855 réponses à ce sujet

[Maverick827]

Really wasn't expecting this to happen. Just glad I opted for Xbox One first.

 

After this announcement I started thinking about buying an Xbox One, even though I already own a PS4.

 

Said no one ever.

[deuce985]

Really wasn't expecting this to happen. Just glad I opted for Xbox One first.

 

Microsoft's moneyhat schemes is why I no longer own any of their consoles. I can't support that. All that money they spend on moneyhats could've been used on new video game projects or *gasp* opening new studios for the better of the industry. Instead, they'd rather drop millions on...timed exclusives. That just can't sink into my mind. The major problem I have with it is very little of their games appeal to me and they'd rather be spending money on timed exclusives rather than investing in the future with new games/studios.

[Sanunes]

Microsoft's moneyhat schemes is why I no longer own any of their consoles. I can't support that. All that money they spend on moneyhats could've been used on new video game projects or *gasp* opening new studios for the better of the industry. Instead, they'd rather drop millions on...timed exclusives. That just can't sink into my mind. The major problem I have with it is very little of their games appeal to me and they'd rather be spending money on timed exclusives rather than investing in the future with new games/studios.

 

Just wondering does that mean you have switched to PC gaming then, for Sony does "moneyhat schemes" as well.

[deuce985]

Just wondering does that mean you have switched to PC gaming then, for Sony does "moneyhat schemes" as well.

Yes I PC game but also have a PS3/PS4. Sony's first-party appeals to me though so I don't have much problem with them doing that kind of moneyhats. Like I said, Microsoft does not appeal to me with their first-party and they're far worse at showing desperation with the moneyhats. It's money that could make more projects appeal to me on their consoles. Instead, I see them with all these timed exclusive deals but know I'll just it on PC/PS4 so I see no incentive to buy their consoles.

[KennethAFTopp]

Microsoft's moneyhat schemes is why I no longer own any of their consoles. I can't support that. All that money they spend on moneyhats could've been used on new video game projects or *gasp* opening new studios for the better of the industry. Instead, they'd rather drop millions on...timed exclusives. That just can't sink into my mind. The major problem I have with it is very little of their games appeal to me and they'd rather be spending money on timed exclusives rather than investing in the future with new games/studios.

 

Sony was worse in their conference.
 

[KBomb]

Yes I PC game but also have a PS3/PS4. Sony's first-party appeals to me though so I don't have much problem with them doing that kind of moneyhats. Like I said, Microsoft does not appeal to me with their first-party and they're far worse at showing desperation with the moneyhats. It's money that could make more projects appeal to me on their consoles. Instead, I see them with all these timed exclusive deals but know I'll just it on PC/PS4 so I see no incentive to buy their consoles.

So, it's okay for Sony to do it because they have much more appeal to you. However, Xbox doesn't grab you with their games, so you would much rather they spend money on making games you'd rather play? Logic, there just isn't any.

 

Either you find the practice repugnant, or you don't. Seems a little silly to say, "I don't mind if Sony does it. I like them. When Xbox gets games I want, then it's all cool. Until then, screw Microsoft!"

[LenaMarie]

So, it's okay for Sony to do it because they have much more appeal to you. However, Xbox doesn't grab you with their games, so you would much rather they spend money on making games you'd rather play? Logic, there just isn't any.

 

Either you find the practice repugnant, or you don't. Seems a little silly to say, "I don't mind if Sony does it. I like them. When Xbox gets games I want, then it's all cool. Until then, screw Microsoft!"

 

Thats because people are a bunch of hypocritical corporate stoogies. But to be fair, its not totally their fault, they've just been trained to accept and support underhanded business practices. Sadly we are truely looking at a Deus Ex future where loyalty by people is not to their nation, but rather corporations they are fanboys of.

[Il Divo]

Meh, console exclusive games bother me alot more than timed exclusives. Not saying this doesn't suck, but realizing that I'd have to buy a PS4 to play Bloodborne (for example) is more frustrating than the idea of waiting an extra month for access to dlc content I might not even want. 

[Bekkael]

You could just do what I did and acquire all the things so you can sample whatever strikes your fancy.    Really, silly things like eating and gas for your car just aren't as important!

 

Spoiler

[deuce985]

So, it's okay for Sony to do it because they have much more appeal to you. However, Xbox doesn't grab you with their games, so you would much rather they spend money on making games you'd rather play? Logic, there just isn't any.

 

Either you find the practice repugnant, or you don't. Seems a little silly to say, "I don't mind if Sony does it. I like them. When Xbox gets games I want, then it's all cool. Until then, screw Microsoft!"

 A business is a business. I have no problem with the moneyhats if the content appeals to me. Otherwise, it just seems like a waste of money in the eyes of the consumer. Microsoft does not appeal to me with their content. It's that simple really. I have no incentive to buy their consoles. Of course I want them to spend money on content that's more appealing to me. It has plenty of logic you just choose  to see it your way.

 

If I had it my way, I'd eliminate them completely because it alienates fanbases but we live with it and it's not going to change.

[Reaverwind]

Yeah, they said something similar by Skyrim and then screwed up. I hope that Bioware are better at it then.

 

The exclusivity worked in my favor in Skyrim's case - I knew not to waste my money on Dawnguard. 

[Il Divo]

So, it's okay for Sony to do it because they have much more appeal to you. However, Xbox doesn't grab you with their games, so you would much rather they spend money on making games you'd rather play? Logic, there just isn't any.

 

Either you find the practice repugnant, or you don't. Seems a little silly to say, "I don't mind if Sony does it. I like them. When Xbox gets games I want, then it's all cool. Until then, screw Microsoft!"

 

I don't think it's a case of the action being repugnant as much as pointless. I doubt most people are going to shell out for a new console for timed exclusives, especially if the difference is only about a month between release dates.

 

The only market this is likely to impact (from how I see it) is players who own both a PS4 and Xbox One and might have to decide between the two. But even there, time exclusive dlc might not seal the deal if there are other issues which might cause a player to go with DA:I on PS4 over the X-One. 

[Devtek]

Meh, console exclusive games bother me alot more than timed exclusives. Not saying this doesn't suck, but realizing that I'd have to buy a PS4 to play Bloodborne (for example) is more frustrating than the idea of waiting an extra month for access to dlc content I might not even want. 

 

Some people feel the reverse. That you go to system X for this kind of game or to system y for another kind of game  is fine imo b/c it makes each platform stand out, be different, give you a reason to choose one or the other (if you can only afford / have one) rather than having the exact same thing on every platform, then what is the point of having all these different platforms if they are all the same. Timed exclusives for specific content of a game makes some people feel that the version they chose to spend their money on is "inferior" or one that the creators, despite creating the game for multiple platforms are supporting one more than the other.  Timed exclusivity has never personally effected my choice of platform because I want to play specific games specific ways: Actiony games consoles. Bioware games on PC (except Kotor, played that on Xbox first), Strategy games on PC, driving games on consoles, and so on.  In regards to this topic though I am a bit miffed because it is apparently story DLC. With story being apparently one of the "pillars" of the game, having a something that impacts that story delayed artificially is bad mojo.  It's not like maps in a shooter, the maps do not change the game in any significant way (although someone will probably think differently if all they play is shooters).  If game modes were timed, that is a problem because different modes effect your progression.

[KBomb]

I don't think it's a case of the action being repugnant as much as pointless. I doubt most people are going to shell out for a new console for timed exclusives, especially if the difference is only about a month between release dates.

 

The only market this is likely to impact (from how I see it) is players who own both a PS4 and Xbox One and might have to decide between the two. But even there, time exclusive dlc might not seal the deal if there are other issues which might cause a player to go with DA:I on PS4 over the X-One. 

I don't think Microsoft did this to persuade people to forgo Sony and buy an Xbox. I cannot imagine anyone shelling out several hundred bucks simply because they have to wait one month for DLC. So, I agree with you. This is mainly a deal for those who own both consoles. 

 

I own both consoles and if I didn't prefer Xbox already, it might persuade me to buy the game for whichever console got the DLC first. Therefore, this ploy, pointless or not, will probably boost some sales for Microsoft. It's an annoying practice for consumers, but I don't see it as being devious or shady or underhanded. 

[Il Divo]

Some people feel the reverse. That you go to system X for this kind of game or to system y for another kind of game  is fine imo b/c it makes each platform stand out, be different, give you a reason to choose one or the other (if you can only afford / have one) rather than having the exact same thing on every platform, then what is the point of having all these different platforms if they are all the same. Timed exclusives for specific content of a game makes some people feel that the version they chose to spend their money on is "inferior" or one that the creators, despite creating the game for multiple platforms are supporting one more than the other.  Timed exclusivity has never personally effected my choice of platform because I want to play specific games specific ways: Actiony games consoles. Bioware games on PC (except Kotor, played that on Xbox first), Strategy games on PC, driving games on consoles, and so on.  In regards to this topic though I am a bit miffed because it is apparently story DLC. With story being apparently one of the "pillars" of the game, having a something that impacts that story delayed artificially is bad mojo.  It's not like maps in a shooter, the maps do not change the game in any significant way (although someone will probably think differently if all they play is shooters).  If game modes were timed, that is a problem because different modes effect your progression.

 

Personally, I can't really see the difference between the two scenarios. If I buy an Xbox One, the existence of console exclusive games, like Bloodborne, for the PS4 can serve the purpose of making my chosen console feel inferior. 

 

The timed exclusive may follow the same concept, but at least it's known for a fact that the exclusivity will end. I can wait a month and as a PS4 player, I have access to all the same benefits as an Xbox One player. 

 

From a cost/benefit analysis perspective, I can't see why someone would support console exclusivity, but be bothered by timed exclusivity. I traditionally buy Microsoft, although I don't have a next gen console yet. The idea that I will either have to wait a month for some DA:I dlc (the PS4 route) or not play From Software's new RPG at all (the Xbox One route) doesn't leave much of a contest, imo. 

[bmwcrazy]

I don't really care.

 

I'll just get the DLC later.

[Kingthlayer]

IMO us PC gamers shouldn`t have to deal with the little babies and their console wars.  Release the DLC at the same time on Xbox and PC and let Playstationers wait since Sony wasn`t on the ball and Microsoft beat them to EA`s lap.

[LenaMarie]

IMO us PC gamers shouldn`t have to deal with the little babies and their console wars.  Release the DLC at the same time on Xbox and PC and let Playstationers wait since Sony wasn`t on the ball and Microsoft beat them to EA`s lap.

 

People have been asking this question for ages. Windows PC is as much a Microsoft Platform as Xbox, infact Windows 8 is rather interconnected with Xbox, its weird and shameful Windows users get thrown in the PS4 pile. It shows you just what Microsoft thinks about PC Gaming.

[St. Victorious]

I own a Xbox One. So I'll let you know how it is.

[JimboGee]

If companies want to bring a game to a specific console thats fine. If they dont bring it to another thats fine too. Like rockstar not wanting to bring GTA to the PC.

 

Companies should not be able to use money to makes certain games or DLC exclusive to that console. Developers are basically telling a portion of their fans that their money is worthless and that they want cash now. EA have let everybody know they are greedy plain and simple.

 

Microsoft have let everyone who bought a ps4 know that they made the right decision because they are underhanded and are now punishing those who chose not to buy into their bullshit. I sincerely hope Microsoft dont sell any consoles.

[TK514]

After this announcement I started thinking about buying an Xbox One, even though I already own a PS4.

 

Said no one ever.

 

I imagine this is aimed more at the "I was on the fence about which system to buy, and this tilts things towards an XB1" crowd.

[KBomb]

If companies want to bring a game to a specific console thats fine. If they dont bring it to another thats fine too. Like rockstar not wanting to bring GTA to the PC.

 

Companies should not be able to use money to makes certain games or DLC exclusive to that console. Developers are basically telling a portion of their fans that their money is worthless and that they want cash now. EA have let everybody know they are greedy plain and simple.

 

Microsoft have let everyone who bought a ps4 know that they made the right decision because they are underhanded and are now punishing those who chose not to buy into their bullshit. I sincerely hope Microsoft dont sell any consoles.

I have seen this statement a lot in this thread and I don't understand why people keep stating that the dlc is exclusive to the Xbox. It isn't. Dragon Age Inquisition DLC is not exclusive to Microsoft. If you own a PC or a PS3/PS4, you will still get any DLC DA:I offers to Microsoft, you'll just get it a bit later.

 

Is it fair? Maybe. Maybe not. If you think PS3/PS4 is the way to go because of this reason, then perhaps you should be a more informed consumer, considering Sony partakes in the very same practice.

 

In this day and age, most people own more than one console and more often than not, the same game is being released on different platforms. I'll wager Sony and Microsoft both bid to have the exclusive and Microsoft won out. What better way to have people who own different platforms to choose which version to buy? Companies that sell video games offer different pre-order bonuses. It's how it goes. 

[Kirikou]

People have been asking this question for ages. Windows PC is as much a Microsoft Platform as Xbox, infact Windows 8 is rather interconnected with Xbox, its weird and shameful Windows users get thrown in the PS4 pile. It shows you just what Microsoft thinks about PC Gaming.

Microsoft gets money for every copy of an XBOX One game sold, they don't get money for any copy of a PC game sold unless they published it. Simple really.

[Mihura]

This is disappointing, I was kinda more hype now with the characters reveal but after hearing about this, meh.

In before is story base dlc. If turns out to be true this is gonna to suck a lot. Probably picking the most cheap version of the game for PC.

[PSUHammer]

Really...what does it matter?  Exclusive DLC in Bioware games have never been earth shattering, anyway.  Couple different weapons or pieces of armor.