P
peter42O
Guest
The bolded doesn't make any sense. C'mon bro, you're better than this. If Sony weren't competing, they'd of languished in sales and prestige by now. If there are no options on the market a customer finds appealing, they'll just...not buy or support any of the available options! We've seen that happen before even in the gaming industry, it could always happen again.
But the point is, the market feels Sony is providing better competition and hence why they have the most market-share, platform sales and revenue. Nintendo may be 2nd in those metrics (usually), but they have a methodology for doing things where they can save tons of costs and usually generate the most gaming profit.
Microsoft has an inferior version of Sony's model and none of the advantages they'd need to emulate Nintendo's, so they have tried pivoting their marketing and model over the past few years.
Perhaps I worded it wrong. Sony is trying to stagnate the industry by prohibiting a competitor from actually competing because they don't want to follow in their foot steps. People say that Microsoft does nothing which is fucking bullshit. Microsoft going with something different and having a different strategy that is Game Pass is the definition of competition. Sony dominated with PS4 so what do you do if you're Microsoft? Stay the same because some can't accept change? Nope. You innovate, you do something that no one has ever done before and that's make your entire business model around Xbox be based on a subscription service and why did Microsoft go this route? Because again, Sony dominated with PS4 and Microsoft knew they needed to do something else. You make your platform stand out by doing something that your competitor ISN'T doing. Sony doesn't want this because they know that if Microsoft were to have just stayed as is, Sony would continue to dominate them but because Microsoft pivoted to a subscription based model, this is no longer the case for Sony and quite honestly and quite simply, they fear it. PlayStation fans can believe whatever they want but when you have 90% of gaming media and just people in general going against Sony because their claims have no validity to them whatsoever to where it's a fucking joke, that tells you everything you need to know.
So that's what I mean by stagnating the industry. Sony simply wants NOTHING to change. That's anti-competitive. That's also fucking boring. People worry about the gaming industry because of Microsoft when in reality, Microsoft is the company that's actually trying a new business model instead of just going with the flow. This is what competition is truly about. When you're on the losing side, you pivot, you change and you do something new that no one else especially your direct competitor is doing. That's how you compete by offering consumers and gamers an intriguing and different alternative.
Sony is the party blamed because they know the effect and end result of doing what they do will impact their main competitor which is exactly the same thing that people complain about with Microsoft acquiring publishers but the difference is that Microsoft is acquiring companies that wanted to sell and would have been sold eventually to someone and to someone that's potentially far worse than Microsoft. Point being is that both are doing what they do to hurt their competition and to gain consumers into their eco-system which is exactly what it's all about.
The games you mention are not the same. Lost Soul Aside was a China Hero Project since the beginning which was funded by Sony for years so no argument there. SF V was partially funded but by moneyhatting the game. You can know the difference by seeing who published the game. When Sony/Microsoft fully fund a game, they always end up being the publisher and distributor. Microsoft funded and published Dead Rising 3. Not Capcom. Street Fighter 5 was published by Capcom, not Sony. Whenever the hardware manufacture funds a game, they always publish it mainly because it normally includes IP ownership. But for argument sake, I will agree with you.
With Stellar Blade, no, Sony didn't fund this game. This game was literally announced in April 2019 for PS4/XBO/PC. Link is below. Game was re-revealed at Sony's PlayStation Showcase in September 2021 and was still said to be a multi-platform game. A year later, obviously a deal was made in the last 12 months between showcases for it become a full exclusive. This is literally a moneyhatted game. So for this game, I disagree.
On a side note - Capcom went to Microsoft first for a SF 5 deal and Terry Myerson declined. He also declined the Marvel exclusivity deal around the same time. I disagree with Myerson in regards to SF 5 as he should have gotten a deal done with Capcom for this game to be exclusive to XBO/PC. I however agree that passing on the Marvel deal was the right decision at the time because they had no studio that was going to make Spider Man or any Marvel licensed game at the level of Insomniac. Plus, the whopping 5 internal studios Microsoft had were all working on games so no one would have been available anyway. I also got two excellent Spider Man games from Insomniac so I for one was happy Myerson passed on this deal simply because it would have been a clusterfuck. Fast forward to 2022/2023, should Microsoft get an exclusive Marvel/Star Wars/licensed IP? Absofuckinglutely.
My main issue is with the double standard a lot of people have due to favoritism towards Sony and PlayStation due to these people not wanting anything to change, for the industry to evolve or for Microsoft to ever truly compete with Xbox. When an Xbox fan like Ryan McCaffrey complains about the Bethesda acquisition but yet praises Sony paying to keep FFXVI off Xbox for a year minimum even though I don't believe that it will ever release on Xbox, that's the double standard. You can be in favor of one but against the other just because one move is bigger than the other because if you combine the moves that Sony has made, they do in fact dwarf the Bethesda and soon to be ABK acquisitions.
I don't care if Sony moneyhats games or whatever because it doesn't affect me. I don't care if Microsoft acquires publishers because again, it doesn't affect me. In my eyes, everyone either needs to shut the fuck up and let them both do what they want to do and accept it OR speak up on both and prevent acquisitions and moneyhats of all kinds and accept that. But let's be honest, no one on either side is going to do that.
You say near the end in regards to Microsoft growing their revenue - "it's not the way many pictured or would have wanted Microsoft to compete". This is the problem. There is no right or wrong way. Sony and Microsoft are going to do what is best for their business strategy and direction. For Sony, it's moneyhatting timed/full exclusivity mainly because they don't have the cash to acquire publishers and their business model is the same as it was in 1995. It hasn't changed all that much if at all. For Microsoft, it's all about Game Pass which is a subscription based service. In order to make your subscription service successful, you need exclusive games and content. The absolute best way to accomplish this is NOT by moneyhatting games. It's by acquiring IP ownership.
Disney acquired Marvel years ago. Disney then started Disney+. Disney then pulled all of their Marvel exclusive shows off Netflix. Do you believe that Netflix just because they had these shows first or for a few years or whatever that they're entitled to any of them? They're not because it's not theirs. It's Disney's.
I understand the last paragraph but at the same time, if it was YOU and Bethesda and eventually ABK fell into your lap, would you truly pass on them? I mean come on man. No one would pass on them. Everyone here would literally do the same shit because it's fucking business and you do what is best for your business, period.
Game wise, I'll be the first to say that their output this year has been pretty much non-existent but I can't say they haven't released quality games despite them not being for me because they have. Whatever they did last generation means nothing to me and I don't know why anyone would care unless they're trying to time travel backwards. lol. Personally, all I care about is the present day and the future. And in this regard, it's yes, a wait and see but im not going to bash them because this generation is 25% complete. There's still 6 more years to go minimum. So personally, I will judge them when the generation ends. As of now, for me, they've only given me one first party title but it was 2021 goty which already surpassed everything they've done since 2008 so how could I possibly complain? It wouldn't make any sense if I did. 2022 has sucked completely and while their gap is much longer than I expected between Halo Infinite and their next game that I play, it's also why I will always own both consoles. Because when there's a gap on one, the other usually fills out that gap for me so im always playing something so again, I can't really complain. Besides, if Redfall releases in early 2023 and I end up loving the game which is a good possibility as it's my type of game, am I really going to care about the dead year known as 2022? Nope.
There's a massive scale of difference but Microsoft is also not the same company as they were in 2001. They're completely different. Their business strategy and pricing model is different. Their CEO is obviously fully on board with Xbox and I know people will say they've been around for 19 years going into this generation but unlike Sony, they've never had any consistency at the higher levels because for Microsoft, Xbox was never seen as something vital to the company where as with PlayStation, it's literally everything for Sony.
You say resort to buying publishers to boost gaming revenue and make staying in the game as a platform holder worthwhile. Even without acquiring publishers, since E3 2018, Microsoft started to prove that Xbox was worthwhile even if some still for whatever biased reason, they don't want to see it and after Bethesda and especially ABK, im sure they see it now. And buying publishers that fall into your lap is simply business. There's nothing wrong about it at all and even more importantly, there's literally nothing illegal about any of it. It would only be an issue if they were already #1 and they're very far from being #1.
Agree with the first paragraph.
The second paragraph - it's not that im against Sony moneyhatting games, it's that people act like this is 100% acceptable but then cry when Microsoft acquires a publisher. It's the same thing but one is on a larger scale but also a more important scale - ownership which coincidentally is something so many PlayStation fans love talking up especially when it comes to Game Pass. So many people bring up that they want to own their games (despite the fact that digital or physical, they own nothing) but yet can't see the hypocrisy when complaining about Microsoft buying publishers in order for them to then own that publisher's IP's. It's hilarious. Both sides is anti-consumer because you're preventing games from going on the other platform. However, if the company you're making an offer to accepts it, then it is what it is. The only people who truly have any issue with Microsoft acquiring publishers are those who don't own or want to own an Xbox console and would prefer to bitch instead. Same applies to those who have an issue with Sony moneyhatting games because they don't own or want to own a PlayStation. The second however is that Sony pays for games that they don't own (which again, a lot of PlayStation fans tend to mention in regards to Game Pass) and have literally no right to the IP whatsoever where as if you acquire a company, you own them. I think a lot of people in general can't wrap their head around the fact that when a company acquires another company, that company's history simply no longer matters because it ends once the acquisition gets completed.
Sony is not Nintendo from back then, I agree. But you say, why should Microsoft gain the benefit of the funds that Sony puts into games via marketing deals or exclusivity which I agree with but at the same time, why should Sony benefit from still getting games that the other platform holder now owns? Sony does prevent games from going on Game Pass day one for those that they have a marketing deal with. Now, I see this from both sides. Business wise, I can't argue it and would do the same. As a consumer/gamer, that's a shitty move because Sony is doing it to "stagnate" the growth of Game Pass for the sole reason of it never taking off and thus, Sony never having to adapt or evolve.
Agree with the last part. Both have different business strategies which is what makes the gaming industry great and is what will lead to making it bigger and better. All three hardware manufacturers have their different business strategies that work for them while at the same time offering something different for consumers/gamers.
