Sony is pleased with multi-platform games

@zerothehero said:

@SecretPolice said:

I Herd they're going to bring more of their exclusive games to Xbox as well. Cows amcry. ;o

lol :P

you Piece of crap.

pot meet kettle

Four hours later and you still can't admit in the equality between Xbox being dry for the past year and Playstation being dry for the next...yet you are still responding. Wow lol. Internet troll to a T

I am sorry that mentioning the PS drought for the rest of the year upsets you. 🥺

Death to exclusives! Consumers rejoice!

Good. Sony is still the market share leader.

@wonderwinner: Damage control noted. 🤭

Sweet. So glad I don't have to purchase more hardware to play these games. Also, being able to utilize extra PC power to upgrade the graphics from the console version and the ability to use M&K.

@zerothehero said:

@SecretPolice said:

I Herd they're going to bring more of their exclusive games to Xbox as well. Cows amcry. ;o

lol :P

Nothing from sony is coming to xbox you Piece of crap. Its going to PC if anything.

lololol Nuff said. :P

@Pedro: what am I damage controlling here?

That Sony is diluting their exclusives.

@Pedro: Why would I damage control that? More games on PC is a good thing. HFW on my 3090 will be godly. Give me that HFR.

I forgot you have a pretend PC. My bad. 😂

@Pedro: yeah, Pedro, Go on, you got rekt because I believe Sony games on PC is a good thing and it doesn't fit your pathetic lemming narrative.

In your mind, even is getting rekt except you don't realize that you are just rekting yourself. 😂 Don't let me noting your damage control get you all upset. 😎

😴

Another person has been Pedroed.😎

@Pedro: You're boring. Definitely lost your touch. Anyway, I'm logging out because this board is stale and Pedro with its 53k posts and 20yo account is a really sad person.

Imagine wasting 20 years on a forum? LoL.

Logging out, by loserdro.

Damn. My presence really gets to you hardcore. How sad. 😥

To maximize profit they should focus on releasing their games on PC at same time as they do on consoles. I think having a wider reception really helps peak and prolong the hype and overall have better sales than if a game gets a console release followed by a PC release a couple years later.

C'mon Sony just put Demons Souls on other platforms

A win for everyone. 😁

Holy shit did you get triggered

Good job Pedro 😂😂😂😂😂

Pedro deserves kudos to rid the forums of the mental midget that WW is

I didn't know it was going to be that easy. 😏

Pedro is pretty much the same as he always was. The issue is that a lot of the interesting people that he argued with are now banned.

I wonder why? 🤔

@Pedro: Thank you, sir!

That's what they should do, I agree. They have inferior console hardware, gave up on hosting Japanese content (what they were known and loved for), and take forever to put out their AAA first party games these days.

This is a remarkable simplification and/or complete mischaracterization of the point I'm making. I don't have the energy to go through all of the seemingly intentional misinterpretations, but I will try to answer a few.

For one, I have no issue with people who continue to buy the games or spend money despite the predatory monetary practices. Where did you even get that from? My point could almost be described as antithetical to this: the publishers encourage these practices, and then use marketing and other nasty tricks to get people to continue purchasing the "new" games despite minimal changes because they have no choice!

Second, the point you make supporting the fact that it is successful for activision to engage in this despite the obviously minimal effort, you have no legs when you criticize "movie games," content-rich open-world games like TW3 and BOTW, etc. because these, regardless if you're a fan of them or not, require more effort than the rotation of some assets with a copy-paste job.

There are a few other assumptions you make about what I'm saying, but I'll leave those for now.

Now to your main point, which I believe most on this board will disagree with, just because it is a smash hit in sales, doesn't mean it is excellent. If this were the case, you should be applauding the performance of all great selling titles, hardware etc. Additionally, this near worship level of support that you seem to have for successful business models despite how obviously predatory they are is tangential to the point I make. There is little actual reason for a game like Call of Duty to get a yearly release.

Lasly, no, it isn't Ill-founded. If every multiplayer game I have dabbled in for an extended amount of time employed these practices, it would have been expensive enough to be prohibitive for at least a few of them. Come on.

Also singleplayer games, I never mentioned the genre alone as being susceptible to this. This is mostly a problem with multiplayer games since they are more profitable. I didn't bring the genre up before, but if I may in a way salient to the discusison, they absolutely would not be encouraged if these models take over. It's just not going to make dollar signs appear in a publishers' eyes unless they have an established market. Think about Square selling their games on mobile vs a small developer pitching a project to a publisher. The small dev's game would most likely have ads shoehorned in, part of why its hard to talk about mobile gaming next to what we're familiar with.

Interesting debate though honestly.

@luxuryheart: Ugh. Try re-reading the comments I made.

1. You have very specific issues with these publishers and developers. That is fine. But you really can't argue that gamers don't have a choice. This is a non critical activity. And because of that, gamers are not forced to purchase the next installment of COD or the others like it.

2. I do have legs when I criticize movie games. I make it rather clear that I don't the way in which is takes control away from players but the general gaming population do. Not every game has to be to my liking or catered towards me. I simply find other games that fit my taste. I am not going to say they should stop making these games if gamers are into them. There are many games that gamers enjoy that I can criticize but doesn't mean they should not be made or supported. I am not going to dive into the copy and paste comment and your references that counter.

3. I have near worship level of support for these successful business models? What? Pointing out the obvious is not equal to worship or adoration. You are confusing concepts. Also it is not a general disagreement on this board the smash hits are automatically excellent games. I would appreciate you not making claims that are blatantly false on my behalf.

4. Gamers can only play and spend on X amount of games. It doesn't matter if all games implement these practices you speak of or not. This also cements the reality that gamers have options. Which is counter to point number 1.

5. These models are currently the most profitable in comparison to any single player game but single player games are still made by a ratio that dwarfs these games. So, I am not sure what takeover would equate to. Is that monetarily speaking or number of games? If we are speaking monetarily, they have already taken over and single player games are still as strong as before. If we are talking about the number of these games dwarfing or surpassing single player in share numbers, that is impossible because of point 4.