Support NeoGAF

[MUnited83]

And your point is? We are talking about incompetency of a company like SE here and I shared proof. Now you suddenly reverted back to Nier ignored whatever I said in my post about Square Enix and PC releases. The key points were that they

* Have history of lackluster ports
* Have history of fudging up release dates on PC
* Have history of silently dropping a game on PC and giving no fucks
* Have history of ignoring PC version in marketing material

Yet people still buy their games so I am sure they are least bothered by whatever a niche video game forum thinks about them.


Has SE started taking preorders for Nier Automata on Steam? Have they put up a promo page on Steam marketing the release date? Have they promised same day and date release for Nier?

Why is it hard to understand that the PC version is not a priority for them? Why does it always have to be 'money hat'.

They have started taking preorders on their own site long ago.

Square Enix Also has no history whatsoever when it comes to not including a PC version that was already announced in marketing materials. That's quite literally a lie on your part. You can't find a single time where they did this except for Automata.

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

None of the marketing materials mention any platforms other than PS4, ever since the point when the Steam logo was pulled.

In interviews it's hard to completely ignore a previously confirmed release, but when it was mentioned since then it was in a completely non-committal way, and with ominous reference to "ninjas". Same thing goes for press releases -- they aren't marketing directly to the audience, they are for the press. The press should be well aware of the platforms a game will release on.

Yup, and just like I mentioned in the other thread, it seems a lot like the NMS situation the more I think about it.

Yeah, but then after that and saying that with the power of PC they could do so much more with their incredible engine, no matter how many times asked they didn't say a frigging word about anything else for the PC version. No footage at all either. Nothing. Everybody went in blind. I hate that and it looks like it is happening here as well. Unless I missed PC footage somewhere.

Not even a solid release date...

Until a couple days before launch.

So yeah, now that I think about it, it really does seam similar in many ways. Even how the release date 3 days apart...

 

[Durante]

To be fair, I can't completely exclude the possibility of an internal struggle at S-E.
Something like the European branch wanting to do proper marketing for a PC day-and-date release for once, and S-E Japan having none of that.

What I know is that creating this video specifically to advertise the PC release is indicative of a very different S-E from the one that repeatedly pulls mention of the Steam version and/or its release date from trailers.

 

[Budi]

Dark Souls 3 was on sale before it even came out bro. It was $42 on PC for a preorder (if you're not a shmuck that buys everything from Steam)

Not that relevant, just saying, who the fuck is paying $60 for PC games?

Are you shaming people that do? I just bought For Honor for 60 euros. GMG only had Uplay keys and I don't dabble in shady sites, since I'm not a crook. And I wanted the Steam version for all the extra features that comes with it.

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

To be fair, I can't completely exclude the possibility of an internal struggle at S-E.
Something like the European branch wanting to do proper marketing for a PC day-and-date release for once, and S-E Japan having none of that.

What I know is that creating this video specifically to advertise the PC release is indicative of a very different S-E from the one that repeatedly pulls mention of the Steam version and/or its release date from trailers.

But that would make absolutely no business sense imo for the Japan branch of the same company to want to advertise less thereby reaching a smaller audience for their product especially when the adverts are already made...

What possible reason other than a marketing deal would they have to cut off the flow of the version of their product that they make more money from per copy sold? Unless, like I said, they are being reimbursed elsewhere.

 

[SarusGray]

Are you shaming people that do? I just bought For Honor for 60 euros. GMG only had Uplay keys and I don't dabble in shady sites. And I wanted the Steam version for all the extra features that comes with it.

I think he's just saying there a better deals on PC than consoles when games are first released.

 

[Durante]

I think he's just saying there a better deals on PC than consoles when games are first released.

Well, yes, but a big reason for that is that publishers can generate keys for free.

Yes, that's right, no 30% cut -- which means $18 which don't go to the platform holder. So when a purely digital retailer decides to eat some of that cut, that's one common reason why you end up with those ~45$ prices.

So even if the game is sold in such a fashion, the publisher can make as much money on it as if it was sold on Steam (or PSN for that matter) at $60.

 

[DarkLordMalik]

They have started taking preorders on their own site long ago.

Square Enix Also has no history whatsoever when it comes to not including a PC version that was already announced in marketing materials. That's quite literally a lie on your part. You can't find a single time where they did this except for Automata.

You might have forgotten but FFIX was announced for Smartphones/PC and released first on Smartphones followed by complete silence about PC release. Did Apple or Google moneyhat exclusivity here or what?

Also I just checked official SE Store and there are no preorders open for Nier on PC. There is the PS4 day one and black box edition available though.

https://store.na.square-enix.com/preorder

 

[Wereroku]

To be fair, I can't completely exclude the possibility of an internal struggle at S-E.
Something like the European branch wanting to do proper marketing for a PC day-and-date release for once, and S-E Japan having none of that.

What I know is that creating this video specifically to advertise the PC release is indicative of a very different S-E from the one that repeatedly pulls mention of the Steam version and/or its release date from trailers.

So there was a video advertising the PC release? So really the only thing not being advertised is when the pc version releases. Could it have been pushed back slightly to add a new version of Denuvo? It just seems so stupid to have an exclusive release date announcement.

RotTR was already announced for all platforms before the timed exclusivity announcement, that's partly why MS got such a backlash. Also, because MS is evil and Sony isn't, according to the internets.

I think MS and SE got so much shit because of the stupid way the exclusivity was announced. Just tell people it is coming to XBO December 2015 and other platforms later. Also Nier is much lower key solely because less people give a shit it's sad but true.

 

[pswii60]

RotTR was already announced for all platforms before the timed exclusivity announcement, that's partly why MS got such a backlash. Also, because MS is evil and Sony isn't, according to the internets.

 

[Corpekata]

You might have forgotten but FFIX was announced for Smartphones/PC and released first on Smartphones followed by complete silence about PC release. Did Apple or Google moneyhat exclusivity here or what?

Also I just checked official SE Store and there are no preorders open for Nier on PC. There is the PS4 day one and black box edition available though.

https://store.na.square-enix.com/preorder

Uh, it's right there:

https://store.na.square-enix.com/search?p=nier

In the middle.

 

[Aostia]

Sony marketing department clearly is better than other competitors ones because their exclusives are praised while oter's are labeled as stolen games

 

[Gestault]

Unless a company really looks like it's leveraging a lack of information to "trick" buyers into a worse product, I don't think it's the platform holder's job to basically advertise outside of their interests. If the publisher is ok with the announcement structure, there's probably a business reason for it.

I thought the Rise of the Tomb Raider announcement was fine once it was cleared up within that first month, and I think the Crash Trilogy is fine being announced first for PS4. In both cases, it's not like we didn't know about the secondary platforms well before the initial launch.

I do think people leaned hard into Microsoft for RotTR, but that doesn't mean Sony (or Activision) deserves that treatment. Ideally, yeah, all platforms are announced at launch, but I get why that doesn't always happen.

RotTR was already announced for all platforms before the timed exclusivity announcement, that's partly why MS got such a backlash. Also, because MS is evil and Sony isn't, according to the internets.

Was it? Which reveal was that? I remember the Microsoft E3 trailer being first, and before that there was just a vague announcement of a new Tomb Raider title, without a name or platforms.

 

[DarkLordMalik]

Uh, it's right there:

https://store.na.square-enix.com/search?p=nier

In the middle.

I listed the page that shows the upcoming preorders. The recently announced DQH2 PC port is available there but no Nier.

The link you shared even has a generic black screen with logo on preorder page. They didn't even update it unlike the PS4 version. The release date still says early 2017.

All of this shows to me that it is another FFIX situation here. Nothing more.

 

[Wereroku]

Sony marketing department clearly is better than other competitors ones because their exclusives are praised while oter's are labeled as stolen games

Huh? Sony gets shit for stuff like the exclusive destiny stuff. The only thing I've ever heard called stolen was FFXIII and that was a case of crazy people.

 

[Corpekata]

Unless a company really looks like it's leveraging a lack of information to "trick" buyers into a worse product, I don't think it's the platform holder's job to basically advertise outside of their interests. If the publisher is ok with the announcement structure, there's probably a business reason for it.

I thought the Rise of the Tomb Raider announcement was fine once it was cleared up within that first month, and I think the Crash Trilogy is fine being announced first for PS4. In both cases, it's not like we didn't know about the secondary platforms well before the initial launch.

I do think people leaned hard into Microsoft for RotTR, but that doesn't mean Sony (or Activision) deserves that treatment. Ideally, yeah, all platforms are announced at launch, but I get why that doesn't always happen.

But we don't know what the other platforms for Crash are. Unless they announce them like, today, I guess?

 

[3rdamention]

Ok, are there any other examples of Microsoft's New Transparancy as argued in the OP? I mean, basically, its Dead Rising 4 and that's it?



What are some of these other Xbox Exclusives that Microsoft have recently been announced with full transparency and easy to understand exclusivity?



And some of those arguments against Sony being somewhat deceptive or dishonest are pretty silly. PlayStation Ireland's Twitter Account shouldn't be held to the same levels of accountability as Sony themselves. Then we have the labels on a game's case in different regions saying different things? Doesn't really seem like some company wide policy to promote a lack of disclosures towards their titles.

 

[Gestault]

But we don't know what the other platforms for Crash are. Unless they announce them like, today, I guess?

Fair enough, though isn't the PS4 version a June/July release?

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

And some of those arguments against Sony being somewhat deceptive or dishonest are pretty silly. PlayStation Ireland's Twitter Account shouldn't be held to the same levels of accountability as Sony themselves. Then we have the labels on a game's case in different regions saying different things? Doesn't really seem like some company wide policy to promote a lack of disclosures towards their titles.

Doesn't seem like a company wide policy to be clear to their consumers either.

 

[Lister]

Oh so you're trying to make this a when is a sale not a sale argument. LOL.

Margins vary by storefront, region, and distribution channel. You have no idea what SE's margins are and are just pulling this out of your ass, all to justify your belief that Sony forced SE to pull a trailer when the much more believable option is that SE fucked up the trailer in the first place.

This is asinine. MOST consoles sales are retail sales. MOST PC sales (by a large margin) are digitla sales. The margins on digital sales are about 2 to 1 vs retail. ON PC there are also numerous avenues ot persue, including your own store, or a store with a lower share of the mprofits.

Bottom line is, the PC version could sell 1/2 of the console version and still bring in a similar amount of profit as the console release.

Moreover, you're opening up your company and IP to new fans and new revennue streams. Exclusivity is almost always a bad deal. Well, no that's not true, it's almsot always a short sighted deal. It could still be a good deal

 

[Planisphaerium]

Tomb Raider was a success partly due to the PS3 and its install base. So its bullshit that it was a timed exclusive for a year. And it didnt even sell that well anyway.

 

[MUnited83]

You might have forgotten but FFIX was announced for Smartphones/PC and released first on Smartphones followed by complete silence about PC release. Did Apple or Google moneyhat exclusivity here or what?

Also I just checked official SE Store and there are no preorders open for Nier on PC. There is the PS4 day one and black box edition available though.

https://store.na.square-enix.com/preorder

https://store.na.square-enix.com/product/418950/nier-automata-pc-download

I listed the page that shows the upcoming preorders. The recently announced DQH2 PC port is available there but no Nier.

The link you shared even has a generic black screen with logo on preorder page. They didn't even update it unlike the PS4 version. The release date still says early 2017.

All of this shows to me that it is another FFIX situation here. Nothing more.

Will you admit we are right if it ends up being released in the leaked date then?

 

[ronaldthump]

Doesn't seem like a company wide policy to be clear to their consumers either.

if its not a missive directed at their consumers, well - the other people aren't their consumers.

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

if its not a missive directed at their consumers, well - the other people aren't their consumers.

Literally everyone who has the money and see's your adverts are potential customers. You don't just exclude everyone who doesn't yet own your products. Many people also have both PC's and PS4's and buy software from both believe it or not.

EDIT: I can't tell but I think you may have been trying to be sarcastic. Sorry if so lol.

 

[DarkLordMalik]

Will you admit we are right if it ends up being released in the leaked date then?

Yes. You can save this post.

 

[unapersson]

Was it? Which reveal was that? I remember the Microsoft E3 trailer being first, and before that there was just a vague announcement of a new Tomb Raider title, without a name or platforms.

It went up for pre-order on Amazon shortly afterwards, I ordered the PS4 version at the time. It didn't seem all that unusual at the time (and it was Tomb Raider after all), other platform announcements are often excluded when announced on a platform holders stage, but then at some point later it morphed into a winter exclusive.

 

[WaterAstro]

Why would either company want to highlight something that benefits the competition?

Just say it's timed exclusive, like Sony has done, and don't even give dates.

 

[Mubrik]

sure,
its shitty.
its even anti-consumer (cant give date on p.c release. really sony/S.E?) practice .fuckery.
but lets face it.
there are still a company first and foremost and this is just standard practice.
at least we know it isn't fully exclusive and will come to other platforms at some other time.
and its very easy to know this.
if it was exclusive and the deals are straight, it'll be in almost every line and PR you find.
if it was console exclusive and deals are straight, it'll be on every line you can find about console exclusivity.
now if it wasn't console exclusive and/or maybe the deals aren't straight you'd bet they'd fucking keep mum (take crash as an example).
its very easy to read btw the lines to the point it's almost non-issue.

tl;dr
this

Why would either company want to highlight something that benefits the competition?

Just say it's timed exclusive, like Sony has done, and don't even give dates.

 

[Battlechili]

I think Sony is intentionally vague.
They don't WANT to fully disclose what's going on with a game because that doesn't make them look good. This shows even beyond their exclusives. Just look at their Youtube channel:

 

[graywolf323]

I think Sony is intentionally vague.
They don't WANT to fully disclose what's going on with a game because that doesn't make them look good. This shows even beyond their exclusives. Just look at their Youtube channel:

why cut off the upload dates? The Switch one is from a month ago and the PlayStation one is from 7 months ago

 

[Battlechili]

why cut off the upload dates? The Switch one is from a month ago and the PlayStation one is from 7 months ago

No real reason. Just didn't want unnecessarily large images.
The Switch news was newer, but it was never announced as being purely on Playstation even at the start.

 

[orochi91]

Sony is unable to secure 3rd-party exclusives for the most part and is forced to settle for timed-exclusivity.

They've opted to keep consumers in the dark about other potential platforms, thus creating uncertainty and confusion among fans. This will result in some fans (who own multiple gaming platforms) being tricked/pressured into buying certain game(s) on the PS4 because of the lack of news regarding other platforms.

We on GAF can pick apart the BS usually, but I feel bad for gamers elsewhere on the Internet/social-media who are tricked by these marketing tactics.

 

[Gestault]

It went up for pre-order on Amazon shortly afterwards, I ordered the PS4 version at the time. It didn't seem all that unusual at the time (and it was Tomb Raider after all), other platform announcements are often excluded when announced on a platform holders stage, but then at some point later it morphed into a winter exclusive.

I think a retailer creating a profile for pre-orders is different from an announcement from the publisher. I still haven't seen anything specific showing RotTR was originally announced for all platforms.

 

[CerebralTiger]

Sony probably has forbidden Kojima to talk about the PC version ever again, they will release the PS5 version without saying it is full exclusive(or lying on stage about it like with Nier or Ni no Kuni 2) but people with believe it is exclusive because they never learn, and a few months after the PS5 version the PC one will show up.

The big difference in Death Stranding's case is that KP is using SIE owned tech to develop the game. Under such circumstances, it's very likely that Sony is in a position to prevent the PC version from happening.

..And fund an AAA game by himself?

Someone like Kojima wouldn't have had a hard time finding a 3rd party publisher to fund his game

 

[sense]

Sony is unable to secure 3rd-party exclusives for the most part and is forced to settle for timed-exclusivity.

They've opted to keep consumers in the dark about other potential platforms, thus creating uncertainty and confusion among fans. This will result in some fans (who own multiple gaming platforms) being tricked/pressured into buying certain game(s) on the PS4 because of the lack of news regarding other platforms.

We on GAF can pick apart the BS usually, but I feel bad for gamers elsewhere on the Internet/social-media who are tricked by these marketing tactics.

There is no proof for your comments regarding Sony trying to get third party exclusives. You are implying they are trying to secure third party exclusives which obviously is not worth it in the first place. Ms has them but it ain't helping. Timed exclusivity and marketing deals seem to be enough that they don't need to go out of their way to secure third party ones. Sony Japan seems to be collaborating with studios to bring some Japanese exclusives but it really isn't worth it to spend a lot of money to secure something just for their platform when they have enough first party studios to fund.

 

[orochi91]

Sony Japan seems to be collaborating with studios to bring some Japanese exclusives but it really isn't worth it to spend a lot of money to secure something just for their platform when they have enough first party studios to fund.

For sure, WWS has been a godsend for the PS brand, and I expect that they'll start reviving some of their dormant IPs eventually now that 3rd-party exclusives are no longer in vogue.

 

[maverick40]

Nah sorry but Microsoft took the permanent crown when it came to Rise of the Tomb raider.

Nothing can top that

 

[David___]

Someone like Kojima wouldn't have had a hard time finding a 3rd party publisher to fund his game

What 3rd party pub is going to give him free reign to do what he wants with their money?

 

[plasmawave]

I think Sony is intentionally vague.
They don't WANT to fully disclose what's going on with a game because that doesn't make them look good. This shows even beyond their exclusives. Just look at their Youtube channel:

I hope you're joking.

 

[RexNovis]

Yea their messaging regarding console exclusivity has been an absolute mess recently. They definitely need to do a better job communicating this clearly. There shouldn't be any confusion about whether or not a title is fully PS4 exclusive or will be releasing on PC at a later date.

 

[Kayant]

I think Sony is intentionally vague.
They don't WANT to fully disclose what's going on with a game because that doesn't make them look good. This shows even beyond their exclusives. Just look at their Youtube channel:

Am more surprised Nintendo just have a stock trailer with all platforms Sony/MS pretty much always have only their own platforms in trailers. I don't see anything wrong here because afterall these are their marketing channels so them advertising other brands seems out of place.

 

[Unreal Champ]

Their labels need work, other then that I don't think they've had a particular case as bad as Rise of the Tomb Raider.

It's just as bad. The only difference, its Sony so people on here give them a pass. Hypocritical if you ask me of members on here.

 

[The Artisan]

It's just as bad. The only difference, its Sony so people on here give them a pass. Hypocritical if you ask me of members on here.

i don't think sony ever moneyhatted a developer as an answer to an exclusive that mS had, that's what rotr was all about. everybody compares it to sf5 but my understanding of that situation is that sony funded development, capcom was in dire financial situations at the time and sf5 would not have been made if sony did not step in

 

[JP]

Surely it would be the publisher to discuss what they're going to do with their own game?

Sony may not even know what machines a publisher is going to release their game on, even if it's something they've had a hand in then the publisher may not even decide until after they see how it performs on PlayStation.

 

[MatrixMan.EXE]

I think Sony is intentionally vague.
They don't WANT to fully disclose what's going on with a game because that doesn't make them look good. This shows even beyond their exclusives. Just look at their Youtube channel:

What you've highlighted Nintendo of doing there is extremely rare for a platform holder to do. Go and look on Xbox's YouTube channel and count how many multiplatform game trailers mentioned PS4.

Spoiler

They don't

Why would you advertise a competitors' platform on an official marketing channel?

 

[Sanke__]

I feel like crash and ffvii are really bad examples since they are both remakes of PlayStation games

 

[Moneal]

So now that we know PC isn't releasing on the 10th. Does everyone still think Sony made them pull the video?

 

[Aenima]

I mean, they mean practically the same thing, but is it because there is a PS3 release of the game in Japan/Asia?

EDIT - yep. Apparently it also came out on PS3 in Asia, so there's your answer. In the west it only released on PS4, therefore it's 'console exclusive' over here.

Im in Europe and my Yakuza 0 say only on Playstation.

 

[AmuroChan]

Someone like Kojima wouldn't have had a hard time finding a 3rd party publisher to fund his game

No, but Sony just made it really easy for him to partner with them. Kojima had said that every other interested publisher had asked him to do a presentation to pitch his game. Sony was the only one who said Yes without him having to do anything.