Siempre Amanazando


CRank: 5Score: 39510

MS Bribing for it right?

Ok, so we heard MS secured the rights of the first Titanfall on their platforms and PC for its "lifetime" (whatever that means).
We all know why it went down.
But is it right that MS does this? We already know they have done this numerous times in the past with FFXIII and the GTA series.
Now I know what a lot of you are just saying, "It's just business".
Well, that doesn't really mean anything.
Bribing is still wrong.
It's that transactions like this one has occurred so much around the world, that we had just gotten used to it.
It's morally wrong and unfair competition to others.
There are just tons of businesses that has been lost, even while they are better than other business, due to bribery.
Which in some cases can lead to corruption.

Such as this one, "A whopping 50% of companies in Malaysia surveyed by Transparency International (TI) said that they had lost business due to bribery.This is the highest percentage among 30 countries, all active in international trade, where such surveys were conducted. The survey in Malaysia also revealed that 39% of the 101 companies failed to win a contract or gain new business because their competitor paid a bribe.
In comparison, even in less developed countries such as Senegal and Nigeria, less than 30% said that they lost business because they didn't pay a bribe, said Low. Saying that the findings highlighted the structural corruption in Malaysia, Low said: "Petty corruption, such as paying RM50 can be curbed easily. But structural corruption may have political impact."

As you can see here, underdeveloped countries cannot gain traction because bribing is just being used to win, limiting the countries productivity and affecting the trust with politicians.

"Companies bribe to win contracts, speed up bureaucracy and avoid the rules – or change them. They go through more indirect financial contributions that are intended to influence procurement processes and policy makers."

"The results found that 27 per cent, or more than one in four businesspeople surveyed, think that they had lost business in the last 12 months due to bribery."

Here goes into specifics of how many businesses were lost due to bribery

Now, another thing you are saying is that these are just games. Well no matter what bribery is used for, it is wrong.
Ethically it is horrid.
In our world we have lost advancement in technology and achieving things more efficiently due to bribery.
Oil companies anyone?
We had electric cars in the early 1990's that will get about 100 mpg, what happened to those back then?

What we have here is MS bribing for exclusives. Instead of doing it the right way of acquiring or opening constant new studious, they are just bribing for a game. But then majority of the time it goes to other platform down the line. So I believe it's a waste of time to get a system for those games. Its unfair that Titanfall will not release on the other platforms. You can tell that Respawn wanted it to go on the PS4; but EA became their greedy ways and made cash deal with MS. I do not see how EA is improving, but worsening their reputation by doing this, while still having other exclusivity deals with MS.

I am not saying this as a PS fanboy or whatever, but in a ethically point of view. As bribery is still present in this world and needs to stop. Any business that does this bothers me. I wonder if MS and EA has any shame in this.

The story is too old to be commented.
Pandamobile2950d ago (Edited 2950d ago )

You're ridiculous. If Sony secured a third party exclusive you'd be praising them to high heaven for seizing the opportunity. When MS does it, it's "bribery"?

I suppose you don't consider all those PS4 indie games like Octodad and The Witness to be the results of shady, unethical business practices, do you?

darthv722950d ago

Bribing is a wrong term to use. in fact platform holders have been paying for exclusivity for many console generations.

why would this one be any different?

iamnsuperman2950d ago (Edited 2950d ago )

Exactly bribery is the wrong word. It is bribery at all. It is just a different way of doing thing. Microsoft pays for the exclusive third party deals while Sony builds its in house stuff. I prefer the latter (I just think it makes more sense to do it that way and less riskier since third party exclusives don't come cheap) but it isn't bribery

MysticStrummer2950d ago

Exactly what I was going to say. This isn't bribery.

TopDudeMan2949d ago

I agree darth, it's not so much bribery. It's negotiation and investment.

Don't get me wrong, I still don't like it and I frown upon companies that do it because it means I might potentially miss some good games, but it really is just business.

dedicatedtogamers2950d ago

Bribing is the wrong word.

But the underlying sentiment - I think - is valid. What has the Xbox brand brought to the game industry? I mean, really sit down and think for a minute. What has Xbox brought to the wide world of videogaming?

Halo? Bought out by Microsoft from a Mac developer, Bungie.

Gears of War? Made by EPIC and crew.

Fable? That one is Molyneux and his team.

Banjo Kazooie? Perfect Dark? Killer Instinct? All franchises from RARE.

Sony and Nintendo actually open studios and build franchises. Microsoft simply gets out the checkbook. The last time they opened studios, it was to make Kinect games.

But don't worry, gamers. Microsoft isn't going to be in the videogame industry for much longer. I give the Xbox One 4 years, tops.

Pandamobile2950d ago

I don't think you know how business works.

admiralvic2950d ago

M$ really pushed online multiplayer on consoles and made it successful. While Sony / Sega were both doing it around the same time, neither were as successful or as popular as Xbox Live was at the time.

In either case, you could easily apply this sort of bias against Sony or Nintendo. Nintendo is rather infamous for killing series and misunderstanding their fan base. Some examples include Mother, F Zero, Metroid, Star Fox (at least "true" SF games) and several more niche examples. In Sony's case, a lot of the things you're saying here could apply to their games.

In either case, I don't think your impact on the industry should be limited to what games you published. M$ did things like online (as I mentioned above), achievements, got Xbox Live Arcade going (in the early days this was better than the PSN offerings thanks to titles like Castle Crashers) and a few other things.

givemeshelter2949d ago

Sure...Whatever you say...

TwistingWords2950d ago (Edited 2950d ago )

So Sony is bribing Capcom with Deep Down, bribed Quantic Dream and did Sony partially bribe Ubisoft for those exclusive PS4 Assassins Creed missions?

A business deal is not defined by logic or law as a bribe.

I also find it embarrassing for Cat to personally approve a blog which could in fact be classed as traducement in the US and UK...

2950d ago Replies(1)
SeraphimBlade2950d ago

I think you're mixing up "bribing" and "capitalism."

EA has absolutely no obligation to bring Titanfall to every console; they were offered a deal, and they took it, just like every business transaction literally ever. Plus, I notice that exclusive games tend to be of higher quality because they put all their resources into getting the most from one system (I'm assuming 360 and XB1 architecture aren't terribly different) so this might even be best for Titanfall itself.

I MIGHT share your feeling if we were talking about, say, exclusive DLC for a multiplatform game. That's when it feels like a developer has forsaken a number of their fans. This, though? Nope. Average fanboy feather-ruffling.

This is usually when I'd half-jokingly recommend looking into a gaming PC, but you'll probably need Origin and their draconic anti-cheating software to play it here. I'm angrier about that...

(and seriously, you're comparing this to the death of the electric car? It's one game, not a revolutionary technology that would destroy a market)

XboxFun2950d ago (Edited 2950d ago )

"We already know they have done this numerous times in the past with FFXIII and the GTA series."

Really? Do you have any proof to back up this bold statement? Does this mean Sony bribed Namco for Tales of Xillia or to keep Disgaea on PS3?

I love this sony fanboy mentality. Lord forbid MS provide exclusives for their system. I mean one minute we have Sony fanboys screaming that MS has no exclusives then the next we have them saying MS pays for exclusives (and that's baaaad). The sony fanboys are so concerned about what MS and their fanbase does it's hard to believe they actually enjoyed anything that Sony had offered them.

I love this misuse of the term bribe too. I have never seen such contempt from one side over a game not coming to their system.

"Its unfair that Titanfall will not release on the other platforms."

This statement is what it basically comes down too. Hurt feelings over a specific game not coming to the PS4. It's not fair to the Sony fanboys but it is fair to anyone who is a Xbox fan or user. Hilarious how this is not stated anywhere in this blog or anyone on this site.

And because MS saw greatness in this title and wanted it for their fans, magically it turned into a back ally bribe deal meant to hurt the other platform in some evil biblical way.

And are we seriously linking world businesses on bribery and trying to compare them to legal and fair deal of a video game coming to the Xbox One? Are we this desperate?

NYC_Gamer2950d ago

You do know that Sony also opens the check book for exclusive deals too right?when MS does the same its some huge crime.

Show all comments (32)
The story is too old to be commented.