kingfey
Banned
Why pay millions, when there is billions sitting in your bank?
-
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.
Jez Corden suggests 'Indiana Jones' wont be exclusive. Contested by Nick, admits old info 'could be wrong'
- Thread starter Maxwell Jacob Friedman
- Start date
- Rumor
kingfey
Banned
Those are not the same.
Minecraft on all system makes sense, because of the nature of the game. Its targeted towards kids. The marketability of the game, allows it to be on all devices around the world.
While MLB doesn't belong to Sony. It's MLB who wanted to make it multiplatform.
There are tons of minecraft versions aside of gaming, which are targeted for education and other stuff. It was never going to be a console exclusive game.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
A wild counter rumor appears.
OP wanna do a threadmark with this ?
-----------------------------------
Jez admits he might be wrong as he had 'old info'
OP wanna do a threadmark with this ?
-----------------------------------
Jez admits he might be wrong as he had 'old info'
Last edited:
Zok310
Banned
Tune is next time!
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
I'll be doing the same when Sony follows their footsteps. My post history will back me up as well. I even want games that I don't care for, to come to my platform of choice, just because I know someone out there will enjoy it.
Do some of y'all get happy and giddy like this too when you get to have a meal, then proceed to laugh at a poor person because he does not get to enjoy a meal? I don't get the rationality of enjoying someone else not being able to enjoy something that you enjoy? It's kinda weird...
Last edited:
Aguero9320
Member
I think it will be exclusive. I wish that it wouldn’t be.
Exclusives are stupid. Let me play what I want where I want, rather than denying me the opportunity to give you money or forcing me to buy both consoles. (Disclosure, I own them all)
Archaic bs.
Exclusives are stupid. Let me play what I want where I want, rather than denying me the opportunity to give you money or forcing me to buy both consoles. (Disclosure, I own them all)
Archaic bs.
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
I read the first page and saw a bunch of people talking up how this doesn't mean anything except more money for MS.
Look...I don't really give a shit how much money these companies are or aren't making. I don't really give a shit how much more a game can make if it's multiplat versus being an exclusive. Fact is, none of that means much for me as the customer, or a gamer. Exclusives may not necessarily be the biggest money makers (often times, not always), but that's NOT the only purpose they serve.
The benefits with games being exclusive (especially a first-party game) to a single platform, generally, are:
All of these things are much more infrequent when talking about games that are non-exclusive, especially 3P ones. Also worth noting that some first-party exclusives tend to exist simply as a means to add value to a platform's catalogue or cover gaps in terms of genres missing on the platform due to lack of certain 3P support. So please spare me with the "but they'll make so much more money!!" takes.
Anyway though, more on-topic, the situation with Indiana Jones is probably like how
SLB1904
said. Deal set up way before the acquisition, didn't involve Microsoft. Zenimax/Bethesda were still operating as a 3P then so naturally they made a deal for the game to be multiplat.
They can always change that with the sequel tho (well, if the game gets a sequel, partly depending on if the film is good).
Look...I don't really give a shit how much money these companies are or aren't making. I don't really give a shit how much more a game can make if it's multiplat versus being an exclusive. Fact is, none of that means much for me as the customer, or a gamer. Exclusives may not necessarily be the biggest money makers (often times, not always), but that's NOT the only purpose they serve.
The benefits with games being exclusive (especially a first-party game) to a single platform, generally, are:
-Less hardware configurations to worry about (at least simultaneously)
-More optimization and specific use of a singular hardware spec
-Full access to platform technical and human resources
-Providing a marquee branding image for a given platform (reinforces a
gaming culture around that platform brand)
-All of which help a lot of them generally have the resources to push
ahead and lead game design in one area or another for their time
All of these things are much more infrequent when talking about games that are non-exclusive, especially 3P ones. Also worth noting that some first-party exclusives tend to exist simply as a means to add value to a platform's catalogue or cover gaps in terms of genres missing on the platform due to lack of certain 3P support. So please spare me with the "but they'll make so much more money!!" takes.
Anyway though, more on-topic, the situation with Indiana Jones is probably like how
SLB1904
said. Deal set up way before the acquisition, didn't involve Microsoft. Zenimax/Bethesda were still operating as a 3P then so naturally they made a deal for the game to be multiplat.They can always change that with the sequel tho (well, if the game gets a sequel, partly depending on if the film is good).
Deerock71
Member
Last edited:
Kilau
Gold Member
Lognor
Banned
Indiana Jones, a huge ip, being developed by one of the best developers out there. Who gives a shit? Huh
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
It could also mean less games; Sony and Microsoft aren't made out of infinite money, and they still money to carry on normal operations. Publishers who would've normally been able to secure funding outside of platform holders, are now beholden to if the company that owns them post-acquisition has the funds themselves (or if that company takes out loans of its own).
If not, then that publisher or developer may no have the required funding from its parent company to get their game developed. A lot of people point to Microsoft's market cap but that $2.5 trillion isn't actually anywhere near the amount of money they have on hand to work with. It's just a valuation of their company's worth, which is partially based on what areas of markets they do business in and the growth opportunities investors see in those places.
Generally they bring in around $60 billion in profit each year, but there's also some billions of dollars they need to regularly have in at all times to operate at the capacity where they make revenues big enough to profit in $60 - $70 billion a year. It's same with any other company, including Sony. But with additional employees to pay salary for, bonuses for, 401Ks for, insurances for, equipment for, travel and paid vacation for, etc., that adds onto the operating income these companies already have to account for, and then you always have the risk that software development budgets can balloon, or other parts of the company could contract in revenue (or worst), needing an emergency shift of allocated funding from lesser-priority areas to prop up the failing parts, etc.
Not to mention the extra expenses that'll come with marketing, advertising, distribution, QA testing and so on with each additional game being made through these acquisitions...like I said these companies buying them don't have infinite money, and they definitely don't have as much in stable operating income (or even cash reserves) as market caps indicate, but while that also applies to Sony I wanted to specifically focus on Microsoft because some people think their market cap means they can spend into oblivion.
It definitely helps in some ways but it doesn't wipe away the possibility that newly acquired studios can't be shut down, that goes for any of these platform holders or investment groups buying developers and publishers really. And before that point is reached, they would probably scale back capacity of production meaning less game releases.
Lucifers Beard
Member
who are these guys anyway? I’m old and out of the loop. Do these people claim to be insiders and if so, how?
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
Jez Corden is a claimed insider and on the Xbox Two podcast with Rand Al Thor.
Bernd Lauert
Banned
Machine Games making a poo poo game? Doubtful. The dialogue will be Reddit tier cringe, though.
kingfey
Banned
Still, jez heard it was exclusive due to old info.
Whatever is happening behind the scene, no knows about it.
kingfey
Banned
This is why I dont trust insiders. No one knows anything.
This showcase would help us get more info.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
No platforms were mentioned in the announcement teaser trailer, so its anyones idea.
Oddvintagechap
Member
Does it matter? fighting about a screensaver.
TheGodfather07
Member
One of them says it won't be exclusive and the other say it will, adding a "last time i heard" just to cover his back. That's just typical of these fraud "insiders" who really know nothing and just make guesses.
Last edited:
kingfey
Banned
Could end up like Goldeneye.
HONESTLY, this is our best guess at the moment:
kingfey
Banned
I like a good screensaver. I don't buy cheap ones. Makes my phone experience fresh.
MasterCornholio
Member
kingfey
Banned
No one knows that deal.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
My uncle who works at Nintendo does.
MasterCornholio
Member
Only Disney and Microsoft do. What I said is true though. There has to be some sort of agreement because Microsoft doesn’t own the IP.
Last edited:
kingfey
Banned
All you need to know is that the studio which is making the game, is MS 1st party studio. This gives leverage to MS.
Other than that, we have no clue. Hope this showcase gives us more answers, or else we would be on this subject for another year.
kingfey
Banned
My condolences to your uncle. He got kidnapped by Nintendo ninjas.
MasterCornholio
Member
Actually Disney are the ones that own the IP not Microsoft. Really depends on what they want to happen with the franchise.
Jerm411
Member
Plantoid
Member
I assure you that a big AAA Indy game will move a lot of copies, it's been years since the last uncharted.
Better yet if it turns out multiplat
Topher
Gold Member
It very well could be a huge IP again, but living up to that pedigree isn't going to be easy. Machine Games will need some top notch writers to pull it off.
Hobbygaming
has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
The interesting thing will be if there's 1 or 2 other games at the Xbox show that will come to PlayStation due to prior deals
Hobbygaming
has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
I do hope it is exclusive though and is Xbox's answer to Uncharted. I'm hoping Hellblade 2 is amazing too and all of these games look impressive graphically
Competition is good
Competition is good
Lognor
Banned
Sure. Like spiderman before 2002. Or top gun 30 years ago! What's your point?
You obviously care about the ip because here you are in this thread commenting about it!
Lognor
Banned
I wouldn't say writing is what made Indiana Jones what it was. Sure, it's important. But if it's "only" an uncharted clone, good writing shouldn't matter, right? Uncharted writing is passable, nothing else. It's the set pieces that matter, or at least for uncharted.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Exclusive. Not exclusive.
I think a bigger issue is in modern day, does the average gamer even care about an Indiana Jones game? The best movies were 30-40 years ago.
Even worse, just imagine if the game is based off recent Harrison Ford where the guy is a senior citizen.
I think a bigger issue is in modern day, does the average gamer even care about an Indiana Jones game? The best movies were 30-40 years ago.
Even worse, just imagine if the game is based off recent Harrison Ford where the guy is a senior citizen.
Topher
Gold Member
The Indiana Jones movies were written by Lawrence Kasdan at the height of his career. They were directed by Steven Spielberg at the height of his career. Uncharted at its best, as great as they were, has nothing on the Indiana Jones movies.
Edit: Having said that, I do think it is weird to call the writing in Uncharted "passable" when the primary writer in the franchise is revered in the video game industry because of her work with Uncharted.
Last edited:
MasterCornholio
Member
Call me retarded but there’s a stark difference between movies and games. Just because the movie is incredible doesn’t mean the game will be and vice versa.
Topher
Gold Member
Yep. Exactly my point. That's the question. Can Machine Games create a game that lives up to the pedigree of past Indiana Jones movies?
MasterCornholio
Member
Looking at the history of Indiana Jones games it won’t take much to surpass them. I’m surprised at how bad some of them are. As for surpassing the movie that’s a pretty tall order. Honestly I think they should aim at making the first one good and just build from there sort of like Naughty Dog with the first Uncharted. Not a bad start for the franchise but the second blew it out of the water.
As for the devs I only know them for their Wolfenstein games. Can’t really say what my opinion is based off that since Indiana Jones will be a very different experience.
Topher
Gold Member
Surpassing the movies is almost impossible. You've got a George Lucas story, written by Lawrence Kasdan, directed by Steven Spielberg, with Harrison Ford starring.
Surpassing that?
Those expectations are unfair, but I'm hoping for a good game.
Last edited:
MasterCornholio
Member
Surpassing the movies is almost impossible. You've got a George Lucas story, written by Lawrence Kasdan, directed by Steven Spielberg, with Harrison Ford starring.
Surpassing that?
Those expectations are unfair, but I'm hoping for a good game.
They sure have a lot of work to do. Hopefully they don’t disappoint.
kingfey
Banned
Raiders of the lost ark is impossible to surpass that.Surpassing the movies is almost impossible. You've got a George Lucas story, written by Lawrence Kasdan, directed by Steven Spielberg, with Harrison Ford starring.
Surpassing that?
Those expectations are unfair, but I'm hoping for a good game.
Sorry machine games, but that movie is something that is hard to surpass.
Swift_Star
Banned
Everyone moneyhats and Microsoft is not innocent, lol.
it’s not weird when you realize who is saying that lol.
That said… I’m more interested in seeing what this game will do to differentiate itself from both uncharted and tomb raider.
Magic Carpet
Member
Indiana Jones the mobile Pixel Art point and click. Raiders of the Lost Pixel Art.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
They might not have a choice.
Might be a clause to use the license.
azertydu91
Hard to Kill
You can like licenses even if you think they aren't big or big anymore what is this bullshit parallel?I liked F zero but it is less popular than it was, just like Indiana jones so sure it may gain back popularity if a new movie and a new game come out in a short interval but to say Indianna jones is as big as it used to be is false...Though in your example I really don't get Spiderman, because there was the Tobey spidey, the garfiel spidey and now the holland spidey, and with games it works even less since no spiderman games sold better than the PS4 version and Miles morales....
Edit for the record the best Spidey is
Garfield
Last edited: