also purchase all the console systems because I love gaming so I never have to wait for a game to appear on another system unless I want to.

I will give you another reason Sony is in talks for PUBG because if they thought the game was so big to get on their system they would have beat MS to the punch.  Sony is in talks because its a win for MS and they would love to market the game coming to their system to take that win away.  

As for TR, MS should always make their deals so that the developer cannot speak about another system until after the exclusive times out.  This is the one of the problems I thought MS should have realize the during that mess.  If you are going to play the game, even if you say the deal is timed, having the developer talk about another platform while you are funding and marketing the game for yours seems like bad business. Why allow free press for your competitor when you are funding the project.

As for desperation, is MS doing anything different then they have in the pass. Would MS make this deal if this was the 360 and they have an opportunity to get a 10mill PC seller onto their platform.  What makes this deal a desperation for MS.  I have not seen any real reason from you why this isn't a deal that doesn't get done like any other deal for a successful product.  It's desperation for MS but for Sony its because they have good relationship with devs.  I am sure you are not seeing the irony in those statements.

I would fell cheated if the dlc was needed to enjoy the game be it available in my console or not. I fell much more cheated if a game that I always got on my console was highjacked for one year.

Nope I don't see irony. MS doing it on x360 wouldn't look desperate. They doing on x1 looks like even more after it was revealed bluepoint is looking to make it on ps4.

How would you ever know if the DLC would provide a better experience for the game if you have no opportunity to enjoy it.  You can only guess or just say to yourself "I do not care" but whether you cared or not you have no choice but to take it.  You paid your money for the game and the developer locked you out of content.  So for you, since you do not purchase DLC this is no problem but for many that do purchase DLC, this is a huge problem.  As I have stated for me I do not care as well so when i purchased Destiny for the Xbox, I knew those DLC would not be coming to the Xbox anytime soon but I cared little.

As for a game that will not come to your system for a year, well its the business.  You feel cheated as a PS only gamer but then how do you think the Xbox gamers feel.  If MS was the only company doing this you could well ding them for it but since they all do it, its just part of the industry.  I am sure when you play the 3rd party timed or full exclusives on the PS, you do not care at all if those games ever see the light of day on the X1.  If anything you are comfortable that Sony gets those exclusive so you do not have to think about any other system but the PS.

As for MS being desparate, well I guess as with anything people can believe whatever they want but you still have not provided any proof why this is desperate since this is standard MO from MS.  Desparation would be to do something you do not do to change an outcome of an event.  Also you continue to just totally ignore that MS has a publishing agreement with blue.  As I mentioned as a business, why would you let your competitor upstage a move you made for a popular product to come to your system and not make a counter move.  Its like you believe MS and Sony is playing the same game as gamers interest.  Their are moves and counter moves and whether MS was in first or last in installbase they would still make the same moves.



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 05 October 2017
ThisGuyFooks said:
Machiavellian said:

One thing you have to give Sony credit for, when they pay for exclusives, they make sure it never sees the light of day on another console.  MS only seems to be interested in timed exclusives.

That's because Sony has more money than Microsoft so they can lock up the games permanently.

Market leadership and being a japanese company who created a large foothold in Japan and the world created a major advantage.microsoft despite their lack of creativity is deficient in these things as well. They've never been a market leader. Video games are moreso the bread and butter for Sony than it is for Microsoft.



DonFerrari on 05 October 2017
Machiavellian said:
DonFerrari said:

I would fell cheated if the dlc was needed to enjoy the game be it available in my console or not. I fell much more cheated if a game that I always got on my console was highjacked for one year.

Nope I don't see irony. MS doing it on x360 wouldn't look desperate. They doing on x1 looks like even more after it was revealed bluepoint is looking to make it on ps4.

How would you ever know if the DLC would provide a better experience for the game if you have no opportunity to enjoy it.  You can only guess or just say to yourself "I do not care" but whether you cared or not you have no choice but to take it.  You paid your money for the game and the developer locked you out of content.  So for you, since you do not purchase DLC this is no problem but for many that do purchase DLC, this is a huge problem.  As I have stated for me I do not care as well so when i purchased Destiny for the Xbox, I knew those DLC would not be coming to the Xbox anytime soon but I cared little.

As for a game that will not come to your system for a year, well its the business.  You feel cheated as a PS only gamer but then how do you think the Xbox gamers feel.  If MS was the only company doing this you could well ding them for it but since they all do it, its just part of the industry.  I am sure when you play the 3rd party timed or full exclusives on the PS, you do not care at all if those games ever see the light of day on the X1.  If anything you are comfortable that Sony gets those exclusive so you do not have to think about any other system but the PS.

As for MS being desparate, well I guess as with anything people can believe whatever they want but you still have not provided any proof why this is desperate since this is standard MO from MS.  Desparation would be to do something you do not do to change an outcome of an event.  Also you continue to just totally ignore that MS has a publishing agreement with blue.  As I mentioned as a business, why would you let your competitor upstage a move you made for a popular product to come to your system and not make a counter move.  Its like you believe MS and Sony is playing the same game as gamers interest.  Their are moves and counter moves and whether MS was in first or last in installbase they would still make the same moves.

How would I know? Maybe internet? And by playing the game you'll also know if it fells missing. You paying for the base game not for the missing dlc.

 

I don't care much. But you make it sound like missing skin is more relevant than full game 1 year lock. Both are business. I preffer 1st party anyway.

 

Ok as you said you can consider it not desperation if you want. But you also already accepted that they manage this very bad.



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."

Machiavellian on 05 October 2017
DonFerrari said:

How would I know? Maybe internet? And by playing the game you'll also know if it fells missing. You paying for the base game not for the missing dlc.

I believe this is something that is different for each gamer.  I never feel compelled to purchase DLC so I never do but I do know people that purchase everything.

 

I don't care much. But you make it sound like missing skin is more relevant than full game 1 year lock. Both are business. I preffer 1st party anyway.

No, what I am saying is that it could be important to someone else.  It would be arogant of me to expect what is important to me to be the baseline for everyone else.  I do have friends who were upset about the DLC stuff for Destiny.  I on the other hand did not care.

 

Ok as you said you can consider it not desperation if you want. But you also already accepted that they manage this very bad.

I only acknowledge that they should always strive to not let any talks of another system until after their agreement is up. I just consider it smart business.  If MS did not have that clause in their agreement like they did not have it during the Tomb Raider agreement, it definitely should be their after.  


DonFerrari on 05 October 2017
Machiavellian said:
DonFerrari said:

How would I know? Maybe internet? And by playing the game you'll also know if it fells missing. You paying for the base game not for the missing dlc.

I believe this is something that is different for each gamer.  I never feel compelled to purchase DLC so I never do but I do know people that purchase everything.

 

I don't care much. But you make it sound like missing skin is more relevant than full game 1 year lock. Both are business. I preffer 1st party anyway.

No, what I am saying is that it could be important to someone else.  It would be arogant of me to expect what is important to me to be the baseline for everyone else.  I do have friends who were upset about the DLC stuff for Destiny.  I on the other hand did not care.

 

Ok as you said you can consider it not desperation if you want. But you also already accepted that they manage this very bad.

I only acknowledge that they should always strive to not let any talks of another system until after their agreement is up. I just consider it smart business.  If MS did not have that clause in their agreement like they did not have it during the Tomb Raider agreement, it definitely should be their after.  

Yes there are people that buy. The deals are clear before launch so he can decide to buy or not the version that would miss the dlc.

The fact that it is more important to someone doesn't make the missing skin more relevant than one year game lock.

And in case of tr they were even more guilty because of the piss announcement trying to pass as permanent exclusivity while Sony make it clear that it would come first to their console.



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."

Around the Network
Machiavellian on 08 October 2017
DonFerrari said:
Machiavellian said:

Yes there are people that buy. The deals are clear before launch so he can decide to buy or not the version that would miss the dlc.

The fact that it is more important to someone doesn't make the missing skin more relevant than one year game lock.

And in case of tr they were even more guilty because of the piss announcement trying to pass as permanent exclusivity while Sony make it clear that it would come first to their console.

You only make a decision to buy or not buy if you have both systems.  If you only have one you just miss out.  Also you are just saying missing skin but in destiny you missed out on not just skin.  You miss content which included maps, skins, strikes etc.  Its just not one piece of content is quite a bit.

The only thing wrong with the TR announcement was that MS should have shut down all talks about any other system until after their agreement.  I am only thinking of this for the business case.  MS can say the agreement is timed which is fine, but allowing talk about another system during that time frame defeats having a timed window.



darkenergy on 09 October 2017
ThisGuyFooks said:
darkenergy said:

+1

This thread just shows that there are people who simply doesn't like Xbox and it is showing it. Then there are comments like this:

^^ Now this is a comment I would like to see more unfortunately that isn't entirely possible.

Your comment immediately gets thrown out the window when you mention Phantom Dust flopping, that game is FREE TO PLAY and player count has reach over a million some time ago lol.

I think it gives more validity to the "Microsoft is in desperate need of" point of mine, that the only Xbox One semi-hit of the year is a Free to Play game tho

Actually no it doesn't, it's more people trying to desperately downplay Microsoft.

DonFerrari said:
ThisGuyFooks said:

Take it however you want, but Xbox is in DESPERATE need of a game hit.

This year has been rock bottom for Xbox when it comes to sales, Hardware and Software sales.

The Xbox One is Down YoY, it is being outselled by the 3DS in the US, every single exclusive that has released this year has flopped.

Halo Wars 2 performed horrible. Voodoo Vince and Phantom Dust too.

Forza 7, released today, is currently at No. 48 in the Amazon Top 100. Again, released TODAY.

Cuphead is at 31.

Now you tell me. Is Microsoft desperate for a hit or not? 

Forza 7 sales represent unprecedent antecipation for X1X release.

darkenergy said:

+1

This thread just shows that there are people who simply doesn't like Xbox and it is showing it. Then there are comments like this:

^^ Now this is a comment I would like to see more unfortunately that isn't entirely possible.

Your comment immediately gets thrown out the window when you mention Phantom Dust flopping, that game is FREE TO PLAY and player count has reach over a million some time ago lol.

And your alignment shows as well... and when did free to play reaching 1M on 30M userbase meant success?

Last I heard Shu Yoshida was sad that the indie games on PS4 PSN+ had less than 50% download ratio.

1 million for a cult classic game from the Xbox era isn't a sucess? Whatever you say.

ThisGuyFooks said:
Machiavellian said:

One thing you have to give Sony credit for, when they pay for exclusives, they make sure it never sees the light of day on another console.  MS only seems to be interested in timed exclusives.

That's because Sony has more money than Microsoft so they can lock up the games permanently.

Last I check Microsoft is one of the wealthiest companies worldwide.



Proud to be a Californian.

Porcupine_I on 09 October 2017
darkenergy said:

ThisGuyFooks said:

That's because Sony has more money than Microsoft so they can lock up the games permanently.

Last I check Microsoft is one of the wealthiest companies worldwide.

Sure, but doesn't mean the XBOX division can get as much money as they want. Microsoft has done that in the past, but I believe they are at a point where XBOX have to prove that they can be profitable on their own to stay relevant in the Microsoft family. I actually think they hang on a pretty thin thread right now. Everything seems moving towards making the XBOX brand nothing more than a service included into their Windows business.



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

RJ_Sizzle on 09 October 2017
Porcupine_I said:
darkenergy said:

Last I check Microsoft is one of the wealthiest companies worldwide.

Sure, but doesn't mean the XBOX division can get as much money as they want. Microsoft has done that in the past, but I believe they are at a point where XBOX have to prove that they can be profitable on their own to stay relevant in the Microsoft family. I actually think they hang on a pretty thin thread right now. Everything seems moving towards making the XBOX brand nothing more than a service included into their Windows business.

There could be something to that. Shannon Loftis said that they're pursuing games that have a social aspect to them, as opposed to dumping millions into new AAA IPs. Not saying they won't keep making that kind of game, but that's why it's really important for MS to have the game to themselves right now. Maybe Xbox will evolve into a living room Steam-type platform.



EthanWilliam on 09 October 2017

Thank you for sharing