MrBeatdown (User)

  • Contributor
  • 7 bubbles
  • 5 in CRank
  • Score: 60090
""

Comments

@GiantEnemyCrab

I'm not talking about the details of the release, whether something is a timed exclusive or not. That doesn't really make a difference here.

I'm talking about a first party company blatantly undermining a partner company's business, just because it doesn't favor them.

If Square Enix wanted Sony to stay quiet on a Tomb Raider PS4 release because of a deal with Microsoft, it would be a lousy move on Sony'... #1.8.4
16d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
I'm more curious what Activision thinks. Undermining the business relationship between them and Sony doesn't exactly scream good business. That would be like Sony spilling the beans on PS4 versions of Tomb Raider or Titanfall. #1.8.1
17d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
cgoodno: "You are gaining nothing new."

lelo: "Are you that naive? X1 owners will get nothing new"

Umm... #10.1.5
40d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
@PowerOfGreen

You're changing the topic? I admire your commitment to fan fiction. #7.1.4
41d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
I remember last year at GamesCom, a Capcom rep said this about Dead Rising 3...

"Definitely not a timed exclusive, it's an Xbox One game. We see a lot of this online. It's not coming to PS4 or PC."

lol

http://www.craveonline.com/...

Good thing we had reps there to clear things... #7.1.1
41d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
It's not like you get to choose between getting EA games through Games With Gold or through EA Access. Microsoft allowed EA to make that decision for you. Games With Gold can kiss any potential EA games goodbye. The funny thing is EA would have inevitably given out some of their games on Plus or GWG. They gave out four or so in the past year on Plus, including Battlefield 3. You'll never see that happen on GWG as long as EA offers their own subscription.

It's not... #1.1.3
41d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
@YouAreSalty

Three AAA games. I'd imagine if Sony was content offering only a handful of their own games each year, rather than two games per platform each month, guaranteed, they'd throw Killzone and a couple old sports games your way a little sooner too. #4.1.2
46d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
Once the fall games hit.

Right now, it makes very little sense to offer a retail game on Plus. There are so few games on the market to compete with, publishers can sell their games at a premium. #4
47d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
You're right. If you read the fine print on the EA Access site, they already exclude Titanfall in the fine print. It doesn't even qualify for the 10% off.

I figure it's because it's not EA-owned. #1.2.1
52d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
Choice has to have a point.

PS+ has gotten four AAA EA games in the past year or so.

Why pay EA $30 more now to get access to... four EA games? #24.1
52d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
One of the absolute best games of the past nine years isn't dethroned in the first eight months of a new console's lifespan?

Shocking!

Let's explore this mysterious phenomenon. #9
52d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
Exactly.

In the past year, PS+ got Battlefield 3 (woo, free Battlefield!!!!), Dead Space 3, Kingdoms of Amalur, and starting next week, Crysis 3.

PS+ got four EA games free.

Now people are bitching because Sony won't let them pay EA $30 more to get four games free we would probably could have gotten through PS+ anyway.

Anybody want to buy some magic beans? Only $100. If you sign up for the MrBeatdown Savers Club for the l... #3.2
52d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
@Neonridr

"EA still sucks as a company, but as a PS owner, I would have at least liked the chance to decide if EA Access was for me or not.

Now, thanks to Sony, I don't have that opportunity."

Thanks to Sony, EA doesn't have the opportunity to opt to offer their games on their own service, rather than PS+, which you're most likely already paying for.

Those in favor of having a choice aren't seeing th... #1.1.24
52d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
@PRock10

There is no real value in it.

The 10% off is off standard prices. I read yesterday the discount don't even stack with a sale on EA games currently running on XBL. It's a discount that's only good if you're not getting a better deal for free.

Everybody seems to be in agreement digital versions of retail games should be cheaper. EA's trying to get us to pay for that. The standard pricing is absurd to begin with. It&... #5.3.3
53d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
"which won't be great for Sony's own subscription services."

Services which we will be paying for anyway.

Services which no longer offer games from publishers who keep games exclusive to their own services.

That sure as hell isn't good for us. It's great for publishers. That's about it. Options aren't always in the consumer's best interest.

This is going to be the online pass all over aga... #5.2.3
54d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
It's possible.

Did he post this before 12:15am? #29.1.2
55d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
Uh huh.

It's up on the PS Store. #29.1
55d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
It's sad that a remastered version of what's arguably the single greatest game to release in the past nine years is the best game on a system that has been out for eight months?

Okay... #5
55d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
I had no idea Chumlee was in Kingdom Hearts. #8
57d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
Not sure if you realize I was being sarcastic.

I'm not debating this stuff is dumb.

I'm just saying, when it comes to things like this, leave it as paid content. If developers are going to charge for something, I'd much rather they charge for the meaningless stuff.

If I have to deal with the occasional fart sound from some guy who had to have it, I'm fine with it so long as I'm getting map packs free.

Besi... #5.3.2
64d ago by MrBeatdown | View comment
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 114
Showing: 1 - 20 of 2273