That’s a funny thing though because it’s ok to consolidate only if a certain company is doing it, of course.
I don't think you know me well enough to make those statements, and I don't think they are fair overall.
It's important to distinguish growth from consolidation. I find it perfectly acceptable for someone like Xbox to acquire Ninja Theory, or Sony acquiring Insomniac. Those are, in my opinion, within the realm of organic growth / business as usual.
Consolidation falls way more in line with buying big publishers or massive developers, and here I'll of course include the ones that kickstarted it this gen: Microsoft. I fail to see how someone can cheer for microsoft spending 80B in two of the biggest third party publishers, only to lock on their content behind their platform. This does not benefit the consumer, does not benefit the gamer, does not benefit anybody except Microsoft.
On the other hand, I'd be extremely disappointed if Sony fired back and bought Square or CDPR, for example. I'd rather they acquire smaller studios, like Ember Labs for example, and then grow them into AAA powerhouses.
That said, in business you need to fight fire with fire, and when your competition starts consolidating, you need to do what you can or else you will be left without a choice.
The same people who start crying when they see a "moneyhatted" Playstation timed exclusive....
I'd say many people cry wolf around moneyhatting, and I'm against the practice of paying for temporary exclusives. If you're paying to develop a game or even a specific DLC, sure, why not. But paying to gate it to a platform when it will be multiplat? Fully against.
Yay the others are not getting what I would've had anyway my choice is therefore more validated....I don't care if there are problems on my side as long as I can show the problems on the other sides.Because I need to feel part of someting, I AM what I CONSUME.Criticizing what I bought thus become a personal attack.
That's how some people think, it can be a conscious or unconscious process.
All said.
Sony don't have to try because MS aren't pushing them. They can hold announcements, make delays, be secretive. They don't have to bring a full meal to the table in terms of also having proper BC/MP support, they can ration-out what they do offer from the AAA buffet.
Disagree. Sony is holding announcements, but the games are going to come out and probably will be GOTY challengers, most of them. They are allowed to be more selective with marketing due to their position, sure, but it doesn't seem to detract from the quality, which is the most important thing.
XB don't have to try, because they can buy-back any ground they lose. And they have the money, and the blessing of MS above them, to do it. They don't ''earn'' anything for themselves, so to speak. They also don't 'need to' have money spent on blockbuster AAA games, they have the money to coast on what they do offer.
Disagree. XB are trying their hardest to dominate the market by force. This strategy, however, is flawed, as I'm pretty sure Microsoft's CStaff are very much interested in a quick ROI. As soon as the metrics are not what they forecasted, they will pull the plug.
I just fear it'll take a new player to shake one or both out of their roles... and I don't think we're gonna get the miraculous return of SEGA as that distruptor.
I think we need a new player, but I'd be very afraid of Google or Apple as said player, for example. They would just be Xbox 2.0 and would gobble the whole market. We need someone disruptive, new, fresh, and without daddy's wallet. Some player willing to build themselves into the game and build their own thing.
