-
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.
Leaked Marketing Agreement for RE8 Forces Parity and Blocks the Game From GamePass
- Thread starter Krizalidx11
- Start date
- Rumor
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
It's a marketing deal, it's common sense
I don't think Sony would have to say anything, releasing it on gamepass would theoretically break that deal
Work out great for Disney
I don't think Sony would have to say anything, releasing it on gamepass would theoretically break that deal
You know Sony loves when big companies comes beating their war chest at them.
Work out great for Disney
Last edited:
TheGodfather07
Member
at the end of it they always end up embarrassing themselves and looking extremely stupid and desperate, yet they keep doing it. we'll have another rumour tomorrow with no legit proof that will end up with 15 pages. do they even play games or are they just microsoft marketing people?
Alright
Banned
I brought up that Sony should be called out when they do stuff bad, like mixing politics and gaming and been hypocrites. Not when fake stuff comes from twitter.
You made a post responding only to the political bit, with a political point.
Aggelos
Member
PharaoTutAnchAmun
Member
40% advantage for the XboxSX compared to the PS5?? You still believe that delusional lie??yep. i didnt see this screenshot in your OP. where is this from?
Pretty crazy if true. I have always said that forced parity is a real thing and it's good to see this in writing.
i wonder if the xbox one x version will be paired back as well despite the 40% advantage. this is going to be fascinating to visit when the DF comparisons release.
O boy i swear...some people
skit_data
Member
He...he wrote One X...
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
i swear some people indeed.
There's more nuance to this than a lot of people are reading. In short, it won't necessarily prevent it from coming to Game Pass, and it certainly won't prevent it from being better on Xbox.
What it does do is make it more complicated for Xbox to get select third party games into Game Pass, presuming this is a standard contract that's been being used for some time.
That just gives MS more incentive to buy publishers.
We know the focus here is Game Pass, and that means first and third parties day one. If Sony makes that harder without actually moving into that method of selling themselves, all they're really doing is poking the bear.
What it does do is make it more complicated for Xbox to get select third party games into Game Pass, presuming this is a standard contract that's been being used for some time.
That just gives MS more incentive to buy publishers.
We know the focus here is Game Pass, and that means first and third parties day one. If Sony makes that harder without actually moving into that method of selling themselves, all they're really doing is poking the bear.
KingT731
Member
In reference to the One X. Back when RE3 Remake came out the One X version had an initially higher resolution but the framerate was "bad" so in a future update Capcom lowered the res and the framerate was just fine. Hypothetically if the same situation occurs I don't think it would be the result of any type of silly parity clause.
DrAspirino
Banned
It wouldn't be unheard of. Remember when Sony tried to buy a timed exclusivity for Starfield? Microsoft decided it wasn't worth the hassle, that was sick of Sony getting timed exclusives, and bought the entire studio, publisher and parent company (Zenimax).
If anything, I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft, out of spite, do exactly the same they did with Bethesda. They certainly have the money to do so.
I don't think people have got the scale MS are aiming for into their heads yet. When they say billions, they don't mean "a lot".
And whether you think that's a reasonable number or not, you have to think of their plans in terms of those numbers. I've said it before, but they want Game Pass to be the default way people experience video games.
Sony pissing away millions on marketing deals that say "no Game Pass" is going to end up like a moth tapping a giant. It's just not the game MS is playing right now. If it starts getting in the way of their bigger plans, MS will have to react.
Last edited:
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Lol you seriously believe that nonsense lmao
Reizo Ryuu
Member
I don't personally know the numbers, so what you're saying might be true, but you can't really say this without factoring in the installbase.
Like if there were 10m GCs sold, and RE4 sold 2 million copies on it, that's 20% of the userbase, whereas if the ps2 sold 40m, and RE4 sold 4 million copies on it, that's 10%, making it effectively less popular on that platform; more people that are able to buy it, and thus ending up selling more, doesn't automatically mean it was actually more popular.
Mr Moose
Member
One X.
It's been a while since I looked it up, but numbers for Code Veronica and 0/4 weren't massively smaller or bigger than RE3.
The franchise had seen its best days on PlayStation. Without the film and the changes to 4, it probably wouldn't exist today.
PharaoTutAnchAmun
Member
Oeps sorry i misread that part. I'am sorry
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
I think going forward, if some of these terms are what Sony leverages for timed exclusivity and co-marketing deals, we'll probably see less 3P publishers jump on said deals, especially for next-gen only titles (where previous gen install bases cannot be leveraged). Ultimately the choice comes down to the publisher, but these type of deals essentially become pricier and pricier and at some point I don't think the prices feel justified for what you get.
It should also be kept in mind though that deals like the one for RE Village were set up before current gen kicked off, so for other cross-gen games where Sony has co-marketing or timed exclusivity deals, don't be surprised if there are similar clauses in them, particularly if the deals were arranged late 2018 or into 2019/early 2020.
Honestly the shittier part is the forced technical parity; there is probably wiggle room in what constitutes as technical parity under these terms, but even though PS5 and the Series X are relatively close in overall capability, they still have some unique advantages to one another and forcing technical parity ironically also hurts the platform with the timed exclusivity/co-marketing deal if the elements covered under that part of the contract are what I suspect.
Granted, Microsoft's done this in the past as well, although we'd have to go back a few years. Forcing technical parity is the part of these contracts that always sticks out as crappy, and it's pretty disappointing to see Sony continue with that.
This is why ultimately install base size for consoles doesn't say too much; guaranteed rate of sale increases for any given piece of software do not scale linearly with increases in the install base, and rarely scale exponentially (though never scale inversely). We have enough examples of this happening.
Generally what larger console install bases promise is more breathing room for a larger variety of software to find an audience within that install base, as you may have percentage X of that install base buying Game A and percentage Y of that base buying Game B, with no overlap. However, say on console 2 with an install base of exactly 50% console 1, you may not get a 1:1 scaling of percentage X and Y on that platform, so there's a chance Game A or Game B sell even less than the total difference in console install base because of lack of audience overlap.
That's usually the better use-case of measuring console install base numbers, anyway. But on RE4, I know some people like to say it performed worst-than-expected but Capcom did the GC port absolutely ZERO favors by announcing the PS2 version (with additional content) mere weeks before the Gamecube release. That was always a bit of a scummy move IMO and it did hurt sales performance of the game on GC, as a lot of multi-console owners who would've purchased it on GC just waited for the PS2 version instead.
It should also be kept in mind though that deals like the one for RE Village were set up before current gen kicked off, so for other cross-gen games where Sony has co-marketing or timed exclusivity deals, don't be surprised if there are similar clauses in them, particularly if the deals were arranged late 2018 or into 2019/early 2020.
Honestly the shittier part is the forced technical parity; there is probably wiggle room in what constitutes as technical parity under these terms, but even though PS5 and the Series X are relatively close in overall capability, they still have some unique advantages to one another and forcing technical parity ironically also hurts the platform with the timed exclusivity/co-marketing deal if the elements covered under that part of the contract are what I suspect.
Granted, Microsoft's done this in the past as well, although we'd have to go back a few years. Forcing technical parity is the part of these contracts that always sticks out as crappy, and it's pretty disappointing to see Sony continue with that.
This is why ultimately install base size for consoles doesn't say too much; guaranteed rate of sale increases for any given piece of software do not scale linearly with increases in the install base, and rarely scale exponentially (though never scale inversely). We have enough examples of this happening.
Generally what larger console install bases promise is more breathing room for a larger variety of software to find an audience within that install base, as you may have percentage X of that install base buying Game A and percentage Y of that base buying Game B, with no overlap. However, say on console 2 with an install base of exactly 50% console 1, you may not get a 1:1 scaling of percentage X and Y on that platform, so there's a chance Game A or Game B sell even less than the total difference in console install base because of lack of audience overlap.
That's usually the better use-case of measuring console install base numbers, anyway. But on RE4, I know some people like to say it performed worst-than-expected but Capcom did the GC port absolutely ZERO favors by announcing the PS2 version (with additional content) mere weeks before the Gamecube release. That was always a bit of a scummy move IMO and it did hurt sales performance of the game on GC, as a lot of multi-console owners who would've purchased it on GC just waited for the PS2 version instead.
Last edited:
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
For someone who writes a lot you sure don't seem to like reading
cireza
Member
Why ask a question when there is the answer in my following post ? The person I was responding to stated that it was debunked in the topic. Yeah, I did not take the time to read 10 pages of topic, so I basically took his word and deleted the post to avoid derailing the thread.
If you take pleasure in this, that's awesome. Enjoy to your heart's content. Rest assured, I still believe that Sony is the worst thing that happened to video-games as a whole, even if in this case, it seems like standard practices in the end (which still suck for the players).
Last edited:
SLB1904
Banned
DForce
NaughtyDog Defense Force
Seriously, you guys need to take the time to read the thread before replying now.
killatopak
Gold Member
RE4 and REChronicles sold 2m and 1.3m on the Wii.
REmake on the PS3 exclusively sold 2.9m
Reminder that it sold 1.35m on the GC
RE4 on PS2 sold 2.3m
Last edited:
Reizo Ryuu
Member
That still doesn't mean anything to me without the installbase numbers.
killatopak
Gold Member
Wii has 100m install base.
GC has 22m
a 4.55 times increase in installbase resulted in 0.2 or 20% increase in sales for RE4, the best selling GC RE
PS3 has 87m
a 4 times increase in installbase resulted in 1.15 or 115% increase in sales for REmake, the second best selling GC RE.
RE4 sold 1.6m on the GC
REmake sold 1.35 on the GC
i’m not pulling these numbers from memory
https://www.capcom.co.jp/ir/english/finance/million.html
Last edited:
Derktron
Banned
Even though it seems that it has been misinformed, I hope Microsoft finally becomes even more aggressive this generation as Sony has done the last generation and this is where I hope Nintendo sees this as an opportunity to also stay in their lane and do what they've been doing with the Switch. Let both companies fight it off.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Totally. Sony moneyhatted SFV too, blocking it from Xbox and Switch.
No doubt MS got pissed at the Bethesda deals Sony made lately, and there was rumour Sony wanted to do a Starfield deal too. So MS said fuck this and bought them out.
MS should gobble up Capcom.
Bruno_Arrais85
Member
dude Sony paid for part of the development of SFV.
assurdum
Banned
Only an Xbox fanboy can think is remotely possible. Such deal are repeatedly did on both sides, Christ the level of ignorance of some people in this thread is something else. At least check what we talking about indeed to cry stupidly? So now it's a sort of next excuse, I guess Third parties are automatically downgraded on series X port when an exclusive deals on ps5 occurs. I call it
Last edited:
Sw0pDiller
Member
Is this another blame Sony thread? So much hate going around...
JackMcGunns
Member
What's crazy is that we don't know what other publishers/devs Sony has made deals with. We do know that Sony went around and visited various studios and made deals to either lock in time exclusives or marketing deals similar to what we're seeing here with Capcom.
All these head to heads comparing technical details are basically useless if Sony paid for parity, Hitman 3 wasn't in the list apparently.
All these head to heads comparing technical details are basically useless if Sony paid for parity, Hitman 3 wasn't in the list apparently.
FingerBang
Member
11 pages where it's been explained several times that this is standard, that there is no clause to make the Xbox versions run like the PlayStation ones and that it doesn't mean the game was going to be released on Game Pass on day one, and people still keep spreading bullshit.
At this point I blame the mods and the board for not putting an end to this. Is this the kind of discussions you want to happen here? Is this how we talk about videogames?
At this point I blame the mods and the board for not putting an end to this. Is this the kind of discussions you want to happen here? Is this how we talk about videogames?
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Exactly.
assurdum
Banned
Last edited:
Reizo Ryuu
Member
This is still a bit fuzzy to me for determining popularity, because surely there's overlap between GC and Wii users, as in how many of those actually bought the game for the first time? The ps3 comparison has a gap of 12 years and it could very well be the first time many of those people bought it.
A better comparison for popularity is GC vs PS2.
Physiognomonics
Member
Didn't they pay for some of SFV development? Anyways what Sony did here is not a good look. Instead of spending money to prevent a release on other platform (and the game will still be released on Xbox) they should keep their studios instead of getting rid of them. They should spend their money on creating new content to build a better future. Another short term decision by Sony.
JackMcGunns
Member
Yea, no coincidence at all that Capcom would announced exact same resolution and framerate settings for RE8, including a funky 45fps. So naive.
assurdum
Banned
Yea because until now it's never happened on multiplat
skit_data
Member
Sony had the marketing rights to Hitman 3. Still quite a difference in end result.
On the other side of things, MS had marketing rights to AC Valhalla, and the PS5 version performed worse after patch whereas XSX version performed better.
Judging from that there is more reason to believe MS is more picky about stuff like this than Sony.
So Sony must be "scared" of Stadia too?
It's always delusions of grandeur with anything xbox isn't it.
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Last edited:
graywolf323
Member
honestly I think it's a combination of fanboys (on all sides) & trolls
killatopak
Gold Member
Are you for real dude? Install base has a limited effect on how many copies get sold the bigger the installbase is. Besides it’s still audience preference on genre, ip retention on certain platforms that prevails.
If want you sales numbers and installbase I’ve given everything before so look at my older posts or at the sourced linked in my previous post so go look at them yourself.
Just as a reminder on how stupid this installbase comparison is.
Viewtiful Joe released at the same time on PS2 and GC. It sold a whopping 46k copies worldwide on the PS2 while it only sold a measly 275k on the GC.
assurdum
Banned
Gaffers after reading this post
Allnamestakenlol
Member
Eww, the P word.
Fuck parity.
MasterCornholio
Member
Just wait for the comparisons to see what "technical parity" means.
assurdum
Banned
Just to be clear the parity used in the contract is referred to the contents not graphic performance. It's a typical clause.
MasterCornholio
Member
But the PS5 isn't Native 4K correct?
[VG Tech] Resident Evil Village PS4/Pro vs PS5 Frame Rate Comparison (Gameplay Demo)
PS4 Pro in Prioritize Screen Resolution Mode, PS5 with Ray Tracing On and PS5 with Ray Tracing Off all render at a resolution of 3840x2160 using what appears to be Checkerboard Rendering. There's noticeable ghosting on PS4 Pro that isn't present to the same extent on the other consoles. PS4...
You'll have to wait and see what the base resolution is on both before making that claim.
Last edited: