Sega "failed" because of a lot of reasons but Sony going into gaming with deep pockets was definitely part of the reason.
Sounds simillar with the current landscape
Yeah, mixed up the stats. will fix the first post and yeah it is an additional distinction between AAA and next-gen console title even if there is an overlap.
Yeah in the EU they secured a 1 month timed exclusivity for Tomb raider 1. What people seem to fail to mention with Tomb Raider 2 "killing sega" too is that software sales on the Sega Saturn had tanked 60% and on hardware it was getting outsold 6x before core-design decided not to release on it. It wasn't the reason Sega didn’t sell consoles.This is of course not the whole truth and you know that so we have to file this under trolling.
For anyone who likes to know what Three didn't tell you:
It was an unnecessary move by Sony but they still did it. And Lara Croft exploded to mass media popularity back then. It certainly accelerated the death of the Saturn to a certain degree.
Have you ever thought that it exploded because PS did marketing with it and the PlayStation 1 was actually what was popular?
We will never know because it could be a consequence or a coincidence but that doesn't change the fact that Sony outright paid money for a game to not be released on a rival platform,a business practice they still do nowadays, to great success if we count their first deal from the 90's as a success. So part of their success is to actively harm competition by signing deals, since the very beginning of their PlayStation brand.
But this isn't limited to just them especially when the example given has a prequel where Sega did the same.
It's of course not the same when you have a 4 weeks exclusivity in only one region instead of securing a deal where the other platform is left in the dust completely.
So you're saying that Sony's one year timed exclusives of Ghostwire and Deathloop are way less damaging than MS buying Bethesda to cancel PS5 versions in development
That's true but that's what the deal was for, they made it so Sega can use Tomb raider exclusivity as a selling point. The popularity of Playstation made ignoring it for longer bad business for the TR IP. The sequel not coming to Saturn and getting cancelled was only on Saturn's own failure as a product, it didn't cause it though IMO.
Like when MS paid to have Halo not on Apple Mac?Sony Vies for Tomb Raider 2 Exclusive - IGN
Executives at Sony are looking to make Tomb Raider 2 an exclusive…www.ign.com
Core Design
Original home of Lara Croft and Tomb Raider. Discover more about the company and the games developed by Core Design.core-design.com
they were paid not to release it not decided to release it
The loss of Tomb Raider didn't kill either Sega or the Mac either
So you're saying that the MS ABK merger could be the start of the Sony downfall and that should have been stopped. Thanks for clearing it up. I wholeheartedly agree with your conclusions. The merger should not have passed.
I think we've gathered they did an exclusivity marketing agreement already. It was posted and that's what kicked off the discussion.
Sega's downfall was well documented. How many articles can you find online where it talks about Sega's downfall was a result of marketing deals?
Because the Saturn as a product had failed, not because it caused its failure.
Your limited understanding had you going to a Reddit post about a YouTuber deciphering a PR statement. Hoeg is generally good but he jumps to a lot of conclusions like Sony must have given up rights as a parent company because Bungie use words like "creatively independent."
Wow I didn't know Silent Hill 2 and Stellar Blade were exclusive. Sucks for Xbox players but at least with MS having 30+ studios now hopefully they can get more games out to match Sony's 3rd party deals.
If GamePass prices increase in the future, it's still going to be relatively cheaper for me to to play the games I want to play. 3 x AAA games at full price is more expensive than GamePass for 1 year.
Bethesda is a talent acquisition for gamepass, which needs constant content.
Regulators were only concerned with COD and cloud gaming, Sony only pushed the COD angle heavily, they never really lobbied against say Spyro or Blizzard games being exclusive.
Sega themselves announced Saturn was a dead console in 1997: "Saturn's not our future". And Sega fans want to blame Sony that third parties abandoned a system that Sega themselves said was done?
So Sony signing a deal to not make a TR sequel on Saturn was because games started to not sell well on Saturn? What? That doesn't make sense at all.
We don't have the numbers to say how far MS can reasonably go losing out on PS COD money but the CMA now does. Xbox has been losing money for a long time but remember that is exactly why Satya wanted to sell Xbox during the Xbox One days. Despite being able to afford funding Xbox for ages Satya saw Xbox as dead weight and a bad investment. The only reason Satya didn't sell it was because Phil convinced him on how Xbox could become part of MS' subscription & services grand strategy. Satya gave Phil a shot & opened the vault to help Xbox win the content battle, that is how we got Obsidian, Team Ninja etc. and later Bethesda and ABK.
Are you related to this woman:
Fyi there were 5 companies trying to buy ActivisionBlizzard it just so happens that MS pulled out ahead there. If MS had passed somebody else would own ABK.
I mean are you really going to be mad 25 years later after Sega tried it first on the first game?
He is a merger and acquisition lawyer. This is literally his field. You claim he's "jumping to conclusions", which is funny because that is actually exactly what you've been doing all this time. Your whole argument that the Bungie acquisition was without any terms or conditions is nothing more than assumption.
"Bungie will continue to operate independently, maintaining the ability to self-publish and reach players wherever they choose to play." If you're independently operating and independently self publishing, then Sony has no say in it. That's the very definition of independent.
You're blatantly misrepresenting what he's said. Here is what he's actually said:
I have no idea why you keep insisting as if it's completely normal for an acquisition for a platform holder will remain full creative, operation and publishing independence, all while announcing it as a fully multiplatform studio. Because it isn't.
Yes, Sony can alter that arrangement if there is no contract preventing that, but considering Bungies history and the very clear wording used in press releases and announcement from both Sony and Bungie, it is more than reasonable to assume that there probably is a contract that specifically says that Bungie gets to decide what to develop and what to develop for.
Why doesn’t it make sense? Edios cancelled all Saturn games even ones it didn't have any exclusivity contracts on. They had to give up very little because they knew that it wouldn't sell there anyway because the Saturn had failed. They made out like a bandit.
I'm not saying it's the same. I'm saying the "AT ALL" only happened because Sega Saturn had failed and it didn't make sense for Edios to release there later. That fact was on Saturns failure. It was already dead in sales of hardware and software.
Xbox didn't get Team Ninja. It got Team Donte
Freedom of expression of non AO games, no more censorship of Japanese games. Bring back anime tiddie and pantsu to Playstation!
That’s just cancelling pudding in advance.
Haha good catch, Ninja Theory not Team Ninja is what I meant.
You can get a factual answer by reading the CMAs report. You'll come to notice that regulatory bodies are very nuanced in their evidence gathering and decision making. Much more so than the average gamer.
Played the Diablo 4 beta on PS5 this weekend, the game felt so unpolished and janky compared to older blizz games. I think they may be rushing this game out the door a few monthsntoo early...if this means an independent Blizzard who use to say "it will be done when it is done" then maybe this is a blessing in disguise and we finally get a WarCraft 4.
If even MS gets us a WarCraft 4 that will do.
Nintendo would challenge such acquisitions and unlike MS Sony doesn't have the we're the biggest loser of the console makers argument.
This, are we really back again at believing that Bungie remains fully in charge and Sony does not fully control them.
