• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Marvels Avengers: Spiderman to be Exclusive to the Playstation version [Confirmed]

Andodalf

Banned
Source quote on this?

Literally the PS blog post where it was announced. They jerk themselves off for how great their “own crystal dynamics take” on the character is, who is “familiar, but fresh” with heavy Ditko and JR Sr. Influences. That’s not what you say if your using an existing design.
 
Last edited:
Exclusive content incentivizes consumer adoption of hardware. Business 101. Console manufacturers are in the business of selling those consoles to make money. It's a round loop.

If you don't own that PS4 you have 2 options: you buy the PS4 or port beg and complain cause you decided to make an investment elsewhere to puff up another company's pocket and it's not playing out like you expect. You could always make the investment in owning all 4 major platforms (PC, Xbox, Nintendo, and Playstation) and have no issues - as long as your pocket allows or you're willing.

The, "everyone should have access to everything" no exclusives socialist paradise... or, "only exclusives that I deem okay".....stop living in La La Land. Your hobby is part of a business and defacto gated to your purchasing power. It's what it's.
 
Last edited:

Shambala

Member
Don’t worry X gon give it to ya
LrwCLdK.jpg
 

sainraja

Member
It doesn't have to make sense. Does it make sense for Disney to shut down Lucas Arts and give the Star Wars gaming IP to EA for 10 years? Nope, but that happened.

Again you have your speculation and I have mine. We can't prove each other wrong and they are just educated guesses on our parts.
You keep disputing but you're not presenting a counter point that proves otherwise.
 
It makes so much sense that we got crappy SW games for years and there was such a huge controversy over lootboxes that Iger had to step in himself.

But if you are going to do mental gymnastics to convince yourself that it made sense then I'll do the same. Disney doesn't publish games, they license their IPs. Sony is the market leader in games. Outside of a brief period of time IGs has always been very close and worked very close with Sony even when they were independent. IGs could always be as successful as ND in their games, but always lacked behind. They picked and chose the most popular super hero in the world to work on because why wouldn't they?

You don't have to like it, but it makes perfect sense.

Again, unless you have a source to prove that Sony currently has the game rights to Spider-man then your assertion is incorrect. It doesn't have to be a binding contract a la the leaked Sony one. Something from a reliable source (not a random youtuber please) stating it will suffice. Something similar to what you can find regarding EA and Lucas contract for Star Wars games.


Sony probably got the console game rights during the 2015 contract amendment. Ill probably do a thread linking every wikileak and wall street journal article. Sony gave up the merchandise rights for 10 years, for money. Im sure they probably would exchange them for the game rights. Or to allow Marvel to use Spiderman in the MCU.
 

EverydayBeast

thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
It’s all legal in console wars, Spide-man exclusive to PlayStation has M$ fans plenty upset
 

sainraja

Member


Sony probably got the console game rights during the 2015 contract amendment. Ill probably do a thread linking every wikileak and wall street journal article. Sony gave up the merchandise rights for 10 years, for money. Im sure they probably would exchange them for the game rights. Or to allow Marvel to use Spiderman in the MCU.


I doubt this will convince him. He's got his mind made up!
 

Entroyp

Member


Sony probably got the console game rights during the 2015 contract amendment. Ill probably do a thread linking every wikileak and wall street journal article. Sony gave up the merchandise rights for 10 years, for money. Im sure they probably would exchange them for the game rights. Or to allow Marvel to use Spiderman in the MCU.


Gamers are lucky Sony has exclusive rights to Spiderman, Sony is a great game developer.
 


Sony probably got the console game rights during the 2015 contract amendment. Ill probably do a thread linking every wikileak and wall street journal article. Sony gave up the merchandise rights for 10 years, for money. Im sure they probably would exchange them for the game rights. Or to allow Marvel to use Spiderman in the MCU.


Are you guys serious with Grace Randolph? I think I'm being trolled at this point. She also said in the youtube clip someone posted that Sony "didn't really care" about selling the merch rights. No big deal. Yeah, sure. Yoshida san said it was a mistake, but I guess Grace knows more than him. Next you'll link me to Mikey Sutton and Jeremy Conrad.

EDIT: The premise for her thesis is that Sony always had the game rights since the original contract from the late 90s. If that was the case then Sony "allowed" Spider-man games on XBox and Nintendo systems this whole time. Marvel UA, Amazing Spider-man and so on. Nice guy Sony right there.

And you start your post with "Sony probably got the console game rights during the 2015 contract amendment". 1) That is an assumption on your part and 2) The contract with Activision didn't expire until 2017 so it's impossible for Sony to have gotten it until then.

Activision Publishing, Inc. (expires December 31, 2017) – console, pc, handheld LP games license.

Activision Publishing, Inc. (expires December 31, 2017) – console, pc, handheld Classic games license.

I'll save you time:

Merch rights:
11.b. Exercise of Merchandising Rights From and After Amendment Effective Date. The following will apply from and after the Amendment Effective Date:

11.b(i) General. Notwithstanding any contrary provision of the Original Agreement, from and after the Amendment Effective Date, except as otherwise expressly provided for in this Amendment, Marvel will carry out all functions (including, not limited to, all administrative, sales and marketing functions) and shall have the right to exercise all rights related to all merchandising whether with respect to Classic Items, Picture-Related Items, Series-Related Items, merchandising the SPE Characters or otherwise and SPE shall have no approvals or other restrictions over Marvel’s exercise of such rights (whether Marvel exercises such rights itself, through its Affiliates or through licensees or other designees). Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, including without limitation Section 11.a(ii)(A) related to the contribution of Picture-related and Series-Related merchandising to the LP and the payment to SPE of the Redemption Payments as described in the Redemption Agreement, and Section 11.c(ii) relating to the reversion of rights with respect to SPE Characters, Marvel shall be entitled to retain for its own account any and all revenues derived from all merchandising (whether with respect to Classic Items, Picture-Related Items, Series-Related Items, SPE Characters or otherwise) except for the Redemption Payments.

Comic rights:

3.e. Excerpts. SPE shall have the non-exclusive right to make or publish excerpts, synopses or summaries of the Property not to exceed 10 pages in length, for purposes of advertising, publicizing or exploiting the foregoing rights in and to the Productions (but not for sale). SPE shall offer to engage Marvel to produce and (if SPE requires printed paper copies) print any such excerpts which are in comic book format, and, if Marvel accepts such engagement, Marvel shall perform the services at rates not exceeding Marvel’s standard rates for comparable custom publishing.

5.b. Publishing Rights. The print publishing rights with respect to the Property and the right to make text (with supplemental pictures, images or artwork) or comic books (consisting of text and pictures, images or artwork) based on the Property available to a reader by means of a digital or electronic delivery system (e.g. by means of CD-ROM, DVD, Kindle, Nook, Sony Reader or the internet) (which rights shall not be deemed Interactive Applications) provided that there are no characters exhibiting motion which carries forward the action of a plot or story (except that the foregoing shall not be deemed to prohibit (i) the movement of a static character across a screen [as opposed to animated character movement] and/or (ii) the use of incidental background or foreground animation on top of or behind a two-dimensional hand drawn image [e.g. falling rain in front of the static comic art] and/or (iii) panning across a static two-dimensional hand drawn image. For the purpose of clarification, the foregoing exceptions are consistent with and are meant to be in the nature of the sample X-Men comic book in DVD format produced by Intec and reviewed by SPE prior to the execution of the Amended and Restated License Agreement (Spider-Man) in 2004. Marvel’s rights under this Section 5.b are subject to the provisions of Section 11, below, including the contribution to the LP of novelization rights, screenplay publication rights and making-of book rights with respect to Pictures and the Mandatory Holdback Against Plot Disclosure and for the avoidance of doubt may be licensed, exploited directly or otherwise delegated as permitted in this Agreement. Without prejudice to Marvel’s rights under Section 5.a hereof, and except as otherwise expressly provided in this Section 5.b: (i) nothing contained in this Section 5.b shall be deemed to reserve to Marvel any interactive rights with respect to the Property, and (ii) a menu or similar device which permits the reader to select which linear text (or pictures, images or artwork) is to be viewed but does not permit the text (or pictures, images or artwork) to be altered or combined in a non-linear manner, shall not be deemed “interactive.” SPE will have a right of approval, not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed, over all commentary or quotes from SPE personnel and/or from Picture or Television Series production personnel that is included in any “making of” book or other publication published, licensed or authorized by Marvel relating to a Production. SPE agrees to use reasonable efforts to reply to such requests for approval within five (5) business days and if any disapproval to give specific reasons for such disapproval.

Game rights:
11.b(iii)(F)(1) By Marvel During Picture Release Windows.

11.b(iii)(F)(1)(x) Free to the Consumer Exploitation by Marvel. During each Picture Release Window, in order to reduce conflicts with SPE’s use of free-to-the-consumer Interactive Applications and Alternative Reality Games for advertising and promotion of Pictures and in connection and Picture-Related Co-Promotions, Marvel may not exploit and/or license any form of Interactive Application or Alternative Reality Game on any free-to-the-consumer or promotional basis (or in connection with any Co-Promotion), except (I) as specifically permitted in Sections 5.g(ii)(A),11.b.(iii)(F), 11A.b(iv) or 11A.b(v) of this Agreement, (II) as provided for (as of the Amendment Effective Date) in the existing third party licenses (“Grandfathered Agreements“) listed on Schedule 20 (which shall not be amended or extended after the Amendment Effective Date in any way which would increase or extend the licensee’s rights with respect to Interactive Applications or Alternative Reality Games relating to the Property beyond what would be permitted under this Agreement in the absence of this clause (II)), and/or (III) by way of Interactive Applications (but not Alternative Reality Games) that feature Prominent In-Game Advertising (as defined below), provided that (a) there is no In-Game Advertising (other than advertising purchased by SPE pursuant to SPE’s Ad-Buy Right) for any live-action or animated theatrical motion picture or live-action television program or other live-action linear audio-visual work (it being understood that nothing contained herein shall limit Marvel’s rights to exploit In-Game Advertising intended to promote publishing or non-linear applications such as video and/or computer games) featuring any superhero, which is initially released or scheduled to be initially released (either in theaters, by broadcast or in the home entertainment market) at any time during the applicable Picture Release Window (a “Defined Production“), and (b) Marvel complies with SPE’s Ad-Buy Right (as defined below). For the avoidance of doubt, this Agreement’s limitations on Marvel’s exploitation of Alternative Reality Games shall not prohibit Marvel from including in Interactive Applications elements that may also be found within Alternative Reality Games including, without limitation, location based gaming (e.g., Check-in services/games (Foursquare, SCVGR, Sony’s Near, GPS, theme park check-in games), audiovisual check-in services (e.g., GetGlue), providing codes to promote games or other products, collect digital points/currency in exchange for real world prizes, augmented reality, etc., so long as the relevant Interactive Application and all related elements, taken as a whole, do not (I) violate any of the ARG Protection Limitations, and/or (II) constitute, in the reasonable opinion of consumers, an alternative reality game.

11.b(iii)(F)(1)(y) Consumer-Pay Business Models. Marvel shall have the right during each Picture Release Window to exploit Interactive Applications on any basis, using any business or economic model of any nature, which seeks to collect revenue directly from consumers for the privilege of playing or using the Interactive Application, including without limitation the following: (I) any business model in which the consumer is required to pay a fee to purchase, download, license or otherwise play the applicable Interactive Application, (II) using a “freemium“ model, under which the consumer is permitted to play a limited number of basic levels of the Interactive Application for free in order to induce the consumer to pay a fee to purchase, download, license or otherwise play additional levels of the applicable Interactive Application, (III) free-to-play games that derive revenue by explicitly prompting the consumer to pay for in-game commercial features (e.g., micro-transactions such as virtual property transactions for real money), and/or (IV) subscription services which charge the consumer a periodic fee for the right to play one or more interactive applications including Interactive Applications. During each Picture Release Window, no Interactive Application conducted or authorized by Marvel, and all related elements, taken as a whole, may (I) violate any of the ARG Protection Limitations, and/or (II) constitute, in the reasonable opinion of consumers, an alternative reality game provided however, that the forgoing limitations shall not apply to any Qualifying Subscription ARG, Qualifying Marvel Family ARG or Grandfathered Agreement. As used herein, “Qualifying Subscription ARG“ shall mean an Alternative Reality Game relating to the Property where the consumer pays a material subscription fee of not less than the greater of (i) $5 per month (excluding non-public beta testing and limited-time free trials not to exceed two [2] months in duration; provided that Marvel may not offer free trials during the six [6] month period prior to then-targeted initial theatrical release date of the applicable Picture in the applicable territory) or (ii) the customary subscription fee in the industry at the time for high-quality subscription-model massively multi-player on-line games.

11.b(iii)(F)(2) By Marvel Outside of Picture Release Windows. Outside of Picture Release Windows Marvel shall have the right to monetize Interactive Applications and/or Alternative Reality Games using any and all business models and methods in Marvel’s sole discretion (including for pay exploitation, ad-supported applications, in-game advertising, etc.) subject to the “Mix and Match” limitations on combining Picture-Related or Series-Related Elements with Classic or non-Property-related elements set forth in Section 11.b(iii)(G) and the limitations on Co-Promotions provided for in Section 11A.

11.b(iii)(F)(3) By SPE. Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this Agreement, SPE shall not have any right to exploit Interactive Applications or Alternative Reality Games at any time except for use in advertising and promotion of Productions and/or Co-Promotions in which no fee is charged to any consumer at any time (unless the Interactive Application is provided as a premium and applicable law requires that there be a charge, in which event SPE may charge the minimum amount permitted by applicable law).

11.b(iii)(G)(2) Exceptions. As exceptions to the general rule stated in Section 11.b(iii)(G)(1), Marvel may do any or all of the following: (w) reference in materials disseminated to the trade (but not in materials disseminated to the general public) general publicly-available facts regarding the box office or home video sales figures, (x) authorize its master licensees for Picture-Related video games (currently, Activision for console games and Gameloft for mobile and on-line games) to include Classic characters from the Property in Picture-Related or Series-Related video games in order to improve game play, (y) authorize its master licensee for Picture-Related or Series-Related toys (currently, Hasbro) to include a call to action to purchase toys featuring other Marvel characters (which may or may not be from the Property) on the backs of packaging containing toys based on Picture-Related Elements in a manner consistent with such licensee’s past practices, and/or (z) permit Marvel’s master licensee for Picture-Related toys to include Classic toys based on other characters from the Property (but not Non-Property Items) in Picture-Related packaging to round out the product line in a manner consistent with the parties’ practice on the first three Pictures.

I doubt this will convince him. He's got his mind made up!

Give me something credible and I'll change my tone. Seems like it's you who have your mind made up to believe whatever it is you want to believe.
 
Last edited:

iorek21

Member
I'm a Playstation fan, but I really don't like this; Spidey is probably the biggest Marvel hero, taking him away from the other platforms... dunno...

It's hard to compare this to a Justice League game with a console exclusive Batman because he's one of the most important members of the group, while Spider Man is not really a big Avengers member.

Still, mixed feelings about it. It's their right to make this deal, but I don't think it's really fair
 

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Well this is a bit of a different situation because Sony actually owns Spiderman.
Correction: they own the rights to any content medium.

And no, I do not expect, and quite frankly, no should Sony give them up. He is now the biggest name in the MCU.
 

sainraja

Member
Are you guys serious with Grace Randolph? I think I'm being trolled at this point. She also said in the youtube clip someone posted that Sony "didn't really care" about selling the merch rights. No big deal. Yeah, sure. Yoshida san said it was a mistake, but I guess Grace knows more than him. Next you'll link me to Mikey Sutton and Jeremy Conrad.

EDIT: The premise for her thesis is that Sony always had the game rights since the original contract from the late 90s. If that was the case then Sony "allowed" Spider-man games on XBox and Nintendo systems this whole time. Marvel UA, Amazing Spider-man and so on. Nice guy Sony right there.

And you start your post with "Sony probably got the console game rights during the 2015 contract amendment". 1) That is an assumption on your part and 2) The contract with Activision didn't expire until 2017 so it's impossible for Sony to have gotten it until then.



I'll save you time:

Merch rights:


Comic rights:





Game rights:






Give me something credible and I'll change my tone. Seems like it's you who have your mind made up to believe whatever it is you want to believe.

What's the actual source to all of that? And you're banking on people not reading that. Regardless, I would like to hear your take on why Spiderman is so closely tied to Sony in gaming when according to you they don't own/have the rights to him.
 

MaulerX

Member
Well this is a bit of a different situation because Sony actually owns Spiderman.


Sony doesn't "own" Spiderman. Let's stop spreading this bullshit lie.

If they did then you wouldn't have these two things:

1- Disney gets a cut from Spiderman movies

2- Disney gets 100% of merchandise sales. Which is a hell of a lot more than what Sony gets from box office after cinemas take their cut and after Disney gets their cut.


Unkown

3- Sony is probably also paying Disney for the licensing rights to Spiderman games and/or it's just timed.
 
Last edited:
Is anyone actually excited about the Avengers game? I couldn't care less when I first saw the muddy-as-all-fuck trailer for the game and didn't have high hopes.
 

Esca

Member
Is anyone actually excited about the Avengers game? I couldn't care less when I first saw the muddy-as-all-fuck trailer for the game and didn't have high hopes.
Each time they show it it looks better. I don't mind gaas and think it could work well if they do it right with this game
 

Andodalf

Banned
What's the actual source to all of that? And you're banking on people not reading that. Regardless, I would like to hear your take on why Spiderman is so closely tied to Sony in gaming when according to you they don't own/have the rights to him.

Its simple, Giving Sony access to the Character exclusively in gaming was a bargaining chip in negotiations for him to appear in Marvel movies. They didn't sell over the rights, but as long as Sony plays ball on the movie front, Disney will negotiate in good faith on the gaming side, essentially giving them right of first refusal there.
 
What's the actual source to all of that? And you're banking on people not reading that. Regardless, I would like to hear your take on why Spiderman is so closely tied to Sony in gaming when according to you they don't own/have the rights to him.

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?
 
Last edited:

JonnyMP3

Member
Are you guys serious with Grace Randolph? I think I'm being trolled at this point. She also said in the youtube clip someone posted that Sony "didn't really care" about selling the merch rights. No big deal. Yeah, sure. Yoshida san said it was a mistake, but I guess Grace knows more than him. Next you'll link me to Mikey Sutton and Jeremy Conrad.

EDIT: The premise for her thesis is that Sony always had the game rights since the original contract from the late 90s. If that was the case then Sony "allowed" Spider-man games on XBox and Nintendo systems this whole time. Marvel UA, Amazing Spider-man and so on. Nice guy Sony right there.

And you start your post with "Sony probably got the console game rights during the 2015 contract amendment". 1) That is an assumption on your part and 2) The contract with Activision didn't expire until 2017 so it's impossible for Sony to have gotten it until then.



I'll save you time:

Merch rights:


Comic rights:





Game rights:






Give me something credible and I'll change my tone. Seems like it's you who have your mind made up to believe whatever it is you want to believe.
This was released today because of all this hubbub. But it says that Activision license expired in 2014 and not 2017. Meaning that Sony could have got the gaming rights in 2015.

 

ManaByte

Gold Member
This was released today because of all this hubbub. But it says that Activision license expired in 2014 and not 2017. Meaning that Sony could have got the gaming rights in 2015.


Spider-Man was in Disney Infinity, the LEGO Games, MVC Infinite, and Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 since then though.
 

JonnyMP3

Member
Spider-Man was in Disney Infinity, the LEGO Games, MVC Infinite, and Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 since then though.
No idea. That could be individual licensing agreements. But all I am clarifying is that Activision's license for Spider-Man expired in 2014 and not 2017.
 
This was released today because of all this hubbub. But it says that Activision license expired in 2014 and not 2017. Meaning that Sony could have got the gaming rights in 2015.


I always choose a reliable and trustworthy site like apptrigger.com when I try to find reliable news.

What I posted came from a binding contract, not some random website.
 

ManaByte

Gold Member
No idea. That could be individual licensing agreements. But all I am clarifying is that Activision's license for Spider-Man expired in 2014 and not 2017.

Did you even read the article you linked? They explained that Marvel allowed Sony to publish an exclusive game and Marvel went to Insomniac and allowed Insomniac to pick what character. They selected Spider-Man. It had nothing to do with any rights issue.
 

JonnyMP3

Member
I always choose a reliable and trustworthy site like apptrigger.com when I try to find reliable news.

What I posted came from a binding contract, not some random website.
Ok...
Here's a 2014 article about the same thing from Games industry.
Better?
 

sol_bad

Member
Literally the PS blog post where it was announced. They jerk themselves off for how great their “own crystal dynamics take” on the character is, who is “familiar, but fresh” with heavy Ditko and JR Sr. Influences. That’s not what you say if your using an existing design.

That's about character design, it has nothing to do with the world the game is set in and whether it is linked to the PS4 game or not.
 

JonnyMP3

Member
Did you even read the article you linked? They explained that Marvel allowed Sony to publish an exclusive game and Marvel went to Insomniac and allowed Insomniac to pick what character. They selected Spider-Man. It had nothing to do with any rights issue.
Did you read what I wrote? All I said was Activision didn't have the rights at 2014 and not 2017. Whoever else had them... I never claimed jack.
 
No idea. That could be individual licensing agreements. But all I am clarifying is that Activision's license for Spider-Man expired in 2014 and not 2017.

maybe is individual or is about the spiderman "version" so a game based on a sony movie means its owned by sony otherwise you can make your own take of spiderman or based on comics as long as marvel grants you the license

form the article

Fast forward to June 2016, E3. Following the first-ever announcement of Marvel’s Spider from Insomniac Games at Sony’s press conference, Marvel Games head Jay Ong had this to say of the company’s new direction for console gaming:

“We’ve had a long history of success with Activision, and we still have a great relationship with them. But the future of the Spider-Man console games is with Sony and Insomniac. We’re delighted about this partnership, and that’s something that’s going to continue forward. With [regard to] other console partners, stay tuned. There’s many more interesting additional things to come. But Activision is in the past, with regards to Spider-Man.”

As far as we know, it is Marvel who still holds ultimate rights to the character. Ong’s comment in 2016 suggests as much as he called it a “partnership” and also mentioned other console partners.

That’s why we can see Spider-Man appear in mobile games like Marvel Future Fight, multiplatform games like LEGO Marvel Super Heroes 2, and even console-exclusive games like Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3: The Black Order for the Nintendo Switch. If Sony had owned his video game rights, you can bet he’d only be appearing on PlayStation.
 
Last edited:

JonnyMP3

Member
form the article

Fast forward to June 2016, E3. Following the first-ever announcement of Marvel’s Spider from Insomniac Games at Sony’s press conference, Marvel Games head Jay Ong had this to say of the company’s new direction for console gaming:



As far as we know, it is Marvel who still holds ultimate rights to the character. Ong’s comment in 2016 suggests as much as he called it a “partnership” and also mentioned other console partners.

That’s why we can see Spider-Man appear in mobile games like Marvel Future Fight, multiplatform games like LEGO Marvel Super Heroes 2, and even console-exclusive games like Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3: The Black Order for the Nintendo Switch. If Sony had owned his video game rights, you can bet he’d only be appearing on PlayStation.
Personally, I'm not arguing about who owns the gaming rights. Check through my posts. I said Sony "could" have got the gaming rights, but I'm not claiming that.

My point in the whole thing was Activision not having the license by 2014 and not 2017.

Anything Marvel choose to do, is up to them!



The reading comprehension on this forum...
 

evanft

Member
LMAO isn't this that shitty GAAS thing? Who cares? If I want to waste money I can think of better ways than at a MTX casino.
 

Megatron

Member


Sony probably got the console game rights during the 2015 contract amendment. Ill probably do a thread linking every wikileak and wall street journal article. Sony gave up the merchandise rights for 10 years, for money. Im sure they probably would exchange them for the game rights. Or to allow Marvel to use Spiderman in the MCU.


no. If that were true we wouldn’t have gotten him in Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 in 2019.
 

Megatron

Member
Boo Sony Booooo....


....can anyone tell me when Tetris Effect multiplayer will be coming to PS4?

Isnt it six months later? I mean there’s a hell of a difference between ‘six months’ and ‘never’. And don’t forget that Tetris Effect itself was already exclusive to Sony for 2 Years.
 

MrFunSocks

Banned
MEGATON. Can't believe they're casually dropping it via PS Blog, lmao. Surreal stuff, really.
I'm sure that game that everyone on here has been saying was garbage will all of a sudden now be holding it up as a classic that is better on PS4 lol.

Anyone that thinks that Sony didn't use their "ownership" of the movie rights to spider man as leverage to get him in games exclusively when they want to is crazy. Of course they did.
 

Justin9mm

Member
Sony doesn't "own" Spiderman. Let's stop spreading this bullshit lie.

If they did then you wouldn't have these two things:

1- Disney gets a cut from Spiderman movies

2- Disney gets 100% of merchandise sales. Which is a hell of a lot more than what Sony gets from box office after cinemas take their cut and after Disney gets their cut.


Unkown

3- Sony is probably also paying Disney for the licensing rights to Spiderman games and/or it's just timed.
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!
 
You're speaking in oxymorons to defend your favorite corporation. You don't license something you own. Sony does not own Spiderman; Marvel does. They license him for movie rights. Sony gets absolutely 0 dollars from merchandise, IP rights, royalties, etc.

Don't be upset. Xbox can get Craig. Tell uncle Phil.
 
Will wait for a deep sale regardless of platform I pick it up on.

I'll bet money that he still finds his way to the PC version one way or the other. Just likes the "exclusive" PlayStation outfits in Control.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom