Reason why Sony puts all its faith in Destiny

  • 99 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for super600
#51 Posted by super600 (32403 posts) -

So what are you trying to say TC. This thread could bring some really good discussion if the OP was not confusing to understand.

Avatar image for solidx12
#52 Posted by solidx12 (420 posts) -

Last gen i played online mostly on my 360 from Gears, COD to Battlefield3. Like most of my friends, i switched to the PS4 this gen for the online games. i find it more populated specially for games like Batllefield4 http://bf4stats.com/ (where ps4 has double the users as x1 in any time of the day) and other games like Warframe, FF14, DC universe. The chat party has helped the PSN be more online friendly like the 360 was. I also love the UI where everything is easily reachable. PSN still has a lot of work for sure but it has the right elements to grow like LIVE did with the 360.

And dont forget a game like Planetside2. Even though it has been out for 2 years on PC, it will most definitely play a factor if SOE can play their cards right this summer.

I am sure Sony wants to make sure the PS4 is the place to play your favorite shooters, and I am sure if Sony didn't get that exclusivity deal with Activision, MS would jump on that like they did with other games recently.

Avatar image for StarCrusherInc
#53 Posted by StarCrusherInc (25 posts) -

When it comes to Destiny and the talk in this thread of number of players how many can play Destiny at one time on each system? I am a Battlefield player myself and if Destiny does not have PvP with at least 12v12 and vehicles on PS4 I don't see why it is being hyped so badly. Titanfall was hyped like crazy but the three people i know who bought it were all disappointed in the 6v6 and I am seeing the same future for Destiny unless there is something I do not know about the PvP.

Avatar image for gfxpipeline
#54 Posted by gfxpipeline (471 posts) -

@darkangel115 said:

KZ never had dedicated servers.

Yes, it was Warhawk I meant to type.

It is hilarious that Microsoft is finally almost a decade later finally bringing their POS online service up to the standard Sony set with the PS3's dedicated servers for major first party titles.

Who other than Microsoft would be so lame as to:

* Make their tiny fanbase pay 50 dollars a year for online gaming

* Make their tiny fanbase host their own games with crappy P2P connection

* Almost a decade later finally got the clue from Sony and the PC gaming world and started providing standard dedicated servers

* And then actually be dumb enough to try to call it 'teh Cloud'

Absolutely no surprise Microsoft is 0/3 in the console market and sitting in last place.

Anyone who wants a laugh at what an absolute piece of garbage online service Microsoft had with the Xbox 360 just go back to the the original Gears of War and Xbox fans screaming and crying over the junk P2P base online setup had that made it a nightmare just to get into one of its tiny 4 vs 4 games. And when they did the game was plagued with host advantage problems and bugs.

Microsoft once again bring its tiny fanbase what gamers have had standard on Sony's consoles for years with the PS3. Dedicated servers and Blu-Ray.

Avatar image for ShoTTyMcNaDeS
#55 Posted by ShoTTyMcNaDeS (2782 posts) -

@Salt_The_Fries said:

Let me start with the disclaimer that Microsoft with X1 hasn't created anything spectacular at this point with regards to online infrastructure, i.e. there hasn't been any 1st party title which would rock online. Only Titanfall, except it's not exclusive. However, all their major titles (be it timed-exclusive like Dead Rising 3 or Plants vs. Zombies or exclusive like Forza 5, Killer Instinct or Ryse) have had significant online component. And of course upcoming Forza Horizon 2, and Sunset Overdrive will heavily rely on multiplayer components. Not to mention Halo: Master Chief Collection. So let's say by this fall this will have become respectable.

Now, with that in mind, Sony is arguably in even worse situation with this respect, because almost all their major exclusives or games console exclusive to it (apart from Killzone: Shadow Fall, which from what I've heard died almost completely) have been largely devoid of any multiplayer aspect.

So...is this heavy reliance on Destiny, as if it was some kind of a saviour, a sign that Sony can't create any multiplayer-centric experience with massive community? That it has to rely on a 3rd party multiplatform game to do that?

Of course, you can rightfully argue that by this fall, Sony too will have had some meaningful online communities with Little Big Planet 3 and DriveClub (for better or worse)...but then again there's Halo 5 on the horizon for the next year, so...

Anyway, PC already trumps both.

Why are you still reading this?

Maybe if Sony had enough money at the end of the month to pay their bills, they could infest in a real online infrastructure with voice capabilities that didn't sound like you were talking in a pop can!!! PSN is still so horribly behind XBL in every way imagineable its not even funny! So while MS continues to improve their new console each month, Sony acting like a bunch of arrogant baboons just sits around and acts like their SHYT don't stink. I truly feel bad for the cows who fall for this same line of BS every single console generation. Sony has all of you by the nostrils leading you down a path of lies just like every other generation!!

Avatar image for LegatoSkyheart
#56 Edited by LegatoSkyheart (29547 posts) -

Isn't Titanfall's Multiplayer Numbers much higher on Xbox One than it is on PC?

And isn't Battlefield's Multiplayer higher on PS4 than anything as well?

They're both 3rd Party Multiplats (although Titanfall is only on Microsoft Platforms), but doesn't that kind of make your point moot?

Avatar image for RR360DD
#57 Edited by RR360DD (13643 posts) -

@gfxpipeline said:

@darkangel115 said:

KZ never had dedicated servers.

Yes, it was Warhawk I meant to type.

It is hilarious that Microsoft is finally almost a decade later finally bringing their POS online service up to the standard Sony set with the PS3's dedicated servers for major first party titles.

Who other than Microsoft would be so lame as to:

* Make their tiny fanbase pay 50 dollars a year for online gaming

* Make their tiny fanbase host their own games with crappy P2P connection

* Almost a decade later finally got the clue from Sony and the PC gaming world and started providing standard dedicated servers

* And then actually be dumb enough to try to call it 'teh Cloud'

Absolutely no surprise Microsoft is 0/3 in the console market and sitting in last place.

Anyone who wants a laugh at what an absolute piece of garbage online service Microsoft had with the Xbox 360 just go back to the the original Gears of War and Xbox fans screaming and crying over the junk P2P base online setup had that made it a nightmare just to get into one of its tiny 4 vs 4 games. And when they did the game was plagued with host advantage problems and bugs.

Microsoft once again bring its tiny fanbase what gamers have had standard on Sony's consoles for years with the PS3. Dedicated servers and Blu-Ray.

LOL Sony didn't set any standard. A few select 1st party titles had dedicated servers. I remember all the idiot cows defending Killzone because Sony lied saying it had dedicated servers and cows fell for it.

And look at it now. You can't play online on the Resistance games. You can't play online on MAG. You can't play online on Motorstorm. All because Sony shut down the servers. Yeah, Sony really have set the standard. LOL

Funny how MS now have a fully scalable solution for offering dedicated servers platform wide and cows like you complain, Just because sony can't offer the same thing. Not unless they pay off a company that has the infrastructure to support it. I guess thats why you're butthurt.

Avatar image for super600
#58 Posted by super600 (32403 posts) -

@gfxpipeline said:

@darkangel115 said:

KZ never had dedicated servers.

Yes, it was Warhawk I meant to type.

It is hilarious that Microsoft is finally almost a decade later finally bringing their POS online service up to the standard Sony set with the PS3's dedicated servers for major first party titles.

Who other than Microsoft would be so lame as to:

* Make their tiny fanbase pay 50 dollars a year for online gaming

* Make their tiny fanbase host their own games with crappy P2P connection

* Almost a decade later finally got the clue from Sony and the PC gaming world and started providing standard dedicated servers

* And then actually be dumb enough to try to call it 'teh Cloud'

Absolutely no surprise Microsoft is 0/3 in the console market and sitting in last place.

Anyone who wants a laugh at what an absolute piece of garbage online service Microsoft had with the Xbox 360 just go back to the the original Gears of War and Xbox fans screaming and crying over the junk P2P base online setup had that made it a nightmare just to get into one of its tiny 4 vs 4 games. And when they did the game was plagued with host advantage problems and bugs.

Microsoft once again bring its tiny fanbase what gamers have had standard on Sony's consoles for years with the PS3. Dedicated servers and Blu-Ray.

10's of millions had xbox live gold last gen. So I don't get that point of yours.

Avatar image for inb4uall
#59 Posted by inb4uall (6564 posts) -

@Salt_The_Fries said:

Sony ponies attacking me :<

Nah mate, just people in general attacking you. Because quite frankly, your thread is shyte.

Avatar image for darkangel115
#60 Posted by darkangel115 (4444 posts) -

@gfxpipeline said:

@darkangel115 said:

KZ never had dedicated servers.

Yes, it was Warhawk I meant to type.

It is hilarious that Microsoft is finally almost a decade later finally bringing their POS online service up to the standard Sony set with the PS3's dedicated servers for major first party titles.

Who other than Microsoft would be so lame as to:

* Make their tiny fanbase pay 50 dollars a year for online gaming

* Make their tiny fanbase host their own games with crappy P2P connection

* Almost a decade later finally got the clue from Sony and the PC gaming world and started providing standard dedicated servers

* And then actually be dumb enough to try to call it 'teh Cloud'

Absolutely no surprise Microsoft is 0/3 in the console market and sitting in last place.

Anyone who wants a laugh at what an absolute piece of garbage online service Microsoft had with the Xbox 360 just go back to the the original Gears of War and Xbox fans screaming and crying over the junk P2P base online setup had that made it a nightmare just to get into one of its tiny 4 vs 4 games. And when they did the game was plagued with host advantage problems and bugs.

Microsoft once again bring its tiny fanbase what gamers have had standard on Sony's consoles for years with the PS3. Dedicated servers and Blu-Ray.

Wow you are so full of hate lol. lets do a little run down of your bullet points

1) Sony also charges for online service now as well so thats kind of a wash huh? also Tiny fanbase? Sony said that there PSN+ doubled since the PS4 launch and that the PS4 had a 50% attach rate for PSN+, this was at the time they were at 4 million sold, so 50% = 2 million. Now if that was doubled that means that PSN+ on the PS3 was at about 1 million subscribers. XBL last count had 46 million subscribers with "more then half" being gold so 23 million minimum. In other words XBLG had 23 times the subscribers that PSN+ did during the 360/PS3 era. So how is that a tiny fanbase?

2) Yes P2P is crappy. and it sucked that halo 4 was P2P as a 1st party game. Not going to argue with you there. But in the same sense TLOU, UC3 and KZ3 all 1st party Sony games had P2p Multiplayer. So its not like Sony was bringing out the servers either. Matter of fact the only game last year on the PS3 and 360 combined that had servers was GoW :judgement. Now with both PSN+ and XBLG requiring a fee for this gen. MS has 5 games with servers going in the 1st year. F5, FH2, SO, Halo:MCC and Titanfall. Sony has 0 despite KZ and DC which would both greatly benefit from having servers. I agree that at this point P2P is crappy. But its Sony that's all P2P so far and MS that's putting all their games on Servers.

3) PC doesn't have a standard service that provides servers. Players can rent servers for games that support it, but no games on PC have dedicated servers unless the dev decided to have them. and thats rare. Outside of BF4 I can't think of any non MMOs or F2P games (those require servers) Sony hasn't either for the better part of 10 years. KZ, UC, GoW: ascension, TLOU, Gran Turismo all 1st party games that would benefit from servers, yet they don't have them.

4) The cloud is a generic term thats used to describe storage that isn't local. Its something that companies like Google, Amazon, Apple, Rackspace, Microsoft, and even Sony with PSnow are using. The cloud isn't just dedicated servers. It can be used in so many ways that the term "cloud" has really lost meaning as it can mean something as simple as storage (like drop box) to something complex like cloud compute or game streaming. Netflix is also a cloud based streaming service. As is youtube. Sorry you don't understand what it is or how it works.

5) yes fans cried over gears 1 and 2 being on servers. What happened? well gears 3 and judgement had them. Fans also cried over KZ not having them on 1 and 2 yet 3 and SF never got them. Also Gears wasn't even a MS 1st party game (it is now) it was made by epic and its their servers that were used. You call XBLG crap on 360 but it still had the best uptime of any online service (which is important when talking about online service) and didn't suffer any major breaches. Hell it wasn't even affected by heartbleed, meanwhile apple, amazon, google, and Sony were. It also never been hit with a DDoS attack which Sony was recently hit with one this year. Security is important and over the past 10+ years XBL has been the most secure with the most uptime. Yes the lack of servers on games like Halo 4, and Forza 4 and FH1 are disappointing. But their biggest competitor Sony didn't have them for TLOU, GoW ascension, even GT6 which just came out doesn't have them. MS is settign the standard with all their 1st party games running on dedicated servers, meanwhile Sony has 0 games doing it. What are your thoughts on sony charging 50 a year for online play but not having servers for games like KZ, and Drive Club while MS has them for titanfall, F5, FH2, Sunset overdrive, and halo : MCC?

Avatar image for Kjranu
#61 Edited by Kjranu (1743 posts) -

After what Microsoft pulled with Titanfall the MS fans have absolutely no right to b!tch about Sony exclusive deals with Bungie.

Avatar image for gfxpipeline
#62 Posted by gfxpipeline (471 posts) -

While gamers were playing lag free LAN like online gaming with 32 and 40 players in Warhawk and Resistance...

Microsoft was forcing the tiny Xbox fanbase to pay 50 dollars a year for laggy P2P based online games with only 8 and 16 players in Gears of War and Halo.

So, yeah, Microsoft's online service for the Xbox 360 was complete junk. No surprise the Xbox 360 came in last place.

Avatar image for santoron
#63 Posted by santoron (8583 posts) -

@Salt_The_Fries: I can go along with a lot of your threads - even some rather silly topics - but that's just flat out stupid. You're thinking like a SW fanboy and not like a regular person here.

Regular people don't think about 1st or third party. They care about the game, not who makes it.

Regular people don't demand online in all of their games. Do you hear a mainstream storm brewing about SP titles? Of course not. Hell, a healthy fraction of gamers don't go online at all. Ever.

Regular people are certainly not building a list of exclusive online enabled titles. Even fanboys start their eyes rolling at such a stretch to find "ownage".

And WTF do you think Sony needs "Saving" from to begin with? Hardware flying off the shelves? You invented a problem that doesn't merit discussion to explain a rather straight forward marketing deal, similar to MS's own deal with Activision for CoD. See the resemblance? It's because they are identical.

Would you like to explain to me how MS tried to save itself by putting all its faith in CoD? Didn't think so, and I don't want you to, because that's also absolutely moronic. CoD is a mega franchise with well over 100 million spent annually on advertisement. By shifting a couple (IMO insignifigant) DLC dates XBox's way, Activision gets another company to pay for a bit of the marketing. SAME THING WITH DESTINY.

In the real world the LAST thing either platform has to worry about is if they have enough multiplayer shooters. Just stop it.

Avatar image for santoron
#64 Posted by santoron (8583 posts) -

@darkangel115 said:

Its kinda impressive that a new IP FPS has outsold CoD on the X1 and has very likely chipped into CoD and BFs sales as well.

It becomes a lot less impressive when you remember they not only packed in the game for free with consoles, but knocked $50 off the bundle to get them off the shelves...

Avatar image for inb4uall
#65 Posted by inb4uall (6564 posts) -

@santoron said:

@Salt_The_Fries: I can go along with a lot of your threads - even some rather silly topics - but that's just flat out stupid. You're thinking like a SW fanboy and not like a regular person here.

Regular people don't think about 1st or third party. They care about the game, not who makes it.

Regular people don't demand online in all of their games. Do you hear a mainstream storm brewing about SP titles? Of course not. Hell, a healthy fraction of gamers don't go online at all. Ever.

Regular people are certainly not building a list of exclusive online enabled titles. Even fanboys start their eyes rolling at such a stretch to find "ownage".

And WTF do you think Sony needs "Saving" from to begin with? Hardware flying off the shelves? You invented a problem that doesn't merit discussion to explain a rather straight forward marketing deal, similar to MS's own deal with Activision for CoD. See the resemblance? It's because they are identical.

Would you like to explain to me how MS tried to save itself by putting all its faith in CoD? Didn't think so, and I don't want you to, because that's also absolutely moronic. CoD is a mega franchise with well over 100 million spent annually on advertisement. By shifting a couple (IMO insignificant) DLC dates XBox's way, Activision gets another company to pay for a bit of the marketing. SAME THING WITH DESTINY.

In the real world the LAST thing either platform has to worry about is if they have enough multiplayer shooters. Just stop it.

TC has been owned.

Avatar image for darkangel115
#66 Edited by darkangel115 (4444 posts) -

@santoron said:

@darkangel115 said:

Its kinda impressive that a new IP FPS has outsold CoD on the X1 and has very likely chipped into CoD and BFs sales as well.

It becomes a lot less impressive when you remember they not only packed in the game for free with consoles, but knocked $50 off the bundle to get them off the shelves...

True, but seeing as CoD is an annual franchise that packs in about 20 million in sales every year its pretty impressive. Also sales never include digital copies and we have no confirmation if the bundles are included in sales or not. Its really hard to put a number on things this gen. CoD sold over 2 million before Titanfall even released and it passed it in less then 2 months. You gotta give credit where its due. Even as a stand alone it was top 1 for almost 8 weeks straight except for the 1 week infamous launched where it fell to second, it was top for the other 7 weeks

Avatar image for StrongBlackVine
#67 Edited by StrongBlackVine (13262 posts) -

PS4 sales are much greater Xflop and until that changes any other topic is a fart in the wind. Also I prefer single player unless it is co-op so this doesn't bother me at all. Destiny is ultimate co-op game so Sony struck gold with that marketing deal. I expect 65-70 percent of Destiny sales on current-gen to be PS4.

Avatar image for StrongBlackVine
#68 Posted by StrongBlackVine (13262 posts) -

@kuu2 said:

Sony has never had strength in multi player games compared to MSoft due mainly to LIVE being so strong and heavily integrated from the beginning. We are seeing MSoft pull even further ahead with off loading AI to Azure infrastructure as well. I can't ever see Sony being ahead in online experience.

I can't ever see Xflop winning a generation.

Avatar image for Salt_The_Fries
#69 Edited by Salt_The_Fries (12477 posts) -

@santoron said:

@Salt_The_Fries: I can go along with a lot of your threads - even some rather silly topics - but that's just flat out stupid. You're thinking like a SW fanboy and not like a regular person here.

Regular people don't think about 1st or third party. They care about the game, not who makes it.

Regular people don't demand online in all of their games. Do you hear a mainstream storm brewing about SP titles? Of course not. Hell, a healthy fraction of gamers don't go online at all. Ever.

Regular people are certainly not building a list of exclusive online enabled titles. Even fanboys start their eyes rolling at such a stretch to find "ownage".

And WTF do you think Sony needs "Saving" from to begin with? Hardware flying off the shelves? You invented a problem that doesn't merit discussion to explain a rather straight forward marketing deal, similar to MS's own deal with Activision for CoD. See the resemblance? It's because they are identical.

Would you like to explain to me how MS tried to save itself by putting all its faith in CoD? Didn't think so, and I don't want you to, because that's also absolutely moronic. CoD is a mega franchise with well over 100 million spent annually on advertisement. By shifting a couple (IMO insignifigant) DLC dates XBox's way, Activision gets another company to pay for a bit of the marketing. SAME THING WITH DESTINY.

In the real world the LAST thing either platform has to worry about is if they have enough multiplayer shooters. Just stop it.

I think you're one of the best posters around here and it saddens me that you seem to violently disagree with me under the pretense of seeing stupidity in this whereas I think you missed the point - which I will get to in a moment.

For one thing, I don't care about the distinctions about 1st, 2nd and 3rd parties. I used them only for SW purposes as most people here are quite vehement about it. And for another, I didn't imply that Sony needs saving. They don't. Their sales are rock solid and consumer trust seems to be at an all-time high.

Thirdly, I didn't meant to sound like a fanboy. I recognize PS4 is a good console for what it is, and I'm not bashing it for games I won't play coz they aren't / won't be on my console of choice (unless I compare them directly to the games from similar genres on competing platforms) . I weighed the possibilities beforehand and I simply decided to ignore what PS4 has to offer in favour of something else.

Most of my criticisms of Sony or PS4 stem from the fact that I am seem to be in the opposition here and you know who represents the majority of the population here and how it influences unfair bashing of other platforms along with unreasonable blind hype of anything Sony. I am a subversive kind of person and I'm naturally inclined to side with the underdogs, however I also give credit when it's due.

And going back to the topic, I don't care about CoD deal at all, it's supposed to last a month anyway and I swore I'd never play any CoD ever again starting with Modern Warfare 2. Here we're talking about whole year. However the DLC itself is very insignificant, so it doesn't affect me as a person and the topic itself wasn't personal. It however bothers me that Sony makes it seem as if Destiny was their thing entirely and I just wanted to find a reasoning for it. I think the point I was trying to make might have been a relevant one. As relevant as any topic anyone could've made here before about Sony attempts to have their own Halo killer.

I don't like political correctness for the sake of it, so I like to create discussions that put people out of their comfort zones. Look, in my disclaimer I already stated that MS is no better.

What's the problem?

Avatar image for santoron
#70 Edited by santoron (8583 posts) -

@Salt_The_Fries said:

And going back to the topic, I don't care about CoD deal at all, it's supposed to last a month anyway and I swore I'd never play any CoD ever again starting with Modern Warfare 2. Here we're talking about whole year. However the DLC itself is very insignificant, so it doesn't affect me as a person and the topic itself wasn't personal. It however bothers me that Sony makes it seem as if Destiny was their thing entirely and I just wanted to find a reasoning for it. I think the point I was trying to make might have been a relevant one. As relevant as any topic anyone could've made here before about Sony attempts to have their own Halo killer.

I don't like political correctness for the sake of it, so I like to create discussions that put people out of their comfort zones. Look, in my disclaimer I already stated that MS is no better.

What's the problem?

We don't know that the terms are for a year. That's an Amazon blurb, so no one knows yet. Amazon being wrong sure ain't news. We've seen MS ACTUALLY secure a full year of DLC exclusivity with GTA IV though and XBox fans were thrilled with the news. Even if it were true, we're watching pages taken from MS's playbook, so let's not start pretending Sony is doing something new here.

I can see that Sony's advertising is bugging basically all XBox fans, and I find that both silly and hypocritical. We've watched MS do the same advertising with Madden in the past and CoD every. single. year. And you've never heard the PS fans cry as loud and long as XBoxers now. I just don't get it. Everyone here knows Destiny is coming to PS and XB, new consoles and old. Just like we all know Madden aand CoD are multiplat without MS admitting it in commercials they paid for. And MS didn't start that fire either. Sony did this all the time back in the PS2 days. Back when, you know, they actually could afford to advertise... ;P

I think the biggest thing that bugged me about the post was your attempt to portray this as some desperation play by Sony to cover up an alleged hole in their library. That's just full bonkers to me. A stretch even as a SW argument, because if there is one thing fans of all types can agree on is we have plenty of shooters en route to each console. More than plenty.

If there's a weakness in lineups now, it's the story driven Single Player games you seemed to portray as a weakness in your OP for not shoehorning in Moar Multiplayer, which IMO was a major problem with much of last gen: trying to find a way to have multiplayer in every title just to have it. It wastes time and money better spent adding more content to the actual game. It's a peeve of mine, so I might have overreacted. A smidge.

Want my personal take on the Destiny situation? Sony is thrilled to have a deal in place, but this is Activision's idea. You're dealing with a Ticked off Kotick. Activision had a fiery and highly publicized parting with the heads of Respawn (formerly of Infinity Ward) and Kotick made efforts to damage those two and their future plans in every way he could. So when they finally have a game ready to go, who gives them a huge check to keep it off another platform, massive advertisements, free pack-ins, free servers, ect? Kotick's old CoD buddies MS. I think he saw this as a both a "FU" and a threat to his half billion dollar investment in Destiny. So he goes to Sony and offers them a sweetheart deal that gave his new mega franchise much needed front line exposure, and slapped MS on the wrist without doing anything that permanently damaged their relationship.

It's all conjecture on my part but makes sense to me. This just isn't the type or scale of deal Sony does usually, and it isn't like they fell into a bunch of money recently. But Sony would be fools not to jump on something like this if they were getting a deal.

TL;DR: Destiny isn't exclusive, everyone here knows. This stuff happens all the time, and Single Player focused games are awesomesauce. And TC is still cool. Mostly ;p

Avatar image for fgjnfgh
#72 Edited by fgjnfgh (2650 posts) -

so you're saying that Microsoft got online exclusives games Halo,Sunset (I am not sure if it is), Forza ( I mean c'mon it's racing), and Titanfall. I think Halo and Titanfall are worth mentioning in this situation, but I am not sure how Titanfall is performing now. I played Killzone PS4 last a couple of weeks and it had like 200 players. Xbox 1 sold like 3m where PS4 sold around 7m, so I guess multi plat games will be sold more on PS4 since more players own PS4 and that really wouldn't effect how PS4 looks when compared to X1's 2 exclusives games Halo and Titanfall at the end of the year. I

Avatar image for matt_millz
#73 Posted by matt_millz (30 posts) -

Halo does with the piece of shit that is halo 3. Sony doesn't want a halo, a gay repetive shooter that isn't even in its original creators hands anymore. Sony has a lot more exclusives uncharted 4, The last of us 2 maybe, the order 1886, bloodborne, everyone's gone to the rapture, no mans sky, until dawn, soma, and a lot more. There's an exclusive fpsmmo that's coming out to i don't remember what it's called. I'll take any of those games over fucking halo and fable. Besides I have AW for ps4 and that provides me a good enough mindless FPS experience online. Looks better on the ps4 than the Xbox anyways like all games do.

Avatar image for onesiphorus
#74 Posted by onesiphorus (1943 posts) -

@matt_millz: why bumped a four month old thread?

Avatar image for silversix_
#75 Posted by silversix_ (26347 posts) -

PS4 is promoting a garbage game like MS promoted a garbage game (titanfail)

Avatar image for notorious1234na
#76 Edited by Notorious1234NA (1917 posts) -

@Bigboi500: yes to sum up what he said

Avatar image for Ballroompirate
#77 Posted by Ballroompirate (25830 posts) -

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

Salt I think you should write a thesis on Sony. You seem to be an expert on the subject.

Ugh no, I'd rather eat 8 bean and cheese burritos from taco bell.

Avatar image for Krelian-co
#78 Edited by Krelian-co (13274 posts) -

None of the games you mentioned is exclusive (except for killer insctinct which is a meh game that only lems care for), xbone has no exclusives.

But to answer your question: for the same reason they hyped titanfall to no ned. BUT HAVE YOU SEEN TITANFALL?! and failed. Lems hyped it as the next messiah, "da system seller", the savior of xbone, and was forgotten within a month.

Also now that we mention "TEH CLOUD" didn't lems said that sunset overdrive was going to use teh cloud? is still a craptastic 90p game no different than any other in terms of performance, where is "teh cloud" may i ask?

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#79 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

Hey no fair ! What about Nintendo's Splatoon and Super Smash Siblings ? They want a piece of that online action too.

Have you no honour, sir ? :(

Avatar image for Krelian-co
#80 Edited by Krelian-co (13274 posts) -

Avatar image for CanYouDiglt
#81 Edited by CanYouDiglt (8230 posts) -

If your point was PS4 has only Destiny for multiplayer so that is why it is pushing it so much then yes I agree. X1 has Destiny also plus it has Forza 5, Titanfall, FH2 , MCC, plus more. PS4 lacking games is not new information though.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#82 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@Krelian-co

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Killer Instinct, even though I did the samething a while back. Anyway, I looked into the game recently and its got some pretty sweet interplay mechanics, its nothing on the level of Dead or Alive but with season 2's ambition of extending these mechanics to air combos and maybe it might just be the best 2.5D Fighting Game yet... Right ?

Avatar image for BigBadBully
#83 Posted by BigBadBully (1535 posts) -

I get what your saying. Sony is lacking with implementing online functionality with its games to give them life and build up PSN. They have misfired on some games with the perfect chance to add in some online functionality. For instance, Infamoius Second Son should of had co-op or something like Sunset Overdrive Chaos Mode. Then Sony/Evolution made a huge mistake with Driveclub. If Evolution stuck with Motorstorm, we'd probably be looking at a very entertaining online experience.

Finally, Sony is ablle to weather the storm since some multiplats and f2p games can fill the void. Being an xbox owner that doesnt entice me, i want something like socom(h-hour), Motorstorm, twisted metal, the online games Sony had that differentiated from the crowd. PS3 did a good job mid-to end life cycle, uncharted(co-op/multiplayer), twisted metal, the last of us(fun multiplayer).

Avatar image for lamprey263
#84 Edited by lamprey263 (34383 posts) -

It wasn't so much Sony that put it's faith in Destiny, rather it was Bungie that sought out Sony's, it was Bungie who dropped trow, bent over, spread its butt checks and relaxed its anal sphincter and applied the lube and said "stick in in there Sony". Sony just played along because it was to their benefit to do so. Cows were responding to all the Bungie lip service and reveled in it. Bungie knew what they were going, cows are the best form of free mega-hype generation, and Bungie knew just how little they had to do to get them excited enough to talk it up for them.

Bungie isn't the first developer to recognize the benefit of kowtowing to cows. Many IPs that probably wouldn't have done well as multiplats have flourished on the PS3. Make a multiplat and a game must survive on its merits. Make a Sony exclusive and cows get rock hard hard-ons and nipples so erect they could cut glass.

Avatar image for CanYouDiglt
#85 Posted by CanYouDiglt (8230 posts) -
@lamprey263 said:

It wasn't so much Sony that put it's faith in Destiny, rather it was Bungie that sought out Sony's, it was Bungie who dropped trow, bent over, spread its butt checks and relaxed its anal sphincter and applied the lube and said "stick in in there Sony". Sony just played along because it was to their benefit to do so. Cows were responding to all the Bungie lip service and reveled in it. Bungie knew what they were going, cows are the best form of free mega-hype generation, and Bungie knew just how little they had to do to get them excited enough to talk it up for them.

The media blitz was done by Sony not Bungie. I mean sure Bungie seemed to have went more into the Sony camp to build the fanbase but it is Sony's marketing and not Bungies. Sony could have spread out the marketing for other games if there were some but the pickings were slim.

Avatar image for ominous_titan
#86 Posted by ominous_titan (1215 posts) -

The xbox would have been DOA without Halo ,it carried that big indestructible machine on Masterchiefs back . Of course Sony would want a piece of that action they've struggled to get an online game with that type of popularity and longevity

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#87 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@ominous_titan

True, but I like to believe they couldve scraped by without Halo until they eventually stumbled onto Gears of War. I never really liked Halo, I've been spoiled by real FPSs on the PC.

Avatar image for Krelian-co
#88 Posted by Krelian-co (13274 posts) -

DISCLAIMER : I will try to bash sony games and praise xbone games masking a fanboy thread with fake concern and biased points.

That's basically what i read.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#89 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@Krelian-co

Then take off your fanboy googles and read it again.

Avatar image for remiks00
#90 Edited by remiks00 (3788 posts) -

@Salt_The_Fries said:
@TheTruthIsREAL said:

Like Microsoft put all faith in Titanfall? They are just promoting the game for the PS4 as its the best place to play Destiny. XBOX has COD marketing so it's really half and half

I've covered that in the disclaimer already.

I've covered wars, you know...

However I'd like to add that the situation here is tad different as we're talking console-exclusivity of the WHOLE GAME vs timed console-exclusivity of a DLC.

Avatar image for PernicioEnigma
#91 Posted by PernicioEnigma (5869 posts) -

@Bigboi500 said:

@Salt_The_Fries said:

@Bigboi500 said:

Is there a point to all that incoherent rambling?

Oh, I'm sorry...did I break your concentration?

I take that as a big ole "no, I don't have a point".

His point was to debate whether Sony is putting a lot of faith in Destiny because the PS4 lacks decent online multiplayer games and they're hoping Destiny will succeed and full the void.

That wasn't too hard to comprehend, was it? Whether it's true or not is of no interest to me though.

Avatar image for lglz1337
#92 Edited by lglz1337 (4942 posts) -

did you know that since 2006 MS did nothing spectaculair for this industrie ?

Avatar image for funkmaster1233
#93 Posted by funkmaster1233 (706 posts) -

Sony were always jealous of Halo so this is their way of getting back but the funny thing is that Bungie suck now and everyone is wanting to play the MCC. If Destiny was exclusive then fair enough but it isn't.

Avatar image for Krelian-co
#94 Edited by Krelian-co (13274 posts) -

@remiks00 said:

@Salt_The_Fries said:
@TheTruthIsREAL said:

Like Microsoft put all faith in Titanfall? They are just promoting the game for the PS4 as its the best place to play Destiny. XBOX has COD marketing so it's really half and half

I've covered that in the disclaimer already.

I've covered wars, you know...

However I'd like to add that the situation here is tad different as we're talking console-exclusivity of the WHOLE GAME vs timed console-exclusivity of a DLC.

another day, another lem desperate to pass multiplats as exclusives.

Avatar image for Phazevariance
#96 Posted by Phazevariance (12110 posts) -

Necrothread....

Avatar image for Krelian-co
#97 Posted by Krelian-co (13274 posts) -

@FastRobby said:

@tormentos said:

@Bigboi500 said:

Is there a point to all that incoherent rambling?

Nope since the most played game online is COD and is not xbox exclusive and is superior on PS4..

framerate > #pixels => xbox one>ps4 version.

Does xbone run the game at 60 fps? oh wait, they both run at locked 30 fps, meanwhile ps4 runs at 1/3 more pixels, 1080p > 900p, GET REKT

Avatar image for tormentos
#98 Posted by tormentos (26627 posts) -

@Salt_The_Fries said:

Let me start with the disclaimer that Microsoft with X1 hasn't created anything spectacular at this point with regards to online infrastructure, i.e. there hasn't been any 1st party title which would rock online. Only Titanfall, except it's not exclusive. However, all their major titles (be it timed-exclusive like Dead Rising 3 or Plants vs. Zombies or exclusive like Forza 5, Killer Instinct or Ryse) have had significant online component. And of course upcoming Forza Horizon 2, and Sunset Overdrive will heavily rely on multiplayer components. Not to mention Halo: Master Chief Collection. So let's say by this fall this will have become respectable.

Now, with that in mind, Sony is arguably in even worse situation with this respect, because almost all their major exclusives or games console exclusive to it (apart from Killzone: Shadow Fall, which from what I've heard died almost completely) have been largely devoid of any multiplayer aspect.

So...is this heavy reliance on Destiny, as if it was some kind of a saviour, a sign that Sony can't create any multiplayer-centric experience with massive community? That it has to rely on a 3rd party multiplatform game to do that?

Of course, you can rightfully argue that by this fall, Sony too will have had some meaningful online communities with Little Big Planet 3 and DriveClub (for better or worse)...but then again there's Halo 5 on the horizon for the next year, so...

Anyway, PC already trumps both.

Why are you still reading this?

Can you quote sony saying Destiny will save us.?

Sony had a deal with Bungie for each deal Sony has with a developer MS has 4,we all know sony is not making deal left and right this gen,Destiny is a multiplatform game and sony has a deal for content just like MS had it for Madden,AC Unity,COD AW and many more,does that mean COD is the xbox one savior.?

Sony doesn't have to create that after all the most played games on 360 online were multiplatforms,COD has been owning Halo pretty much since 2007,so regardless of having a bigger user base for Halo it mean nothing in the end because the most played online game on XBL is also on PSN.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
#99 Posted by LJS9502_basic (161759 posts) -

*yawn* They haven't put all their faith in Destiny. They are promoting a game. Duh....

Avatar image for funkmaster1233
#100 Posted by funkmaster1233 (706 posts) -

@tormentos said:

@Salt_The_Fries said:

Let me start with the disclaimer that Microsoft with X1 hasn't created anything spectacular at this point with regards to online infrastructure, i.e. there hasn't been any 1st party title which would rock online. Only Titanfall, except it's not exclusive. However, all their major titles (be it timed-exclusive like Dead Rising 3 or Plants vs. Zombies or exclusive like Forza 5, Killer Instinct or Ryse) have had significant online component. And of course upcoming Forza Horizon 2, and Sunset Overdrive will heavily rely on multiplayer components. Not to mention Halo: Master Chief Collection. So let's say by this fall this will have become respectable.

Now, with that in mind, Sony is arguably in even worse situation with this respect, because almost all their major exclusives or games console exclusive to it (apart from Killzone: Shadow Fall, which from what I've heard died almost completely) have been largely devoid of any multiplayer aspect.

So...is this heavy reliance on Destiny, as if it was some kind of a saviour, a sign that Sony can't create any multiplayer-centric experience with massive community? That it has to rely on a 3rd party multiplatform game to do that?

Of course, you can rightfully argue that by this fall, Sony too will have had some meaningful online communities with Little Big Planet 3 and DriveClub (for better or worse)...but then again there's Halo 5 on the horizon for the next year, so...

Anyway, PC already trumps both.

Why are you still reading this?

Can you quote sony saying Destiny will save us.?

Sony had a deal with Bungie for each deal Sony has with a developer MS has 4,we all know sony is not making deal left and right this gen,Destiny is a multiplatform game and sony has a deal for content just like MS had it for Madden,AC Unity,COD AW and many more,does that mean COD is the xbox one savior.?

Sony doesn't have to create that after all the most played games on 360 online were multiplatforms,COD has been owning Halo pretty much since 2007,so regardless of having a bigger user base for Halo it mean nothing in the end because the most played online game on XBL is also on PSN.

CoD 4 owned Halo since 2007? Halo 3 had hundreds of thousands concurrent users well into 2010 which is insane for an exclusive console game. Since 2010? Sure.