• 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.

Phil Spencer: “We don’t pay for exclusivity on our own platform."

Status
Not open for further replies.
analog_future

analog_future

Resident Crybaby
From the FTC hearing today:


The FTC is now questioning Phil Spencer about Call of Duty and negotiating deals with Activision for the Xbox Series S / X version for around the launch of that console in 2020. A document mentions the revenue split offered, and we heard yesterday that Activision wanted a better split to work on an Xbox Series S / X optimized version.

The FTC is trying to establish the idea of Microsoft acquiring content so it doesn’t have to pay these fees and can have exclusive content. “If you own content you don’t have to pay for exclusive content?” asks the FTC.

“We don’t pay for exclusivity on our own platform,” says Spencer. He does note that Sony apparently signs deals to keep third-party games off Xbox.

“When a competitor is actively signing third-party games to skip our platform, it became more important to us to secure third-party games on our platform, inclusive of Call of Duty.
Click to expand...

Quite fascinating.

Sony clearly has no qualms with paying 3rd party developers to keep their games off of competitors' platforms (see Final Fantasy XVI, Forspoken, Final Fantasy VII Remake, Ghostwire Tokyo, Deathloop, KOTOR Remake, Pragmata, etc.. etc..) but Microsoft apparently isn't willing interested in that approach.
 
Last edited:
Gaiff

Gaiff

SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Bollocks. He just doesn't have the leverage like in the days of the 360 (and surprise, they did this back then!). Signing an exclusivity deal with Xbox means the publisher will see their sales tank by 60-70% and they would ask the moon from Microsoft to make up for that which obviously Microsoft can't do.

We've seen the sales split and when the Playstation version is outselling the Xbox version by as much as 4:1, you can tell what is going on.
 
Last edited:
Gudji

Gudji

Member
Cracking Up Lol GIF
 
Fabieter

Fabieter

Member
LakeOf9 said:
I think he's saying they aren't paying for it, developers are choosing to make them xbox exclusive because of ms support/marketing

not sure I fully believe it but that's what he's saying
Click to expand...

They choose to not to do a simultaneous release of high on life on Playstation because xbox did some marketing without a binding contract and its still not on Playstation after six month. This is a straight lie.
 
IntentionalPun

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
I think you are just mis-reading that.

He's saying we don't have to pay for exclusivity if they own the game. That's it.

This is just a total non-quote.. look at the question asked.

“If you own content you don’t have to pay for exclusive content?”

He basically answered "no we don't have to pay for exclusivity of content we own."
 
Last edited:
LiquidMetal14

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
These guys are a bunch of idiots they can't admit anything they've been doing. Microsoft's monopolistic tactics have been at play for a long time. But it isn't worth stating something like this when every developer or publisher or console manufacturer has some contract to have exclusivity or some degree of content or whatever the agreement would be. Microsoft is not exempt of this. It's the way business has been done for a long time. At the end of the day the install base does the talking and the more leverage you have the more you could probably ask for. Microsoft is in no strong position and it's been like that for a while but most of it has been because of its own doing not because of some stupid reason or excuse they're using to don't play the success of their main competitor. One company knows how to run their business in the sector and the other one doesn't.
 
Pelta88

Pelta88

Member
If OP was watching the proceedings or following this acquisition he'understand that XBOX doesn't pay for exclusivity, anymore, because there is a significant cost in making content exclusive to platform with only 16% market share.

Que the "Well Microsoft can just buy whatever" responses that omit the fact that XBOX is a division with a defined budget.

Or that Phil Spencer just testified that Activision threatened to remove COD from XB unless they agreed to take less royalties from every copy sold.
 
Last edited:
IntentionalPun

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Pelta88 said:
If OP was watching the proceedings or following this acquisition he'understand that XBOX doesn't pay for exclusivity, anymore, because there is a significant cost in making content exclusive to platform with only 16% market share.

Que the "Well Microsoft can just buy whatever" responses that omit the fact that XBOX is a division with a defined budget.

Or that Phil Spencer just testified that Activision threatened to remove COD from XB unless they agreed to take less royalties from every copy sold.
Click to expand...
That's not even what Phil was saying.

He was asked if they pay for exclusivity of content they own. “If you own content you don’t have to pay for exclusive content?”

He never said "we never pay for exclusivity of any content", as he wasn't asked a question about that.
 
SlimySnake

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
hououinkyouma00 said:
Spencer is a fucking joke. You don’t pay for exclusivity but you buy an entire publisher and make the biggest games exclusive.
Click to expand...

I think Phil is such a liar that even if this deal goes through, no one will ever respect him again. he will be a joke for the rest of his life. The biggest lying suit of them all. A used car salesman who will always be mocked on the internet no matter how many xbox consoles he sells going forward.

His legacy would be that of a liar.
 
Bumblebeetuna

Bumblebeetuna

Member
I was listening to that exchange and wasn’t the lawyer just making the point that MS can buy creators and then not have to pay for that content to be exclusive?

In other words, they don’t have to pay for Starfield to be console exclusive, because they own it?
 
Negotiator101

Negotiator101

Member
LakeOf9 said:
I think he's saying they aren't paying for it, developers are choosing to make them xbox exclusive because of ms support/marketing

not sure I fully believe it but that's what he's saying
Click to expand...
Gamepass day 1 is money for the developer up front therefore the developer is getting a big load of cash to get the game out the door. Obviously contracts are written so if he's lying this can easily be checked, basically he's not lying.
 
Gambit2483

Gambit2483

Member
analog_future said:
From the FTC hearing today:




Quite fascinating.

Sony clearly has no qualms with paying 3rd party developers to keep their games off of competitors' platforms (see Final Fantasy XVI, Forspoken, Final Fantasy VII Remake, Ghostwire Tokyo, Deathloop, KOTOR Remake, Pragmata, etc.. etc..) but Microsoft apparently isn't willing interested in that approach.
Click to expand...
KreexJu.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
  • Poll
If Phil Spencer tears down the wall of exclusives on Xbox, will those of you who own an Xbox sell their system?
23
1K
Kururu replied
Phil Spencer on what the hell is happening in the games industry and why exclusives have become a risky business
Business Game Dev 3 4 5 6 7
301
18K
ProtoByte replied
VGC: "Phil Spencer, for so long cast as Xbox’s saviour, may ultimately be remembered as the man who killed it.”
Opinion Business 2 3
142
9K
March Climber replied
[Windows Central] Microsoft and Xbox announced 'Marvel's Blade' at The Game Awards — but could it also be coming to PlayStation?
Platform 6 7 8 9 10
499
35K
Darsxx82 replied
  • Locked
Phil Spencer says they haven't decided if TESVI will be a console exclusive "We look at it on a case by case"
Game Dev
20
1K
Robb replied
Top Bottom