FromSoftware didn’t want Sony to publish Dark Souls as it was ‘disappointed’ by how Demon’s Souls was treated
-
Depends on whether you consider Xbox and Windows to count as 2 different platforms or not.
-
Nintendo doesn't "personally" do anything. They are a corporation.
And they do purchase both IP's and studios. Just off the top of my head they bought Monolith from Bandai-Namco and Bayonetta has been exclusive ever since the second one.
Microsoft has been way worse than Sony. Zenimax alone was might have been bigger than Sony's entire portfolio depending on how you measure. Activision-Blizzard was far, far bigger. And at least with Zenimax, it seems like most of their studios have gotten worse since acquisition, with a lot of them being shut down.
I don't mean to overly defenf Sony, but just paying publishers for 1 year of exclusivity seems pretty mild in comparison. I'd prefer they didn't buy studios like Bungie, but at the same time the acquisitions of Naughty Dog and Insomniac seem to have worked out pretty well.
-
Hey I was a skeptic too but got to play it for an hour during the network test and am actually cautiously optimistic. I could still be wrong but it seemed like they put a lot of thought into the new systems.
-
I thought they were putting all their stuff on playstation too, is that not the case?
-
I have also expressed doubt about nightreign in the past but am on board now. And calling elden ring part of the enshitification process is absolutely ridiculous. I dont care if you're a "fromsoft purist", elden ring is a phenomenal game by any metric.
-
That's been rumored for years. I remember back in the day seeing rumors about Halo coming to PlayStation.
Not entirely without merit. Minecraft has been released on pretty much everything with a CPU, although some of those may have been before Microsoft purchased Mojang. There were a lot of weird scenarios after the Zenimax and Activision-Blizzard where the now-Microsoft-owned studios had pre-existing contracts with Sony they needed to honor. It looks like some of the IP they recently purchased that had traditionally been multiplat might remain that way, like the "Age of ___" series, Doom, and Call of Duty.
I've seen rumors that Starfield might come to PS5, but nothing substantial. I don't think there would have been any chance of that if it had sold well on Xbox and Windows.
I've also seen rumors of Halo, Gears of War, and Forza, but I will not start buying those unless there are more signs that Xbox is giving up on hardware entirely. If they could get deals done to get GamePass on Playstation and Switch that might start to look more realistic though.
Most of their games are still exclusive though. Avowed just released last weekend for Xbox and Windows and no hint of a PlayStation release for example.
The reverse is also true. Sony has published MLB games for the Xbox and Switch for example.
-
"to publish customers"
To benefit their company, they don't think about punishing the customers for a single second when they make those decisions.
-
Sony doesn’t really do that, not in the way that we’ve seen Microsoft do it at least. And most PlayStation exclusives are on PC now or are planned for PC.
-
Fair, I thought more of those had already gone across.
-
Just as a heads up, it's more than rumors, it's now an active part of their strategy going forward.
Exclusive games that were released previously and are worth porting generally will, to find new revenue and audience basically. Same as new releases with no PlayStation / switch (2) platforms announced yet, it's a matter of development resources to port those, a when and not an if. (Avowed just released exclusively and south of midnight coming next month both are yet to be announced for ps5 for instance, the focus was on a good release of already announced platforms)Recent examples: Indiana Jones will release im spring on ps5, same as age of empires 2 and mythology and forza horizon 5. The rest is coming. they'll just try to sync it with a calendar that makes sense
Seo of thieves and grounded, pentiment and high fi rush already got ported as well, I'd expect starfield and age of empires 4 to get ported for their DLC releases at the end of the year.Look out for a big support of switch 2 from Xbox as well
-
I cannot wrap my head around how Elden Ring is a good game. The world is empty and dull. The bosses are copy paste. The dungeons are copy paste. It was so boring for me from beginning to end. The story was dumb. I don't remember one character because they're all boring and there's no reason to give a shit about any of them. I will probably die not understanding why Elden Ring was considered good instead average at best.
-
I'm sorry you feel that way.
-
Nintendo doesn’t “personally” do anything. They are a corporation.
lol. lmao, even.
Just off the top of my head they bought Monolith from Bandai-Namco and Bayonetta has been exclusive ever since the second one.
Monolithsoft was three separate offices- Nintendo bought two of them, which were both already working exclusively as a Nintendo second party, and the third was dissolved during the Bandai-Namco merger due to the fact that Namco was treating them like shit after Nakamura retired and the merger was the last straw. Monolithsoft is one, if not the only, exception to Nintendo staying out of buying companies, and Iwata has even commented on it only happening because Sigiuira basically asked them to, and it not being something they want or like to do.
As for Bayonettas since 2, Nintendo's publishing it for PlatinumGames, who used to be a Nintendo second party. They started working with Sega in 2008 iirc because Nintendo literally pointed Sega their way (This is the same time period when Nintendo was giving Sega work to try to dig them out of their hole, e.g. Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games). My understanding is that internally Nintendo still considers PlatinumGames a second party dev, despite Sega publishing several games for them.
You can decide if those are exceptional cases or something as bad as Sony, but I know where my vote lies.
Microsoft has been way worse than sony.
Probably, yeah.
I don't mean to overly defend Sony
Then don't? Going to completely uninvolved third parties and snapping them up to hoard their IPs, or simply outright paying them to not publish elsewhere (coughepiccough) should always be indefensible. Xbox is worse, but Sony is still real bad about this shit, and Epic is worse than all of them.
-
14% ownership is ownership. Not just "big investor". It's not big enough ownership to pull unilateral changes, but when someone owns 14% of your company they do sit at the big boy table.
-
To reiterate this, in the US, buying anything over 5% of a public company requires public disclosure to the SEC, as it means the buyer has immense influence on that company. At that point other shareholders, i.e other owners, should know about it.
-
G [email protected] shared this topic
