re: Apparently Elder Scrolls 6 is officially set to skip PS5 entirely

quote:

---

what 3rd party games has Sony gotten absolute exclusivity on?

---

It would be hard to give you a full list because Sony doesn't release such information as they view this info as strategic. A US Senator has asked them to provide him with a list though so we'll probably have a definitive list soon. LINK I doubt any of us will be surprised when it is very lengthy. Sony readily admits that paying for third party exclusivity is part of their strategy.

Demon's Souls Remake would probably be a good one to mention on this board. Bloodborne. Any Fromsoft PS exclusive title was definitely because Sony paid for that.

Sony doesn't own the gaming rights to Spiderman, so they definitely gave Disney something to make those games PlayStation exclusive (through payments or other agreements involving the character). Not a "third party" game now that they have bought Insomniac, but still not something that happened organically by any stretch of the imagination. Microsoft doing an exclusive Indiana Jones game was likely a response to this.

I will link an article just about their third party exclusivity spending in 2020: $329 million.

quote:

---

To say that Sony has struggled to develop its studios is not at all based in reality

---

How they spend their money, and their complete opposition to MS owning Call of Duty even when there is no threat of MS making it exclusive to the point of lying to regulators, makes it pretty clear that Sony does not agree with your assessment. Internal Sony documents filed with the court showed that they believe Call of Duty going exclusive to XBox would completely kill the PlayStation. They do not have faith in their exclusives to carry their system. That's why they have done so much co-branding with Call of Duty, which is another form of exclusivity that is very valid to this discussion.

I agree with their view of it. The PlayStation exclusives aren't enough to compete with what XBox has to offer.

quote:

---

You’re the one that doesn’t simply understand what “quantity over quality doesn’t equate to profits” means.

---

Apparently not. That statement would seem to be implying that PlayStation has more quality, and therefore greater profits. If that isn't your intent, then the statement makes no sense in the context of your overall argument.

If that is your intent, then it still makes no sense in the context of your overall argument, because XBox makes more profit.

In which way were you intending your nonsensical statement?

quote:

---

he could be talking about either one of us.

---

In this conversation, maybe so.

quote:

---

Sony readily admits that paying for third party exclusivity is part of their strategy.

---

For sure. But every company has done this at some point

quote:

---

Demon's Souls Remake would probably be a good one to mention on this board. Bloodborne. Any Fromsoft PS exclusive title was definitely because Sony paid for that.

---

Not quite. Sony owns the IP for both of them. FromSoft co-developed both of them with Sony Japan Studio. That’s not a case of just paying for exclusivity - they financed and assisted with development. All the other FromSoft games were made solely by FromSoft.

quote:

---

Sony doesn't own the gaming rights to Spiderman, so they definitely gave Disney something to make those games PlayStation exclusive (through payments or other agreements involving the character).

---

Yeah I don’t know how this came to be

quote:

---

How they spend their money, and their complete opposition to MS owning Call of Duty even when there is no threat of MS making it exclusive to the point of lying to regulators, makes it pretty clear that Sony does not agree with your assessment

---

Of course they don’t want their competitor to own the biggest franchise on the planet. There is no reason to believe MS would’ve kept COD multiplat past the previously agreed upon deal. They were going to say whatever they could to stop the deal.

quote:

---

Internal Sony documents filed with the court showed that they believe Call of Duty going exclusive to XBox would completely kill the PlayStation.

---

Link?

quote:

---

They do not have faith in their exclusives to carry their system.

---

This is nonsense dude. I’ve seen you make solid points in discussions on this topic but statements like this kill any momentum you gain. Their opposition of the deal has nothing to do with their confidence in their other franchises and studios. Their games are objectively critically acclaimed, they sell objectively well, and they’ve just come out and said they’re sticking to the formula. It works. I personally think it’s starting to get stale and would like to see some more variety, but there’s no denying that it’s successful.

quote:

---

That's why they have done so much co-branding with Call of Duty, which is another form of exclusivity that is very valid to this discussion.

---

For the 100th time, Microsoft did the same shite with COD back when PlayStation sucked. Marketing deal, timed DLC, whole 9 yards. Nobody cared back then though, just like I don’t care now.

quote:

---

I agree with their view of it.

---

It’s not their view. Youre projecting your views and analyses from that stupid frickin trial onto them. Their crying and embellishment to help prevent the deal are no different than some brokedick embellishing his back injuries for a payout in a fender bender.

quote:

---

The PlayStation exclusives aren't enough to compete with what XBox has to offer.

---

Again, totally fine to think this. That’s not the consensus of the general gaming public though.

Same. I play PS5 for the exclusives and Series X for GamePass. That fight has been going on for over a decade though. I usually get both.

quote:

---

But I find myself largely using the gamepass on my PC, and not the Xbox.

---

Same. I can’t tell you the last time I’ve turned on my Xbox. Played several GP games on my pc though. I was going to start Starfield once it got cleaned up a bit but it seems like the community all of a sudden turned on it last week.

They all bring different things to the table. I like Xbox’s controller and PC forwardness better, and I prefer PS5’s interface and exclusives (for now). I guess in my perfect world, console selection would be like PC and would depend solely on hardware and storefronts (who offers more deals on games and whatnot) but the genie is out the bottle and that’ll never happen.

quote:

---

Of course they don’t want their competitor to own the biggest franchise on the planet. There is no reason to believe MS would’ve kept COD multiplat past the previously agreed upon deal.

---

This is factually incorrect. Regulators actually looked at this question and all came to the conclusion that Microsoft making COD exclusive would make the purchase of Activision unprofitable. There's no way Sony would have come to this conclusion. Jim Ryan even admitted as much in an internal email that was filed with court documents, which really kind of torpedoed the Call of Duty arguments in court. LINK Sony acted in bad faith from day one. It's truly appalling stuff and should absolutely anger gamers. Sony is ABSOLUTELY the bad guy in this MS/ABK story.

quote:

---

Link?

---

LINK

quote:

---

This is nonsense dude.

---

I don't think so at all. They have clearly shown that they believe losing Call of Duty gamers will be devastating to their business. They took lobbying the FTC to about as extreme as you could go in opposition to a purchase by a competitor. Literally stood alone on a hill while all other potentially affected parties said they had no issue with the deal whatsoever. They clearly believe this will be devastating to their business model.

The stupid part is that Microsoft offered Sony a deal for ALL future Activision games for any currently existing IP at the beginning of the year, and Sony turned it down so they could lobby regulators to oppose the deal. Sony knew that signing that deal with Microsoft would make their opposition to the deal look shallow.

Instead, they ended up with a deal JUST for Call of Duty (maybe that's all they care about) after the FTC lost in court because Microsoft no longer had to go out of their way to give Sony the world. If any of you have favorite Activision games outside of Call of Duty that end up skipping PlayStation in the coming years, it will be because Sony's aggressive posturing ended up backfiring on them.

quote:

---

For the 100th time, Microsoft did the same shite with COD back when PlayStation sucked. Marketing deal, timed DLC, whole 9 yards. Nobody cared back then though, just like I don’t care now.

---

Doesn't change the facts of the current market, and isn't really relevant to the reasons Microsoft chose to purchase Activision (which are largely due to mobile gaming, in reality, and very little to do with console exclusives).

quote:

---

Youre projecting your views and analyses from that stupid frickin trial onto them. Their crying and embellishment to help prevent the deal are no different than some brokedick embellishing his back injuries for a payout in a fender bender.

---

Not talking about testimony. Talking about internal documents filed under discovery. If we were talking about testimony though, I find it very hard to believe Sony execs would have lied under oath over this deal. It ain't worth going to jail for. What happened in that court case is the most accurate information available to us about internal goings on at all three major gaming companies and I believe it would be totally worth any gamer's time to go back and watch that/read the materials that came out.

Truthfully, I don't think Sony's really even being honest with themselves. I think they're clearly scared of Game Pass getting Call of Duty. Call of Duty on Game Pass on day and date of release, even without it being an XBox exclusive, will be a hit to Sony's bottom line. Internal Sony documents discussed in the links above showed that "[14?] million users (by device) spent 30 percent or more of their time playing Call of Duty, over 6 million users spent more than 70% of their time on Call of Duty, and about 1 million users spent 100% of their gaming time on Call of Duty." We're talking about a potential 21 million gamer shift JUST for Call of Duty.

quote:

---

Again, totally fine to think this. That’s not the consensus of the general gaming public though.

---

Sony disagrees. They are even scared of Call of Duty "running better" on XBox than it does on PlayStation and believe that even that scenario (without exclusivity) would cause immense harm to the PlayStation. They do not have faith in their exclusives carrying the PlayStation.

quote:

---

Is this the gaming board version of "meeting at the sonic"?

---

I just think it's odd how many people think MS has been acting maliciously here, when the truth is Sony has been the bad actor throughout this entire thing. It isn't even difficult to come to this conclusion. The publicly available information clearly shows this to be true.

quote:

---

Is this the gaming board version of "meeting at the sonic"?

---

real bizarre shite. I like Sony. I have a Ps5. I have more games to play than I can possibly get to. Who gives a shite and why should I give a shite what other people play?

quote:

---

I just think it's odd how many people think MS has been acting maliciously here,

---

when there's an email that states "we can spend them out of busniess", it's not hard to see who's malicious regardless of if that specific email was allowed in court or not.