Ready to Run may only be a PS4 exclusive because Sony communicates faster than its competitors. Microsoft's slow communication may be costing Xbox One some games.
Would think their issues with indies would exemplify that. Why wouldn't it show itself with main stream games as well?
This happened with one company and the author chose to throw his opinion in at the very end of the quote. No where does the CEO say the game is exclusive because Sony reached out to us faster. The articles is two sentences long and comes to the conclusion of the headline?
Agree. A quote made into an "article" with an assumption thrown in from the "writer." Awesome stuff indeed ; /
The bigger you are the slower you move I have observed. Unless there is a buffet involved.
Either way, you better believe MS is in it to win it when it comes to exclusives.
The WB- I said the same thing when this articles was up for approval. This is article has an excerpt from the dev (interview), but has the writer's opinion at the end of it. The writers opinion is also in the title.
Except most of what MS have done with the XB1 has been a case of over self-importance. "Do what we say because we command the industry." From their position on indies to early DRM and Kinect. They've only acted like they need to see people walk across the street to the other guy who does something similar before they change tactics. And then there's the case with MMOs and F2P. How at this point it looks like an exception when one shows up on any Xbox system because MS's insistence of needing XBL Gold.
It's also an indie game - seriously who buys a console for indie games? Get an e-machine from Wal Mart and get them on Steam if that's all you care about.
Indies are important, but it doesn't make sense to buy a next gen console to play indies. I care about the big titles, the ones I actually buy the system to play. All these indies keep talking like someone owns them something. Also wasn't 360 one of the first consoles that gave indy developers a platform to launch their titles with xbox live arcade. Another day more complaining, nothing new. PS I just watched the reveal trailer, I don't think many people will be hurt if it stays on ps4. It looks like that kids movie cars.
It's actually a logical assumption. The game is PS4 exclusive, and the develop said they talked with other companies but Sony was the fastest in communication. I don't see the problem here. I mean, yeah, the article is really short and is based on an assumption, but it's a logical one.
And you wonder why people consider this site the home for a specific brand of fanboy… I wonder why this article was even approved, much less on the front page. - _ - OT: Is this why Titanfall and Sunset Overdrive are PlayStation exclusives?
Microsoft May Be Losing Games to Sony Because of Slow Communication Really? I don't think it's an issue...
@maniac You just copy/pasted someone else's comment from the article page. You should at least acknowledge the original comment, not try to pass it off as your own.
When the quote was: “Playstation was and still the most open platform for us. We surely talking with other guys, but communication process is faster at Sony.” Is: "It seems like Xbox One fans may be missing out on some games due to Microsoft’s slow communication in comparison to Sony." Really that much of a jump? We know that they're missing out on one, so yes, they may be missing out on some others too.
@thekhurg You do realise that Respawn Entertainment are an independant developer or "indie" which you despise? The devs that are making Titanfall with backing from EA but are not owned by EA or Microsoft. Such prejudice from gamers for indie companies which are responsible for most of the best games you play today. A shame that some people think that all games should be created by a publisher and not indies like Respawn or Epic.
Alright seriously... What the heck is going on at Microsoft? Usually Microsoft seals the deal for most developers rather quickly when it comes to competition. Left 4 dead, bioshock, ninja gaiden, hell even mass effect all got deals with Microsoft rather quickly. If the issue now is time then Microsoft has to "get with the times." Sony has an aggressive setup this time around and Microsoft should not be sulking around. I hate to say this but, in this type of setting between businesses, this is usually when a company is looking to sell their brand. If Microsoft's team isn't showing any signs of moving their company forward then expect the xbox brand to be sold within 2 years. It would be a win for the Sony fans and may leave people a sour taste in their mouth who supported Microsoft being behind the xbox brand. But I seriously think Microsoft is ready to sell the Xbox brand.
I don't think the headline is saying anything we don't already know. - Adam Orth #dealwithit debacle comes out and Microsoft is silent for months, literally, months until the X1 reveal. - Fans complain about the X1 policy for months on end and Microsoft shows no signs of backing down...until pre-order numbers come in - Microsoft has their restrictive indie policy in place for years and only recently loosened up the restrictions. - Playstation Plus launched nearly 4 years ago and it is only within the last 6 months that Microsoft has started doing freebies and bonuses...and they still can't compare to what PS+ offers To say that Microsoft "responds slowly" is an understatement. The only thing Microsoft is fast about is flooding the airwaves with PR statements. EDIT @ below: The author presupposes "maybe Microsoft's slowness is costing them games". To which I say "yeah, they are pretty slow. Maybe so". Microsoft has - two consoles in a row - done a phenomenal job of securing 3rd-party support for the first 2-3 years. Microsoft has - two consoles in a row - done a terrible job of maintaining 3rd party exclusives beyond that point. I won't deny that Microsoft has secured some 3rd party exclusives. Obviously, they have. But they've obviously lost out on a lot of games, considering the significant number of indie devs who have spoken out against Microsoft within the last few years.
And yet MS has secured a good number of 3rd party exclusives for their Xbox One. MS can 't reach out and cater to every single developer in the world. Some are bound to get a call sooner than later. The same can be said for Sony as I am sure they were slow on a lot of games that they could have secured as their own. Again I like to point out that everything you have mentioned in your comment has ZERO to do with what this article's author ASSUMES.
@Dedicated You speak as if you have first hand knowledge of the inner working and production details of MS and game developers. You don't. The author makes his own opinion that has no claims or proof that due to MS's slowness it's costing them exclusives. From what evidence? The quote the author gives sure doesn't say or suggest that. How many exclusives did they lose because MS were slow to contact a company back? What was the reason MS chose to not contact them right away? And considering the number of indie devs that ARE on board with MS and others who have said they are looking into working with MS how can you say they lost out? On what?
@ maniac Um, no? I speak as if I have read plenty of reports and quotes from numerous devs over the last few years, leading me to that speculative conclusion. I am happy to say that it is simply speculative, but it is the conclusion I make, nonetheless. The article - also - seems speculative. The title itself is speculative ("may be losing", not "is definitely losing"). You sure seem to hate speculation, despite the fact that you were swift to speculate yourself: "The same can be said for Sony as I am sure they were slow on a lot of games that they could have secured as their own". (fwiw, I agree with you. It is obvious when Sony has been slow to communicate with devs, i.e. the entire first 3 years of the PS3's lifespan. Right now, based on Sony's rapid acquisition of a ton of indie support, they're certainly acting faster) Yes, a number of indie devs ARE on board with MS. A number of indie devs AREN'T on board with MS and instead of having to speculate, those indie devs have been very outspoken as to why they are currently avoiding Microsoft. This indie dev said Sony communicates faster. Pretty cut and dry, if you ask me.
Now THAT'S called using logic, dedicated. Please, try not to destroy people's arguments quite so completely in the future. That can be rather damaging psychologically. I do think it's funny, though, that maniac came back with the third party exclusives Microsoft "secured" by paying large sums, including at least one documented instance of actually going behind a developer's back. Given their well-known propensity for breaking out the checkbook, it's unlikely that just that one occurrence exists. By the same token, it's not too likely that this developer's experience with Sony's expedience over that of their competitors is the only time such a thing has happened. After all, this isn't the first game we've heard of that's gonna be on PS4 but not XB1, is it? Yet maniac claims the conclusion reached by the article's author- and, as you pointed out, it's not even posited as a definite, but a possibility- is something that's happened only once. When you use logic, you look at so much more than just the immediate details of a situation. It allows you to arrive at a more precise conclusion. You can still be wrong, but you're less likely to be so if you take everything into account. Unfortunately, some people don't like to do that, preferring instead to be selective about what "facts" they use, so that they only arrive at the conclusion- speculative or otherwise- they desire.
"The author presupposes "maybe Microsoft's slowness is costing them games"" Based off of what Dedicated? What games have they lost due to them not responding quick enough to a developer? The actual quote the author gives does not ever suggest that MS lost out. The author gives no proof of any other game MS lost due to a slow response. And the many games on Xbox and upcoming games, AAA and indie seems to shoots that theory down real fast. actual quote: "Playstation was and still the most open platform for us. We surely talking with other guys, but communication process is faster at Sony." Dedicated, you speak in broad terms but you never provide any specifics just like this author does. In fact as usual you state a lot of points that have nothing to do with the actual story or topic at hand. Instead it's only to remind people on this site of what MS has done in the past. Oh goodness, now I know this is all bad when Hicken comes to save you. @Hicken Sony fan logic of MS going behind a devs back? I can only assume you're talking about Titanfall. http://venturebeat.com/2013... http://www.purexbox.com/new... http://www.gamespot.com/art... Notice how each of those stories claims that Respawn is working on an Xbox 720 exclusive? That's because the rumors of this was way before the reveal of the actual Xbox One console. Now you mean to tell me MS went behind Respawn's back and secretly made a deal with EA and that every journalist and game rumor hound knew and Respawn didn't? And even if it was possibly a timed exclusive then MS saw the potential and secured it quickly. "Yet maniac claims the conclusion reached by the article's author- and, as you pointed out, it's not even posited as a definite, but a possibility.." 0_o?? what? I am talking about the article and what is written. The author takes a quote and turns it into something that has no proof, no meaning and no examples or claims to back it up. Have you even read the article yourself? The short two paragraphs on this site? How can the author make a claim that MS may be losing games when there hasn't been nearly enough proof of it? And it's based on a quote that doesn't even suggest they did? Seriously, I feel like you guys are pranking me right now. Can you both let you blinders and bias down for just one second and actually take a look at this article and ask yourself if the conclusion the author comes up with based on the info he gives is true. No, instead you and Dedicated have to fill in the blanks and post unrelated topics about MS that try and fit with the many large holes and baseless assumptions that this article leaves. Conclusion: This is exactly what I and others pointed out about you Dedicated. You drum up the negativity and get the simple natives like Hicken all riled up and restless. Look at some of the more even minded comments on here and you'll see that this article(or lack of)is absolutely ridiculous.
@ maniac The developer quoted in the article says "Playstation was and still the most open platform for us. We surely talking with other guys, but communication process is faster at Sony" Based on that, we can conclude the dev feels 1) PS was and is the most open platform for them 2) Despite talking to other companies, Sony is faster at communicating. Lastly, we add in the fact that - as of right now - the game appears to be exclusive to the PS platform, correct? It isn't announced for the PS's biggest competitor, X1, correct? The author, then, speculates and says "huh. This game is exclusive (or at least timed exclusive) and the dev themselves are saying it is because Sony is faster and more open. I wonder if other game devs have had a similar experience". And lo, other game devs HAVE had a similar experience. These guys are not the first folks to praise Sony and/or bash Microsoft, are they? Add it all together and you have some speculation based on a fairly firm foundation. So, now that you know how I (and probably the author, though I can't speak for them) came to my current conclusion, please tell me what facts I've misunderstood. EDIT: Actually, I saw you have no bubbles. If you'd like to continue the discussion, I'd be happy to continue via PM.
@maniac: Oh, you. Forever ignoring things that make your argument look silly. Tell me, why would Respawn come out acting surprised after it was CONFIRMED- not rumored, like everybody was saying prior to that- that it would be an Xbox exclusive for the duration of its life? Why would they lie. Read Zampella's direct quote here, though I'll post it, anyway http://www.gameinformer.com... "Always MS exclusive at launch, great partner and focus is good for a startup. EA made a deal for the rest, we only found out recently =(" Seems like Vince is saying they were operating under the impression it was a timed exclusive. And, earlier that same day... https://twitter.com/VinceZa... "Of course we will, just not the first Titanfall." Implying multiple games in the series, and that others could possibly see a Sony platform release. Actually... http://www.computerandvideo... "The shooter rotation we think about now is Battlefield, Titanfall and Battlefront, and so we like those three brands going forward," according to EA's Frank Gibeau. This was August, almost exactly two months prior to the announcement that Titanfall would be a generational exclusive. Now, if it were going to be exclusive from the outset, with NO chance of it being on PS4, why would it be included in their shooter rotation? Wouldn't having one game in the rotation as an exclusive actually mess up the rotation? All signs point to Titanfall being a timed exclusive which Microsoft secured lifetime exclusive rights to without the knowledge of Respawn. Unless they're lying. And if Zampella lied here- and why would he?- then it's possible the studio lied about the potential "alpha" asset issue as well. Two of your links even say "rumor" in the URL. Should we believe those rumors over the words straight from EA and Respawn? Weren't you one of the many saying you believed Respawn over insiders just recently? Where the hell do you think these articles you linked got their information? You're not even making real arguments, anymore. This is too easy.
Presupposes? I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Is this "one" company that has made this statement and the author of the article states that Xbox could be losing games due to them not communicating fast enough as this "one" company says? Really?!? Has it ever occurred to anybody that maybe, just maybe MS doesn't want this game in their line up. I believe that's still MS's perogativ as to what games they want on their systems. Seems to me somebody is mad that they aren't getting the money that they thought they would cause not as many companies are responding. And I say "companies for the following reason. First off the article starts of by saying that the game" Ready To Run" may be a PS exclusive ("may" is the keyword here, which means it can go one way or another). The first quote of the CEO developing this game says “Playstation was and still the most open platform for us. We surely talking with other guys, but communication process is faster at Sony.” That's all he says. Is other guys MS or Nintendo or Steam, how about Apple or Android? He says "other guys". Not singling out MS by saying "Microsoft". Guy is singular, guys is plural aka more than one. Unlike a lot that tend to comment here, I take a lot of these articles with a grain of salt. It's like reading the tabloids. There might be some sort of truth here, but for the most part it's bullshit. Good day, catch y'all on the next bs article.
Microsoft wasn't slow to getting Titanfall first.
Just securing it as an exclusive so that all the claims they made surrounding it, like what cloud support could do for it, became worthless. That its not any technical issues preventing it from being on the PS4 but contractual.
Its just another day and another site trying to have a dig at Microsoft. No matter what a company dose someone will always find something to pick at. The PS4, WiiU or Xbox one are not perfect consoles but they are all very good consoles and all offer games us as gamers want. People really need to stop with the negative stuff and start working on the positive side of gaming as it will all end in tears for us gamers.
@mars: the technical reason why Titanfalls wasn't and isn't is because MS came back to Respawns request for a need for massive cloud servers. Something Sony couldn't and didn't respond too. Take it this way, even Killzone Shadowfall, PS4 flagship launch game and IP doesn't have real dedicated servers. It only has P2P with proxy servers.
lol very intelligent comment
It's going to take time to undo the damage Don did to the brand over the few years he ran this division
How does anyone buy this? The title is completely misleading. one game dev said they are 'talking to other guys', yet the article generalises this to every game dev as being the reason why MS are losing to Sony. It could be Sonys platform is easier to write for and has better hardware specs? Seriously
Oh please I don't give a damn about overrated indie games. I care about the communication with: TitanFall Plants vs Zombies Quantum Break Halo 5 Forza Horizon 2 Kinect Sports Rivals & Project Spark You guys need to stop overrating indie games. Who's buying next-generation consoles to play indie games...Not Me!
You've just listed an indie game - Titanfall. Respawn are not owned by any publisher. EA is just funding their game via EA Partners. Respawn owns the Titanfall IP not EA or Microsoft. This is why I think Respawn will part ways with EA to make Titanfall 2 multiplatform.
xbox1 is dead truste me
Funny how because of some developer of unknown game suddenly we have 3 lines article but when all other devs say MS gives free dedicated servers, let me underline this MOST POWERFUL SERVER NETWORK in the world for free and send their own men to help out with development difficulties there is no articles at all, no praising as well. Typical n4g.
Thats very interesting.
Which part? The excerpt from the dev or the writer's opinion?
The excerpt from the developer. The writers opinion I could care less about.
Yeah it makes you wonder how much of this goes on.
Stupidest thing I have ever clicked on... Flamebait times 2000000000 percent. Nobody gives half of half a fuck about that studio or it's game.. besides those devs themselves.... Indie devs are the last to get a free pass, if they make a big hit, THEN they become relevant. If it's their first game, we gotta be able to play it before it will ever be wanted/needed. This is why kickstarter is cool, but flawed in it's existence... instead of getting approval from a publisher (who has experience with discerning a given dev/dev studio's credibility/quality/qualificat ions) devs get to gamble with OTHER people's money, not a studio who is in the business for SPECIFICALLY that.
"Recently announced Ready to Run may only be a PlayStation 4 exclusive because Sony communicates faster than its competitors. Communication Xbox Please Wait Alexey Menshikov, CEO of Beatshapers, the developer of Ready to Run, told GamerFitNation that “Playstation was and still the most open platform for us. We surely talking with other guys, but communication process is faster at Sony.” It seems like Xbox One fans may be missing out on some games due to Microsoft’s slow communication in comparison to Sony." The entire article. There ya go, I saved you all a click.
The article needs clicks so they can make money, and if they make money they will make more articles.
In that case, make an article that comprises of more than two broken up paragraphs. This kind of 'article' is not worth the new tab.
Microsoft should just go back to pc. lets go back to the time when it was only Nintendo and Sony fighting over the gaming market. just look at how many more games there was.
So you must be completely oblivious to what's happening over in Nintendo land.
And now look at how many MORE games there are because MS is in the console market. I say we go back to the SNES, Genesis days. Just look at how much better the games were without DLC, and microtransactions. But that's just my nostalgia talking. The video game industry has come a long way and for the better.
We'd need another SEGA for that to happen, but sadly no one except for Nintendo is in a position to be that sort of company. Sony is...kind of able to do it, but it's clear that they also add in the needs of their other divisions (music, movies, etc) into the design process of their hardware. Microsoft is becoming more and more of a "services" company so I don't think they could fill those shoes, either. An inexpensive ($175-275) console with no frills and only a focus on gaming would do quite well in this day and age, I think. Problem is, 3rd parties typically shun these sort of consoles (see every Nintendo console since SNES; every SEGA console since Genesis/MegaDrive) which would require an incredibly powerful 1st-party lineup. Again, only Nintendo is in a position to pull that off. I think indies are - somewhat - filling the shoes of all those wonderful B-grade games that we got during those early eras. Games like Toejam&Earl or Mutant League Football (ironic) or Earthbound simply aren't going to be made by big companies in this day and age anymore.
Hate to tell you this but Sony has only been in the gaming market since '94. You speak as if they were the only players ever.
Yeah, for reals. Well Said!(bubble for you^^^) I think some people think that just because Sony have been in the game longer than MS, that they have been around longer and done more for gaming than Nintendo. When they have not, and in this generation, MS has actually done more game-changing feats to sculpt the new ways we all play, and drive the industry forward than Sony has... Next gen remains to be seen, but honestly all 3 companies feed off each other's features/flaws/ideas, so really, fighting about the core dynamics of who has done what is about the dumbest thing you can do with your time. Instead, focus on what you want to play, and folks need to stop bashing a companies core drive and principles, (as if they know them anyway...) That's like trying to guess at the unknown, it is just speculation, and it makes the people who do it look dumber than if they had said nothing.
you and the 10 people who hit agree are what I affectionately call Sony Ponies... GTFO of here...you're mindless drivel is a waste of every gamers time on this site
No thanks I don't want Microsoft back to PC. They've made it plainly obvious they want nothing to do with PC gaming. Let them sink with their Xbox console and hopefully their games division is put to rest by the new CEO.
They need communication on a human level, not a corporate one. this is a quote from a Sony representative on Drive-club's delay: 'No point in it coming out and half doing that job' that's all he said and needed to say, stating the obvious works.
That's not how communication works. For the love of god. Game devs and Sony do not sit down for a cup of tea to discuss these things. Please educate yourself about how business works. EVERYTHING when it comes to getting exclusives and such is done through communicating on a corporate email after many days of discussion and planning.
I wasn't talking about sercuring exclusives you silly twat. I was talking about communication with the public.
what type of games they are talking? maybe maybe certain indie dev...who need to get money fast...but for sure not aaa titles
It's an Indie title. I looked it up and watched the trailer :-p
yeah in fact i didnt not found any screenshot on google of this ready to run ..ahahah..embarassing
I agree. At the begining they were quite slow but they are doing a lot better now. Phil Spencer and Chris Charla seem to be doing a really good job so far. Chris Charla is expected to announce the first wave of indie titles sometime next month and its also rumored that Johnathan blow( ms biggest critic) is coming on board too,i believe ms is doing a far better job now at communicating with devs.
The communication is better on Sony's part. I'd think that goes without saying. Whilst Phil Spencer is attempting to exemplify his passion for games as head of MGS (I don't buy his comments as anything more than PR, because where were they months ago?), people like Shahid Kamal, Adam Boyes and even Yoshida-san have been communicating on a personal level and even over Twitter with developers large and small - with genuine passion for what a developer is bringing to the table. I'm not saying MS doesn't communicate, but their recent delay with getting indie developers on board and their HUGE disconnect with what they have produced with the Xbone and what consumers and gamers want shows that their communication in regards to what is important, is lacking. They need to think of developers as people with passion to create something new and affecting, rather than corporate slaves to their drive to succeed.
Microsoft's Shooter/Sport push has been impressive. They're quick to secure Titanfall, Gears to latch on to their audience. On the indie front, I agree they were slow. When they did a 180 on their [email protected]
@ DigitalRaptor In the long run, the indie dev-to finished game/and/or support process has far less to do with anything really important to any given console's relativity. In other words, NOBODY goes to shop for a game console thinking:"Oh boy, I sure do want which ever system has the most simplified/compatible platform for underground sleeper hit games!" No, they do not, and acting as such is fucking retarded. MS is getting their AAA and exclusive game situation all ready to roll out and execute quickly and efficiently. And do whatever else they can to do all the things that they feel they NEED, to do, as well as all the internet douchebags are trying to DEMAND that they should do. Just like Sony is. Both are doing their best to do the best they can, and both are going to be striving for excellence in as many ways as they possibly can to accomplish this. Anything other than understanding that fact is ignorant, plain and simple. Which ever one you prefer is the only difference. Don't bash EITHER company for focusing on what they find important to them, in the order that they find will work, (I mean, if you were supposed to be deciding what ______ company should be doing, YOU would work for that company, no?) And stop taking mostly irrelevant indie dev's quips with a company as THE DEFINING FLAW of their business model. Same thing with resolution complaints, and other little bashings of minor issues... We have all seen, and already know that these factor in to the market in a smaller way than the exaggeration crowd seems to remember. I remember having sub par resolutions and frame rates on ALMOST EVERY MULTIPLATFORM GAME for ps3 and 360.. did that stop either one from selling well? Oh hell no. Oh fuck no. Did that really factor into anybody's decision for their purchase? Not really, or else MS would have wiped their asses with Sony's face last gen. And that didn't happen. in fact, both systems sold extremely well, and the PS3, ended up selling more units globally than the 360, even though it would appear that MS was mostly dominant for the majority of the generation. Long story short, let time tell the story, and let some time pass, let more games come out before acting as if you know everything... instead of being gypsy ass fortune tellers, and bashing shit that we really have no idea about. After all, it's about the games, not the system, otherwise, the handheld market which release systems that are ALWAYS inferior to the consoles would have no market, and would cease to exist on the scale that it does. With the 3ds trumping ALL of the consoles ever made.... So yeah, good first and third party games equal a good system PERIOD. Indie support/streamlining is just a bonus, not a defining factor. P.S. Sorry for the novel I wrote. but I had to cover all the bases of my thought process. EDIT: Added P.S. Apology.
Money talks...and that's how Microsoft communicates.
I'd laugh if all this 'communication' was actually 'under the table' communication from both companies.