Top
940°

Sony Denies Making Marketing Deals To Force PS4 Pro Parity With Xbox One X

Destiny 2 has been confirmed to run at 30 fps on the Xbox One X. This led to some speculation among fans that Sony is forcing parity with the PS4.

Read Full Story >>
gearnuke.com
The story is too old to be commented.
freshslicepizza1201d ago

Yes it is good and I like that he said its up to the developer to choose to use the power of Xbox One X but marketing deals to withhold content is not something to be proud of.

2pacalypsenow1201d ago

It brings gamers to PlayStation, just like it brought gamers to Xbox last gen. Nothing wrong with that.

Nitrowolf21201d ago (Edited 1201d ago )

I agree that its dumb to withhold content, but where are you in those Microsoft articles and e3 stories of their conference touting the same thing only about xbox? Timed exclusive is a whole lot worse imo than tiny free content that has minimal gameplay offering.

Point still stands though. 3rd party deals are dumb, but they are here to stay so no sense in getting salty about it.

darthv721201d ago

@2pac... but people came to 360 last gen because the multiplat games played better, not because of exclusive content. If anything sony was rather demanding that any game released on PS3 after the 360 HAD TO HAVE something extra to differentiate it. Basically they didnt want any sloppy seconds but that is how most ports played anyway regardless of extra content.

As for the whole destiny thing... its the CPU that is holding things back. DF did a video about it a little while ago when D2 was announced. Rather than try to improve the frame rate (for pro) by running 1080p 60 they are aiming to stick to the 30fps (blame it on the base PS4) and shooting for 4k res. Go figure the xb1 would be doing the same thing because (again its the CPU not GPU) if they cant get the base model to run at 60fps then they arent going to make an unfair advantage for those who get the better model.

@nitro, timed exclusives have been around allot longer than many realize. The only thing bad is that one side has to wait a little longer than the other but ultimately the game still comes out (and improved in many cases). MS may have been guilty of paying for timed exclusivity but the games still came to other platforms. MS never did anything even remotely close to what Sony and Capcom did for SFV.

And that was shady to cut off a whole fighting community on xbox under the guise of financial help in making the game when Capcom didnt need financial help in making Res Evil 7 or Marvel vs Capcom Infinite.

Kingthrash3601201d ago

I knew this was BS when it was first brought up. Even made a video about it.
All this shows is how the gap between consoles are not as wide. It's either the xbox X power was overblown or the pro is under estimated.
Seeing that AC:O is also checkerboard rendered and the 30fps on both consoles maybe the pro is "true 4k" afterall.........:)
Or "true 4k" was just a load of crap used to undermine great games that were being made for the pro before the xbo X was revealed .
NO matter how you look at it more and more false information is coming to light.

freshslicepizza1201d ago

@darth

Well said, this is why I said Sony is proud to exclude others and force gamers to their platform. Many of their fans also want it that way, as long as they are the ones who reap the benefit. If not watch out! First party, yes, makes total sense but not third party.

uptownsoul1201d ago (Edited 1201d ago )

I love @moldybread & @darthv72's (and lots of other people's) negative view of marketing deals to withhold content. I'm sure the same group of people have a negative view of Sony not participating in cross-console play...

What I find really funny is that most of the people with negative views of both practices seem to only express their negative views of these practices after Microsoft reverses course in 2015-2016.

Prior to that, I never saw ANYBODY complaining about Xbox 360 marketing deals to withhold content (a practice they may not have invented, but surely perfected). AND Microsoft was against cross-platform all of last gen and the first 2 years of this gen...and again, not a peep.

IMO, Only people who have expressed their problems with Marketing to withhold content & No cross-platform play LAST generation can be taken seriously NOW.

If you got tweets or videos or comments on websites complaining about Microsoft (2005-2015) doing these practices then your consistent & thus get a pass, everybody else...not buying the phony outrage.

2pacalypsenow1201d ago

If Sony is not making those deals, Microsoft will...

TKCMuzzer1201d ago

@modlybread
Hypocritical? cough, Tombraider, Ok for one and not the other? You should read what you write sometimes.

Thegamer411201d ago (Edited 1201d ago )

@darth, People went to the 360 because it was released first and was the only HD console at the time, it had nothing to do with slightly better-looking multiplats.

The PS3 ended up selling more than the 360 after it being on the market for over a year with no competition. Take a guess why? Exclusives.

r2oB1201d ago

@ moldy

Most of Microsofts E3 conference was full of launch exclusives AKA timed exclusives. Which means the are withholding those games from PS4 gamers for a designated amount of time. Do you think that's anti consumer of them? Shall we check your post history to see how many times you peeked into E3 articles and complained about Microsoft withholding those games from gamers.

Sunny_D1201d ago

@uptownsoul

All this proves is that bar none Xbox fanboys are the biggest flip flopper of gamers anyone has seen. They flip flop just like MS did with their DRM policies at the beginning of this gen.

cellfluid1201d ago

What does content has to do with frame rates??

Why o why1201d ago

Uptown soul.... trust me...there will be zero response to your comment by the 'professional complainers'.. so much energy spent on the console they dont like but zero history of parity in their 'new concerned' conviction . Moldy will always be moldy but darth is acting weird of late.

XanderZane1201d ago

Jim Ryan is a joke. Why is he talking about the original Destiny? They are talking about Destiny 2, which would obviously have a different deal. The fact that he said, "Not to my knowledge." tell me he's clueless and doesn't really know if it does or doesn't have a parity clause in the contract.
As for Microsoft's timed exclusives, I hate them. Microsoft should have made them true exclusives or console exclusives. Same way they did with Titanfall and Sony did it with Street Fighter 5. Microsoft needs to grow some balls and either get more studios to make true exclusives or pay 3rd party to make console exclusives. Look at Ubisoft making Mario_Rabbid Kingdom Battle for Switch. This is what Microsoft should be doing for XBox One X. No different then PS4 getting Nier: Automata & Nioh. This will draw gamers to their consoles.

coolbeans1201d ago

@uptownsoul

-"Prior to that, I never saw ANYBODY complaining about Xbox 360 marketing deals to withhold content (a practice they may not have invented, but surely perfected)."

1.) Maybe it's just me...but I think awarding the 'perfecter' of this unfortunate practice should go to the company's who's able to get a contract that enforces content parity for one whole year. Hats off to them cranking the insidiousness to eleven! :D

2.) What worth does your anecdotal evidence hold?

-"AND Microsoft was against cross-platform all of last gen and the first 2 years of this gen...and again, not a peep. "

Again, more anecdotal evidence that'd I'd argue is untrue. Various users across all platforms have aired annoyance about the walled-off approach console companies have had with online play.

-"If you got tweets or videos or comments on websites complaining about Microsoft (2005-2015) doing these practices then your consistent & thus get a pass, everybody else...not buying the phony outrage."

So, rife through our personal history filled with possibly thousands & thousands of comments in order to prove legitimacy before commenting? That won't prove to be incredibly tedious.

UltraNova1201d ago (Edited 1201d ago )

Moldy care to explain how Sony managed to limit Assassin's Creed Origin's fps to 30 when Ubi has a deal with MS?

While you are at it please explain the RotTR thing and 22 "console launch exclusives" announced by MS this E3.

The hypocricy and flip flopping levels are off the charts. Its unbelievable...

freshslicepizza1201d ago (Edited 1201d ago )

@UltraNova
"Moldy care to explain how Sony managed to limit Assassin's Creed Origin's fps to 30 when Ubi has a deal with MS?"

Where did I say Sony did that? Its an open world game, how many open world console titles run at 60fps? Microsoft isn't forcing developers to do anything if you are implying Xbox One X can handle it.

"While you are at it please explain the RotTR thing and 22 "console launch exclusives" announced by MS this E3."

Phil already explained to Gamestop during the interview. Some games were world premieres and some are Windows/Xbox only and some are console launch meaning timed exclusive deals. That means they are not paying those developers to keep the games from coming to your PS4 down the road like Sony does to block games coming to the Xbox FOREVER.

"The hypocricy and flip flopping levels are off the charts. Its unbelievable..."

It sure is unbelieveable, people used to go after Microsoft for timed deals but now they wont go after Sony. people sued to attach Microsoft for not wanting to do crossplay and now they wont go after Sony. People used to go after Nintendo for monitoring its users and having things like freinds list and blocking voice chat for the children, now they wont go after Sony for doing it.

IGiveHugs2NakedWomen1201d ago

You want to know why this is absolutely ridiculous? Because none of these games is being built from the ground up for the Xbox One X. It's nothing more than a delusional conspiracy theory.

Master of Unlocking1200d ago (Edited 1200d ago )

Yet Microsoft has been doing it for years now, parity deals I mean. But if Sony were to do it now it would be wrong of course...

coolbeans1200d ago (Edited 1200d ago )

@Master of Unlocking

"Yet Microsoft has been doing it for years now, parity deals I mean."

There's never been any proof of console performance parity (what's actually being discussed here) signed by them though. Content parity & first-release deals have been common for both of them.

Realms1200d ago

LOL. The reason MS isn't making any marketing deals is that they don't have any leverage because we all know full to well that they lived or die with those deals don't believe me then tell why MS line up without said deals looks so anemic. MS may not have invented exclusivity deals but they sure milked the hell out of them when they where the dominant console a practice and strategy that Sony is now using against them.

KilKarazy1200d ago

Nitrowolf, the exclusive Destiny content still hasn't come out on Xbox. Microsoft has never done that. DLC was "first" for a month like it is now with Sony which is fine. The reason people are so skeptical of this is that Destiny was and is not allowed to be publicly acknowledged to be coming out on Xbox One as a result of Sonys deal. Neither are the other 2 big AAA releases. It's not much of a stretch for Sony to be requiring parity when the game doesn't "exist " on other platforms.

slasaru011200d ago (Edited 1200d ago )

This is ridiculous. MS can ask Bungie to create another super gun or helmet but for Xbox version. It will cost peanuts and same production effort, lol

+ Show (20) more repliesLast reply 1200d ago
yarbie10001201d ago

Headline is misleading. He doesn't say it doesn't happen. He said he's not going to go into details about clauses and he says he doesn't have knowledge of it.

uptownsoul1201d ago (Edited 1201d ago )

Sony probably doesnt make marketing deals to force parity. Assassin's Creed Origins is marketed w/Xbox and they've confirmed both 1X & Pro versions will be Dynamic Rez @30fps. BUT...

I'm sure the professional complainers will still blame Sony for that too.

aconnellan1201d ago

@uptownsoul

I don't think they would have done it specifically, but - speaking of Assassin's Creed - remember when Unity had both console versions running at 900p/30fps, and Microsoft got shit all over for holding the PS4 back?

Where's the heat on Sony now that the opposite is true? We know that the One X is more powerful than the Pro, but now it's ok that they both run at the 'lower' res and frame rate compared to what the X can accomplish?

GottaBjimmyb1200d ago (Edited 1200d ago )

It definitely happens the one x is unquestionably stronger and destiny two will be exactly the same on both. I find it funn that when PS4 was being "held back" earlier this gen, everyone here was pissing and moaning, now suddenly everyone is perfectly fine with it and it is a no brainer to hold back on the One X. Totally obvious.

naruga1201d ago (Edited 1201d ago )

every empty-brainer who says about deals forgets that out there are not only PS4 pro and XoneX but also og PS4s and og Xones which have far bigger audiences than pro consoles ....devs must keep in touch with them too , cant make exclusive games...Sony shouldnt have to explain that there are no deals DDuh:< .....but ok eveyr BS someone shouts must become instantly News

Aceman181201d ago

@naruga

Thank you, someone here finally saying what the brain dead complainers should have realized. There's more models of OG PS4 and X1 on the market and it would be totally unfair if those versions only ran at 30 while the Pro and X did 60.

If you ppl can't see this important fact then i say please stop making comments about this.

MegamanXXX1201d ago (Edited 1201d ago )

Xbox will always be PS4's b****.This generation, anyhow.In terms of sales this gen as well.

Otherwise they have both have plenty of cool experiences...many of which will have the potential to be superior on XBox in a small number of months.

...but as long as you enjoy your own experience, that is all that matters.

DarXyde1200d ago

Common sense would tell the average person that 30fps doesn't become 60fps with a 10% CPU advantage.

I wish people thought about that more.

fenome1201d ago

Agreed!
It would be shady AF and just a complete waste of money.

MegamanXXX1201d ago (Edited 1201d ago )

and it will still be in 30fps

joab7771201d ago (Edited 1201d ago )

Somewhere I read that the CPU bottlenecks the X1X also, making it about 7-10% faster than Pro. Maybe hey couldn't get it to run at 4k/60 on either. Though I wish they would offer a 1080/60 option for mp. It's 4v4 and not open world.

I will add though, that if Sony didn't have anything to do with it, they really lucked out, because if the PC, X1X and PS4 released the same day, and the X1X IS capable of running at 60 fps, Sony would have shelled out a lot of money, and lost quite a few players. So, either coincidence or purposeful, Sonu dodged a bullet for sure B/C Id much rather have 60 fps than a new strike and mp map.

TheCommentator1201d ago

DX12 in the command processor reduces the bottlenecks and results in up to a 50% reduction of the CPU workload. Plus, the CPU itself is completely customized, and there's nothing like it on the market today.

da1writer1200d ago

@TheCommentator that's untrue, it's an evolved Jaguar chip called PUMA. Look it up, it's still a simple laptop processor. I'm sorry to burst your console war dream but Desktop CPU's crap all over these low powered (slow) CPU's in these consoles. Play your games please, not the plastic boxes you worship. Be gamers, not corporate slaves.

Dark_Knightmare21201d ago

Who would think that anyway besides dumb f**king fanboys. It was clear as day the reason why it wasn't 60 on x1x was to keep parity with og x1 owners and not put them at you know a huge f**king disadvantage in crucible

XanderZane1200d ago

Well, that's what everyone kind of expected for MP games. It's not like it couldn't run the game at 60fps. I have a feeling Battlefront 2 and Call of Duty WW2 will all be 30fps on all the game consoles as well, just so the mid-gen consoles can stay parity with the OG consoles.

butchertroll1201d ago (Edited 1201d ago )

Jez Corden about Assassins Creed Origins between XOX and Pro :

Jez @ E3 @JezCorden

Fact Ubisoft told me there's no difference between PS4 Pro and Xbox One X version of AC: Origins could be part of a much bigger problem

https://mobile.twitter.com/...

So, Sony is paying Ubisoft for parity even if Microsoft has a marketing deal with AC Origins.

Who ever thought that Sony is forcing graphical parity between Pro and XOX for Destiny 2 because marketing deal is a FRICKIN IDIOT!

mark3214uk1200d ago

didnt ms do this with the x1 and the ps4, pay devs not to make the ps4 better on some games e.g the same resolution

IamTylerDurden11200d ago

Umm they made the Destiny marketing deal before Scorpio was even a thing. The reason they are making so many marketing deals is bc the own over 50% market share and are dominating this gen. The deals are easier to come by when you have twice the install base. If both Sony and MS are offering similar amounts obviously the publisher will choose Sony due to a larger crop of potential players.

gangsta_red1200d ago (Edited 1200d ago )

I mean would anyone even admit to this even if they did?

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 1200d ago
ARESWARLORD1201d ago

I don't think Sony would do that. That's the type of thing that would completely ruin your name with the gaming community. PS4 pro is beastly I've had it since launch and I love it LET​ Xbox have no more powerful system for now it doesn't really matter they're both good

Thatguy-3101201d ago

Of course Sony won't do that. If it did then they should explain why assassin's creed is using dynamic resolution at 30fps.

thekhurg1201d ago

Same reason that Sony forced Crackdown 3 to be 30fps and look like a glorified Xbox 360 game.

mandingo1200d ago

@thekhurg. Thats the art style. How should it look?

AZRoboto1201d ago

People claimed Microsoft did the same thing back in the 360 days, with no concrete proof behind it.

thekhurg1201d ago

They were just talking out of their asses. Everyone knew the PS3 was more powerful than the 360, but it was impossible to optimize for anyone that wasn't a 1st party developer. So games ran poorly compared to the exclusives.

Cell was an awful decision, Sony fixed that this generation.

rainslacker1201d ago

People used the parity clause as proof, but they misinterpreted what that was actually stipulating for parity. Performance parity in general I've never seen be enforced when it comes to performance. There was never any reason to actually do so. Content parity is another issue, and I understand why MS did that, but they've since dropped that clause with this gen.

AmUnRa1200d ago Show
Neonridr1201d ago

While I honestly don't believe Sony would be so low, they do have a crap ton of marketing dollars into some of the big fall games this year (Destiny 2, Call of Duty, Battlefront 2). Would look silly to be promoted as the "platform of choice" only to have the competition have a better version yet having paid nothing for it. So I guess it's not out of the realm of possibility I guess. But here's hoping that this is true and Sony wouldn't enforce some crazy rule like that.

Nitrowolf21201d ago

Yeah but they would already be doing that since call of duty all things considering that the pc version can look and run better.

Their advertisement is all just about saying they have exclusive content and that they can have commercials run only for thier console.

TBH im pretty sure we would have heard if this is true by now by some random developer like we did last gen with ps3 and 360.

Neonridr1201d ago

yep you could be right. Obviously we would never want to hear that this sort of stuff is true. Would be very anti-consumer and slimey.

ninsigma1201d ago

Will they be the better version though?? Performance wise, sure, the x will have a slight edge but at the same time, PS4 buyers will get more content for the same price. So it'll be a toss up for consumers to decide which they want.

Neonridr1201d ago

yeah absolutely. I mean Destiny you get that exclusive content and on the other platforms you might get earlier DLC or what have you. So definitely that factors into the equation. I just meant on a pure technical standpoint it should be better on Xbox One X, but that's up to the devs to utilize that extra power or not. They could in theory just take the Pro version and copy + paste and call it a day.

MegaMohsi1201d ago (Edited 1201d ago )

most casual consumers will take content over "more pixels" and will buy it on the platform most of their friends play on because this is a social game.

ninsigma1201d ago

"but that's up to the devs to utilize that extra power or not."
Agreed here. I've been thinking that the games that are already enhanced for pro that will also be enhanced for X will likely just take the Pro improvements and apply to X. Then games post X launch will (SHOULD) be enhanced according to what X can do.

MegaMohsi1201d ago

Sony markets Destiny 2 as having the exclusive content that makes it the place to play Destiny 2. I saw video of the 4k/60 fps PC version and it looks amazing. They don't have to "force parity" basically play it on PS if you want the exclusive content.

If PS4 version isn't native 4k and Xbox version is, do enough people care about slightly better resolution or content you won't get on other platforms for at least a year?

Neonridr1201d ago

depends I guess. I play on PS4, but I could honestly care less if Xbox users had an extra couple of exotics or some extra armor at the end of the day. But to some, that could be huge.

I just want the game to look and run fantastic, which it will still do on my PS4 Pro.

Dark_Knightmare21201d ago

Please sit here for a minute and use your little fanboy brain and actually think for once. Oh screw it I don't have all day the reason the x1x version of destiny 2 is 30 is to keep it fair with og x1 owners otherwise x1x owners no matter how few would have a massive advantage over og x1 owners in crucible

Neonridr1200d ago

yeah, it makes the most sense. Wouldn't be fair for the 30fps users. Otherwise Destiny would have to have dedicated servers just for the One X users instead.

rainslacker1201d ago

They're marketing the content though....why bother with the performance stuff? It's like the whole argument that it's the games that matter. For most players, it's the content that matters. Say COD. For those really into the game, having the content as soon as possible would be more important than slight performance gains.

Neonridr1200d ago

depends, Destiny is an extreme example. Usually it would be getting DLC a week early or something.

ShadowWolf7121200d ago

Marketing deals for Destiny and Star Wars were in place long before Scorpio was a thing, man. There'd have been no NEED for any kind of Parity Mandate in those as the PS4 WAS more powerful than the Xbox One. Heck, the Destiny deal (which applies to the series, not just one game) was inked before either system was out with their specs revealed.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1200d ago
MegaMohsi1201d ago

Did they force parity with AC Origins running at dynamic 4k? Did they force parity with Crackdown 3 running at 30 fps? Gears 4? Please enough with this crap.

KionicWarlord2221201d ago

How can Sony force parity with Crackdown 3 and Gears of War 4?

You make no sense. Lol.

Nyxus1201d ago

That's exactly his point...

ninsigma1201d ago

https://giphy.com/gifs/edit...

That's the joke, they can't...just like they can't on multiplats.

Thatguy-3101201d ago

Uh that's his point man. The only game Ms has that's 4k/60fps is Forza all the other big games are dynamic 4k with 30fps. Even the ones they're partnering with