I gave other examples in my post that you have not responded too.
> What does cocky even mean? These are corporations!
Not sure that changes anything. Cocky in this sense is Sony thinking they can get away with something because they were running high after the PS2 era.
> You need to go back to the Super Nintendo and Nintendo 64 era, then.
Golden Eye, Donkey Kong Country, Killer Instinct, Banjo-Kazooie, among others.
Ok? What exactly does that have to do with Microsoft? They bought rare in 2002. I am completely missing the point you are trying to make.
> I'm of the opinion that Sony Entertainment paying for exclusivity deals with Square-Enix, is not remotely comparable to Microsoft buying a massive studio (Bethesda Softworks), with incredibly popular franchises (Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Doom), and locking them to their platforms barely three years after.
I strongly disagree. However as I mentioned my key problem is paying for exclusive content. It is indefensible that I pay the same amount for a game on Xbox with LESS content than on PS5 because Sony paid money to try to boost the sales of their consoles.
Yes Microsoft has made mistakes, but Sony has made their own mistakes and every time they do its because they are cocky going into a new generation with a significant market advantage.
That is why I feel like Sony needs strong competition and we need these consoles to be much much closer in marketshare for both companies to actually have to fight for consumer dollars instead of Sony just getting away with whatever they want because they have the big splashy exclusive games.
> I gave other examples in my post that you have not responded too.
Where?
The only one is cross-play, and let's be honest here, how would Microsoft justify not supporting cross-play, when their consoles are essentially PCs running a modified version of Windows?
> Cocky in this sense is Sony thinking they can get away with something because they were running high after the PS2 era.
I'm not sure what to think about this comment. Corporations aren't cocky. Sony isn't even a monopoly.
> Ok? What exactly does that have to do with Microsoft? They bought rare in 2002. I am completely missing the point you are trying to make.
They bought Rare and their exclusive IP, which became Microsoft exclusives. Same with Bungie, Bethesda, and now, more than likely, Activision-Blizzard.
In fact, that seems to be Microsoft modus operandi: buy big studios, lock popular franchises on their platforms. It is not disputable that Microsoft bought their way in gaming, as all the acquired studios had previous, very profitable, franchises they capitalized on.
> However as I mentioned my key problem is paying for exclusive content. It is indefensible that I pay the same amount for a game on Xbox with LESS content than on PS5 because Sony paid money to try to boost the sales of their consoles.
Right. I still don't understand how you couldn't agree on the fact that Microsoft is doing precisely that, but with whole franchises.
PlayStation owners won't be able to play, say, the new Elder Scrolls. It is likely that they won't be able to play CoD in three or four years. How would you feel if Sony Entertainment were to buy EA, making a bunch of sport franchises PlayStation exclusives?
You seem to be OK with that. That is a bit hypocritical, isn't it.
> That is why I feel like Sony needs strong competition and we need these consoles to be much much closer in marketshare for both companies to actually have to fight for consumer dollars instead of Sony just getting away with whatever they want because they have the big splashy exclusive games.
So the answer to market dominance is... market consolidation?
And the answer to in house exclusives is... taking cross-platform games and making them Microsoft exclusives?
I gave other examples in my post that you have not responded too.
> What does cocky even mean? These are corporations!
Not sure that changes anything. Cocky in this sense is Sony thinking they can get away with something because they were running high after the PS2 era.
> You need to go back to the Super Nintendo and Nintendo 64 era, then. Golden Eye, Donkey Kong Country, Killer Instinct, Banjo-Kazooie, among others.
Ok? What exactly does that have to do with Microsoft? They bought rare in 2002. I am completely missing the point you are trying to make.
> I'm of the opinion that Sony Entertainment paying for exclusivity deals with Square-Enix, is not remotely comparable to Microsoft buying a massive studio (Bethesda Softworks), with incredibly popular franchises (Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Doom), and locking them to their platforms barely three years after.
I strongly disagree. However as I mentioned my key problem is paying for exclusive content. It is indefensible that I pay the same amount for a game on Xbox with LESS content than on PS5 because Sony paid money to try to boost the sales of their consoles.
Yes Microsoft has made mistakes, but Sony has made their own mistakes and every time they do its because they are cocky going into a new generation with a significant market advantage.
That is why I feel like Sony needs strong competition and we need these consoles to be much much closer in marketshare for both companies to actually have to fight for consumer dollars instead of Sony just getting away with whatever they want because they have the big splashy exclusive games.