graywolf323
Member
you phrased it in such a way that made it seem like a fact
and somehow it’s not the same if Sony funds a third-party game and has it as exclusive
Last edited:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
IGN France: Yes, Redfall was originally planned for PS5
- Thread starter jm89
- Start date
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I'll wait for you to share one yourself, can't just keep sharing without getting anything in return, mate.
Bloodborne is a 3P developed game but the IP is owned by a 1P. Death Stranding was the same case and that got a PC release on game pass. It's not really the slam dunk you guys seem to want to make it.
But beyond that, all the other examples used in the same paragraph are accurate, to the best of our knowledge, in terms of being paid third party exclusives.
I love your post so much right now, I could make love to your avatar!
I supplied a link to the OG quote in case there was any confusion when I posted that. I also said "supposedly" permanently exclusive. I have a hard time believing anything MS or Sony say.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
"reportedly" lolDoesn't matter, reportedly Sony have paid to keep FFVIIR a permanent exclusive, as per documentation submitted to the regulatory bodies
Did they make it a permanent exclusive? Or did they not?
Can you show me a permanent exclusivity contract or something as your source? Or a statement by a SquareEnix or Sony executive?
(Don't quote me those stupid Microsoft's submissions though that called Final Fantasy a first-party Sony IP
Because by that logic, since it's already a first-party IP, it is not really timed. And Sony was being altruistic when they released their first-party game, Crisis Core, on Xbox despite 0 obligations to do so)
Unknown?
Member
Understand the situation before you conflate them. SF5 was not going to exist without funding as it was in a dark period for Capcom. Capcom isn't financially hurting and doing very well right now which is why SF6 isn't exclusive.you phrased it in such a way that made it seem like a fact
and somehow it’s not the same if Sony funds a third-party game and has it as exclusive
*edit* read it wrong. Lol but yes, exactly.
Last edited:
Mr Moose
Member
The slam dunk of MicroSoft lawyers being dumb? Superman.
azertydu91
Hard to Kill
soulbait
Member
I still do not understand what the big fuss is about this stuff. There has been exclusive games for years, and you have had cases in the past where games would be made for one console on time and then the next in that franchise would go to another. It is just part of gaming. If the console manufacturer owns a studio, I 100% expect that studio's output to be for that manufacturer's console only. Microsoft is unique, because for a long time they have been publishing both on Xbox and PC, many times with a same day release. They then purchased other studios, and some of those studios still produce games for other platforms outside of Xbox or PC. Minecraft is a good example of this.
I really do not understand the whining back and forth over this. You are not entitled to play any video game. As long as there are games on the platforms that you own, you should be happy. Does it suck when a game you want is not available on the platform you own? Yeah, but tough tits. Life goes on. It is just a video game. You are basically yelling, "I am mad that I cannot spend my money to buy your game." Cry me a freaking river.
There is one practice of this though that does bother me though: when the game has exclusive content on one platform versus another. That shit to me is indeed an "unfair" practice, because you are paying the same amount of money for less content. But at the end of the day, it is about something so small and insignificant, why get so pissed about it?
Ya'll are whining about not having access to a game and/or because you took someone's marketing speak as a full on promise. Get over it. You have options if it is that big of a deal to you: buy both consoles, get a gaming PC, buy a sub to GamePass ultimate and stream the game, or just go on with your life knowing it is okay that you do not have access to all the toys you want.
I really do not understand the whining back and forth over this. You are not entitled to play any video game. As long as there are games on the platforms that you own, you should be happy. Does it suck when a game you want is not available on the platform you own? Yeah, but tough tits. Life goes on. It is just a video game. You are basically yelling, "I am mad that I cannot spend my money to buy your game." Cry me a freaking river.
There is one practice of this though that does bother me though: when the game has exclusive content on one platform versus another. That shit to me is indeed an "unfair" practice, because you are paying the same amount of money for less content. But at the end of the day, it is about something so small and insignificant, why get so pissed about it?
Ya'll are whining about not having access to a game and/or because you took someone's marketing speak as a full on promise. Get over it. You have options if it is that big of a deal to you: buy both consoles, get a gaming PC, buy a sub to GamePass ultimate and stream the game, or just go on with your life knowing it is okay that you do not have access to all the toys you want.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
There is no statement that shows that it's locked permanently from Square, just like there's no statement that shows that Square have deliberately decided not to release FFVII R or FF 16 on Xbox.
That's not the question I asked. I asked if you can share a statement from Square where they have said they're keeping VII-R off of Xbox deliberately for sales reasons.
Last edited:
They ported over a PSP game that's a direct prequel to FFVII... the one that's available on Xbox and Switch right now.Have you considered why Square ported the much less popular Crisis Core to Xbox and not the much more popular FFVII Remake itself ?
Not sure how anyone can say without laughing that anything but moneyhats are involved there.
See above. If Square are porting the far less popular Crisis Core to Xbox, FFVIIR would be an automatic shoe-in unless moneyhat/contractually obligated.
Unknown?
Member
Most people aren't whining, they're pointing out the bad PR of, "wanting gamers to play everywhere" BS that Microsoft has been saying.
It essentially casts doubt on their ENTIRE stance with the future of Activision. If they flat out lied about Zenimax, they will do the same again.
FalsettoVibe
Member
Are we seriously playing exclusive games list wars now?.....lol
Y'all are a mess.
Y'all are a mess.
Last edited:
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
So Sony did not make it a permanent exclusive. The timed exclusivity period is also over, and Square Enix is free to release the game when they want to and where they want to.
Sounds like fair to me. Why should Sony be blamed for this if Square Enix is not releasing their game on a console where their games don't really sell well at all?
Puscifer
Member
That mythical money on the table Sonybros have been screaming about is there somewhere.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Japan Studio co-developed with From. First party as first party gets.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Yeah, they ported the version re-created in UE4 to match the art style of the VII R. Why wouldn't they port the much more popular R itself ?
Last edited:
azertydu91
Hard to Kill
You were the one to claim sony made it permanent, if there is such a contract then there is proof, if there isn't I can't provide proof of something that doesn't exists.
So congrats with your claim you have to provide evidence and with mine I can't since there can't be proofs of inexistence....Just think for a few seconds how impossible it is to prove the inexistance of smth....
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Where's the statement from Square that says they're free to port FFVII R to other platforms but are choosing not to ? Do you have one and can share please ?
For all the "but if you read what Phil said he didn't specifically say that" you do I don't know how you're taking MS saying25% error ? lol ok, well going by your logic it's 75% true, so it's 3 times more true than it is false.
To mean they entered into permanent exclusivity
azertydu91
Hard to Kill
You were the one to claim sony made it permanent other people call you on your bullshit so provide the claims, people don't have to prove that they doubts you....especially you.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Emmy Rossum is also pretty hot. We can exchange our "exclusives".
Behavioral access remedies and all that
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
The example from MS submitting to the regulatory bodies have already been posted multiple times in this thread.
Sony is excluding Final Fantasy 16 from Xbox consoles, says Microsoft
Same goes for the Silent Hill 2 remake and other games that Sony has made ‘arrangements with third-party publishers which require the “exclusion” of Xbox’
ftw.usatoday.com
Still waiting for yours, tho.
Last edited:
Sony had a good relationship with Arkane, they should have tried to acquire them from Bethesda instead of playing it small and signing for timed exclusivities.
Now its too late and there is a big gap in PlayStation offering. Arkane are one of their kind studios, there really is no equivalent, and they are now the jewel of the crown of MS.
Now its too late and there is a big gap in PlayStation offering. Arkane are one of their kind studios, there really is no equivalent, and they are now the jewel of the crown of MS.
Last edited:
Like I swear Japan Studio splashes across the screen in the same fashion it does on Demon Soul's but you know common sense isn't really common.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
It's their product. They are free to release their games wherever they want to
unless you can show something that's preventing them from doing so.
GHG
Member
Emmy Rossum is also pretty hot. We can exchange our "exclusives".
Behavioral access remedies and all that
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
It's their product. They are free to release their games wherever they want to
It has already been posted, but you, and some other users, are deliberately choosing not to believe it because it mentions Bloodborne, a third party developed game whose IP is owned by a first party, even though everything in it is accurate
Last edited:
azertydu91
Hard to Kill
So a link about FFXVI and not FF7R remake, do you want to bring a link about how bloodborne is exclusive too ?But I'll bite even in this article it is treated as a supposition...So you have nbothing but MS words about Bloodborne and other shit that are probably even less precise that a blind man in a storm.The example from MS submitting to the regulatory bodies have already been posted multiple times in this thread.
Sony is excluding Final Fantasy 16 from Xbox consoles, says Microsoft
Same goes for the Silent Hill 2 remake and other games that Sony has made ‘arrangements with third-party publishers which require the “exclusion” of Xbox’
Still waiting for yours, tho.
The big fuss is playstation only gamers got so used to every major studio game day 1 and could list war major studio money hats. Now that a major studio game is not coming its the end of the world. But sony taking games away is cool but Microsoft can't because of reasons.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Where? Can you repost it here please or link it to me?
Any contract or statement that legit proves that Sony is still preventing FFVII Remake's release on Xbox?
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
You should really *READ* the article instead of just replying based on the headline.
Go read the article, please.
Sure
Last edited:
Mr Moose
Member
The example from MS submitting to the regulatory bodies have already been posted multiple times in this thread.
Sony is excluding Final Fantasy 16 from Xbox consoles, says Microsoft
Same goes for the Silent Hill 2 remake and other games that Sony has made ‘arrangements with third-party publishers which require the “exclusion” of Xbox’
Still waiting for yours, tho.
“In addition to having outright exclusive content, Sony has also entered into arrangements with third-party publishers which require the ‘exclusion’ of Xbox from the set of platforms these publishers can distribute their games on,” reads Microsoft’s statement. “Some prominent examples of these agreements include Final Fantasy 7 Remake (Square Enix), Bloodborne (From Software), the upcoming Final Fantasy 16 (Square Enix), and the recently announced Silent Hill 2 remastered (Bloober team).”
It's almost like MS lawyers don't know what the fuck they are talking about.
On page 11 of the document (opens in new tab), there's a reference to a "Superman" game as a PlayStation exclusive, which would appear at first glance to be a brand new, unannounced title.
Microsoft probably didn't just leak a PlayStation-exclusive Superman game
That's likely not the game they meant
www.gamesradar.com
Last edited:
azertydu91
Hard to Kill
And you have deemed it true just because it comes from MS....Even when the article itself treats it as a conjecture....So you have nothing, like bloodborne being a 3rd party and superman being devellopped, do you want to add tucker carlson in the mix the help your credibility ?It has already been posted, but you, and some other users, are deliberately choosing not to believe it because it mentions Bloodborne, a third party developed game whose IP is owned by a first party, even though everything in it is accurate
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
It must be true. MS would never mislead, like Bloodborne.It has already been posted, but you, and some other users, are deliberately choosing not to believe it because it mentions Bloodborne, a third party developed game whose IP is owned by a first party, even though everything in it is accurate
NonPhixion
Member
Weren’t you asking for proof of Square Enix saying such things in regards to other peoples claims? Does the same not apply to your claim or naw?
Gobjuduck
Banned
So it’s bad when the deal is HUGE, but keeping many smaller franchises away is fine.
Once Xbox owns the publisher / devs, they are funding every project.
This whole “Xbox exclusivity is bad, but Sony gets a pass because they are funding theirs” is weak.
Sony is acquiring developers too, they are buying way more third party exclusivity deals.
The only difference is Xbox has more money to make bigger purchases. If Sony had the bank, they’d do it too. just say you don’t like how big these purchases are, and not that Xbox’s business practices are bad and Sony’s are good.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Where does it say "permanent exclusive" or that Sony is still blocking the Xbox release" or "Sony extended the exclusivity contract?"
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
You're replying to older posts than the one you replied to in your last one. You're all over the place my friend.
I don't know what this means. I posted a proof where it says what I 'claimed'.
Yet no one in reply has posted any proof or statement about FFVII R being withheld from Xbox purely based on a Square Enix decision.
Where does it say "permanent exclusive" or that Sony is still blocking the Xbox release" or "Sony extended the exclusivity contract?"
What does "Sony have entered into arrangements with third party publishers which require the exclusion of Xbox" mean ?
Does that phrase mean something else to you ? If so, please let us know what.
Last edited:
azertydu91
Hard to Kill
Why bother answering your newer posts when you are paraphrasing the same post without anything substantial in it....Yet you never provided trusting sources for your claims, it has been debunked to hell and back above yet you keep posting it.
You're replying to older posts than the one you replied to in your last one. You're all over the place my friend.
I don't know what this means. I posted a proof where it says what I 'claimed'.
Yet no one in reply has posted any proof or statement about FFVII R being withheld from Xbox purely based on a Square Enix decision.
NonPhixion
Member
So your proof is what a MS lawyer stated in a document that did not point to any official source? Well done, Top Gun.
You're replying to older posts than the one you replied to in your last one. You're all over the place my friend.
I don't know what this means. I posted a proof where it says what I 'claimed'.
Yet no one in reply has posted any proof or statement about FFVII R being withheld from Xbox purely based on a Square Enix decision.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Doesn't say it at all. Reading comprehension fails many.
Where does it say "permanent exclusive" or that Sony is still blocking the Xbox release" or "Sony extended the exclusivity contract?"