'He also criticizes the exclusive culture in the industry, pointing out PlayStation and Nintendo as being “scared of change” and that they still believe in “walled gardens”'
It's right in there if you bothered to actually read it. From the sounds of it, he's against exclusives in general but has personal experience with Microsoft which is why he brings them up specifically.
Thing is, while true, Sony/Nintendo aren't the ones downplaying exclusives and trying to come off as this "come on everyone, lets hold hands, we shouldn't have any barriers in gaming" company during onslaughts of interviews only to then contradict themselves later. Phil talks so much it ends up biting him on the ass later.
for all those Multiplatfomists-no barriers supporters ..i want to ask
Is Microsoft pays any money to Sony from Windows sales??? ...then why the fk Sony to give their exclusive products to MS or any other platform holder???....
people (developers or not) who cry for all games to become multiplatform are detached from reality or have other more suspicious purposes
-Yeah he's actually criticizing all 3 but specifically Microsoft because thats who he worked with, but I honestly its sounds like something from a 13yr rant rather than someone who understands business:
“Make their games and port them to ALL platforms, not leave anyone behind. The 13 year old kid whose parents were able to only afford to buy one system for their child now won’t grow up playing Halo because Microsoft believes that it makes the most financial sense to leave PlayStation players out. How does that benefit anyone but Microsoft?”
-So he doesn't believe in platforms? Platforms and exclusives are a neccessary tool to generate profits that the devs themselves are concerned with because unlike manufacturers they are ONLY concerned with making 1 game at a time to make a profit.
-If he's so concerned about the 13yr old who's parents can only afford 1 console, then why not fund & dev his games for anyone to playe for FREE....surely there are parents who cant afford to buy their kids games tooso why stop at the console... why is it all on the console manufacturers, why isnt he making free games?
-That all said, actually Microsoft has done alot to make games more affordable an accessible so I dont get his criticism at all.
Incorrect... he calls out Microsoft because he mistakenly imagines the conversations Phil has made on exclusivity in the past suggests they are open to put games on other platforms. When what they have always stressed is they are open to put games on their supported eco-systems. This allows options for their games to reach much larger base and does not include the option to pay Nintendo and PlayStation to put all their games on their platforms.
His suggestion is that Xbox become a 3rd party developer for other systems. Which is simply ridiculous. He does not call out all platforms and then emphasize his experience with MS. He calls out MS and offhandedly mentions Sony and Nintendo in afterthought.
@sonic nah man, people just want to be able to play games. Exclusives mean nothing to anybody besides die hards. Microsoft, Sony, tendo, or whoever should pay whoever publishes a game for access to the game. It’s not a hard concept, why bottleneck games anymore?
You claim people are detached from reality… but it’s like not a “reality” it’s a simple effect from how the industry was ran for decades. So it’s more of a artificial barrier than a reality. There’s no “suspicious” behavior. Video games are entertainment at the end of the day, some people can’t afford every system, it’s not always some tribalistic vendetta. You sound like you are out of touch of reality if anything.
Like for example if Sony pictures only released their spiderman movies to play on Sony tvs/PlayStations/Blu-rays, would that make any sense? No. We live in a new era, holding onto imaginary company laden battle lines is a bad look.
Let PlayStation play halo, let Xbox play Pokémon, let switch play uncharted. Saying no just shows how hard you grasp at the tailfeathers of yesteryear.
Yes, they have been releasing exclusives on PC now….not to mention PS Now has a PC App and it has many older PS exclusives on the service that you can play.
While not perfect, they are showing effort into this now
Yep, they were very "nice" when they bought Zenimax and took long established multi-platform IP away from a player base that had been playing those series of games for decades. He's telling exactly who he needs to be telling.
@Ursozord Yea because buying a publisher and locking down their catalog is the as paying for the development of a game that wouldn't have been created otherwise. "Their the same" Lol
I have no sympathy for the crying about Microsoft buying studios, because if the shoe were on the other foot everybody knows sony fans would praise the move. Sonys 1st party talent mainly comes from buying up once independent studios, very few studios under either Sony or Microsoft were built from the ground up with talent put together by them. So sure many try to move the goal posts to act like sony is so different when it comes to acquisitions but at the end of the day they both are just doing what they can to increase their gaming portfolio & strengthen their brand...and hell Microsoft doesn't even tie you to a console at all, all 1st party is on pc, letting you play anywhere but ps, they are honestly much more consumer friendly than Sony.
I'm sure you don't have any sympathy. "crying"? LOL, that's hypocrisy at its finest. Name any major studio, in fact name any studio at all that Sony purchased that pulled long running multi-platform IP off of xbox and took it away from the xbox fanbase. I'll wait. No ones moving any goal posts except for maybe you, the reality is the situations are very different and you're trying to find an excuse to make Sony look like MS when it comes to acquisitions and that couldn't be further from the truth. But maybe it would be an easier pill to swallow for everyone if Spencer didn't go around claiming to not place barriers on people to gaming and then take beloved franchise away from people because for MS its easier to throw money around than it is to foster or create talented studios of their own. Yeah taking away peoples beloved franchises from where they prefer to play them is definitely the most consumer friendly thing anyone could do. You cant be serious with this s---. smdh
Sony buys the devs, MS buys the IP's . They are very different when it comes to acquisitions. Try to find me one IP other than Sunset Overdrive that Sony acquired as a result of buying a dev. They have actually had relationships with their dev's. What has MS ever created with Double Fine or Ninja Theory? They bought the IP's plain and simple. Sony already owned all the IP's from every dev before they acquired them. You can't buy loyalty. Just look at people jumping back into Insomniac after Sony bought them.
What it comes down to is consolidation, if Sony were to get a big publisher will you be all for it? What if they split them down the middle half the current 3rd party games are not available on the other platform?
Microsoft didn't "take them away" like a brutal divorce sometimes forces a child to be taken away by just one parent. Zenimax was happy to forgoe other consoles for the $$$$.
In a perfect world there would be no exclusives... unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world. If the Ori dev wanted their game on every platform, they shouldn't make a deal with Microsoft... or Sony... or Nintendo.
He knows that. But, Microsoft is at the same time saying they want to get rid of those barriers. His literal complaint is the difference between what they say and what they do.
But what about the point he's trying to make? He's basically saying that exclusives shouldn't be a thing, which is, well, something I don't agree with.
***He's basically saying that exclusives shouldn't be a thing, which is, well, something I don't agree with.***
That's not his point. His point is clearly quoted about how Microsoft talks about removing artificial barriers while doing the exact same thing as Sony/Nintendo.
Regardless of how you feel about exclusives, good or bad, Microsoft is the one saying something completely different than what they are doing regarding exclusives.
And I agree, exclusives should be a thing, to an extent. It creates a healthy, competitive environment for the industry. But it 100% needs to be watched to ensure that anti-competition elements don't creep in to give any single company dominant control of the market via IP purchases.
You're essentially complaining about the opinion of the developer and not saying "Microsoft should stop saying they don't believe in exclusives when they clearly do." If you're going to go after the developer, you should also go after Microsoft for their own words.
Chris I disagree he is totally saying exclusives shouldn't be a thing...at least *starting with Microsoft when he says this:
“Make their games and port them to ALL platforms, not leave anyone behind."
You say: "That's not his point. His point is clearly quoted about how Microsoft talks about removing artificial barriers while doing the exact same thing as Sony/Nintendo."
-Gotta disagree with you here, sounds like you guys are purposely taking the comments made about being able to play on many different devices out of context. Microsoft has removed artificial barriers by putting all their 1st party games on pc, thus no longer making console needed to play but I dont think anybody in their right mind thought that "removing artificial barriers" ever meant removing *ALL* artificial barriers, nor did Microsoft say that as a factual matter. Gamepass also reduces barriers giving gamers access to more games cheaper, cloud, etc to some limited extent. Frankly this dev is surely talking big about somebody elses wallet....ironically only after his game has done well on xbox & pc= that barrier he's really talking about is just more $$$ in his pocket from ps. Its a cheap shot in fact to all 3, because he gets to play the nice guy while making more money, meanwhile who cares about the platform owners investment. If hes such a no barriers guy then dont take the funding or ask sony to fund it for all platforms & see how that goes??? This is a clear case of how some will take a good thing, deed/genorosity and then say well they could do more here, more there, etc. Microsoft is not doing exactly like Sony/Nintendo, until they both make all their 1st party games available on pc day one thats a HUMONGOUS DIFFERENCE...and if we want it to go further with NO BARRIERS then sure that means ALL GAMES playable everywhere but I think we can all agree this would breed complacency and quality of games would suffer in the longrun because theres less incentive, less competition without competing brands.
***Gotta disagree with you here, sounds like you guys are purposely taking the comments made about being able to play on many different devices out of context.***
Direct quote from his post:
"Microsoft is in this weird ‘between a Rock and a hard place’ position where they’re saying that this is the vision they want to see happening in the future, no artificial walls, no boundaries, but then they’re not necessarily acting accordingly”
Well said. There has to be exclusives that are optimized for a particular platform to show off its capabilities. Not our fault a certain company doesn't place an emphasis on this and ends up coming third every generation. If they just commit to this they wouldn't have to hide actual sales figures, promote the crap out of a service that's going to hobble them eventually or claim to promote cross platform play. But hey if some people like to believe the same lie Gen after Gen....
I get the point that the Moon Studios founder is trying to make but I really think that it's all about money in the end. No business in the world runs on Good Samaritan points. I personally like the "exclusive culture." Makes console wars more exciting. And no, don't give me that "gaming is for all" bs. You pick sides in this mf or you play PUBG on your phone.
Agree 100% but I think this is about how contradictory MS is being as opposed to being exclusive. What's likely going on is, they probably wanted to port ori to Playstation after switch and MS probably wasn't okay with that as the switch porting really seemed to be MS trying to bully Sony which didn't work. Ultimately when they couldn't do it anymore, they stopped porting. Just sounds like they don't want to work exclusively with MS anymore is all tbh. As a dev, it would make sense to want to be multiplat even if I don't think Ori would get the attention it gets now as a multiplat. The trade off is limited audience but alot more exposure because of exclusivity. Sounds like a fair trade to me
Crazy all of the people trying to give this guy a hard time when he's justifiably calling out hypocrisy. You can't say you want to expand gaming while restricting where people can play their games. Sony doesn't hide the fact that they want to expand their business and Nintendo thinks that games should be made to serve their hardware not the other way around. Phil had a lot to say before the Bethesda buyout about removing barriers to play but when a business opportunity arose he took it and he's still out there paying for timed exclusives as well.
"This deal was not done to take games away from another player base like that. Nowhere in the documentation that we put together was: ‘How do we keep other players from playing these games?’ We want more people to be able to play games, not fewer people to be able to go play games." - Phil Spencer
And yet only if they want to play those games on PC or Xbox or a steaming service. You can't say you want more people to play the games and then sell it on fewer platforms. That's just lying to people.
Exclusives allow companies to create their own competitive advantage. Without them, or shall we say, without the need for them, many won't get funded, many won't get built. Don't be so quick to yank away any motivation that results in high quality high quantity content. Who develops better than first parties? Would that stay the same if all games came to all consoles? I doubt it.
That said, calling out someone for saying one thing and potentially doing another, is not related at all to my personal feelings about exclusivity.
I agree with both of your points. I think exclusives serve a purpose. They set the bar and are usually well funded and polished. But you can't say you want more people to play games and then sell those games on fewer platforms. It's inconsistent to say the least.
Ok people. The man is simply saying he wants Ori on PlayStation and everything else but can’t. He made this great game on the system with the smallest user base thats the only ones that can play it. Ori is exclusive and he has problems with exclusives. Not hard to see the real issue here.
I know how these things have always worked. This isn’t a new ideal. As someone that loves games I have always got every system. I didn’t want to miss out on Mario world nor did I want to miss out on Sonic 3. (Helped that my dad was a big time gamer too) Some people have to choose the system that has the most pluses for them OR that fits their budget. Been like that from the beginning. Only way around this is for Microsoft to sell its gaming division, Sony to sell its gaming division, Nintendo to sell itself, or for Stadia to claim its rightful place on the video game throne.
It's kind of a shame there's so many people reinforcing these walled-gardens as if it gives them some value. How does it hurt you in any way that someone else who chose a certain platform plays your games?
Exclusives are good for no one. Even platform holders are slowly realising it and releasing their games on PC. Imagine a world where regardless of your platform of choice you can enjoy Forza Horizon 5 and Halo as well as God of War and Spider-Man.
You are assuming the plants will flourish in gardens that aren't walled. First party AAA games are made to be an attractive garden. If they don't need to bring people to the First Party the funding won't be as high and the need to be eye catching won't be there.
Would Halo have been delayed and fixed if it wouldn't have hurt the Xbox brand or would it be Cyberpunk?
Exclusives typically provide benchmark experiences for each generation because developers can utilize the full capabilities of the hardware they are given to work with while not holding anything back due to worrying about potential issues that may arise pertaining to portability. This combined with the fact that each company counts on exclusive content to sell their brand, it raises the bar for what can be achieved. It benefits the consumer if you are a consumer who values quality of experience over quantity.
Also, exclusives benefit Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft because it helps them differentiate their product and brand. When considering specifications, the Switch is inferior when compared to the Series X, PS5, and the vast majority of gaming PCs. Nevertheless, if I am a Mario or Zelda fan I know which company’s product I must invest in to obtain these experiences. The face of Mario is tied to Nintendo in the same way Mickey Mouse is tied to Disney. It differentiates them from the competition.
There are clear benefits to closed ecosystems. Even if the consumer often has to pay a premium through supporting multiple platforms.
I think the statement sayinf MS is in this weird place rings true. PPL are mad at MS for not having real Serie X exclusives and at the same time some ppl are asking for the opposite.
If consoles didn't have first party exclusives then what would be the point in having 3 different console platforms since they all release on each others consoles?
Might as well everyone just get a pc. Or if a console is a must. You want a handheld one? Get a switch or want to play on a TV? Get a playstation.
He sure did take MS money and advertising to get his game where it is..he should be happy his game was so successful, don't bad mouth any of the big 3, take all your money and go make free games for 13year olds to play. MS is sticking to their word..you can play the game on a cell phone for crying out loud..they said they wanna make it so you dont have to own an Xbox to play..and u literally dont have to have an Xbox..PC, Cell phone, web browsers and soon T.Vs. they even had a commercial in Japan playing MS games on PS5!
They put his game on PC, all Xbox consoles and the Switch and he bitches that it ain't on Playstation? A game he knew from the very beginning no matter what MS was saying for PR wouldn't go to Playstation..I'm 100% playstation never once came up when they were inking a deal..but now that he has a truck of money and wants more, he pretends to be on some high horse. This guy need to STFU..make his private game and put it everywhere he see fit..after using MS to make a name for his studio, he has the balls to insult them and then Sony and Nintendo..wow..
"100% playstation never once came up when they were inking a deal".
What about that part? It puts the part you picked out in context.
MS PR is made to the public. I am 100% positive that in the contract to do not only 1 game but 2! Nowhere was playstation or any other console mentioned in the paperwork. He knew damn well what he was signing.
He's someone who works closely with Microsoft, and clearly put stock in what Microsoft says. And you're saying he shouldn't?
He's not saying he feels like he was contractually cheated out of something. He even makes that clear.
You make it out like he shouldn't be saying anything because he made money on the deal. Microsoft did too. He fulfilled his obligations, just as Microsoft did theirs, and so he has every right to criticize Microsoft for not living up to their PR.
You acting like he's out of line, as if he owes his success solely to Microsoft and he's indebted to them just makes you sound like a Microsoft apologist.
The Ori dev must not have been up on history of Microsoft with their Embrace Extend Extinguish/Exterminate strategy that's still ongoing. Just like buying the Kinect tech to keep Dr Marks from using the tech on PlayStation. Just as Microsoft bought Zenimax to deny games from PlayStation while they say something else about having open barriers.
Make their software compatible in multiple areas except for their competitor to try to put them at a disadvantage. Goes with games as well. There's nothing new here. Companies like Netscape know this well. As well as Opera, Java, etc.
Microsoft just has a hard time making that strategy work when Sony is so dominant worldwide. Thomas crying about Microsoft's two face when he should have already known. They've been doing double speak from way back.
I like exclusives. I like having reasons to own particular consoles, but I can see why he, as a creator, would want his game experienced by all. I disagree however that MS should port their IPs to all platforms and vice versa.
Eric Barone had the choice the go straight to Xbox but instead kept Stardew Valley on Steam greenlight. He worked on it with his own time and money so he had more options open. If you want to be an independent developer it is on you to stay that way. It is not a platform holders fault if you knowingly sign a contract tying yourself to a corporation. If you want the money and support to rush things along maybe think about why that cash flow is available to you.
He wasn't bitching about it when he took MSs money.... now that the games have been out for a while he starts talking shit. Now, I think MS is doing the same thing any other company would do if they have had the same amount of money. I'm NOT saying thats a good thing at all. This is the industry, though. If sont could have bought bethesda they would have. It really is that simple. It sucks that millions won't be able to play series they used to, but itsno different than it would have been if Sony had 7b to throw at them.
Lol the nerve on this guy Ms is way to nice with their games i mean for god sake you can play ori on everything except playstation.
He should be telling Sony and Nintendo this smh
It's called exclusives. Every platform is creating ''Artificial Barriers''
The dude opened his mouth and now everyone knows who to be worried about.
I get the point that the Moon Studios founder is trying to make but I really think that it's all about money in the end. No business in the world runs on Good Samaritan points. I personally like the "exclusive culture." Makes console wars more exciting. And no, don't give me that "gaming is for all" bs. You pick sides in this mf or you play PUBG on your phone.
Ori saga playstation port confirmed.
One can dream. :)