• 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.

Ori Dev Criticizes Microsoft For Creating “Artificial Barriers”

Now
Bernd Lauert Bernd Lauert DarkMage619 DarkMage619 B bushwookie

we want to see proof of MLBs demands of Sony. Don’t we guys?
I'll tell you what I want to see.

I want to see you back the fuck up from misquoting me. You can go butcher some other persons quotes if you like, but you can go ahead and edit my name right off this post.

Or you can quote me directly where I said anyone FORCED Sony to do anything. You've got your facts twisted up here. Why don't you go untwist that shit before continuing the discussion any further.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
MLB already had a third party game to "reach more people", but, they found out making great games is hard, and their game was not even in the same ballpark (see what I did there) in quality to the years of pedigree. I am more than willing to bet (chirp chirp) they approached Sony when it was time for licensing renewal (which it was, I can't remember how long they sign them for but I want to say in the 7 to 10 years range) after their own 3rd party failures, with a sweetheart deal for the MLB 3rd party license, since it's already a well established revenue machine and a huge risk to get another developer to try and make a game, a good sim baseball game at that, year 1.

I know some baby nuts want to paint the picture that the MLB was going to "yank the first party license or else" to the most popular baseball game out there, which makes the majority (like literally 99%) of their video game licensing revenue, and give it to some company that has no game in the wings, and take the risk of not losing any revenue at all without any proven products. That is as delusional as it gets. Said companies (EA/2K) could have had the license all along, but I bet nobody was biting. The Show is a powerhouse, and it would take years of a pricey investment to build a competent competitive product. 2K found out the hard way.

It was mutually agreed on, and more than likely MLB was like, "now hear us out, DD is growing ten fold year over year, we could not get our own game off the ground, this shit is tough, we agree, so let's get that MUT/FUT like expansive monies! Don't worry about other platform distribution, we will handle all of the publishing logistics for you, just churn out the well established quality product as you have always done, have the 3rd party license on lock, and let's explode together."

But keep fooling yourselves that they were going to "destroy their numero uno gaming money machine", OR ELSE!
 
Last edited:
So. They had an opportunity with a team ready and waiting for a chance to create a baseball game and they decided not to? Not, they couldn’t make a game or didn’t consider it an option? They just decided they didn’t want an MLB game. Then they let 2k put games on their platforms until they stopped making a game. And then they allowed the horrible RBI baseball on their platforms in order to have something, anything to represent an mlb sim on their consoles.and now they’re doing Sony a favor by letting them make the show available to them because MLB forced Sony?
I have one question. Who’s writing the screenplay? I think Sorkin is all booked up for the next decade.
"Opportunity with a team ready". What team did they have ready, and who had this "team"?

All three platforms allow basically anybody to release games on their consoles. You putting it as "they let" and "they allowed" as if they were desperately trying to get anything they could is laughable.

Prior to this year. MLB The Show routinely sold a million copies total, if even that. MLB as a whole has been diminishing in popularity for years. The reason Microsoft and Nintendo likely didn't bother to sign a licensing agreement with MLB to make a game is because...


Wait for it...


Almost nobody cares about baseball anymore.

Why pay for Licensing and developing a game, when it's counterpart struggles to sell even a million copies on the most sold console?

Nobody was doing anyone a favor. It's business. MLB wanted more exposure, and Sony wanted the license for it's baseball game series. So MLB and Sony agreed to the deal that it is. Nothing more, nothing less. Nobody forced anyone to do anything, and I never said as much. Why you decided to carry ten unpinned grenades, a backwards facing gun, a leaky flame thrower, and a paper shield up this hill for battle is anyone's guess but yours.
 
MLB already had a third party game to "reach more people", but, they found out making great games is hard, and their game was not even in the same ballpark (see what I did there) in quality to the years of pedigree. I am more than willing to bet (chirp chirp) they approached Sony when it was time for licensing renewal (which it was, I can't remember how long they sign them for but I want to say in the 7 to 10 years range) after their own 3rd party failures, with a sweetheart deal for the MLB 3rd party license, since it's already a well established revenue machine and a huge risk to get another developer to try and make a game, a good sim baseball game at that, year 1.

I know some baby nuts want to paint the picture that the MLB was going to "yank the first party license or else" to the most popular baseball game out there, which makes the majority (like literally 99%) of their video game licensing revenue, and give it to some company that has no game in the wings, and take the risk of not losing any revenue at all without any proven products. That is as delusional as it gets. Said companies (EA/2K) could have had the license all along, but I bet nobody was biting. The Show is a powerhouse, and it would take years of a pricey investment to build a competent competitive product. 2K found out the hard way.

It was mutually agreed on, and more than likely MLB was like, "now hear us out, DD is growing ten fold year over year, we could not get our own game off the ground, this shit is tough, we agree, so let's get that MUT/FUT like expansive monies! Don't worry about other platform distribution, we will handle all of the publishing logistics for you, just churn out the well established quality product as you have always done, have the 3rd party license on lock, and let's explode together."

But keep fooling yourselves that they were going to "destroy their numero uno gaming money machine", OR ELSE!
I agree with most of your take here. The fact is that none of us know the Licensing contract details, or atmosphere during negotiations, so it's all speculation. Anyone claiming any of those specifics is "fooling themselves". All we do know is that nobody was forced, and both MLB as well as Sony had limited leverage in negotiations. With MLB holding an ever declining valued license, and Sony currently being the only producer of a decent baseball game.

My only disagreement is The Show struggling to sell a million copies every year is neither a "powerhouse", nor a "money machine" to MLB really. Of course both are subjective terms that could mean different things to different people.
 

FrankWza

Member
I'll tell you what I want to see.

I want to see you back the fuck up from misquoting me. You can go butcher some other persons quotes if you like, but you can go ahead and edit my name right off this post.

Or you can quote me directly where I said anyone FORCED Sony to do anything. You've got your facts twisted up here. Why don't you go untwist that shit before continuing the discussion any further.
One of 2 scenarios happened and you called mine out for being” That's so far out into fanboy territory, there's not even a map for it. Lol” which I quoted below. Before that, I don’t believe you were even involved in this conversation. So I backed up my “theory” with a fact. Are you now pretending you have a completely different theory than “mlb demanded “? Sad
"Opportunity with a team ready". What team did they have ready, and who had this "team"?

All three platforms allow basically anybody to release games on their consoles. You putting it as "they let" and "they allowed" as if they were desperately trying to get anything they could is laughable.

Prior to this year. MLB The Show routinely sold a million copies total, if even that. MLB as a whole has been diminishing in popularity for years. The reason Microsoft and Nintendo likely didn't bother to sign a licensing agreement with MLB to make a game is because...


Wait for it...


Almost nobody cares about baseball anymore.

Why pay for Licensing and developing a game, when it's counterpart struggles to sell even a million copies on the most sold console?

Nobody was doing anyone a favor. It's business. MLB wanted more exposure, and Sony wanted the license for it's baseball game series. So MLB and Sony agreed to the deal that it is. Nothing more, nothing less. Nobody forced anyone to do anything, and I never said as much. Why you decided to carry ten unpinned grenades, a backwards facing gun, a leaky flame thrower, and a paper shield up this hill for battle is anyone's guess but yours.
That's a weird way to paint that picture. You start off by saying "Based on that rationale", and then immediately abandon any kind of rationale completely.

Your premise is based entirely on the assumption that Nintendo and MS have been desperately trying to develop a MLB game the last 15 years, but just couldn't manage to do it because try as they might... Only Sony had the dev studio capable of doing so.

That's so far out into fanboy territory, there's not even a map for it. Lol
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
I agree with most of your take here. The fact is that none of us know the Licensing contract details, or atmosphere during negotiations, so it's all speculation. Anyone claiming any of those specifics is "fooling themselves". All we do know is that nobody was forced, and both MLB as well as Sony had limited leverage in negotiations. With MLB holding an ever declining valued license, and Sony currently being the only producer of a decent baseball game.

My only disagreement is The Show struggling to sell a million copies every year is neither a "powerhouse", nor a "money machine" to MLB really. Of course both are subjective terms that could mean different things to different people.
Powerhouse is apt as far as no third party wanting to invest to compete, baseball is a very tough sport to replicate virtually for a sim. It takes years of OCD levels of precise tuning. Not just about sales metrics of units. Diamond Dynasty (their version of MUT/FUT) has been producing more and more revenue YoY. The Show is very intertwined in MLB, it's used as their graphical overlays for the MLB Gameday on their website and mobile, and is synonymous with baseball gaming pretty much.

In the baseball gaming arena, it's a powerhouse, especially considering it was on only one platform at the time. MLB wanted to expand the brand, and they figured out the only way to do that is with the best and already established game out there when they failed on their own. There was no, "you better take the 3rd party license and make more money for not only yourselves, but us too, instead of the first party licensee, or else we make no money for some time!" That is not good business, and shows why brand fanatics are not running these companies.
 
Last edited:
One of 2 scenarios happened and you called mine out for being” That's so far out into fanboy territory, there's not even a map for it. Lol” which I quoted below. Before that, I don’t believe you were even involved in this conversation. So I backed up my “theory” with a fact. Are you now pretending you have a completely different theory than “mlb demanded “? Sad
Quote where I stated what you claimed I did or STFU.
 

FrankWza

Member
Based on that rationale, couldn’t we make the same assumption that Microsoft and Nintendo were incapable of putting out a quality MLB game of their own? They had 15 years and access to the license as well. Why are we assuming that MLB forced anything but we’re not assuming Microsoft and Nintendo lacked the studio to make a quality MLB title? Because the only one forced to do anything at that point is MLB. They were forced to give their license to 3rd party devs because 1st party, besides Sony, wasn’t capable and utilizing the license to the extent that they wanted.
That's a weird way to paint that picture. You start off by saying "Based on that rationale", and then immediately abandon any kind of rationale completely.

Your premise is based entirely on the assumption that Nintendo and MS have been desperately trying to develop a MLB game the last 15 years, but just couldn't manage to do it because try as they might... Only Sony had the dev studio capable of doing so.

That's so far out into fanboy territory, there's not even a map for it. Lol
No I don’t. It’s been that way since 2006. The bold claim is saying MLB forced Sony to do anything when they never had sole exclusivity. My information is easily found on the internet. Also, if Sony had the MLB license to themselves how did MLB publish RBI and put it on xbox and switch?
What facts are there behind your assumptions?

You put yourself in a conversation and obviously didn’t read. I didn’t make any assumption. You called it an assumption and it’s a fact. You brought a peashooter to a gunfight kid. ;)
 
Powerhouse is apt as far as no third party wanting to invest to compete, baseball is a very tough sport to replicate virtually for a sim. It takes years of OCD levels of precise tuning. Not just about sales metrics of units. Diamond Dynasty (their version of MUT/FUT) has been producing more and more revenue YoY. The Show is very intertwined in MLB, it's used as their graphical overlays for the MLB Gameday on their website and mobile, and is synonymous with baseball gaming pretty much.

In the baseball gaming arena, it's a powerhouse.
In the baseball gaming arena? It's definitely a powerhouse, no question. I'm just saying that the arena ain't as big as it used to be.

I think you and I basically agree on the facts, but likely have slightly differing reasons as to why those facts are what they are. Seeing as those reasons are far more ambiguous and subjective. There's nothing wrong with that. The more I think about it, the more I agree in fact.

But Frank up there is outta his tree. I can't fathom how he even thought up such a theory, or why he's so convinced of it. Hopefully his prescription gets refilled soon though.
 

You put yourself in a conversation and obviously didn’t read. I didn’t make any assumption. You called it an assumption and it’s a fact. You brought a peashooter to a gunfight kid. ;)
Posting an inaccurate source doesn't even qualify as a peashooter bucko. You flatly stated that MS had the Licensing to make a MLB game of their own, when they did not. I easily proved your statement false, but you failed to grasp it. Like the old saying goes. You can lead a horse to water, but unfortunately you can't drown it there due to it being on the internet... Or something like that.



Better luck next time tiger.
 

kyoji

Member
Spencer would have no problem putting those games on those other systems.

But it has to be through gamepass
And why would playstation or nintendo allow that when they are market leaders? They gain nothing from allowing another platform to add a subscription model when they can just offer there own
 

FrankWza

Member
Quote where I stated what you claimed I did or STFU.
But Frank up there is outta his tree. I can't fathom how he even thought up such a theory, or why he's so convinced of it. Hopefully his prescription gets refilled soon though.
You’re going to keep on with the insults and crybaby quotes when I backed up my reason with a fact? Seriously?
Posting an inaccurate source doesn't even qualify as a peashooter bucko. You flatly stated that MS had the Licensing to make a MLB game of their own, when they did not. I easily proved your statement false, but you failed to grasp it. Like the old saying goes. You can lead a horse to water, but unfortunately you can't drown it there due to it being on the internet... Or something like that.



Better luck next time tiger.
Why would Microsoft concern itself with a license they have no interest or ability to utilize. It’s not that they were not allowed to make an MLB game, it’s that they could not or would not. So you saying they didn’t have the license might be true, but not because they were legally blocked from it. Otherwise, RBI would not be able to be on their console. It’s because they don’t have a baseball game to make that they can use the license for. Understand?
 

Warablo

Member
MLB already had a third party game to "reach more people", but, they found out making great games is hard, and their game was not even in the same ballpark (see what I did there) in quality to the years of pedigree. I am more than willing to bet (chirp chirp) they approached Sony when it was time for licensing renewal (which it was, I can't remember how long they sign them for but I want to say in the 7 to 10 years range) after their own 3rd party failures, with a sweetheart deal for the MLB 3rd party license, since it's already a well established revenue machine and a huge risk to get another developer to try and make a game, a good sim baseball game at that, year 1.

I know some baby nuts want to paint the picture that the MLB was going to "yank the first party license or else" to the most popular baseball game out there, which makes the majority (like literally 99%) of their video game licensing revenue, and give it to some company that has no game in the wings, and take the risk of not losing any revenue at all without any proven products. That is as delusional as it gets. Said companies (EA/2K) could have had the license all along, but I bet nobody was biting. The Show is a powerhouse, and it would take years of a pricey investment to build a competent competitive product. 2K found out the hard way.

It was mutually agreed on, and more than likely MLB was like, "now hear us out, DD is growing ten fold year over year, we could not get our own game off the ground, this shit is tough, we agree, so let's get that MUT/FUT like expansive monies! Don't worry about other platform distribution, we will handle all of the publishing logistics for you, just churn out the well established quality product as you have always done, have the 3rd party license on lock, and let's explode together."

But keep fooling yourselves that they were going to "destroy their numero uno gaming money machine", OR ELSE!
Are you kidding me? They could have pulled the license and gave it to EA or Take 2 and still made a fortune. Especially with it releasing on more platforms than just Playstation. They don't care about the quality of the game, they just want more people having the ability to buy it.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Are you kidding me? They could have pulled the license and gave it to EA or Take 2 and still made a fortune. Especially with it releasing on more platforms than just Playstation. They don't care about the quality of the game, they just want more people having the ability to buy it.
Apparently they do, they clearly felt their 3rd party product wasn't good enough.

And pull what license? Sony only had a first party license. Those other companies were free to get the third party and they didn't. 2K already had it and failed.

Just, stop.
 
Last edited:

Jigsaah

Gold Member
Well the guy is right in some respects. I think Microsoft would put their games everywhere if Sony and Nintendo would play ball.

It doesn't make business sense though. You gotta have something to differentiate the companies. Exclusives do that, gamepass and ps now has been doing that.

It's like the guy is wishing for world peace while everybody still has nukes. It's just not gonna happen bruddah. If he wants to go non-exclusive, I mean that's your choice. Nobody forced you to take the contract with Microsoft. You saw a good deal, maybe you were a bit in need of funding because you couldn't do it yourself. Now you think you're too big for your britches after releasing a well received franchise. Get off your high horse, shut your fuckin mouth, make your game and also shut your fuckin mouth.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Which they then went to Sony and got it multiplatform now.
Star Trek Kirk GIF
 

Freeman76

Member
This guy is a complete prick with a Messiah complex, and unaware of it as well. MS should cut him loose. Posts on Era as well which says it all. I remember seeing him arguing with people saying that Ori is the best looking game ever made, I mean wind your neck in mate
 
Last edited:
Why would Microsoft concern itself with a license they have no interest or ability to utilize. It’s not that they were not allowed to make an MLB game, it’s that they could not or would not. So you saying they didn’t have the license might be true, but not because they were legally blocked from it. Otherwise, RBI would not be able to be on their console. It’s because they don’t have a baseball game to make that they can use the license for. Understand?
The entire point that you seem unable to grasp is that Microsoft never concerned itself with the license to begin with.
You claimed Microsoft had licensing rights to MLB, when there's not a single shred of even the flimsiest evidence to suggest they did. You posted a source that had terrible context at best, and was outright false at worse, and then ran with it. And have since pointed to it as factual proof, when it's nothing of the sort. On top of all that, you've misquoted me in some desperate attempt to gain an advantage that wouldn't work anyway because while there is little evidence available that suggests MLB pressures Sony into making The Show multiplat... There's absolutely nothing to support your theory.

MS didn't have the Licensing rights to make a MLB game. Could they have negotiated to do so? Sure, but they didn't. Why didn't they? We don't know, but if I had to guess, it's probably because it wasn't worth it. Paying Licensing fees and developing the game wouldn't have likely been worth it. Especially looking at The Shows sales numbers year over year. MS never even asked for The Show to be on Xbox to begin with. MLB wanted that due to wanting more exposure to a wider audience.
 

DarkMage619

Member
The show is the IP. Any of the 3 console manufacturers could have made an MLB game. There was no Sony exclusivity. A license is a license, Not an IP. All 3 majors had MLB games on their platforms but The Show belongs to Sony. If Microsoft didn’t think it was worth producing their own game as you said, then why would MLB go to Sony to demand something? What did Sony stand to lose that they were supposed to be so afraid of this supposed demand you keep referring to?
Didn't catch why Sony made an Xbox version of the game after years of exclusivity if the MLB didn't ask for it. How valuable is 'The Show' if there were no MLB license with it; Just generic stadiums, players, and teams. Let's not pretend people want to play a baseball game with no baseball license. Also what does any of this have to do with MS doing more to remove barriers from platforms than any other console manufacturer?
 

GhostOfTsu

Member
What’s crazy is, he supposedly has a PS5. I just don’t get why you would spend your time on a console that you loathe when there should be plenty for any adult to play, given our limited free time, on any one console. I understand people wanting all consoles but why bother when you hold the company that makes it in contempt? There’s too many games as is.
DarkMage, Senjutsu, Manabyte, Banjo all say they have a PS5 but all they do is promote and defend Xbox. They NEVER have anything positive to say about Sony. Maybe a small comment in passing but that's it.

They only bring it up when they want to look impartial 🙄
 

Banjo64

Gold Member
All of the platforms.
They shouldn't of made it exclusive.
Agree with that. If I had to guess they probably couldn’t seek the funding amount required from the third party publishers though, so they probably had to pick their poison. At least their next game can be enjoyed by all.
 

MonarchJT

Banned
Spencer has preached games should not be gated or lock players out. And then does the opposite and also buys popular already estsblished ip’s to keep them on MS.

While Nintendo and Playstation are still in their old ways but dont say they want to change it.

Thats the difference
the difference is that he old Mattrick Xbox had an user reach of 50m of consoles .....today Spencer reach is 2 price tier of consoles plus those 120m of active steam users..and the rest of PC users...plus everyone with a mobile / tablet and also plus MacOs through a browser.

yeah there's a big differences between Spencer's Xbox all the others that doesn't talk
 

DarkMage619

Member
DarkMage, Senjutsu, Manabyte, Banjo all say they have a PS5 but all they do is promote and defend Xbox. They NEVER have anything positive to say about Sony. Maybe a small comment in passing but that's it.

They only bring it up when they want to look impartial 🙄
First off none of us have anything to prove to you or anyone else. Secondly I in this very thread I said thought The Show was a good game and I was glad it was on Game pass. Hardly a negative statement. Plenty of people make up stuff about Xbox all the time, at least we speak about systems we actually own.

One thing I have noticed is that MS has been far more open to putting IP they actually own on platforms they do not. No other platform owner has done more in that area so the entire premise of the criticism in this thread is silly.
 

MonarchJT

Banned
1. He literally is making the same point as you.
2. He didn't beg Microsoft to Publish Ori, Microsoft went to them.
3. This is specifically why their next game is multiplatform, they signed with Private Division instead of Microsoft again.
he is wrong....stop it
 

SSfox

Lies about why mods reply ban and warn me.
I agree that Phil is a double standard BS talk. As usual i mean.

But this Ori guy is talking from his perspective, if he was a platform holder his comment would be otherwise. If he want to release his games everywhere he should have stayed independent, but maybe he didn't have choice to make deal back then, but still, a deal is a deal, if they made exclusive deal then that's it, don't make exclusives then start complaining about it lmao. If you want your games everywhere then don't make exclusive deals, sounds obvious.
 
Last edited:

supernova8

Member
Sounds more like they went exclusive with Microsoft (ie Microsoft took a risk on it, true regardless of who approached who) and now he's salty that they didn't make as much as money as if they'd done it completely independently on their own (he's somehow assuming they would definitely, 100% make as much money without the sort of exposure Microsoft can provide them). Don't bite the hand that feeds. Sounds like a willy.
 
Last edited:

OldBoyGamer

Member
Ah yes, the "poor kid" sympathy card Q_Q... I hope he knows that 13 year old kid doesn't have to "grow up playing halo" or any other game; that's some kind of weird participation trophy entitlement beta shit.
Not sure that’s what he meant. I think he was saying ‘you’ve potentially lost a lifetime Halo fan’ as opposed to ‘little poor kid can’t play your game boohoo’

I could be wrong but considering his whole argument is really about him not being able to expand the player base of his game beyond Xbox players pretty sure that’s what he means.
 

GhostOfTsu

Member
First off none of us have anything to prove to you or anyone else. Secondly I in this very thread I said thought The Show was a good game and I was glad it was on Game pass. Hardly a negative statement. Plenty of people make up stuff about Xbox all the time, at least we speak about systems we actually own.
Of course you had to use it as a way to promote GP in the same sentence. So transparent.

Obama Reaction GIF
 

Ozriel

Member
DarkMage, Senjutsu, Manabyte, Banjo all say they have a PS5 but all they do is promote and defend Xbox. They NEVER have anything positive to say about Sony. Maybe a small comment in passing but that's it.

They only bring it up when they want to look impartial 🙄

Weird comment.
It's perfectly fine not to go out of your way to praise any particular platform. Or to have a clear favorite. Or to have a preferred platform.

Just don't head over to the other side for platform warring, console trolling and thread derails.
 

KungFucius

Member
Ah yes, the "poor kid" sympathy card Q_Q... I hope he knows that 13 year old kid doesn't have to "grow up playing halo" or any other game; that's some kind of weird participation trophy entitlement beta shit.
That is a really angry and small take. The point was the 13 year old kid does not grow up a fan of Halo and hence does not bring in any revenue and has no reason to buy an xbox when he gets a job and can afford one himself. Same could be said for the next TES. It's something worth considering. But take it as some whining to spout off some shitty, hateful sentiment about because that is so much cooler than understanding what they guy was talking about.
 

Yoboman

Member
I get its hard being exclusive to the smallest userbase but honestly wtf did he expect when he signed the deal with MS?

In fact I'd say MS went above and beyond by even allowing it on Switch

I believe this is called biting the hand that feeds you
 

Clear

Gold Member
I believe this is called biting the hand that feeds you

Nah, its just business. You do what's right for you and your interests, and you don't blunt that by partnering with people out of sentiment when a better opportunity exists in your eyes.
 

Yoboman

Member
Nah, its just business. You do what's right for you and your interests, and you don't blunt that by partnering with people out of sentiment when a better opportunity exists in your eyes.
You also don't burn bridges on your way out
 

Lone Wolf

Member
I get its hard being exclusive to the smallest userbase but honestly wtf did he expect when he signed the deal with MS?

In fact I'd say MS went above and beyond by even allowing it on Switch

I believe this is called biting the hand that feeds you
Isn’t PC the largest?
 

Majukun

Member
i mean, it's not a secret that the "no boundaries" future microsoft is preaching passes through THEIR gamepass being present everywhere.

nobody spends millions for the good of the medium
 

DarkMage619

Member
i mean, it's not a secret that the "no boundaries" future microsoft is preaching passes through THEIR gamepass being present everywhere.

nobody spends millions for the good of the medium
The boundaries MS are referring to are platform boundaries. Many of their PC releases are also on Steam so even Game pass isn't really a boundary since it's an optional service.

I don't know about doing things for the good of the medium but MS clearly has made their games available outside of services and platforms they own and no one else has done more in that space.
 

Clear

Gold Member
You also don't burn bridges on your way out

I don't see any bridges being burned here. Noone at MS is going to bat an eye over his comments (1)because he doesn't actually say anything negative about them, and (2) because they wouldn't hesitate to do the same thing and switch-up partnerships as and when it suited their business interests.

I hate to point this out but if MS were that committed to continuing an exclusive relationship they'd simply buy out Moon or otherwise make an offer to secure their next project. That they haven't, says it all.
 

Shut0wen

Member
Im sorry but if money by a company is used to fund your game then they call the shots where its published, im confused and dont know the details of how and why ori was allowed on the switch but if its not on ps store then how is this microsofts fault?

If he believed this vision why did he accept microsofts funding? Seems pissed off that the game was successful
 
Last edited:

Hezekiah

Member
This

Microsoft has acquired a lot of developers that historically released games on multiple platforms. Those are probably not going to change (e.g. Fallout, DOOM, Minecraft)

On the other hand, franchises that were always heaviliy associated with Xbox will stay on Xbox/PC, such as Halo, Age of Empires, Fable and many others.
You think the next Doom game will be released on Playsation?

Don't think so, same goes for Fallout, Wolfenstein etc. The exceptions are Minecraft, and Cuphead/Psychonauts which were exceptions due to the origin of those games.
 

synce

Member
Dude posting on ree era takes away any credibility he might've had. Couldn't pay me to read a wall of text on there.
 
Top Bottom