'meh, gamers cry about everything. This is a business, 3rd party deals are fine, if you ONLY buy 1 console you have to live with not everything will be on or cater to that platform.

Tons of great games out there so if something I like is not on my platform of choice I simply move on to something I like that is >>>>OR I buy that other platform= which is why 3rd party business deals are made, so SOME people will have more incentive to buy your product, its business, its not "bad for gamers" because just spending a few hundred dollars on 1 console doesnt entitle "gamers" to every game under the sun.

GTA San Andreas says hello! Timed exclusives and content have been around longer than PS3/360.

@AspiringProGenji

Yup. I´m expecting MS to do the same. Shinobi said MS has secured a marketing deal for a big third party game. Some people think it is the new Assassins Creed Origins.

I´m guess it´s gonna be Cyberpunk 2077! Fingers Crossed!

AspiringProGenji
Shall i name more from Xbox ??? What do you have to say about DR 4, TITANFALL..

Why is moldy screaming over this marketing deal? All we have heard about well over a month is Scorpio this and Scorpio that and Scorpio your mama. Scorpio is coming. Suddenly it is about games? Well tell moldy to run along and not fret, after all he has Scorpio coming. And with Scorpio you have...you have... have...uhm...you have...uhm, hold on the name of those Scorpio exclusive games will come to me...one is called...uhm...it's about this spacesh...er no that's not it...its...uhm...guys?

& now its effecting platform releases such as PC

Freedomland,

I'm pretty sure timed exclusives started well before Xbox 360. You mean to say you don't think the PS2 Grand Theft Auto games were timed exclusive deals?

So over all it sounds like this article is saying if it's going to be exclusive just go FULL exclusive no timed or console exclusive content? This is what it sounds like to me.
Honestly moldy is being bias and hypocritical as usual so ignored as of now. It's not like these 3rd parties don't have say in this. Some of these companies reach out to these big publishers. It's not Sony MS and Ninty clamoring for exclusivity. Some Devs go out of their offer content. Also When a a company has been exclusively been to a one company and some day go 3rd party they outwardly extend to the rival, Bungies Insomniac to name a couple.

Let me sum this up in a way that we can all agree on.

1. When Sony gets exclusives or exclusive content it's only done because the devs are so grateful they are allowed to make games released on a Sony platform, this is their way of saying "thank you".

2. When Microsoft gets exclusive content, its evil and "money hating". This is a bane to gaming and shouldn't be tolerated.

3. If Sony money hats a game, it's simply because Sony knew back in 1995 that the day would come where Microsoft would start the trend of buying exclusives, so they preemptively started doing it before hand as a result.

Death have a EPIC FAIL there wasn't any DLC back on 1995 kid nice try but leave the conversation to the adults.
.
It's been a common practice in this industry since the beginning to go to the console leaders and offer them game exclusive as not all developers had the time and manpower to do a games in 2 different environments without the backing of a mayor 3rd party publisher like activision and EA.
During the ps2 era online was a joke and a handful of game poorly supported it.
Enter Microsoft the new comer with a vision of global game playing online,Xbox was based on power and online community than got perfected on the Xbox 360 with the best online service and paying developers for content (GTA4 $50 millions)instead of waiting for them to offer it like it was done before. Know your gaming history

Guess you have to figure who is the lesser of the two evils. By default, the omission of content from either side because of a contractual deal is bad but both sides do it. Neither Ms or Sony are considered saints in this regard.

Now, as to the subject of timed exclusive content... In most respects by the time that deal has run its course, the side that was missing out will not only get what they been missing but in many cases a little something extra for their trouble. Every game last gen where the 360 got it first, Sony made a requirement that those games would need to be given extra treatment for having to wait.

And this gen it was the same thing, at least as it pertains to the RotTR situation. While many scoffed at having to wait a year, for their trouble they got the definitive edition of the game with all the extra content the xb1 had PLUS a slew of other stuff not available to the xb1 users. And for those who ONLY have one platform well... it sucks when they are caught in the middle of these things. Which is why I have always said (and keep saying) it's much easier to play the field and support all platforms because you never know how things are going to turn out so it's better to be prepared.

Destiny is bad for gaming.. so in a way.. yes?

Still not seeing how that's different from COD or GTA DLC much less Tomb Raider. No instance of the behavior was good for gaming, but because the side which favored it gloated rather than complained its become the norm.

"Of course you don't."

Where the heck does this sense of condescension come from? Especially from the mouth of a blatant and proven hypocrite. I mean really it's actually quite comparable. With Destiny, you're still able to enjoy the core experience at the same time as any other platform that has the game. You had to wait for the timed-exclusive deal to end on Tomb Raider if you wanted to play it on other platforms. I'm pretty sure it's just as - if not more - egregious to hold back a whole game for a year than just some of its minor content.

@ziggurcat
"sorry, moldy, but how is it different that the timed DLC that PS3 owners had to wait for last generation? part of the game isn't being excluded, there is nothing from the core content of Destiny 2 that is being withheld from Xbox owners. it's just extra DLC content, no different than any other timed DLC deal this generation or last."

https://www.polygon.com/201...

Xbox gamers are paying the same amount of money and getting less content. When the exclusive deals happened for Call of Duty those were timed exclusive DLC content that were not sold to Playstation gamers until the exclusive deal ran out, how is that the same thing? You are not paying for something that you don't have access to.

Sony is doing the same thing with Resident Evil 7 and the VR mode. They paid money to have a timed exclusive deal to promote PSVR, meanwhile anyone who bought it on the PC paid the same price with no access to VR mode for at least 6 months.

It is bad enough we get timed exclusive deals and other exclusives for third party but when consumers are paying the same price and not getting as much content then that to me is even more anti-consumer. I also despise retailers having their hands in this practice too. Some retailers also give out pre-order exclusive content, how is that good for consumers who may not even have easy access to buy from there?

You are making your statement way too long. Often times it doesn't make any senses. To be clarified, you talk too much.

"Xbox gamers are paying the same amount of money and getting less content."

no they're not. they're paying for the same amount of core content as PS4 owners. DLC is not core content.

"When the exclusive deals happened for Call of Duty those were timed exclusive DLC content that were not sold to Playstation gamers until the exclusive deal ran out..."

again, how is this different? this is timed DLC content that will be sold to Xbox owners when the deal expires... exactly like any other previous timed DLC deal.

@ziggurcat
"again, how is this different? this is timed DLC content that will be sold to Xbox owners when the deal expires... exactly like any other previous timed DLC deal."

Let me explain again but I will do so more slowly so I don't lose you.

The DLC was sold at THE SAME TIME. One is giving more content to PS4 owners until the timed exclusive deal ends. The DLC for when Call of Duty happened was not available to purchase for PS3 owners until the timed deal ended. Therefor you are not paying in advance for content not available until the timed deal ended.

Resident Evil 7 did not allow access to PC players to play in VR for 6 months, the game was still the same price to PS4 and PC owners from launch. How is that the same to pay in advance for content being locked away as it is for DLC that is unavailable until the timed exclusive deal ends? Playstation 3 gamers were not out of pocket for any expense, the maps were not available to them until the deal expired so they are not paying in advance for anything.

Now read this about Destiny, the whole deal stinks for everyone. A game that is always online is being impacted because of these deals.

https://www.forbes.com/site...

Just admit it, Sony has made a bad practice of timed exclusive deals in the past worse because gamers are now expected to pay for content that comes with less content until that deal expires. Whereas before gamers did not have access so they simply didn't buy it until it was available.

Moldy, it doesn't matter when the content is being made available to PS4 owners. It's a timed DLC deal, same as any other.

"Moldy, it doesn't matter when the content is being made available to PS4 owners. It's a timed DLC deal, same as any other."

You're 100% right. His agenda for the longest time has been to make PS4 and Sony look worse than Xbox and Microsoft. Going as far as lying about their first-party, to getting angry at people for being excited for PS4's insurmountable lineup of games. For somebody who claims to hate the console war, something doesn't add up. And this is what his argument is all about here. Sony - the anti-gamer, the anti-consumer. I mean my god, just look at the mental gymnastics this clown is trying to perform. He's written an essay to say something that can be refuted in a sentence. And his new strategy seems to be ignoring my replies ever since I started successfully exposing his hypocrisy, troll tactics and undercover fanboyism.

"The DLC for when Call of Duty happened was not available to purchase for PS3 owners until the timed deal ended. Therefor you are not paying in advance for content not available until the timed deal ended. "

Lets ignore the season pass of the game that was available to purchase but still had a time lock around it.

No matter how you word it, timed dlc is still timed dlc. Whether its made available to purchase right away or not, its still timed dlc.

I know its a full year, but you act like this is far worse than any of Microsoft timed deals. The Destiny timed content is literally nothing aside from what an extra 10 minutes of gameplay and a few cosmetics.

Tomb Raider, a FULL BLOWN GAME 1 year exclusive to xbox, despite having heavier roots with PlayStation. Yea it comes with everything plus a VR mode, but for me I lost Interest the moment they decided to screw a whole fanbase that made the series to begin with. That and better games were releasing the same time.

GTA 4 DLC, A HUGE EXPANSION was exclusive to xbox for a FULL YEAR.

Skyrim had 30 days timed dlc for xbox

Fallout 3 had timed dlc for xbox

Now im not saying this id right when i bring those up, because what Sony is doing is still wrong, but you saying its worse for content that is so tiny is laughable

Man do you reach to protect ms it's sickening. You're trying to say a gun or two or maybe one mp map for a year is worse than a whole game in rotr being exclusive for a whole year lol like gtho fanboy.

Hey guys, it's just business! Get over it, Tomb Raider says HELLO! No matter how you slice it, now matter how long your explanation, it's all the same. You're just a ruling semantic, don't waste your breath... call your local government representative (lol cause I think some of you would actually do this) if you think it's anticonsumer.

Buying a game like destiny, where from the beginning, not even DLC, but on release of the game one set of gamers pays $59.99 for x amount of strikes and weapons and armour in the game.
Another set of gamers pays $59.99 and gets.x+1 strikes, plus extra exotic weapons and armour in the game. No DLC, just base game. How is that a right practice?
And before you start slagging MS as starting it before, go back to the early tomb raider days where Sony paid to keep it off of the sega Saturn

Xbox did it with the division. Selective memory much?

But nobody cares because the division isn't popular.

Honestly what the f**k is wrong with you moldy, speaking in such a condescending manner to other people when every single comment you write is biased, misinformed BS.

Every single article to do with Sony your in it downplaying or making Sony out to be public enemy #1 and every MS article your on it making wild statements like some crackhead street preacher.

It has got to the point now where every time I see your name pop up I read it to see how outlandish it is, sometimes it makes me laugh at the hypocrisy and the amount of M$ teat your suckling on and I'll admit sometimes it leaves me just plain dumbfounded.

A waste of skin and oxygen, the moment you start to offer something that is discussion worthy rather than trolling the console you don't own then maybe you'll start to be useful. As of now you offer nothing you delusional little boy.

LMFAO! What?

"This is not about timed exclusive games or DLC"

then states

"Destiny that is sold to both Playstation and Xbox owners for the same price but the deal with Sony gives them more content until that timed exclusive deal ends"

sooo this content, is it...I don't know, distributed digitally, like....DLC or?

Moldly...did you even READ what you posted?

@Mold- are you seriously going to be splitting hairs on this?

"The DLC was sold at THE SAME TIME. One is giving more content to PS4 owners until the timed exclusive deal ends. The DLC for when Call of Duty happened was not available to purchase for PS3 owners until the timed deal ended. Therefor you are not paying in advance for content not available until the timed deal ended"

And? Was that suppose to make it any different?

MS legit had MOST of last gen with timed junk, Lost Planet, Dead Rising, Oblivion, Left 4 Dead 1 and 2, Bioshock etc it was just this long list of timed deals and timed DLC by them. I'd argue MOST of what MS had to offer as "new" was timed games from other companies.

No one is saying Sony isn't doing it, heck those guys basically had a LOT of games paid for during the PS2 gen ie GTA, but this gen it isn't just the mass amount of games as money hats like MS last gen.

Sony is still actually making games, Horizon, God Of War, Wild, Detroit, Days Gone, The Last Of Us 2 etc

MS Last gen basically rested almost their entire gen on back door deals.

Did you guys forget that Gears Of War was only RECENTLY bought by MS?
Did you guys forget that MS was eagerly paying Bioware for Mass Effect series yet didn't own the IP?

Soooooooo from the looks of it, MS spent more time last gen paying off for timed games, dlc deals, publishing deals etc then actually building their first party, as to why you see then struggling so badly this gen.

Mass Effect isn't selling XB anymore folks, Remedy is making games else where etc Those deals might get someone to own a 360, they won't keep that person a fan of MS for life bud.

MS spent way, way , waaaaaaaaaaaay too much time with temporary band-aid moves last gen that clearly did not aid them long term.

some Xbox fanboys here are such hypocrite.. They are fine timed exclusive, dlcs etc with numerous Third party games on Xbox but now when every Devs wants to choose the PS4 they go bat shit crazy and needs to lie here.. Yeah!! Now you gonna say "SONY IS THROWING MONEY AT THEM" MS too did the same and what happened to those "MS has more Money BS" comment now... Move on... xbox does it and PS4 is doing it too.. At the end its all about selling your product... Yes! you can say its not OKAY for gamers but then when you see it from business prospective its all fine..

Moldy, really? but then again, i'm not surprised.

There's no difference because they're both wrong. But if you're a busines, you take advantage of whatever opportunity comes your way.

Moldy,

Its the same damn thing, just stop dude.

Btw I missed you accusing MS of the same on that article about the Scorpio deal with Ubi the other day...

Moldy, I hope Microsoft appreciates the time and dedication you put in for them.

@ Ziggurcat

"again, how is this different? this is timed DLC content that will be sold to Xbox owners when the deal expires... exactly like any other previous timed DLC deal."

To be fair, Destiny 1 had timed PS4 exclusive content that was not sold separately. Thorn and Hawkmoon, for example, were two weapons that came with the PS4 version of the game. They were not extra, downloadable content that had to be paid for. They were just included on PS4, and not Xbox, at least until about a year later.

So again, in the attempt to be fair here, you technically could say that Xbox One owners were initially sold less content.

If the Division came with extra content that is not available to PS4 owners and they paid the same money for the game then I agree, that's shady practice all around.

@CorndogBurglar
"To be fair, Destiny 1 had timed PS4 exclusive content that was not sold separately. Thorn and Hawkmoon, for example, were two weapons that came with the PS4 version of the game. They were not extra, downloadable content that had to be paid for."

They still don't get the difference between disparity of what you are buying and what isn't available to purchase.

Do you get the part where you have to wait x amount of time to get the full game and DLC vs NOT HAVING the chance to get the game to begin with?

You can buy destiny 2 at lainch if you want to and wait less than a year for the exclusive content, or you can wait until then to buy the game and the content. With RoTR ps4 had to wait a full year, there were no option to get the main game (without extra content) at launch! that is way worse! do you not see it? Of course you dont!

Hilarious irony. Xbox had a marketing deal with Ubisoft for the Division, but it still sold more on PS4. I'm sure Bungie is having a great time laughing at people like you while putting stacks of money in the bank, thanks to Activision and Sony.

Why cry about something that MS started doing during the 360 days to their advantage? It's business don't like don't support that developer problem solved.

moldybread

you work for MS are you phil spencer?

rise of the tomb raider exclusive for a year? GTA4 dlc exclusive for a long time? titanfall 1? dead rising 4?

so now that publishers much rather side themselves with a console which has more than twice the install base of xbox one it's a problem for xbox fanboys? this E3 MS will buy another timed exclusive just so they can make some impact with xbox scorpio and you will be the first to defend that practice. MS were all about sales numbers major nelson was the biggest troll but now they care more about xblive gaming hours because releasing actual numbers will make them look pathetic

xbox brand can't touch playstation brand in name recognition or diversity of it's games

cry me a river did you see the farcry 5 exclusive marketing deal sony just signed

https://www.youtube.com/wat...

and your whole argument about ps2 era is so wrong because back than ps2 was the dominate console and it was profitable for publishers to release games on it while it was risky on original xbox

The practice in general sucks, no matter it's form. Everyone agrees on that for the most part when it's not beneficial to them, but the console war gets in the way of any logical arguments so there are always people that defend it.

Maybe give up the console war stuff, and start addressing the principal in general and if everyone does that, then maybe it'll stop.

Probably won't though, because these kinds of deals apparently have an effect on the general consumer. If they didn't, they would have died out long ago.

Still wouldn't hurt to put console preference aside and actually stand firm on one's disdain for the policy all the time, as opposed to when it's not beneficial to your console of choice.

Don't we still have Playstation 3 owners waiting for Dead Rising 2 DLC like Case Zero and Case West that is still exclusive to Microsoft since 2010? Pretty sure they paid the same for their copy of Dead Rising 2 that 360 owners did, and yet... no argument there?

Did Playstation 3 owners pay less for their copy of Tomb Raider: Underworld? I'm pretty sure they paid the same, and yet they never did get those two pieces of DLC that were on the marketplace.

Battleground unknown(or whatever the name is)... that info leaked already.
Assasins creed with some sort of deal.
Tomb raider I am sure will have another deal.
To quote Phil and the fanboys: we are going to focus more on inhouse development. :/
Crackdown, 3 years later and the cloud will be brushed under the carpet.
Forza
Then, the other kicker
To quote Phil: we do not want to show offf games that will not be releasing soon...
Will show off games that will be at least a year away.

I'm ok with it, they can have the six month exclusive rights to the Journey music catalog for Rock Band 5

@Ristul

Where were you almost all of last gen?

On 360 and PS3 with COD you bought the season pass and then those map packs were held "hostage" for an extra 30 days on PS3 even after you had paid for it. Sure 30 days isnt a year but its the same practice in a new form so lets not act like this isnt done by others.