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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Project Athia is a PS5 console exclusive (Will come out on PC day 1 but on other platforms in 24 months)

Tagged games:

 

Which platform will you be getting Project Athia on?

Playstation 5 35 59.32%
 
PC 13 22.03%
 
Waiting for other platforms 11 18.64%
 
Total:59
thismeintiel said:
ice said:

Does it matter if it was announced? FFXVI, FFVII, and this would certainly be multiplat. I’m not even coming at your precious Sony, my point was that SE has shown time and time again to put money over their consumers. I don’t blame MS and Sony for trying to make their platforms appealing. Only if everyone showed  a fraction of the outrage that Rise of the Tomb Raider got maybe these deals with big publishers wouldn’t be as common. 

Of course it matters if it was announced as a multiplat first. You trying to stretch the mental gymnastics so it doesn't shows your own bias. It's why no one is pissed at The Medium or Scorn being timed exclusives for XSX. They're new IP, but, more importantly, they were announced as timed exclusives. I'll have to go into the threads for those games and see if you railed against MS/publishers for those. And precious Sony? Lol, good one.

Would love to hear more about the “mental gymnastics”, Those games you mentioned are indie titles, SE is a big publisher. I’m holding SE accountable for their shitty deals. This includes RotTR. Idk why you insist on making this a console war thing, get over yourself. 



Around the Network
Azzanation said:
DonFerrari said:

You have to remember that somehow it is worse that Sony pick a new IP that no one knows will be good or sell well and pay for it to have timed exclusivity than MS buying in a single year 15 studios and keeping the whole portfolio forever. Get on with times.

And of course Sony picking up this timed exclusivity will force MS answer into buying another 8 studios.

Don, not sure if you are with the times on this one, however when MS buys studios they aren't entirely forced exclusives or not guaranteed anyway, we have seen examples of this. Now if Sony brought Zenimax, you could bet your entire house and family that Sony would keep everything as a forced PS exclusive. MS have not ruled out future Bethesda games coming to PS or Nintendo for that matter.

The 2nd point is quite easy to avoid, stop poking the bear and they wont have to buy more studios. Doesn't Sony have a good portfolio of 1st party developers and games? Why do they need to lock up 3rd party games for there system if they have a monster library of games and studios to work with??

Sony is porting some games to PC and even Xbox/Switch, but sure we can say it would be more likely that their titles would be kept exclusive. But sure pretend you aren't using two different standards here and that you are very neutral.



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."

BasilZero said:
DonFerrari said:

Sony is porting some games to PC and even Xbox/Switch, but sure we can say it would be more likely that their titles would be kept exclusive. But sure pretend you aren't using two different standards here and that you are very neutral.

Huh, that is curious, what Sony game is coming to Switch?

MBL The Show will be multiplatform. Don't know if MBL21 or which will be the first, it was reported several months ago.



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."

DonFerrari said:

Sony is porting some games to PC and even Xbox/Switch, but sure we can say it would be more likely that their titles would be kept exclusive. But sure pretend you aren't using two different standards here and that you are very neutral.

Don, porting SOME games to PC is not on Par with what MS are doing with their entire library. Also SOME is more than 1, so what are the other 1st party Sony exclusives coming to Switch and XBox outside of a sport game?

Also please tell me what standards am i taking into this debate without being neutral? Maybe ill ask you the same question?

You agree that Sony will more likely keep their titles exclusives sooo whats with the 2nd part, if you agree than there is no side taking, its simply logic.

twintail said:

I'm curious what these games are, because I'm assuming you're talking about games that had existing contracts in place like Hellblade switch. 

Also this idea that MS is reacting to Sony is so bizarre. MS have also secured timed exclusives for XSX. But, more importantly, they are putting their money into securing day 1 game pass releases. This is why we aren't seeing major time exclusive plays: Gamepass' is their future, so they are using their money to prioritise that service.

Heard of the little game known as Ori? 

Ask Don why MS are buying studios in retaliation to Sony exclusives. His the one that said it.

Don's words "And of course Sony picking up this timed exclusivity will force MS answer into buying another 8 studios."

Last edited by Azzanation - on 09 December 2020

twintail said:
The Fury said:

No, true. But I would prefer it that way, SquEnix are not a poor company, not like they need the money to complete development. I'd rather the money be invested internally into new studios and jobs, instead of paying people off. I mean can you imagine how many studios and games you could create with 7 billion? How many jobs?

I hear ya. Would be great if we could get more details into the specifics of the deal. 

sales2099 said:

The news is pretty fresh. Lol “get over it”....I hope people keep that same energy for when Starfield is Xbox exclusive. 

There is I distinct difference between a 1st party dev keeping a game to the one console vs a 3rd party dev that is expected to release on multiple platforms. 2 years is overkill

The time period is fresh, but you know very well I'm talking about the game being a timed exclusive, which has been known for months now.

everyone is expecting Starfield to be exclusive, not that that should prevent ppl from criticising the move if they believe it to be so. As long as ppl are consistent and can see these acquisitions (studio, game, timed or not) for what they are instead of trying to defend their platform holder's choice, then I see no problem here.

I feel like I have to explain the difference: the devs who make Starfield is going to be 1st party. F-I-R-S-T Party. A distinct difference then a 3rd party. Sorry it’s just frustrating seeing people comparing the 2 as if they are relatable. 

Hey, I’m not blind to the business. Timed exclusives will always be a thing. But 2 years? I think we (should) agree that 2 years is overkill. 6 months is acceptable, 1 year is frustrating, 2 years is essentially a full exclusive since people will have moved on years later. Am I not entitled to make that observation? 

Last edited by sales2099 - on 09 December 2020

Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

Around the Network

The MLB thing is probably not even Sony’s choice to go multiplatform. The other pro leagues have stipulations in their video game deals restricting exclusive games. This is likely the first time Sony has had to renew after 2k stopped doing MLB games. Doesn’t make sense for the MLB and MLBPA to leave money on the table. Plus The Show is full of micro transactions and pay to win crap like NBA2k (not nearly as bad though), so it should give Sony a good revenue boost for the franchise as well.

But yes Azzz you’re correct, it’s disingenuous to paint a picture like Sony supports multiple consoles with “some” games, it’s literally one sports game. Wake me up when I can play LoU2 MP on Xbox.



Azzanation said:
DonFerrari said:

Sony is porting some games to PC and even Xbox/Switch, but sure we can say it would be more likely that their titles would be kept exclusive. But sure pretend you aren't using two different standards here and that you are very neutral.

Don, porting SOME games to PC is not on Par with what MS are doing with their entire library. Also SOME is more than 1, so what are the other 1st party Sony exclusives coming to Switch and XBox outside of a sport game?

Also please tell me what standards am i taking into this debate without being neutral? Maybe ill ask you the same question?

You agree that Sony will more likely keep their titles exclusives sooo whats with the 2nd part, if you agree than there is no side taking, its simply logic.

twintail said:

I'm curious what these games are, because I'm assuming you're talking about games that had existing contracts in place like Hellblade switch. 

Also this idea that MS is reacting to Sony is so bizarre. MS have also secured timed exclusives for XSX. But, more importantly, they are putting their money into securing day 1 game pass releases. This is why we aren't seeing major time exclusive plays: Gamepass' is their future, so they are using their money to prioritise that service.

Heard of the little game known as Ori? 

Ask Don why MS are buying studios in retaliation to Sony exclusives. His the one that said it.

Don's words "And of course Sony picking up this timed exclusivity will force MS answer into buying another 8 studios."

Guess for all the attacks that English isn't my first language you failed in reading, some PS4 exclusives ported to PC and even Xbox/Switch. Means the focal was on some to PC (Horizon for example, allowing Detroit and Death Stranding is another) and even Xbox/Switch is the addition which is MLB.

You can ask me and I'll say I'm a Sony fan without holding the pretenses you and Ludicrous hold of being neutral and impartial.

LudicrousSpeed said:

The MLB thing is probably not even Sony’s choice to go multiplatform. The other pro leagues have stipulations in their video game deals restricting exclusive games. This is likely the first time Sony has had to renew after 2k stopped doing MLB games. Doesn’t make sense for the MLB and MLBPA to leave money on the table. Plus The Show is full of micro transactions and pay to win crap like NBA2k (not nearly as bad though), so it should give Sony a good revenue boost for the franchise as well.

But yes Azzz you’re correct, it’s disingenuous to paint a picture like Sony supports multiple consoles with “some” games, it’s literally one sports game. Wake me up when I can play LoU2 MP on Xbox.

Sure sure, Sony had a deal with MLB and the league forgot for over 5 years that the other platforms exist.... unless you can bring evidence to the table that Sony was forced to make it multiplatform instead of the current interpretation that either Sony saw they could make more money and wouldn't impact their consoles sales or that the league offered a better deal if they made it multiplatform, because it was already show that other licenses for MLB were tried and failed.

Haven't seem anyone painting any pictures here, so perhaps you could paint your strawman in another neighborhood.



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."

It doesn’t matter if the MLB forgot other platforms exist or not, if that wasn’t in the deal they had with the MLB then the other platforms are irrelevant. 2k canceled their MLB games. That doesn’t mean the MLB can just go to Sony and ask for more money, they’re still under a contract. And now that they had to renew, the games are multiplatform, falling in line with what the NFL, NBA, FIFA, NHL, etc mandate in their sports games.

And of course Sony sees it as a chance to make more money and not impact their console sales. Otherwise they wouldn’t make the game, lol. They aren’t legally bound to make an MLB game. I’d imagine Sony makes good money off of Stubs currency.



DonFerrari said:

Guess for all the attacks that English isn't my first language you failed in reading, some PS4 exclusives ported to PC and even Xbox/Switch. Means the focal was on some to PC (Horizon for example, allowing Detroit and Death Stranding is another) and even Xbox/Switch is the addition which is MLB.

You can ask me and I'll say I'm a Sony fan without holding the pretenses you and Ludicrous hold of being neutral and impartial.

Don, i am not trying to attack you, i am just stating that the comparison between the two is way different, even with a few games crossing over isn't on the same level as Xbox. This isn't about picking sides, its just stating reality. Xbox share majority of there games on PC and some even on Switch and PS. You cant compare the two, Sony rarely do that, and when they do, its very little. Anything is better than nothing so props for Sony for at least giving something. 

It goes back to the Tomb Raider debate, Everyone loves calling out Xbox for making deals, but we all seem to forget the very same prince-able applied when Tomb Raider came into existence and no one bats an eye. Its better to be fair than how people pick sides and think its okay when one does it but not the other. Sony, Nintendo and Xbox are all guilty for the same things but seeing one company buy a Timed exclusive deal and think its okay because it suits their console preference and yet when another does something similar which doesn't support their console preference it becomes a major problem and is called out for it. 

These are the things i pick up on. Its not an attack but a FYI.



Azzanation said:
DonFerrari said:

Guess for all the attacks that English isn't my first language you failed in reading, some PS4 exclusives ported to PC and even Xbox/Switch. Means the focal was on some to PC (Horizon for example, allowing Detroit and Death Stranding is another) and even Xbox/Switch is the addition which is MLB.

You can ask me and I'll say I'm a Sony fan without holding the pretenses you and Ludicrous hold of being neutral and impartial.

Don, i am not trying to attack you, i am just stating that the comparison between the two is way different, even with a few games crossing over isn't on the same level as Xbox. This isn't about picking sides, its just stating reality. Xbox share majority of there games on PC and some even on Switch and PS. You cant compare the two, Sony rarely do that, and when they do, its very little. Anything is better than nothing so props for Sony for at least giving something. 

It goes back to the Tomb Raider debate, Everyone loves calling out Xbox for making deals, but we all seem to forget the very same prince-able applied when Tomb Raider came into existence and no one bats an eye. Its better to be fair than how people pick sides and think its okay when one does it but not the other. Sony, Nintendo and Xbox are all guilty for the same things but seeing one company buy a Timed exclusive deal and think its okay because it suits their console preference and yet when another does something similar which doesn't support their console preference it becomes a major problem and is called out for it. 

These are the things i pick up on. Its not an attack but a FYI.

I wasn't comparing then, and even said that it was some occurences of multiplat from Sony teams, etc. You disputed as if you didn't understood the point.

If no one bated an eye you and Ludicrous wouldn't be bringing this here. Also can bring RE and many other examples of 3 decades ago to justify what MS is doing now, but then you can't in other discussions pretend that what MS done in the start of the gen is irrelevant because only matters what happens now.

Regarding the topic in point, 2 years is really a lot and can be harming to xbox fans, but being a new IP that we don't know how quality it will be and how much Sony is involved in the production it alleviates a little the issue. But no we can't say MS outright buying 15 studios is less problematic than Sony securing one or 5 timed exclusives because MS release games on PC and may release some of those on PS.



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."