Indiana Jones Game Deal Amended to Exclude PS5, PS4

LOL Honouring all existing contracts my A**.

This is definitely going to play on the judges minds during the Activision deal for definite. This shows their PR speak can't be trusted.

Not surprised one bit at all, they were always going to amend post acquisition.

Sounds good to me. Since PS typically gets all the exclusives I am interested in, my XBOX mostly collects dust.

Some decent XBOX exclusives would make my investment worthwhile.

I keep forgetting this game is in development 😅

Much rather have Spider-man and Wolverine anyways. If I feel like raiding some tombs I can play Tomb Raider or Uncharted

Oh no, not the licensed garbage, you can't take that away from PS! You monsters!

It's made by bethesda so no surprises here. Just imagine if it isn't better than Uncharted ... that would be funny.

So excited for this, i hope its good. Shame i cant play on my PS5 but not the end of the world, i'll grab it on PC instead. Gutted for all the PS users who have no other systems though.

"It's not our goal to take games away from players"

So much for MS not taking any games away from PlayStation.

@Enuo "We believe in generations"

I'll say it a million times, there's absolutely nothing wrong with exclusives, they are the biggest and best games this industry has.
The problem is that Microsoft and Phil Spencer preach this used car salesman unity "when everyone plays, we all win" garbage while doing the exact opposite behind the scenes!

I'm surprised Disney allowed it to be amended.
Unless MS threw more money at them. Which I wouldn't be so surprised about 🙄

@UltimateOtaku91

At the end it’s only PlayStation that suffers the impact of that. As it stands, Apple has for years shared top secret information with Samsung to have them fab their chips, despite them being a direct competitor.

You do this with contracts that forbid division sharing trade secrets with the remainder of the company. If they refuse to do similar things, again, it’s Sonys fault and proves it’s Sony that can’t be trusted.

You understand that such an amendment to the contract requires both parties to agree, right? This is not against the spirit of the statement. MS didn't break
the contract and cancel the game, nor did Sony had any legal claims for the title.

Had Disney disagreed with the amendment, the game would still be coming to PS5. But Disney said "k, we cool".

Edit: This game is now on the same boat as Spider-Man. Let the hypocrisy on either side start now. Either both are bad, or both are ok. How many will insist only one of these things are acceptable?

@get2sammyb It is getting very juicy.
I bet Phil is wishing that he released Redfall on PS5 now as it certainly would have helped their case and god knows they need it.

Is anyone surprised? I don’t blame them, it’s good business. I do laugh condescendingly at those who try to wriggle around the loophole of “announced games were the only ones promised, but MS still judge on a game by game basis”, LMAO.

@JSnow2 If Sony and Nintendo allowed Game Pass as an app on their systems then there would be no problem at all.

@__jamiie Do you think MS would allow PS plus on Xbox and possibly lose out on revenue from things being bought through the PS store?

@number1024 I suppose that those who only have one platform are happy or sad based on which platform they have.

PS has had a wealth of great platform exclusives that XB owners have been locked out of so it works both ways.

Gutted, really fancied this. No chance in hell of affording an Xbox any time soon and I doubt that my laptop would run this.

@__jamiie how would that work, it would be streaming only, you wouldn't be able to install Xbox games on a ps or switch.

@__jamiie
You mean no problem apart from PlayStation becoming unprofitable and closing down?

@Kevw2006 I think MS would allow PS Plus on their store if Sony allowed GP on theirs.

That being said, I have lost the thread of this conversation so I am not sure that is even relevant to the discussion.

Tbh, can't complain too much considering we get Spiderman and also now wolverine!

@evan23
Why would those with an Xbox be happy about this, it was always going to be multiplatform so they have gained absolutely nothing (unless they are sad console warriors).

@Kevw2006 Thinking logically, Game Pass on PS5 would simply mean XBox first party/owned games come to PS5 and those titles, only, are available to play as part of the subscription similar to EA Play.

What would PS Plus realistically bring to Xbox? They are not even adding their first parties to their PS Plus Extra tier. PS Plus on Xbox would do nothing on its own.

Neither service would grant players to play third party titles on the competitor's hardware.

@Kevw2006 No of course not. But it would solve this particular issue cheer up people who want to play Starfield.

It's not a workable model for either companies but I guarantee there would be a huge number of PlayStation owners who would sign up for Game Pass.

@thefourfoldroot1 I suppose one reason would be that after years of being locked out of great games they would finally have some decent exclusives coming their way.

Personally, I am a multi-platform gamer so I have no stake in the console wars but even as someone who is console agnostic, it is clear that Sony in recent years has been killing Microsoft on the exclusives front. Things were bound to equalize eventually.

We are now moving towards a situation where all 3 major platforms have numerous exclusives and I think that actually helps competition overall.

@Balosi Yes it would have to be streaming for this gen. The same way it works for PS3 games.

It's funny, cause MS lobbied MLB to make The Show multiplatform and also go to Gamepass of all places.

@thefourfoldroot1 That would never happen. Sony's exclusives would still be there.

@__jamiie
Do you realise how much more money Sony gets from COD alone? And how much money it takes to make those Sony exclusives?

@evan23 i thought your comment was quite funny. The bit about your xbox collecting dust made me chuckle..

@evan23
Again, they were getting the game anyway. Nothing was gained from an Xbox player perspective. Nothing apart from bragging rights in some sad console war.

Regarding exclusives helping competition, possibly. But taking away games from others is something MS said they are not about, so presumably they should be making their own exclusives?

Overall this deal will definitely damage competition by dealing a huge financial blow to a much, much, much poorer competitor.

@thefourfoldroot1 Sony wouldn't survive without CoD? Seriously?? That's absolutely not true.

Sony/PlayStation already have lots of exclusive IPs. You can’t have ‘em all.

@__jamiie @__jamiie @PixelDragon
I used to be on Eurogamer years ago, before they went completely off the charts authoritarian. I left shortly before the forums went down. Still lurk now and again. This weekend was absolutely hilarious! Lol

@__jamiie
In that it would lose them billions in cash and many, many players, especially when next gen hits, it will cripple their ability to invest in their only selling point, high budget exclusives and innovations like Dualsense and PSVR.

They would be in a slow decline. Losing COD would be a crippling blow, but more than that, if MS can simply buy up anyone then getting Take2 or EA alongside AKB would take 90% of casuals away from Sony. And casuals, en mass, is where most of the money is.

I've just realised how off topic this whole thread has become. 🤣 My bad.

@Tharsman Both are OK, both can make contracts with whoever they like to get exclusives based an popular IP's, that's not the problem. The problem is Microsoft changing this deal after they they said they would honour all existing agreements/Contracts. So playstation players are yet again losing a game that was originally planned for the PlayStation 5.

They obviously didn't expect today to happen and for this information to come to light.

This is a lot more damning than people realize. Considering Spencer's comments regarding honoring agreements, them being caught in this lie, gives FTC pretty good ammo in how the ABK agreements will play out. Ultimately I do expect Microsoft to win against the FTC, but hopefully this prevents Microsoft from buying out any more publishers...

@evan23 what difference does it make in your situation? Either way it's coming to Xbox.

@thefourfoldroot1 FWIW, my original comment was intended to be a joke about my XB collecting dust not spark a huge debate.

@thefourfoldroot1 If you genuinely believe that the PlayStation brand is solely dependent on CoD then why haven't Sony mitigated for this by creating something comparable to attract all that money in-house?

Nintendo don't have CoD but they're still beating Xbox. Does that mean when Switch/Switch 2 does get CoD that they'll become number one?

@GymratAmarillo Yeah, there has already been an Indiana Jones game that wasn't as good as Tomb Raider. So theres a good chance that it won't be better than uncharted.

@Tharsman its a little bit different than Spiderman. Sony bought the licensing rights to the franchise for film and gaming rather than just to make a singular game exclusive.

If it turns out MS has done the same with the Indy license you are right its hypocrisy to complain about one over other.

Outside of that I am not sure it can be compared though? Maybe Im wrong. I am in the camp of I dont see the issue anyway it happened with Redfall was bound to here too.

Screw Microsoft and Phil Spencer

They say one thing then turn around and do another. Phil's nice guy facade is so annoying.

@PCPS4XB
That’s cool. I didn’t think we were in a huge debate, lol. Just rehashing the same tired arguments. Ignore me.

@Jaxx420

its a little bit different than Spiderman. Sony bought the licensing rights to the franchise for film and gaming rather than just to make a singular game exclusive.

Sony only bought the rights for films and Disney would love to somehow kill that contract. Only reason that happened is because Disney didn't own Marvel yet.

The game development side is a licensing agreement after Activision stopped licensing Spider-Man for games.

Disney offered the license around to various publishers, Xbox included, but it was Sony that picked it up. Despite this, Sony does not have exclusive rights to use the character in video games. The character has shown up in at least two other video games since that deal was signed: Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 [Switch exclusive, published by Nintendo] and Marvel Midnight Suns [multi-platform, published by 2K].

Disney is not in the business of signing permanent or exclusive agreements, much less perpetual ones.

@__jamiie
No need to create straw man arguments, it’s lazy. I clearly didn’t say they were solely dependant, but there are a few large franchises that bring in a massive percentage of gaming revenue. coD is towards the top of that in the console space. And Sony don’t have anywhere near the money of MS to be able to cope with that loss. It’s quite simple.

As to why they didn’t spend hundreds of millions trying to compete with a game they were earning billions from already…the brand is just too entrenched at this point. It’s like trying to topple FIFA, but more so.

@evan23 that's one of the worst consumer logic I've ever heard. Do because a company doesn't do what they need to do to get you to use the product you've already purchased. Then them preventing others from playing the game is some how good because it then forces you to use the product you've already bought?

I can't with the brains of gamers anymore

Of course it is. It was always going to be.

I don't have an allegiance to one system over the other, I have them both. But what constantly irritates me is the perception of Jim Ryan as the scourge of gaming and Phil Spencer as a cool, gaming messiah.

They are both business men; they will do what is in the interests of their shareholders first and foremost. The only difference is that Phil Spencer is better with the media, but honestly this matey facade and positioning that they want what is best for gamers just comes across as disingenuous.

@Tharsman thanks for clarifying that makes more sense to me now.

I'm fine with exclusives, I'm not fine with taking things from gamers to strong arm them into your product.

@PCPS4XB It makes literally no difference to me, as I said above my original statement was intended to be a joke and the conversation got carried away from there.

At least they admitted defeat. Nobody is going to goto your console even if you do buy up the top developers.

@Cutmastavictory Unfortunately, one of the flaws with this platform is I don't know which of my comments you are responding to.

If you are referring to the original one at the top, it was a joke.

If you are referring to the one about competition, I think it is better for the exclusives to be spread more evenly between the big 3 competitors than to be heavily focused on just two of them as has recently been the case.

@__jamiie it's not that sony wouldn't survive without cod, the difference is between surviving and being relevant. How many console gamers consider a Nintendo switch relevant to them when they can't get cod. What about beyond cod. How many Bethesda games have made a presence on switch before the acquisition and how relevant is the switch now that future Bethesda games aren't coming to it.

You kick one support out a table may still stand, kick enough out and you just have modern art. Manages to he around for something, but I guaranty you're not going to be eating dinner off that table any time soon.

That's the problem here. MS is buying big publishers, this will be the second. If they buy ubisoft, ea, square, maybe embracer group starts unloading its acquisitions like eidos/crystal dynamics. Suddenly that playing field becomes insanely hard to survive in. Nintendo has managed to remain part of the discussion, by creating a new market. For the most part sony and ms compete in the same market. Sony doesn't have the funds to start spinning up a franchise every time ms buys 20 of them up in a single go. This is not good for the industry and would cause Microsoft to have a stranglehold on how we play our games, what games we can play, and what companies we can play with. There are no options at that point. Classic Microsoft strategy, keep the competition alive just enough that they limp a long off your bread crumbs, while dictating to them what the new standards are. No gamer wants that.

They definitely also had to pay Disney for the right to not release on PS.

@thefourfoldroot1 nah no debate lol you're good

@evan23 lolol

@NotSoCryptic

How many console gamers consider a Nintendo switch relevant to them when they can't get cod.

Umm.....millions of them?

@Rmg0731 Yep, Disney obviously gave that contract to Bethesda expecting a certain amount of sales/revenue etc so Microsoft most likely paid a lot of money to change the contract to make it xbox exclusive, and for what? all just to hurt sony.

A shame as i would have liked to play it, but never mind. I hope its good for those with an xbox.

Issue as always is the hypocrisy from Microsoft saying they have no intention of taking games away from other platforms and then doing the complete opposite

@UltimateOtaku91 While that is probably true, Sony does the same thing on a regular basis.

@Jaxx420 NP, for what its worth, I think so long the license holder agrees, these type of exclusivity are perfectly acceptable. After all, the licensee is covering development, publishing and marketing costs.

People arguing about which den of vipers is more trustworthy is pretty rich haha

I always think back to 2013, when always online and pay a fee to play a used game was their intention as a 'market leader'.

@AdamNovice Sony paid well in advance to make sure that FF7 and FF16 didn't come to Xbox.

@evan23 🤣🤣🤣You beat me to it!

@Ristar24 Yeah. I wonder how much that contributed to Sony's dominance in the last generation. It wasn't the only factor but it definitely didn't help XB.

@Tharsman agree. The hoo har with this one seems to be around something Phil said about not taking games away from PS.

Dont know the ins and outs but Id hazard a guess development was in pre production when the acquisition went through so a contract amendment at that stage is perfectly fine.

Should he have made a broad statement like that and not think it wouldnt come back to bite him? Nope. But how many times has Jim Ryan done the exact same, all as bad as each other.

@NotSoCryptic There aren't 120+ million die hard Nintendo fans in the world. Otherwise the Wii U would have sold as much as the Wii.

@NotSoCryptic Also, you've basically said that Sony's success and dominance over the last few generations has been because of CoD and the fact that Sony paid for exclusivity on certain aspects and early rewards.

People who own gaming PCs are just out there enjoying the drama, I imagine.

Both companies are hard to like or even really trust. It's a matter of going with the games and not really caring about the companies anymore. This is not surprising one bit about the Indiana Jones game, but like others have said, it makes them out to be total hypocrites because they are. So is Sony with things, but honestly I would have rather they blocked the Bethesda deal rather than care about the Acitivision/Blizzard deal. They have far more games that are appealing at this point.

Other than CoD since it's such a cash cow, I don't believe they will keep anything else multiplatform because they've given us no reason to believe them at this point. They desperately need exclusives, so I get it, but they are still hypocrites for doing this.

That's too bad but not completely unexpected. I am surprised Disney allowed it to happen though considering the latest Indiana Jones movie hasn't exactly been a hit with critics. It sounds like that IP could use all the good will it can get at the moment.

Regardless it is another example of how much nonsense that Phil Spencer quote about "not taking away games" was. It's okay to have exclusives. That's part of the industry. No need to lie about it.

Well, at least they were honest about it this time…unlike when they blatantly lied about Redfall.

@JSnow2 they’re great at playing the victim, when they’re anything but. Classic bully behaviour.

@number1024 or trust anyone, look at the email leaked about Jim Ryan saying 2 days after the ABK deal was announced, he knew COD was staying on PS, so all that we are doomed if they pull the game was a big lie. He said he met with Bobby and Phil. I mean that is shady. Not trying to take sides, but two wrongs don’t make a right.

I really hope these regulatory bodies put a stop to these buyouts like this for MS going forward. Its really going to hurt the industry going forward.

This news should come as a surprise to nobody. Sony don't pay Marvel all that money to put Spiderman and Wolverine on Xbox do they?

I wouldn't trust MS, Sony or any Billion/Trillion Dollar company to keep their word so again you are naïve if you think that was going to happen.

Guess this is good news for both sets of fanboys though - something to talk about.

Calm down kids we got Uncharted at home.

@Tharsman
Spider-man was offered to Xbox first. Xbox said no because they wanted to focus on their IP. This was in 2014. Looking at what’s been released for Xbox since 2014, I’d say that was a very bad call.

Classic Uncle Phil.

Biggest snake in the industry.

Disney is always down to negotiate a higher price.

Yeah this deals not gonna go through, read something before about ms wanting to destroy ps in the console market ,completely wipe them out with all these acquisitions, thats not good,imagine gaming being totally controlled by ms,they will destroy the single player games we all know and love, they must be stopped.

Am I missing the point? I thought this article was essentially to say the FTC has ammunition to illustrate the double speak of Phil/Xbox and as such these 10yr contracts aren't worth the paper they're printed on.
Just to clarify, I have zero interest in this game and I'm sure both companies will be fine regardless of whether the deal goes through or not.

Well, I have my answer. Oh well.

I really effing wanted this, more than any other announced game, and based on recent comments from Bethesda spokespeople ("it's not exclusive") it sounded like a PS5 release was a surefire thing.

It's honestly so disheartening hearing MS pulled the PS5 version. I was.never fussed about Starfield or Redfall, but losing The Elder Scrolls VI was painful and as a big Indiana Jones/Treasure Hunter fan, this cuts extra deep.

Microsoft's portfolio growth route is the most ugly and cynical one in the industry. If you really can't see the difference between what PlayStation are doing with Spiderman and their other exclusives vs this you're either willfully ignorant or misguidedly trying to adopt an middle ground position.

This is predatory and worsening the video games landscape for consumers. Thank God Microsoft are taking a beating from regulators on the Activision Blizzard acquisition. They want total monopoly and they have the money to accomplish it.

We must always remember why they need to resort to these tactics: because they've proven time and time again that they're the one hardware manufacturer incapable of supporting their development teams properly. They have the most studios, yet the least appealing portfolio of games to consumers. The culture at Microsoft is known to be rotten, and their blitzkrieg of the industry should be stopped at all costs.

@themightyant

Marvel offered their catalogue to Microsoft FIRST, they turned then down, this was before Sony bought Insomniac so Microsoft could have hired them, or someone else to make Spider-man, or even made it in house. Regardless it would have been funded by a platform holders, so it was always going to be an exclusive, whoever made it, either first or second party

We don't actually know that for sure. We only know that Disney shopped the IP around after Activision (or Disney) decided to not renew that ABK/Disney partnership, and we know Xbox was offered the IP and they turned it down. I am very doubtful they only pursued platform holders. In fact, I am willing to bet they first approached the likes of EA, 2K and Ubisoft, as any of those licensing the Spider-Man IP would had been way more profitable. The trend for licensed games started to die down at the end of the PS3/360 gen, and most games that launched on PS4/XBO were already in development before the gen ended.

Either way, not sure it makes any difference. Disney announced a few years ago they were opening their IPs for game licensing (around the time they ended their Star Wars/EA exclusivity partnership) and anyone could come and ask to make a game so long they were willing agree to the terms. Bethesda, before being acquired, obviously would add PS as a target on their contract. Disney didn't seem to care about the amend, and if they cared, they simply adjusted their up front fees.

But lets pretend we do care about that difference: how about Wolverine? Because I am certain Disney was not the one to come to Sony on that one.

I’m not surprised it’s now Xbox exclusive. I’m not saying it’s right or wrong. I can see both sides arguments. I would have liked to of seen it come out multi platform and I feel bad for all PlayStation/Switch players. More people would have gotten a chance to play and enjoy it, but I’m not mad at Xbox either, at the end of the day it’s business. I think the other console makers would have done the same. You can disagree and that’s okay. I’m not trying to start an argument or change anybody else’s mind. Just my view on the subject.

The funny thing is, this practice has probably been going on between all of the console makers in some way shape or form - it's just that it's only come to light (from Microsoft side) this time.

Who knows how many games were planned to be multi-platform only to turn around and become exclusive thanks to a little palm greasing.

For all we know, Wolverine was set to be multi-console until Sony bought up Insomniac and had it amended.

The whole finger pointing is just dumb.

@evan23

I'm actually with with this as well, I really enjoy the Xbox ecosystem, but my golly there is nothing worth playing on it right know.
I understand it's crappy to bail on the PS only owners, but we are kind of spoiled with great games

@__jamiie literally released with a PS5 exclusive tho...

Ahhhh the old , Microsoft turned down spider man excuse ...for all any one knows Sony could have done what Microsoft has done and changed Spiderman from multi platform to exclusive to Sony , disney could have offered it to microsoft for multi platform and they said no ,then they went to Sony offered the same and sony said yes if we can have it exclusive and the rest is history ,please show the contract so you can prove me wrong ...I'll wait

@get2sammyb no lie this made me absolutely howl 🤣🤣🤣🤣

@Enuo it’s not been taken away. It was never given in the first place.

I’m only here for the comment section 🤣🤣

Approval of the ABK acquisition would be a disaster. Microsoft already bought a publisher and will keep doing it until they bought their way to dominance or they are stopped. This is the only way Microsoft operates.

@evan23 Sony has awesome exclusives but they START that way, they don’t “steal” games from Microsoft by buying companies up. Sony is better. Microsoft was approached by small company to make a sequel to their PC 2D game & Microsoft passed didn’t think it sounded good - so they went to Sony who said “yes” that was GTA3 lol. Timed exclusive - they let microsoft have it 1 yr later. Sony Bought BUNGIE yet you can play Destiny 2 on Xbox. Long story short microsoft are sore losing babies. Taking away Starfield & they want Activision. I own a Mac & I will never buy xbox or any microsoft crap due to their LONG history of unfair business practices.

I sold my Xbox and only have a ps5 now but don’t blame Xbox wanting this to be only on their console.

PS5 owners are getting final fantasy 16 and the silent hill 2 remake.

I know what games I would rather have.

Plus if I really want to play it will sign up to game pass and steam on my laptop or phone .

@Rob_230 taking games away with an already established player base. The rest will be on a case by case bases. They have actually did what they said they would do when buying Bethesda. I understand not liking it, but they didn’t lie. At the end of the day this is a business and that’s why i buy all 3 consoles cause i know business can and will get in the way, if you can’t afford all 3 or don’t want them all then be happy with what you got to play. Plenty of great games out there 😊

I just hope they have the writers and producers who knows the material and skilled. I like bathesda games if this is good il play it. I don't close myself off to platforms I play what interests me. Playstation,Xbox ,PC or Nintendo if i like it il buy it and spend hours playing the game.

I'm mixed on this. On one hand I'm an 80's kid and love Indiana Jones to death and am gutted, after waiting for years, for an Indy game that I won't get to play it. On the other hand, realistically, it's very unlikely to be as good as Uncharted or Tomb Raider. I'd be amazed if it reviews as well as those games tend to. So I'd be getting it for the character, music and general nostalgia.

To be honest, I'm not even sure who this game is for. Is Indy of any interest to 'the kids' nowadays in the same way all the superhero nonsense is? I wouldn't think so. I know there is a huge demographic of people 35 upwards who play, but a large chunk are people younger than 30 who probably couldn't care less about Indy, especially if it's not some online shooter type game.

So that's one more reason for M$ to beef up console prices...i see i see ^_^

@JuggaloRazzam What a pathetic, fanboy comment. You really need to grow up.

Microsoft lawyers to FTC/EU & CMA & social media campaign last several months... "Sony pays $$ to keep games off Rent(Game)Pass/XB!!😱😬

Also Microsoft: Right,cancel any ps5 versions of Indy,Elder Scrolls VI,Starfield,Redwall,& any other ones the rest of Zenimax were working on!
Bethesda: Um,we had a Disney contract that was multiplatform!🤔🤯
Microsoft/Gamer Phil Spencer: Pay 'em extra, & that'll fix it!! Mwhahaha!!

Funny how despite his corporate friendly "Gaming for all!" public persona,time & again Microsoft have been guilty of projecting & engaging in the very behaviour they like to label their biggest direct competition of doing!!🙄😂

@Sil_Am That's not true. MLB as a league pressured Sony to release MLB games multiplatform. Because in US where MLB is a big league, split between PS and Xbox is really close and you even have Switch. So basically you have maybe 30% of market with PlayStation only release. So MLB just wanted to grab entire market. Otherwise they wanted to give license to someone else who would make MLB games multiplatform. So Sony did not have a choice.
Also. Game Pass deal for MLB games is also negotiated directly with league and not with Sony.

@Godot25 Don't know man, but it seems fishy that it went straight to gamepass, smells like some deal between MS and MLB, but Sony is too poor to try and find any evidence or outright scrap the MLB license, which should have been done. This was a public image disaster for Sony at the time, exactly what MS was after.

@__jamiie "What a pathetic fanboy comment. You really need to grow up."
Says the person who thus far in this thread alone made THIRTEEN comments usually in defence of all things Microsoft!🙄😂

And that's before anyone clicking on your profile past comments finds similar insults at anyone that dare's post anything anti-Microsoft/XB narrative!
Maybe YOU should take a bit of your own advice! 😋😉

Ah well... gutted, but hopefully in the future it will come to PS5.

@Sil_Am That sounds like conspiracy theory. Especially since MLB started to be released on Switch also. So even Nintendo "piled" on Sony to make them look bad? And we are also waiting for MLB games to come out on PC in future.

https://venturebeat.com/games/mlb-the-show-will-end-playstation-exclusivity-and-go-multiplatform/

From wording it is clear, that it was
A: Either we will be allowed to publish MLB games on other platform
B: We are taking license elswhere
...and multiplatform releases were condition for new license contract.
Microsoft dealt with MLB for Game Pass release, not Sony. MLB is even publisher of MLB games on every platform outside of PlayStation.
But if you think that everything bad that happened to PlayStation is Microsoft's responsibility, then go ahead.

@Godot25 Your theory is as much of a guess as mine, so let's leave it at that, without knowing actual details.
They would have probably given the license to MS by now, if Sony didn't make a very good game.
The Switch thing is irelevant anyway, it's probably selling like crap there anyway, just like COD will.

Another flop incoming.

@themightyant and Disney sat with Bethesda to amend their licensing agreement without any resistance, at the end any deal is unique if you did enough for differences to fit a desired perspective.

The actual point is: licensee is fine with Sony having the rights to make PS exclusive Spider-Man and Wolverine games, as they were equally fine with Nintendo making a Switch exclusive Ultimate Alliance game and now they are fine with Bethesda doing an Xbox exclusive Indiana Jones game.

From gamers perspective, it’s simply: why is it fine for Sony to finance, market and publish licensed games exclusively for their platform, but it’s outrageous that Microsoft is doing the same? Because there was a possibility that had they not acquired Bethesda the game would be multiplat form? That would be true for any other Bethesda game.

@__jamiie I would love see if Microsoft allows PS Plus on Xbox.

Have we not learned the central lesson?

All multi billion companies are snakes in the grass.

Microsoft isn’t unique in this regard.

@Mio_Nakashima

So basically Supaidaman.

@Robocod I own a PS5, Switch and Xbox. I'm in a far better place to be objective and talk sense. I don't tie myself to one lump of plastic and circuitry over another. I don't give my undying loyalty to any particular multi-billion dollar company. If my comments seem biased against PlayStation to you, that probably means your Sony worship is a little excessive. 🙂

@Flaming_Kaiser It won't happen unfortunately. I've said it on other threads before but I think eventually that Xbox, Nintendo, PlayStation will all just be apps built into some kind set top box or built into TV and you'll be able to subscribe and buy games for whatever platform you want. Third parties will do the same and that's when first party content will become even more important.

@number1024 "so you care about you"
Why wouldn't he?
I want to play FF16 on my PC but u know... Sony had to go and do Sony things...

@number1024 I don't really understand this line of thinking.

Both companies pay for both timed and permanent exclusives.

Both companies buy studios to gain exclusivity.

Both companies have their own self interests in mind when doing these things.

Other people have stated this above multiple times but neither of these companies are angels acting on behalf of the community.

Speaking logically, exclusivity is bad. It is anti-consumer behavior no matter how you look at it. People are splitting hairs based on the mechanism to achieve it but it all comes down to the same thing. Without exclusives, all that would matter is who could put together the most compelling hardware solution at the best cost. It would also create competition between the stores. All things that benefit consumers.

Thinking emotionally, I like the idea of exclusives. It makes the platform and the hardware matter and makes the market a more interesting place. It also brings back fond memories of the days when a much greater percentage of the games were exclusive. Of course, as with most emotional arguments, it is logically flawed.

@Kevw2006 said this on PureXbox, they all reckon Phil never said that an i’m makin it up!! 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️😂😂

@number1024

but what Microsoft has done, games that were planned for multi play release and then they lock that away...yeah, that's just morally wrong.

You and a few others have stated this but I don't really follow this logic.

If a company uses money to buy exclusivity it makes no practical difference when they do so. Ultimately, it is all the same. The difference is purely an emotional one.

@Tharsman Sony buy a dev, invest, the dev releases a new ip, a brand new game, that is often a GOTY contender or winner.
Microsoft buy an already huge, popular dev an make 3rd party games Xbox exclusive.
That’s the difference.

@evan23 if when Microsoft bought Bethesda Indiana, Starfield, wat eva wasn’t a thing. MS buy Bethesda an say here’s a credit card, we want a big space exploration game and a game with an iconic movie character and Starfield an Indiana were created as Xbox exclusives that’d be fine, like Sony does. Simply using ya trillions to buy huge, popular devs an make 3rd party games exclusive is wrong.

@TheArtfulDodger … you do know that Spider-Man, not Indiana Jones, are “new IP”, right? Unless you shifting this from the difference between Spider Man and Indiana Jones games, to talk about the scale of acquisitions. If so, off topic?

@TheArtfulDodger

Simply using ya trillions to buy huge, popular devs an make 3rd party games exclusive is wrong.

But using millions and market dominance to make third party games like Final Fantasy exclusives is dandy.

@TheArtfulDodger You could link a video with the words coming out Phil's mouth and some posters on Pure Xbox would still insist he never said it. Much like how they now deny he said they had no interest in putting up game pass prices.

@__jamiie ". I don't give my undying loyalty to any particular multi-billion dollar company. If my comments seem biased against PlayStation to you, that probably means your Sony worship is a little excessive."

Oh ,back to the personal commentaries like you do anyone who speaks negatively of Microsoft/Xbox,are we?

1) Thread: "Sorry but the drama over Xbox's buyout of Activision isn't over yet""
You: "The CMA made the wrong decision based on the wrong thing. Cloud gaming is a pathetic reason to block the deal.
If the EU and FTC approve the deal then it leaves the CMA looking very stupid indeed."
2) PS5's remote play portable will reportedly launch in November"
You: "This is the Wii U gamepad but 11 years late!"
3) Thread "Microsoft welcomes FTC injunction on Activision Blizzard buyout"
You: What a very childish comment! (To Intr1n5ic's reply to someone else mentioning Starfield "Save them from the majesty of 30fps. "Brought to you by the world's most powerful console")
4) Thread "Re Starfield,Redfall exclusivity powerful evidence against Xbox's Activision buyout"
You: Once again there are some truly pathetic and childish comments on here.

"I hope the deal goes through and then Microsoft and the studios fail!"

"I'd love it if this forced Microsoft to release Starfield on PlayStation!"

"I hope that the deal gets blocked but Sony get to keep all their exclusives!"

Some people seriously need to grow the **** up.
5) In this very thread...@Euno brings up Phil Spencer's "It's not our goal to take games away from players"
You troll "we believe in generations"

Just like when I brought up the FTC fining Microsoft $20 million (chump change for them), for multiple privacy breaches with children's Xbox microsoft accounts, all you could come up with was petty insults!

Funny how you keep clinging to your "I own all 3 systems" defence to cover your continual snarking at most things Sony game or hardware related (In your own previous comments on multiple threads),or trolling anyone that dares speak ill of Microsoft!
And yet apparently anyone who games on a playstation & discussing gaming topics on a Playstation centric website is inferior to YOUR opinion & can be instantly dismissed as a Sony worshipper!

You can like Xbox/Switch games, but it's laughable you claim other's of fanboying,when your very own posts show a clear bias of your own & trolling others when they dare oppose your views...projecting much?

Btw,have a PC too,but unlike you, been around long enough to have seen petulant Microsoft in the 90's make previous threats vs antitrust authorities getting in their way much as they are now.
But hey, don't let history & facts over Microsoft's monopolistic behaviour everywhere else they've been spoil your rose tinted glasses viewpoint of them!

@Kevw2006

You could link a video with the words coming out Phil's mouth and some posters on Pure Xbox would still insist he never said it. Much like how they now deny he said they had no interest in putting up game pass prices.

I'm not a fan of the price hike, but this is very interesting, because the video is out there:Here is a link to the question that lead to that statement, and this is what he said:

For us running the business we have to look at the return of our business, the cost of the business, we held prices on our console, we held prices on games for us and our subscription. I don't think we will be able to do that forever. I do think at some point we'll have to raise some prices on certain things. But going into this holiday we thought it was very important that we maintain the prices that we have. Because we think, as you said, consumers right now are more uncertain than they have been in a long time and I want our medium of video games to be something they find attractive.

link to exact timestamp of that quote.

So, he did say they would not increase prices going into the Christmas season, but that they would eventually have to. We are now 9 months separated from that interview, and that Christmas season is 7 months behind us.

So, now that video showing the words coming out of Phil's mouth is shown, do you still think Phil said he had no interest in increasing Game Pass prices?

This is why you don't listen to PR talks, whether it's on Xbox's side or Sony's. You never know what information they will give you that is not true or inaccurate

@Robocod I'm glad you're clearly a fan of my words! 🤣 I do love how you've cherry picked all of the comments I've made that support your argument and none of the positive comments I've made about PlayStation and the games I love. Just because you don't agree with my points doesn't mean they're not valid.

I have made several comments on here about how Uncharted is my favourite game series ever. About how much I adore my PSVR and PSVR2. About how I've had a PlayStation since the original.

The fact that you've taken time out of your life to wade through my comments and try to use them to prove that I'm biased towards Xbox astounds me!

Seriously, find something better to do. Maybe go and see a film. Spend time with your family. Anything that makes you less angry and pedantic.

Also, I've been gaming since the 80s so don't try to use longevity against me to infer your opinion is more valid than mine or anyone else's.

@TheArtfulDodger <— This person Gets it 👍 - my dream is that EVEN After Microsoft spends Billions to buy fake companies - PlayStation still Dominates 😎

@__jamiie the problem with that is it will eat into their digital sales or impede on Plus too.

@JuggaloRazzam Really childish comment.

@JuggaloRazzam The fact that you've become so invested in PlayStation that you want to see others fail is a real worry. You have joy at the idea of anyone other than PlayStation succeeding. It's literally a cult mentality.

You shouldn't be so angry at your age (I'm guessing 13 based on your childish comments).

Read a book. Learn a language. Paint a picture.

But gaming clearly isn't for you. You can't help but get angry and defensive over a system you decided to buy and hate a system others chose to buy. That's not normal behaviour.

There are far more important things in the world. Go and ask your loved ones for a hug.

@Tharsman i don’t get wat ya mean? Spiderman was a new ip that was first started after Sony acquired insomniac. Indy, Starfield, Redfall were already things wen Microsoft bought Bethesda. Microsoft simply bought them an cancelled PS5 versions. Sony didn’t do that with Spiderman or any other exclusive.

@Tharsman timed exclusive yeah. Xbox would do the same if they could. Devs are keen to do exclusive desls with Sony for 2 reasons, 1. Sony contribute yo the making of the game an 2. Devs wanna sell games. 70+% of 3rd party games sell on Playstation. Playstation player base is far greater. Back in the PS3/360 days the player base was similar an Xbox had numerous timed exclusives. But that was ok. Now Playstation are way ahead it’s unfair an uncompetitive!! Reminds me of wen i was at school!! 10 of us being rowdy, i get a bolloking!! 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

@TheArtfulDodger

Spiderman was a new ip that was first started after Sony acquired insomniac.

You... understand Spider-Man has existed since 1962, and has had a rather large number of video games dating back to the Atari 2600 (maybe older)... right? you understand what "IP" means, right?

@__jamiie Back to the tried & true "get a life" insults almost as much as "your soo childish!" against any negative comments on Microsoft!
And yet,YOU have had far more posts in this thread attacking any negative posters than me! 😉

Your own projecting on fanboying megacorps by continually trolling others negative comments on Microsoft make it so easy to expose your hypocrisy,so thanks for that!😋
Must've owned a ZX Spectrum or CPC or something & never got over the school yard taunts from C64 owners!😁 😂

Given all YOUR posts in this thread,rather seems like you're the angry kid that needs to "go outside" or maybe play your gamepass games or post a bit more on Pure Xbox! Save YOURSELF & take your own advice...again!😋

@Robocod Are you okay? Try and calm down. I won't even try to correct your spelling because that would probably make you more angry. Sorry! 🙂

I genuinely can't be bothered to waste my time by looking back at your previous comments on this site, but I really appreciate that you have the time to search through mine. It makes me feel important and special to know that you care so much. Did you ever see any of my comments that were positive towards PlayStation? I'm interested to find out because I'm sure I made some.

I'll let you look into it because I have better things to do and you clearly love my work.

@__jamiie i never said anything of the sort. But if you want to play dumb that's your business.

@NotSoCryptic Are you okay?

@__jamiie 🥱

@Tharsman that is completely irrelevant. Spiderman PS4 was a brand new game, Miles was also a brand new game. Not a planned 3rd party game that Sony bought an blocked from other systems.
I had Indiana Jones on the ZX Spectrum, foes that mean the upcoming Xbox game isn’t a new game??? Xbox really clutching at straws re releasing a Specy game!!

@TheArtfulDodger you didn’t say “new game”, you said “new IP”, not just once. If you just learned what IP means, well, I guess that does makes your point new IP irrelevant indeed.

@Spyroescape They cofunded the best Final Fantasy in years the monsters.

#overlorddvd was right 👍😂
Id this game is anything like the latest movie I shall not play it 😂🤣

@__jamiie yes, but you're not.