because the general populace doesn't think about anything that doesn't directly affect them. people originally saw things like netflix as the savior of tv because there were so few ads and a lot of shows available. now as time has gone on, the companies who produce these shows just start their own streaming service so they can make all the money instead of some and we end up with the situation we have now where people are paying more for the shows they used to watch on the tv because of how spread out all the series have become.
especially with tv, exclusives are still relatively new to that area of business so i would expect of a hatred of exclusives to follow in the coming years. the reason i say exclusives are greedy is because exclusives don't serve the consumer base in any way. the only reason exclusives exist is for more consumers to be drawn to your platform instead of a competitors. this means the competitive market turns from quality and quantity to a war of attrition. whichever company can support the loses from undercutting a competitor will win. we are essentially watching two halves of the market try to out monopoly each other and the winner becomes the monopoly.
Last edited by aceperson; 2020-09-22 at 08:20 PM.
https://www.cnet.com/news/how-micros...w-up-bethesda/
"You can't wake up one day and say, 'Let me build a game studio,'" Nadella said in an interview after the company announced its $7.5 billion cash purchase of ZeniMax Media, which owns several industry-leading game developers, including Bethesda Softworks and Id Software. "The idea of having content is so we can reach larger communities."
That's why Microsoft will consider buying even more video game companies in the future, he said, and why it continues to invest in its Xbox Game Pass subscription service.
Correction Linux for User Friendly gaming sucks (but is getting much better).
Linux for gaming itself doesn't suck. I can run almost any game on the market on linux, the ones that can be hard to do is online games. Online games very per game on if you can get them to run on linux or not.
Proton on Steam has been a god sent to the Linux gaming community.
Check me out....Im └(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┐└(-.-)┐ Dancing, Im └(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┘┌(-.-)┐└(-.-)┐ Dancing.
My Gaming PC: MSI Trident 3 - i7-10700F - RTX 4060 8GB - 32GB DDR4 - 1TB M.2SSD
Man, the Game Pass is going to have completely ridiculous value now. It's already a steal, but getting games from Id, Arkane, and BGS (assuming they in particular unfuck their shit) day 1 for barely more than 10 a month on top of all the rest? That's more or less unmatched bang for your buck.
Also, I'm all for this if it means even a chance of Obsidian getting another crack at Fallout with Microsoft budget backing them. I strongly doubt things work that way, but a New Vegas fan can dream.
It is all that is left unsaid upon which tragedies are built -Kreia
The internet: where to every action is opposed an unequal overreaction.
It's still "exclusive". If you want HBO and Netflix...you have to pay for them both separately. And exclusives have been very much a thing since the beginning of "the console wars". If you wanted to play a mario game...you needed a Nintendo. If you wanted to play Sonic games...you needed a Sega. Now if you want to play Gears of War you need an Xbox and if you want to play God of War you need a Playstation.
- - - Updated - - -
Exclusives are not new to TV. HBO, as an example, has been around for decades.
And yes, exclusives do serve to draw the customer away from their competitors...which is the same thing every company does. Ford wants to draw you in away from Chevy. Samsung wants to draw you away from Apple. Every company is offering products and services that their competitors do not so that you will buy from them. So yes, console companies are "greedy" in the same way every company is greedy. Welcome to Capitalism.
but ford has to use quality and affordability to get customers to buy their product. samsung has to use quality and convenience to get you away from apple. ford and samsung don't have to use a platform that is ran by another company in order to sell their products. you are comparing apples and oranges. yes, hbo and other producers had exclusive deals with tv providers but that was the fault of the tv providers, not the producers. the producers got their money from the providers. back when tv was much more divided, it was the providers that were at fault of being greedy. i don't think it was right of hbo and other producers to enter those deals but it was possible that if they didn't take the deal, their services would be completely denied so they couldn't always be at fault for their decisions.
microsoft is a 1.5 trillion dollar company that is buying game studios and franchises and making them exclusive to the xbox. that drives people to the xbox because of the brand loyalty, not the quality. sony won't be able to compete with microsoft in a drawn out war of attrition and will either stop producing games or go bankrupt if this kind of thing is allowed.
this isn't about which company can provide quality, convenience, and affordability. it's about who can stand what is tantamount to a trade war the longest.
Sony has to have quality exclusives to pull you away from Microsoft and vice versa...otherwise the exclusiveness is meaningless. It doesn't matter how many games are exclusive to Microsoft if you aren't interested in playing them.
No, Ford and Samsung don't have to use another platform to sell their products...but, like Microsoft and Sony, they do provide a platform that other companies have to use to sell their products.
Elder Scrolls Online already has one of the scummiest lootbox systems with super super super rare shit you cant even buy with the lootbox currency, 150$ "microtransaction" homes, an optional sub, and pretty much every other possible microtransaction possible. Only thing they could add is season passes if they haven't done so already.
Well, it's a B2P MMO so it's a very different beast.
Optional sub also gives $15 a month in cash shop currency, so if you're subbing you're able to buy the DLC's to own outright even after your sub ends plus have extra currency to spend on other stuff. Lockboxes aside (they always suck), it's a pretty legit model. Especially for a game that sees pretty sizable updates on a quarterly cadence.
one game franchise is all i need to prove you wrong. halo. halo had a great amount of respect and love from the gaming community. 343 has been making bad game after bad game when it comes to halo and yet people are still excited for halo 6. quality isn't needed when it comes to exclusives. it's the brand loyalty of that franchise. i can see the argument that halo was always owned by microsoft but that doesn't matter. microsoft can buy out game franchises with just as much fan loyalty. fallout 76 proves that point through and through. fallout 76 is an amazing piece of proof. people crapped on that game for over a year and yet people still played it because it was fallout. and even with all the negative press involved with fallout 76, people are still excited for new fallout games.
quality doesn't matter when microsoft can just buy brand loyalty.
Alot of people are seeing this in simple terms like Microsoft purely did this to move more consoles and compete with Sony.
MS is looking ahead 10-20 years, they can afford to do that with their bank balance.
You can't really call what is going on these days a console war.
They are even working together, Sony is using Azure, the only people who still see this as a war are fanbois on the internet.
Last edited by DeiVias; 2020-09-23 at 07:45 AM.
I kinda knew it that something like this will happen, when they started pushing lootboxes in Eso in your face pretty much. They wanted to get as much money as possible to make investors interested into the companys there.
Once you go sub its pretty hard to go back to "free" in eso the crafting bag and shit is just too good to pass up.
100+$ dollar homes are reasonable?? Bound crown only housing items is reasonable? As far as I am aware the steam top sales and shit only count the cash spent on a game in steam and not other platforms/launchers. ESO was able to reach platinum sales in 2019 and yet were only able to get in the over 25k concurrent players categoryhttps://store.steampowered.com/sale/2019_most_played/
https://store.steampowered.com/sale/2019_most_played/. Maybe its possible that steam players spend more per player than reg pc, xbox and playstation do but as someone whose main account is on Xbox and see just as many people with crown crate and crown store stuff (myself included) I'd say they probably spend around the same amount.
And yes while lockboxes always suck many games have removed some of the scaminess of them by doing things like letting you sell the rewards in them to other players or to have currencies that let you buy all the stuff in the box. ESO lets you destroy rewards for currency but then doesn't even let you use it on the greatest rewards.
Don't get me wrong I do like ESO and if they ever increase the housing cap I'll eventually get around to finishing building my city on my Coldharbour plot on xbox and Castle in Coldharbour on steam among other mostly finished homes but the money people can and dumbasses like me do is anywhere but reasonable and the only way it could possibly get worse from Microsoft is if they added season passes.
Last edited by qwerty123456; 2020-09-23 at 05:51 PM.
It's totally different, if you want to watch a HBO program you have to pay for something from HBO - this is the same as wanting to play a Bethesda game and having to pay for something from Bethesda.
To be a proper analogy for console exclusivity you would have to pay HBO for their service and also buy a special HBO TV for several hundred pounds. Imagine if HBO was only available on Samsung TVs so you couldn't go with Sony, but then the Samsung TVs wouldn't play Spider Man movies. This is what people don't like about console exclusivity, not the fact you have to buy something from the publisher but having to pay hundreds of pounds for hardware.