All of your games are belong to US.

  • 132 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

51177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 69

User Lists: 0

#1 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 51177 Posts

It seems to me that gamers and journalist have trivialized the acquisition of Zenimax. Not only is it an exceptionally large purchase, it is possibly one of the biggest move in gaming. Now, it is easy to be carried away by the silliness of console wars but, I am still a bit shocked that folks are not seeing the issue with this move. Acquisitions like these should not be celebrated, especially when more acquisitions are rumored to be in the pipeline. If the industry continues to move in this direction we are going to have games being controlled and developed by a few major companies. That does not serve gamers interest nor do I see it as a positive move for the industry as a whole.

I blame the obsession with exclusives. Last gen we were starting to see deviations from the number of exclusives in console gaming, which I view as a great thing because it benefits gamers. But, journalists and a loud minority of gamers keep pushing for more exclusives and the great need for them. Well, I hope the future satiate this desire, because don't for a second believe that a large acquisitions such as Zenimax is going to net less exclusives, it is going to do exactly what some have been asking for the past gen, more exclusives. Sony hijacked two games from Xbox for the next year. It would be folly to believe that there isn't going to be a counter to this. As it has been publicly stated by MS, MS doesn't need Zenimax's games to be available on PS5 or Switch to be a viable purchase. Keep in mind, the industry will be losing a multiplatform developer and publisher that is now going to be part of Xbox. In case that isn't clear, that is not good for the industry. That is opposite of what gaming should be heading to, at least from my view.

For now, MS acquisitions aren't as problematic because their games are defaulted on PC, Xbox and Android (streaming). When compared to its competitions is pretty diverse access but that is how it is now. Things can change and like all companies dumb shit can transpire at anytime. I don't expect games to be solely exclusive to services like Game Pass but stupidity has never been a limiting factor for Microsoft, so who knows.🤷‍♀️

So, do you see these large acquisitions as something good, bad or neutral to gaming?

Avatar image for Random_Matt
Random_Matt

6175

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

#2 Random_Matt
Member since 2013 • 6175 Posts

Bad, 100% guaranteed the elder scrolls game and whatever else will be filled with micro transactions.

Avatar image for sakaixx
sakaiXx

12028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 5

#3  Edited By sakaiXx
Member since 2013 • 12028 Posts

I agree 100% Pedro. Multiplatform publisher acquisition like like Zenimax is bad cause you are losing a significant amount of playerbase that are fans of the games specifically.

Not only that, this whole purchase may led to some potential acquisition race from by rivals like Sony and Nintendo as well as Google and Amazon looking to strengthen their streaming options. We already received some good leak that Amazon is looking into buying publishers and teams for their upcoming steeaming platform and Microsoft/Sony rumored in search for another zenimax sized publisher purchase.

Avatar image for madrocketeer
madrocketeer

8910

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -6

User Lists: 0

#4 madrocketeer
Member since 2005 • 8910 Posts

Removing competition from a market is always bad. Sadly, consolidation is very much a trend in many markets and many industries. Gaming has been no exception.

For one thing, the more I looked into the Bethesda acquisition, the more convinced I became that it was a pre-emptive, defensive move by Microsoft. They likely believed that they either pounce on Bethesda now, or lose them to Google or Amazon.

Avatar image for deactivated-60bf765068a74
deactivated-60bf765068a74

9558

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By deactivated-60bf765068a74
Member since 2007 • 9558 Posts

@Pedro: I hate to break it to you. Nobody is streaming games on android you can mark that off your list right now. Nobody pulling there phone to play AAA console/pc games.

I don't use my phone unless its an emergency. Nobody is gaming on that crap for pc/console games by streaming them. Like what am I gonna do download roblox or some shit thats popping on ios and anddroid shop hell fing no. I don't game that way and never will the screen is trash its too small there no controls. Switch Lite is just 1000% better option every time for every situation.

The End of mobile gaming.

Avatar image for philamona
philamona

50

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#6 philamona
Member since 2020 • 50 Posts

With the issues of mergers and acquisitions, is there a fear the video game industry will eventually become like Big Tech (where there is little competition and monopolistic)?

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

9594

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#7 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 9594 Posts

Not a problem. All of these games will be available on pc with better fps, visuals and resolution.

Avatar image for deactivated-60bf765068a74
deactivated-60bf765068a74

9558

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8  Edited By deactivated-60bf765068a74
Member since 2007 • 9558 Posts

@philamona said:

With the issues of mergers and acquisitions, is there a fear the video game industry will eventually become like Big Tech (where there is little competition and monopolistic)?

Well look at disney they bought fox right and now they own x-men and avatar and aliens and predator right and all fox's stuff.

Tencent is the only gaming company doing these big moves. They own all of china gaming already and are trying to take over pc and nobody is coming close to stopping them. Microsoft buying Bethesda is nothing compared everything Tencent owns in gaming right now the other companies better start doing something soon or its over and they will dominate.

Avatar image for zmanbarzel
ZmanBarzel

2644

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9 ZmanBarzel
Member since 2014 • 2644 Posts

I really don't have an issue with Microsoft buying Zenimax. If employees don't like the games they're being tasked with making, or the actions of their corporate overlords, they move on and start newer, smaller developers to make what they want.

Will these new games be limited when compared to what a $150M budget could get Rockstar or Sony Santa Monica? Almost assuredly, but I'll gladly take a greater number of smaller, cheaper games versus fewer huge AAA titles.

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

9594

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#10 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 9594 Posts

@zmanbarzel said:

I really don't have an issue with Microsoft buying Zenimax. If employees don't like the games they're being tasked with making, or the actions of their corporate overlords, they move on and start newer, smaller developers to make what they want.

Will these new games be limited when compared to what a $150M budget could get Rockstar or Sony Santa Monica? Almost assuredly, but I'll gladly take a greater number of smaller, cheaper games versus fewer huge AAA titles.

Smaller cheaper games is all what Xbox has. At this point even their flagship Halo game looks like a smaller cheaper game 😱

Avatar image for xantufrog
xantufrog

16153

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#11 xantufrog  Moderator
Member since 2013 • 16153 Posts

Good points

Avatar image for Telekill
Telekill

10830

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#12 Telekill  Online
Member since 2003 • 10830 Posts

Agreed. These mass acquisitions (regardless of who does it) are not good for gamers.

Avatar image for ahrequenomori
AhReQueNoMori

624

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 10

#13 AhReQueNoMori
Member since 2020 • 624 Posts

@hardwenzen: Hey, they are trying their best, OK? Don't be mean.

Avatar image for navyguy21
navyguy21

15987

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#14 navyguy21  Online
Member since 2003 • 15987 Posts

I often find that I agree with @Pedro and this is no different.

However, I disagree in a few areas.

Gamers control the industry and what we are seeing is a direct result of our gaming habits.

Microtransactions are a thing because people keep buying them.

Resolution and framerates are sacrificed because we complain about graphics.

Pushing graphics and new tech to produce said graphics is expensive, resulting in soaring development costs. Why do you think Sony increased prices to $70?

What Microsoft is doing with Game Pass was inevitable.....by somebody.

This is why MS said that Sony wasn't their competition, it is Google and Amazon.

Higher prices and development costs risks another 1980s crash. The industry needed a subscription based model because of the cheaper barrier for entry and broader appeal.......just as Netflix did for movies back in the day.

Google was pouring money into R&D to produce a game service after Onlive failed. Sony bought Gaikai for the same reason but didn't see the future in it.

It was inevitable. Look for MS to continue is purchases to shore up its variety of content. They have very few E rated games so I think their next purchase will likely be Sega or a publisher that can produce more kid friendly games.

I don't think it's a bad thing necessarily, there's still room for traditional developers and publishers just like movies are still released on Bluray and even DVD.

Avatar image for philamona
philamona

50

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#15 philamona
Member since 2020 • 50 Posts

@zmanbarzel said:

I really don't have an issue with Microsoft buying Zenimax. If employees don't like the games they're being tasked with making, or the actions of their corporate overlords, they move on and start newer, smaller developers to make what they want.

Will these new games be limited when compared to what a $150M budget could get Rockstar or Sony Santa Monica? Almost assuredly, but I'll gladly take a greater number of smaller, cheaper games versus fewer huge AAA titles.

Let us hope that these newer, smaller developers are not bought by large publishers or allowed to compete as healthy competition is good for the industry.

Avatar image for bluestars
Bluestars

2789

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#16 Bluestars
Member since 2019 • 2789 Posts

i want MS to buy more huge studios and make them exclusives.

just so i can laugh at cow reactions like the meltdown on ‘The Medium’ 9-10 review thread...and when the 7.5 billion bethesda purchase was confirmed HAH

if you are poor and have a choice of one console..fair doo’s but if you are a 1 system fannyboy by choice or have real hate for another console and its games then i look forward to the future laughs

HAH

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

51177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 69

User Lists: 0

#17 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 51177 Posts

@navyguy21 said:

I often find that I agree with @Pedro and this is no different.

However, I disagree in a few areas.

Gamers control the industry and what we are seeing is a direct result of our gaming habits.

Microtransactions are a thing because people keep buying them.

Resolution and framerates are sacrificed because we complain about graphics.

Pushing graphics and new tech to produce said graphics is expensive, resulting in soaring development costs. Why do you think Sony increased prices to $70?

What Microsoft is doing with Game Pass was inevitable.....by somebody.

This is why MS said that Sony wasn't their competition, it is Google and Amazon.

Higher prices and development costs risks another 1980s crash. The industry needed a subscription based model because of the cheaper barrier for entry and broader appeal.......just as Netflix did for movies back in the day.

Google was pouring money into R&D to produce a game service after Onlive failed. Sony bought Gaikai for the same reason but didn't see the future in it.

It was inevitable. Look for MS to continue is purchases to shore up its variety of content. They have very few E rated games so I think their next purchase will likely be Sega or a publisher that can produce more kid friendly games.

I don't think it's a bad thing necessarily, there's still room for traditional developers and publishers just like movies are still released on Bluray and even DVD.

There is no doubt that gamers have some control in the industry because of the general gaming habits. However, these habits can be guided by large companies. Companies have a certain degree of control or manipulation to the overall narrative.

I didn't cover microtransactions because that beast is independent of acquisitions and is already running wild in addition to being company agnostic.

I don't have an issue with GamePass or other services. As you have stated, it is an inevitability. Someone was going to do it. Right now, it is a great multi-platform service. For now. 😉 But, when Microsoft "Borg" publishers and studios, I can see this being a problem for gamers in general. Especially when the publisher and studios are multi-platform developers. If they continue to make games for all of the platforms they did prior to the acquisition then that addresses part of the problem but that is just unrealistic expectations.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

51177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 69

User Lists: 0

#18  Edited By Pedro
Member since 2002 • 51177 Posts

@zmanbarzel said:

I really don't have an issue with Microsoft buying Zenimax. If employees don't like the games they're being tasked with making, or the actions of their corporate overlords, they move on and start newer, smaller developers to make what they want.

Will these new games be limited when compared to what a $150M budget could get Rockstar or Sony Santa Monica? Almost assuredly, but I'll gladly take a greater number of smaller, cheaper games versus fewer huge AAA titles.

The gaming industry is not particularly large but particularly small. Finding other opportunities is not as easy as you are making it out to be and starting a studio is even more difficult, especially if your experience is in larger studios and your skillset is very specialized. This is not even considering the capital needed to start a studio.

Avatar image for zmanbarzel
ZmanBarzel

2644

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#19 ZmanBarzel
Member since 2014 • 2644 Posts

@philamona said:
@zmanbarzel said:

I really don't have an issue with Microsoft buying Zenimax. If employees don't like the games they're being tasked with making, or the actions of their corporate overlords, they move on and start newer, smaller developers to make what they want.

Will these new games be limited when compared to what a $150M budget could get Rockstar or Sony Santa Monica? Almost assuredly, but I'll gladly take a greater number of smaller, cheaper games versus fewer huge AAA titles.

Let us hope that these newer, smaller developers are not bought by large publishers or allowed to compete as healthy competition is good for the industry.

And if they are? They can leave and start their own development house.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

51177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 69

User Lists: 0

#20 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 51177 Posts

@zmanbarzel said:

And if they are? They can leave and start their own development house.

That is not an easy thing to do. You are ignoring the many factors involved in game development.

Avatar image for pc_rocks
PC_Rocks

5632

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#21 PC_Rocks
Member since 2018 • 5632 Posts

Agreed. I truly believed when MS said their competition isn't Sony and Nintendo. This is just another area where big tech companies are trying to consolidate power. Tencent, Amazon, Google, MS and Apple will do everything to lock people in their ecosystems.

Avatar image for regnaston
regnaston

2802

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#22  Edited By regnaston
Member since 2008 • 2802 Posts

I suspect all games developed by Zenimax will not be solely exclusive to the XBOX. All Xbox game will probably come to PC.

Some games will also goto Nintendo. I think Sony is the one that might be left out in the cold so to speak, but who knows perhaps this will force some change so that Sony, MS, and Nintendo just make exclusives from a small set of self developed IP's (Halo, Forza, Zelda, Mario, God of War) and the others are multiplat.

Avatar image for deactivated-60bf765068a74
deactivated-60bf765068a74

9558

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23  Edited By deactivated-60bf765068a74
Member since 2007 • 9558 Posts

@navyguy21 said:

I often find that I agree with @Pedro and this is no different.

However, I disagree in a few areas.

Gamers control the industry and what we are seeing is a direct result of our gaming habits.

Microtransactions are a thing because people keep buying them.

Resolution and framerates are sacrificed because we complain about graphics.

Pushing graphics and new tech to produce said graphics is expensive, resulting in soaring development costs. Why do you think Sony increased prices to $70?

What Microsoft is doing with Game Pass was inevitable.....by somebody.

This is why MS said that Sony wasn't their competition, it is Google and Amazon.

Higher prices and development costs risks another 1980s crash. The industry needed a subscription based model because of the cheaper barrier for entry and broader appeal.......just as Netflix did for movies back in the day.

Google was pouring money into R&D to produce a game service after Onlive failed. Sony bought Gaikai for the same reason but didn't see the future in it.

It was inevitable. Look for MS to continue is purchases to shore up its variety of content. They have very few E rated games so I think their next purchase will likely be Sega or a publisher that can produce more kid friendly games.

I don't think it's a bad thing necessarily, there's still room for traditional developers and publishers just like movies are still released on Bluray and even DVD.

You almost always agree with Pedro? This is the same Pedro who asked what looked wrong with this screenshot of Halo Infinite and then asked what the problem with it was.

Now not only is Pedro's credibility teetering yours is as well. That is very questionable if you almost agree with die hard lem almost always. I'm sorry but I don't think system wars can really side with you anymore past this point now that we see where you stand with a lem that sees nothing wrong with a ugly textured NPC that recieved a ton of backlash on the internet and everyone saw something wrong with but Pedro.

and before you say almost always isn't always agreeing with him this is way too big of an issue to be against 99.9999% of the internet to agree with him so often.

Avatar image for hrt_rulz01
hrt_rulz01

20826

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24  Edited By hrt_rulz01
Member since 2006 • 20826 Posts

Yeah I agree... but I guess that's what you get though when everyone goes on & on about exclusives and how important they are etc. MS is just doing what everyone has been asking for, gamers and the media alike.

Avatar image for davillain-
DaVillain-

46917

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#25 DaVillain-  Moderator
Member since 2014 • 46917 Posts

@ProtossRushX said:
@navyguy21 said:

I often find that I agree with @Pedro and this is no different.

However, I disagree in a few areas.

Gamers control the industry and what we are seeing is a direct result of our gaming habits.

Microtransactions are a thing because people keep buying them.

Resolution and framerates are sacrificed because we complain about graphics.

Pushing graphics and new tech to produce said graphics is expensive, resulting in soaring development costs. Why do you think Sony increased prices to $70?

What Microsoft is doing with Game Pass was inevitable.....by somebody.

This is why MS said that Sony wasn't their competition, it is Google and Amazon.

Higher prices and development costs risks another 1980s crash. The industry needed a subscription based model because of the cheaper barrier for entry and broader appeal.......just as Netflix did for movies back in the day.

Google was pouring money into R&D to produce a game service after Onlive failed. Sony bought Gaikai for the same reason but didn't see the future in it.

It was inevitable. Look for MS to continue is purchases to shore up its variety of content. They have very few E rated games so I think their next purchase will likely be Sega or a publisher that can produce more kid friendly games.

I don't think it's a bad thing necessarily, there's still room for traditional developers and publishers just like movies are still released on Bluray and even DVD.

You almost always agree with Pedro? This is the same Pedro who asked what looked wrong with this screenshot of Halo Infinite and then asked what the problem with it was.

Now not only is Pedro's credibility teetering yours is as well. That is very questionable if you almost agree with die hard lem almost always. I'm sorry but I don't think system wars can really side with you anymore past this point now that we see where you stand with a lem that sees nothing wrong with a ugly textured NPC that recieved a ton of backlash on the internet and everyone saw something wrong with but Pedro.

My fellow mods, please don't banned this guy. He makes me laugh than the average cows here🤭😂🤣

Avatar image for regnaston
regnaston

2802

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#26 regnaston
Member since 2008 • 2802 Posts

@davillain-: LOL

yep very "special" person

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

51177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 69

User Lists: 0

#27 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 51177 Posts

@davillain- said:

My fellow mods, please don't banned this guy. He makes me laugh than the average cows here🤭😂🤣

He is obsessed with me. I am tired of having so many fans. 😌 With that said, he is perpetually making claims about me that are false. I think that should be addressed. 😎

Avatar image for shadyacshuns
shadyacshuns

6267

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#28 shadyacshuns
Member since 2007 • 6267 Posts

Exclusives are not a problem if one is not a fanboy.

Avatar image for regnaston
regnaston

2802

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#29  Edited By regnaston
Member since 2008 • 2802 Posts

@Pedro said:
@davillain- said:

My fellow mods, please don't banned this guy. He makes me laugh than the average cows here🤭😂🤣

He is obsessed with me. I am tired of having so many fans. 😌 With that said, he is perpetually making claims about me that are false. I think that should be addressed. 😎

yeah same here. Accused me of being mad about the PSN hacks 12 years ago and posting here about them. I never even posted about that.

Avatar image for navyguy21
navyguy21

15987

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#30 navyguy21  Online
Member since 2003 • 15987 Posts

@ProtossRushX: I honestly don't know how to respond to you.

You type without recognizing you are just as bad as you claim Pedro to be.

My statement was meant for when he posts traditional replies to posts, and his opinions on different aspects of gaming.

I am not referring to when he is so clearly trolling you guys and you fall for it every time.

I am able to separate the two.

Just as I agree with some of your posts, does that automatically make me a cow? Do I also lose credibility?

Try not to take this place so seriously

Avatar image for osan0
osan0

16293

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 osan0
Member since 2004 • 16293 Posts

yeah its a tricky one. TL:DR its not a good thing for us. But due to the way the industry works they are required for a company to compete.

ideally i should be able yo buy Horizon from the MS store to play on my Linux based PC using joycons if i want. or buy halo from PSN to play on the switch using a PS5 controller. at the moment everything is too tightly coupled together.

but, as a company, how do you compete? what do you compete on? in the games industry content is king. the industry is littered with examples of exclusive content causing a surge in the sale of its host platform. mario, tetris, GT, GTA3, Halo, gears, wii sports and on and on and on.

if i'm MS/sony/nintendo how do i entice people to my platform without content that can only be played on it? how do i entice people to choose my platform over someone elses? also where is the money to be made? its not the hardware itself since consoles are sold at a loss or with razer thin margins. it's licensing fees and online services and, most importantly, games. if you dont have the right games, compelling exclusive content, then no one buys your console, no one subscribes to your services, 3rd parties dont release on your platform (so no licensing fees)....its just lose lose all round.

MS tried with the X1. they wanted to provide the platform and services while 3rd parties made the games (to paraphrase an old joke: developers make games, MS makes money. that was the plan.). it was an unmitigated disaster.

i would love to see the business of making game being separate to the business of selling consoles and services. i would love it if the structure of the industry was such that making an exclusive just made absolutely no sense. i would love to be able to choose what service i use to play online (or maybe not even use a service, just connect to someone server. yes cheating i know yadda yadda) and be able to play all my games on it that way. i would love to see a console hardware business where it wouldn't cost a company 5+ billion dollars just to get their foot in the door (seriously no other company is even considering entering the console business in any major capacity. its a seriously toxic and badly functioning industry).

but we have none of that. we have what we have and when you need to sell games and services to make some money and shift hardware in this business exclusives have proven to be the most effective way to do that. so unfortunately this is going to get worse :(.

Avatar image for lamprey263
lamprey263

39293

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#32 lamprey263
Member since 2006 • 39293 Posts

Time for people to put up or shut up, all those people that think getting an Xbox is a waste of money because they have roid raging PCs should have nothing to fear except being weighed down by all that extra money in their pocket when all these games can be played for $10/month.

Avatar image for aadhya12
Aadhya12

5

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#33 Aadhya12
Member since 2021 • 5 Posts

Never tried such game before, like Brawlstars but Mobile Legend style. Archwar Heroes and Demons

Avatar image for ghost_of_phobos
Ghost_of_Phobos

2185

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#34  Edited By Ghost_of_Phobos
Member since 2020 • 2185 Posts

Exclusives are a necessary evil. Companies do need to differentiate and content is the best way of doing so. Like Netflix and Prime having their own shows. Having hardware tied to the service sucks though. It would be like Prime and Netflix making me buy a different TV for each subscription.

Avatar image for SolidGame_basic
SolidGame_basic

31811

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 SolidGame_basic
Member since 2003 • 31811 Posts

I like exclusives and I'm pro competition. MS doesn't strike me as a company that is going to seal off Bethesda games from Nintendo and Sony. But it doesn't really concern me either way. Can play them on PC if that is the case. From my point of view, Sony and Nintendo are super successful and MS owning Bethesda isn't going to change that. I predict MS will offer Bethesda games day 1 on Game Pass, and may even give them timed exclusivity, but they aren't going to turn away money from other consoles. Why? Because the other consoles don't have Game Pass, so if people want to buy the games full price, let them. MS still has a compelling offer with those games being on Game Pass on day 1. Also, look at Minecraft. Still multiplat.

Avatar image for ahrequenomori
AhReQueNoMori

624

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 10

#36  Edited By AhReQueNoMori
Member since 2020 • 624 Posts

@ghost_of_phobos: I agree. People usually see the "exclusives are bad" part of it only, but competition brings about many other benefits and makes the industry grow.

Avatar image for BenjaminBanklin
BenjaminBanklin

8315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 BenjaminBanklin
Member since 2004 • 8315 Posts

As long as the games come to PC still, it is what it is. Moves like this should have been foreshadowed when MS entered the industry. You don't get to a trillion dollar market cap by allowing competition. An MS gaming monopoly isn't going to be an overnight thing, but a slow burn if they can get it.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

50187

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#38 mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 50187 Posts

I know the selling and buying of companies is a necessary and even a good thing, I just sort of wish that more would open as well.

There has to be a happy middle ground between disappointing, huge-budget AAA games and rewarding, low-budget independent games.

Sometimes I wish Bioware, for example, had been shutdown around the time of Dragon Age 2, and they had all gone off to other studios or created their own.

@ghost_of_phobos said:

Exclusives are a necessary evil. Companies do need to differentiate and content is the best way of doing so. Like Netflix and Prime having their own shows. Having hardware tied to the service sucks though. It would be like Prime and Netflix making me buy a different TV for each subscription.

I wouldn't go so far as to say they are a necessary evil, but I can understand wanting to maintain ownership of something you yourself created. If you didn't create it, though? You can piss off; paying for exclusivity is a bad practice.

Avatar image for ConanTheStoner
ConanTheStoner

20707

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39 ConanTheStoner  Online
Member since 2011 • 20707 Posts
@mrbojangles25 said:

If you didn't create it, though? You can piss off; paying for exclusivity is a bad practice.

Yup, exactly.

And the whole idea that 3rd party exclusives are "good for competition" and somehow benefit gamers is nonsense.

I mean, we've already seen it play out. Up through gen 6, third party exclusives were the norm. The bottom fell out gen 7, most series went multiplat, and we've only seen less and less of 3rd party exclusives since. Did it kill competition? Nope. Do more people have access to more games now? Yep.

It's just so deeply engrained in gamer "culture" to cheer for walling off games, rallying against their own self interest.

-

Got into this with someone on here a while back. And they were like "but if it weren't for these exclusives, I'd have no reason to buy these multiple boxes!"... and it's like yes you idiot. That's the point lol. How is that a good thing for you as a gamer.

Avatar image for Chutebox
Chutebox

47610

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 Chutebox
Member since 2007 • 47610 Posts

@mrbojangles25: "If you didn't create it, though? You can piss off; paying for exclusivity is a bad practice."

I can't tell how much I hate buying any sort of exclusive content/game. it's beyond lame.

Avatar image for Livecommander
Livecommander

1388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#41 Livecommander
Member since 2009 • 1388 Posts

@hrt_rulz01: people were/are asking that ms produces there own quality exclusives and a get a few ip acquisitions.

Gamers know squat about taking over a whole parent company.

This is like sony buying the entire marvel rights.. and w.e there parent company is too.

Zenimax wouldn't have been bought if xbox gave 2 shits about there 1st and second party offerings.

Some nerve Pedro has blaming exclusives when this entire business move was the result of xbox neglecting exclusives.

Besides the money.. having your own darn exclusives is the only thing that saves moves like this from happening.

Sorry ass excuse of a gaming division xbox is atm. Face it. Keeping the big name multiplate and using the money to make their own exclusive project after is the only way I'll see it as a respectful move.

Avatar image for shadyacshuns
shadyacshuns

6267

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#42 shadyacshuns
Member since 2007 • 6267 Posts

I don't see how they are "a problem" for any dedicated gamer who owns all platforms. Someone who wants the convenience of having everything on PC is, you guessed it, a PC fanboy. You want all games to be on your Switch so you can play them on the go, yep, you're still a fanboy who's gonna be disappointed.

Either get all available platforms, or stfu when a game comes out that you can't play because you aren't invested enough in your hobby to do so.

Me personally? I don't like PC gaming, so if a game comes along that is only PC, I don't mind at all because chances are I wouldn't have enjoyed it in the first place. Same thing probably exists for some one who enjoys traditional console gaming, but doesn't like handheld gaming. Chances are they aren't going to be interested in a particular handheld game that comes out.

So there really shouldn't be a problem for anyone involved. Any complaints are going to be contrarian at best.

Avatar image for SolidGame_basic
SolidGame_basic

31811

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 SolidGame_basic
Member since 2003 • 31811 Posts

@briguyb13 said:

I don't see how they are "a problem" for any dedicated gamer who owns all platforms. Someone who wants the convenience of having everything on PC is, you guessed it, a PC fanboy. You want all games to be on your Switch so you can play them on the go, yep, you're still a fanboy who's gonna be disappointed.

Either get all available platforms, or stfu when a game comes out that you can't play because you aren't invested enough in your hobby to do so.

Me personally? I don't like PC gaming, so if a game comes along that is only PC, I don't mind at all because chances are I wouldn't have enjoyed it in the first place. Same thing probably exists for some one who enjoys traditional console gaming, but doesn't like handheld gaming. Chances are they aren't going to be interested in a particular handheld game that comes out.

So there really shouldn't be a problem for anyone involved. Any complaints are going to be contrarian at best.

Yea, I bet there are people here who would love to see Nintendo just become a 3rd party software company. But then we wouldn't have the great Switch. That's just boring to me.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

50187

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#44  Edited By mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 50187 Posts

@ConanTheStoner said:
@mrbojangles25 said:

If you didn't create it, though? You can piss off; paying for exclusivity is a bad practice.

...

It's just so deeply engrained in gamer "culture" to cheer for walling off games, rallying against their own self interest.

...

Yeah and I can't stand it. There is absolutely NOTHING to be gained from exclusives from a consumer standpoint.

CoD is a franchise I tend to dislike, but I am absolutely loving Warzone because it's a.) on all platforms, and b.) it is crossplay. It's the first time I've been able to play with my real-life friends online in ages.

Crossplay is arguably the single best thing to happen to gaming in the past few years (I know it's existed since Windows XP but it hasn't been really a big thing until recently).

I hope future games, specifically Diablo 4 and other coop games, are crossplay as well.

Avatar image for deactivated-6092a2d005fba
deactivated-6092a2d005fba

22663

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#45 deactivated-6092a2d005fba
Member since 2015 • 22663 Posts

I see MS buying Bethesda as a good thing so long as they skip the PS5 altogether.

Avatar image for blueinheaven
blueinheaven

5385

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#46 blueinheaven
Member since 2008 • 5385 Posts

Yeah it's a bad thing for us but a good thing for MS. I really don't think people understand how important the Bethesda acquisition was for MS. But it really depends on what MS do with it afterwards that matters.

If they still release Bethesda games on PS5 it won't have a massive impact other than giving them money they don't need in which case why the hell did they even do it in the first place? But if it's exclusive to Xbox/PC, well... imagine the scenario.

Elder Scrolls 6, Fallout 5, etc, if people are considering a console and one of them has these games and one doesn't you can bet your life it's a no-brainer which one they're going to buy. Whether you like these games or not people will make hardware buying choices based on these games, such is the incredible branding pull they have.

Being selfish for a moment, none of this affects me, fortunately, as I'll be playing on PC with Game Pass so I won't even have to pay to play unless that changes and they go Xbox exclusive in which case yes, I will be SUPER pissed off but I honestly don't see that happening. My current situation with MS dictates that no matter who they buy the same will still apply which is great for me so personally if they are doing all this to make GP indispensable or just to make their console an essential purchase for non PC gamers they're heading in the right direction but yes, I can see the adverse effect this will have on the industry long-term.

Avatar image for jasonofa36
JasonOfA36

3182

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#47 JasonOfA36  Online
Member since 2016 • 3182 Posts

Exclusives don't even sell as well as multiplatform titles, so I dunno why exclusives still remain a thing for over well after a lot of years. Do it the Horizon way, sell the game on another platform after a couple of years when its main platform has stopped/slowed selling their platform or games.

But all in all, I don't mind 1st party exclusives. They still exist to sell the console they're in exclusivity with. 3rd party exclusives can **** off, though.

Avatar image for girlusocrazy
GirlUSoCrazy

13102

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#48 GirlUSoCrazy
Member since 2015 • 13102 Posts

@Random_Matt said:

Bad, 100% guaranteed the elder scrolls game and whatever else will be filled with micro transactions.

It's already been heading in that direction before MS. Fallout 76, ESO, mod store, Classic Doom patched to require Bethesda account, they were pushing in the direction.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

51177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 69

User Lists: 0

#49 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 51177 Posts

@ghost_of_phobos said:

Exclusives are a necessary evil. Companies do need to differentiate and content is the best way of doing so. Like Netflix and Prime having their own shows. Having hardware tied to the service sucks though. It would be like Prime and Netflix making me buy a different TV for each subscription.

The problem with the Netflix and Prime analogy that people frequent is that neither of their services requires specific hardware. It is just not the same.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

51177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 69

User Lists: 0

#50  Edited By Pedro
Member since 2002 • 51177 Posts
@ConanTheStoner said:

Yup, exactly.

And the whole idea that 3rd party exclusives are "good for competition" and somehow benefit gamers is nonsense.

I mean, we've already seen it play out. Up through gen 6, third party exclusives were the norm. The bottom fell out gen 7, most series went multiplat, and we've only seen less and less of 3rd party exclusives since. Did it kill competition? Nope. Do more people have access to more games now? Yep.

It's just so deeply engrained in gamer "culture" to cheer for walling off games, rallying against their own self interest.

-

Got into this with someone on here a while back. And they were like "but if it weren't for these exclusives, I'd have no reason to buy these multiple boxes!"... and it's like yes you idiot. That's the point lol. How is that a good thing for you as a gamer.

Yep! It is generally useless talking to folks who have been so heavily engrained in this falsehood that competition would be lost if exclusives didn't exist. It is as if they believe exclusives only compete with exclusives and not games competing with games.