And look at how much money they've been losing. But it doesn't mean anything to them cuz they get paid by the companies funding all of the shitty DEI companies anyways.
Didn't they have HD remakes of the first 3 games ready and for some reason decided not to release it? And also, wasn't a remake of the first game being developed already with all new actors portraying the original cast and they shelved that one too?
Ultimate Alliance 3 will never go to any other platform cuz it's published by Nintendo.
I have a hours in to the game and while the gameplay loop is fine and fun at times, it's the goddamn greedy monetization of the game that kills it. Sure I can grind but who the hell wants to grind hundreds of hours and rely on RNG just to get one character? Also, I read a rumor that purchasable cosmetics don't unlock on all characters. It only unlocks on the character you choose. So if you want the same cosmetic that's available to other characters, you have to buy it separately f...
I thought Epic takes 15% but reduces it to 12% if you use Unreal. Also again, 30% is the industry standard. No one talks junk about Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft taking 30% oh but big bad Valve and Steam. Oh no, they take 30%. Boooooo. Also, Epic exclusive third party games have been proven to not make a profit for companies. Just do some research and you can find articles about mostly indies saying Epic exclusivity was not worth it. Not all, but some. Supergiant Games is one of the few posit...
Square has always had astronomically high profit expectations. I saw a report where they expected to make anywhere from 400 - 500 million last fiscal year and they only made half of that (a little over 200 mill). They expect to make hundreds of millions of dollars and tens of millions of sales on a single game and when it doesn't meet their high expectations, they consider it a failure. Yes, gaming is their biggest money maker, but they do have other avenues of revenue. I believe they hav...
Yea. That has been planned for years.
@phoenixwing
I'd wait on that cuz the GamePass version is outdated compared to the Steam version. Steam is on v1.2.0 while GamePass is on v1.0.0. GamePass version doesn't even have an option to exit the game like the Steam version does.
So, not winning some arbitrary award that ultimately means nothing at a show that isn't even about the developers who won said awards and is more of an advertisement show makes a game "safe" nowadays? Me thinks the author is using that as a means to justify their own thoughts about the game.
@PrinceOfAnger
"Even sony is already a third party.. isn't MLB on Xbox and they release many games on windows PC?"
Sony putting out MLB games on other platforms is because of the MLB. They wanted more money and going mulitplatform was their choice. If Sony didn't agree then the MLB wouldn't renew their deal. Also, releasing games on PC just makes sense. More money and people playing their games.
Ever since they entered the console market, they never were able to beat Sony or Nintendo at their game. Microsoft dropping out of the console making market is probably the best thing the Xbox division can do since they haven't really made money selling consoles. They probably will release at least 1 more console in the future, but their future is the GaaS model. They've made way more profit on Gamepass alone than they ever did selling consoles.
MGS is very popular, Mario is very popular and yet you call them a cash grab. Sure this is a $10 IF you already have the game. It's gonna be $70 for those who don't.
It will. At least 6 months after this one releases like they did with Last of Us Part 1 Remaster.
The Switch would probably run the game better than the 360. I have an original 360 and the game has noticeable frames drops all the time.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Sony kinda front some money for development of FF7R like they did with Street FIghter 5? Probably remembering it wrong. Also, Square accepted that Epic Games check to keep the PC version of FF7R exclusive for 6 months. Also the check for Strangers of Paradise timed exclusivity too. Square only stopped exclusivity on PC because they realized with FF7R on Steam, they could double dip and get even more money. They had to audacity to release a year and a...
Sony never did. It was a Square decision because back then, Microsoft didn't want crossplay and they also wanted people to pay for Xbox Live for ANY online game. Yoshi P didn't want people to pay two subscriptions just to play the game. I'm all for more people getting to experience what a great game FF14 is.
I dunno why you got downvoted but that was one of the reasons why it was never on Xbox. Microsoft back then when they were market leaders didn't want crossplay between Xbox and PlayStation players. On top of that, Microsoft wanted people to pay for Xbox live while being subscribed to FFXIV too and that didn't fly with Yoshi P. He didn't want people to pay two different subscriptions just to play a game.
So we're gauging the success of a video game based off of Twitch views now?
Exactly. If he REALLY wanted it to happen, it would have happened already with Microsoft games. He could easily make them multiplatform and not exclude them from any platform and yet, he chooses not to. Sony and Nintendo could do the same. Platform exclusivity helps to sell consoles for the most part.
Scalpers are just gonna buy them up like with everything else. They already bought out most if not all of the disc drives and stands as soon as the Pro was announced.