Support NeoGAF

[ManaByte]

The game looks like ass anyway. Will wait for beta impressions and a digital foundry breakdown before I go anywhere near this steaming pile.

You'll get beta impressions before the beta arrives.

 

[SlicedBread3]

Sony is paying for Xbox and PC players to get less content for the exact same amount of money on a game they can buy the exact same day. That’s in no way comparable to a game being exclusive.


PS fans don’t have to pay 60$ to not get the medium. PC and Xbox fans will have to pay 60$ for the honor of not getting Spidey.

Nobody HAS to pay anything. They're luxury products.

If the Spiderman DLC wasn't free, would that fix the problem in your opinion?

 

[Farawayfromhell]

That's a joke.
It's getting to be ridicolous.

 

[Megatron]

There is a hell of a difference in a playable character and an entire game mode too. Point is, if I take this just a tad more serious, is these companies (all three of them) only care about getting our dollars and are willing to make deals to get them. Fanatical hatred or defense for any of them goes well beyond silly.

no, you’re ignoring the point. The point is, waiting a few months for content isn’t that big of a deal. But if you are paying a company to literally never let some gamers play it, that’s scummy. That doesn’t benefit anyone. You’re trying to say Microsoft does the same thing, but they don’t, not recently, anyway. Paying to keep content off other platforms forever is something only Sony does.

 

[digoutyoursoul]

Just had a read of the xbox thread on LOLchartz. Holy shit they're having a breakdown, on one hand giving out about Sony deals while on the other praying MS get WB. Full on panic mode about how xbox will compete next year and the year after. You'd think they'd realise by now that their platform of choice can't compete with PlayStation.

Xbox can compete with PlayStation, it’s not some totally impossible task here. If you mean this current Xbox set up then I somewhat agree, you get better people in and it certainly can and will compete.

 

[Shinobitron]

This doesn't bother me, it's business, both companies are looking for ways to get an edge on each other, it's a cutthroat world out there, even in the video game industry.

 

[Strider Highwind]

Am I the only one who can't even get the Square site to accept my beta code lol?

 

[scoobidoo112]

Alright, I'll just keep my money then. Their loss.

 

[NickFire]

Regardless of whether they have licensing rights to the video game Spiderman, they have the licensing rights to movie Spiderman. And since Marvel wants to use Spiderman in the MCU (and he should never leave it ever), that gives Sony tremendous leverage over video game Spiderman. No one has to like it, but let's not pretend MS isn't leveraging every license it has for profit in some shape or form. The hyperbole about the virtuous company who brought us paid online multiplayer and the scummy Sony is silly.

 

[Paracelsus]

Nobody HAS to pay anything. They're luxury products.

If the Spiderman DLC wasn't free, would that fix the problem in your opinion?

The game with less content should be cheaper, by law.

This should've started happening back in the 360 era when Microsoft was going for timed exclusives.
Tomb Raider Underworld - cut off ending edition for PS3 at full price. Star Ocean 4: same exact game with anime portraits and voices, full price.
Vesperia was nerfed on 360 but it was the only english version for a decade, that's value.

 

[v1oz]

I hate this type of practice. It has to vanish ASAP.

Like having Link exclusive to the GC version of Soul Calibur II.

 

[Paracelsus]

Like having Link exclusive to the GC version of Soul Calibur II.

The home versions of the game feature Necrid, a new character created by Todd McFarlane, and one of three platform-exclusive characters: Heihachi Mishima from Tekken only on the PlayStation 2, Link from The Legend of Zelda only on the GameCube, and Spawn from the comic book series of the same name by McFarlane only on XBOX

What exclusive character does XBSX get?

 

[SlicedBread3]

The game with less content should be cheaper, by law.

So if Sony changed it so that Playstation users had to pay to use Spider-Man instead of getting it for free, you would consider that more pro-consumer?

 

[EliTheIceMan]

Good for them doesn’t bother me I’m getting a ps5

 

[MaulerX]

Go do some research before you keep talking bullshit!

They own film, comic and game rights to Spiderman, they struck a deal with Marvel and Disney to share Spiderman - They still own the rights! Share, the operative word is share, they did not sell the rights, they offered to 'share' Spiderman!

Show me the proof where they don't own Spiderman rights? Spiderman is a fictional character, so when someone says 'own' they mean the rights to that property.

Some moronic people on GAF I tell ya!

The only moronic person here is you bud. You go ahead and believe what you want to believe. Don't let me stop you from enjoying living in your bubble.

 

[ManaByte]

Go do some research before you keep talking bullshit!

They own film, comic and game rights to Spiderman, they struck a deal with Marvel and Disney to share Spiderman - They still own the rights! Share, the operative word is share, they did not sell the rights, they offered to 'share' Spiderman!

Show me the proof where they don't own Spiderman rights? Spiderman is a fictional character, so when someone says 'own' they mean the rights to that property.

Some moronic people on GAF I tell ya!

Sony has the film rights to Spider-Man and the TV rights for shows longer than 45 minutes (which is why Disney is able to produce the animated series on DisneyXD).

All other Spider-Man rights reside with Disney/Marvel. That includes merchandise, which the games are part of.

 

[Paracelsus]

So if Sony changed it so that Playstation users had to pay to use Spider-Man instead of getting it for free, you would consider that more pro-consumer?

Sony is getting Avengers, the other platforms are getting Avenge_.
You shouldn't punish Sony players for having the full game, you should make the game cheaper for the people who have an incomplete game.

Look at Dragon Quest 11 to see how greed can screw gamers

 

[yet_another_alt]

Regardless of whether they have licensing rights to the video game Spiderman, they have the licensing rights to movie Spiderman. And since Marvel wants to use Spiderman in the MCU (and he should never leave it ever), that gives Sony tremendous leverage over video game Spiderman.

Sony really lucked out with that Spider-man deal. Movies are currently dead so Marvel isn't getting much out of it but video games are bigger than ever. Even if it's Miles, the Spider-man game can probably carry the PS5 launch by itself.

 

[NickFire]

Sony really lucked out with that Spider-man deal. Movies are currently dead so Marvel isn't getting much out of it but video games are bigger than ever. Even if it's Miles, the Spider-man game can probably carry the PS5 launch by itself.

I'm gonna wait to see before agreeing, but yeah I do suspect you will be proven correct about carrying launch.

 

[saintjules]

 

[ManaByte]

Why even release it on PC and Xbox at all?

 

[SlicedBread3]

you should make the game cheaper for the people who have an incomplete game.

Yes but by increasing the price of the game with all the content, the one with less content would therefore be cheaper. And guessing by your response, you wouldn't be ok with that, which means your issue isn't with people paying the same amount not getting the same amount of content.

Making a claim about how this limits consumer options would probably be a better argument.

 

[Ulysses 31]

 

[MasterCornholio]

Why even release it on PC and Xbox at all?

Because the content is timed and gamers in those platforms will just have to wait for it?

 

[sainraja]

The leaked contract between Sony and Marvel that ANYONE can read and educate themselves. I'm banking on people reading that and not being ignorant. Why would I post that if I didn't want people to read it?

Here's something your Goddess is wrong on. I'll let you guess how she's wrong on this.



As to your question, Sony moneyhatted to have Spider-man exclusively. Don't overcomplicate it. That is VERY smart on their part as it gives people the impression that you are having (i.e. they own the character).

Sony also moneyhatted to have Iron man exclusive game. Does it mean they own the Iron man character? EA moneyhatted to have SW license, does it mean they own them?

You didn't link to the source (and you know it is a wall of text). Also, didn't someone else already address that as being old?

I won't claim to know the full details but I highly doubt that they "money-hatted" it. What makes your claim [money-hatted] more reliable than the claim that Sony has rights to use Spiderman exclusively in video games? Trying to equate Spiderman to what they did with Iron Man isn't the same and you know it. The deal that Sony had originally struck with Marvel to allow them to introduce Spiderman into the MCU was about to fall apart; that ended up not happening and they confirmed they "worked it out" and not too long after Sony announced Spiderman PS4 as an exclusive.

I don't care either way but you haven't done a good job proving your point either.

--

Anyhow, what ever way Sony did it to get exclusivity to Spiderman, they had the upper hand so I doubt any money was exchanged (which most likely would have been the case under any other circumstance). For example, Marvel, with the rights to Spiderman in video games and Sony with the movie rights which Marvel wanted so they could have him in MCU - what was it that changed both Sony's and Marvel's mind?

Since I doubt there will be any agreement as to what actually happened, I think it is safe to say it is some kind of partnership between the two that allows Marvel to keep using Spiderman in their movies and Sony in video games. I am sure there is an expiry date attached, anyway, what we all know and hopefully can agree on without question, is that Sony's movie business does not want to let go of the Spiderman movie rights.

 

[Sweden85]

Sony is paying for Xbox and PC players to get less content for the exact same amount of money on a game they can buy the exact same day. That’s in no way comparable to a game being exclusive.


PS fans don’t have to pay 60$ to not get the medium. PC and Xbox fans will have to pay 60$ for the honor of not getting Spidey.

Uuh. Spider-man is DLC releasing 2021.. not at release?

 

[NickFire]

I don't know about everyone else, but until all this news started leaking I wasn't all that interested in the game. I vaguely remember seeing a trailer some time ago and just feeling meh. Since then I hadn't thought twice about it. But just the fact Sony was going hard for exclusive content (with Spidey) has made me think it might turn out much better than I expected. I hope the pay off ends up worth all the drama.

 

[ManaByte]

Because the content is timed and gamers in those platforms will just have to wait for it?

The PS Plus stuff isn't timed.

 

[Paracelsus]

Yes but by increasing the price of the game with all the content, the one with less content would therefore be cheaper. And guessing by your response, you wouldn't be ok with that, which means your issue isn't with people paying the same amount not getting the same amount of content.

Making a claim about how this limits consumer options would probably be a better argument.

Why should you increase the price of the complete game instead of making the incomplete game cheaper?

It would be like a store having fake discounts.

Also, you do want to give the idea the game is inferior, you do that by selling the game cheaper than average, not by making the other more expensive.

That would just lead to everybody starting a bidding war over cut content to artificially raise prices.

 

[THEAP99]

Lmao this is great let's keep it coming

 

[a multicultural team of v]

Why even release it on PC and Xbox at all?

Yes, lets not even bother releasing a game on platforms because they don't have early access to a shitty costume that nobody will even fucking wear because it probably looks like trash. How could these people even live without early access to a Legendary Emote™.

More time will be spent talking about these things than anyone will use in game. Most pre-order stuff is absolute garbage.

 

[MasterCornholio]

The PS Plus stuff isn't timed.

Oh I read something earlier about timed content. My bad this PS Plus stuff is actually new to me.

Going to read through it before giving you a response.

Edit: Just read though it and still doesn't seem like that big of a deal. What Plus users will get can be obtained by other gamers as well.

Out of this whole deal the only thing that's really exclusive us Spiderman.

With that said it still makes sense to release the game on other platforms.

Yes, lets not even bother releasing a game on platforms because they don't have early access to a shitty costume that nobody will even fucking wear because it probably looks like trash. How could these people even live without early access to a Legendary Emote™.

More time will be spent talking about these things than anyone will use in game. Most pre-order stuff is absolute garbage.

I agree that it does suck for the gamers on other platforms but it's not like the game will be broken or anything. An exclusive character really isn't a big deal and that PS Plus stuff isn't either.

 

[ManaByte]

 

[sainraja]

Given the amount of people that are upset by this, were you planning on getting this game and were you only planning to get it on the Xbox? I guess the answer will depend on if you are a console exclusive player or are okay with playing on both. Just get the PS5 version if you really want the full content.

 

[SlicedBread3]

Why should you increase the price of the complete game instead of making the incomplete game cheaper?

It would be like a store having fake discounts.

Also, you do want to give the idea the game is inferior, you do that by selling the game cheaper than average, not by making the other more expensive.

That would just lead to everybody starting a bidding war over cut content to artificially raise prices.

I'm not saying they should do anything.

The logic in the post I was originally quoting was to paraphrase:

"If two people spend the same amount on different versions of the game then they should get the same amount of content as each other"

My point was if Sony charged extra for Spider-Man for PlayStation users, then the criteria in that logic has been fulfilled. No one gets more content than another person unless they've paid more money. So if this isn't seen as a viable solution than you need to readjust your argument.

 

[30yearsofhurt]

lol

 

[MasterCornholio]

I'm not saying they should do anything.

The logic in the post I was originally quoting was to paraphrase:

"If two people spend the same amount on different versions of the game then they should get the same amount of content as each other"

My point was if Sony charged extra for Spider-Man for PlayStation users, then the criteria in that logic has been fulfilled. No one gets more content than another person unless they've paid more money. So if this isn't seen as a viable solution than you need to readjust your argument.

One question that I have about this whole thing is was this exclusive content going to be available for all platforms or did Sony approach SE to create it for them?

 

[BlueXImpulse]

no, you’re ignoring the point. The point is, waiting a few months for content isn’t that big of a deal. But if you are paying a company to literally never let some gamers play it, that’s scummy. That doesn’t benefit anyone. You’re trying to say Microsoft does the same thing, but they don’t, not recently, anyway. Paying to keep content off other platforms forever is something only Sony does.

Speak for yourself

 

[Mercenary09]

I'm loving all the salty people over this content.

 

[gojira96]

One question that I have about this whole thing is was this exclusive content going to be available for all platforms or did Sony approach SE to create it for them?

This is a very important question... Also, how do these deals work? Does Sony pay for the development of exclusive content? Or they negotiate a smaller cut on sales?

 

[Thicc Enigma]

Guys, guys. Remember

 

[saintjules]

In the topic of exclusivity, these comments are so funny to me. Why don't you just say that you can't afford the game at full price instead of saying this? Getting the game at a sale doesn't affect what goes on in it, nor does it justify your feelings 6 months or so post release lol.

 

[MasterCornholio]

This is a very important question... Also, how do these deals work? Does Sony pay for the development of exclusive content? Or they negotiate a smaller cut on sales?

If Spiderman was never supposed to be in the game but Sony is paying for him then I don't have an issue with this since the competition can do the same for other content.

But if Spiderman was part of the original plan and Sony is paying for them to make it an exclusive that's something that I have an issue with.

I really would like to know more about the deal before coming to any conclusion.

 

[01011001]

One question that I have about this whole thing is was this exclusive content going to be available for all platforms or did Sony approach SE to create it for them?

this question can be answered by very simple logic.

let's formulate it a bit differently:
"did Square Enix plan to release the, by far, most popular super hero as part of their game, before Sony came to them and gave them that brilliant idea?"

the answer is: OF FUCKING COURSE did they plan to put Spider-Man into their freaking Avengers game... IT'S SPIDER-MAN!

if you make a marvel super hero themed game Spider-Man will always be one of the first characters that will come up in the planning stages.

 

[BlueXImpulse]

In the topic of exclusivity, these comments are so funny to me. Why don't you just say that you can't afford the game at full price instead of saying this? Getting the game at a sale doesn't affect what goes on in it, nor does it justify your feelings 6 months or so post release lol.

He's just trying to get brownie points from other fanbases. All Playstation supporters should be celebrating this, great extra content!

 

[MasterCornholio]

this question can be answered by very simple logic.

let's formulate it a bit differently:
"did Square Enix plan to release the, by far, most popular super hero as part of their game, before Sony came to them and gave them that brilliant idea?"

the answer is: OF FUCKING COURSE did they plan to put Spider-Man into their freaking Avengers game... IT'S SPIDER-MAN!

if you make a marvel super hero themed game Spider-Man will always be one of the first characters that will come up in the planning stages.

Who owns the right to Spiderman though as I'm still confused by this.

 

[junguler]

i don't know how anyone can justify defending this. how other people getting the worst game than you a good thing?

 

[01011001]

Who owns the right to Spiderman though as I'm still confused by this.

Marvel, they license it out to game publishers.

Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 had Spider-Man in it for example, and that was a Nintendo published game

 

[MasterCornholio]

Marvel, they license it out to game publishers.

Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 had Spider-Man in it for example, and that was a Nintendo published game

I find it interesting how it's specifically Spiderman.

 

[JonnyMP3]

I think people are so used to seeing Sonic on Nintendo now that no one remembers once upon a time THEY WERE BOTH SYSTEM EXCLUSIVES!

I'm sorry. This is annoying me.