All Channels
Popular
340°

Who Will Win E3 2018: The Case for Microsoft

From Cinelinx:

E3 2018 is just around the corner, and as the big companies prepare to blow gamers away, I’m taking a look at how Microsoft (Xbox) can end up winning.

Read Full Story >>
cinelinx.com
FallenAngel19842904d ago

Microsoft would need to hit it out of the park with first party support though

2903d ago Replies(6)
Godmars2902903d ago

More like they have to deliver. Release titles within 2-3 years of announcement if not sooner. With those games being of good or great quality.

2903d ago
Fantomex2903d ago

"The most important thing is services and getting those up and running"

I disagree. You can have tons of services, or the best services from a technical viewpoint, but without enough games the services won't have much to use them for.

MS needs a lot more MS games for their games console. That is what gamers are complaining about the most ATM.

FallenAngel19842903d ago

You seriously calling franchises Microsoft owns third party?

2903d ago
FallenAngel19842903d ago

You’re even more ill-informed than I imagined. Microsoft fully owns the Gears of War franchise since they bought it and they own Black Tusk Studio which are the current developers working on the franchise.

Microsoft also owns the Fable IP.

2nd party titles are franchises still owned by hardware manufacturers that have developers not owned by the manufacturers. Saying it’s 3rd party implies you believe that Fable & Gears of War are owned by the developers and not the copyright owner that is Microsoft.

Do you believe that Kirby, Pokémon, Ratchet & Clank, Fire Emblem, Paper Mario, Earthbound, Hot Shots Golf, Detroit: Become Human, & Until Dawn are all third party because the developers behind them aren’t owned by Sony or Nintendo?

Gears of War was contracted out to Epic when it was created, but it’s already been years since they sold it to Microsoft. Lionhead was owned by Microsoft so idk how you even got Fable confused with 3rd party

RabbitFly2903d ago

What he is trying to explain to you is that first an third party has nothing to do with the IP and everything to do with the developer.

Generally speaking for a title to be considered first party it needs to be developed in house. When they make deal with third party developer to work on an ip they own it is Generally considered second party, but this is just a figure of speech.

2903d ago
2903d ago
FallenAngel19842902d ago

@ Rabbit

What I’m telling you is that Lionhead & Black Tusk Studios was/is first party developers so it’s stupid to label either game a third party game. Do you actually look up this basic information before responding?

The IP owner is the thing that separates a first party game from a third party game. Nintendo for example can outsource their IPs to any other developer like they did with Mario + Rabbids & Hyrule Warriors, doesn’t mean it’s suddenly a third party game.

@ Mako

And you don’t even seem to know what a third party developer is if you think Lionhead & The Coalition were/are one. Microsoft acquired Lionhead in 2006 and The Coalition were always owned by Microsoft since 2010-2011.

It's really like you didn’t research any of this before responding. Actually look this up before replying because this is getting annoying having to constantly reiterate something that’s easy to look up for yourself.

Also quit thinking 2nd party games are an interchangeable word with 3rd party. They are distinct terminologies and makes you look foolish tryin to make them seem like the same thing.

When did Coalition officially state their next project? I don’t see any unveiling of the such. Not only that but the next Gears of War game hasn’t even been unveiled.

RabbitFly2900d ago

@FallenAngel1984
"The IP owner is the thing that separates a first party game from a third party game. Nintendo for example can outsource their IPs to any other developer like they did with Mario + Rabbids & Hyrule Warriors, doesn’t mean it’s suddenly a third party game. "

Yes it does. That is exactly what it means.

First part and third party is a designatition of the party that actually creates the game. Not who owns the property. However. As has been pointed out several times now. When something is owned by one company and then licensed out for development to another it is usally referred to as second party. Indicating that it is a "first party" property being developed by a third party studio. This is a figure of speech, but it is a generally acceptable way to refer to such a deal.

No on is arguing that Lionhead Studios or Black Tusk Studios/The Coalition isn't or wasn't first party studios. Mako is citing some kind of third party deals being worked on by Microsoft. I have no idea whether that is true or not, but assuming it is he is correct in his argument.

My reason for stepping in is that I see an individual, you, clearly misinformed - and I would like for you to get a better understanding so you can avoid such misunderstandings in the future.

First and Third party refers to the developers working on the game. Second party is a figure of speech made to describe these tricky situations, because they technically don't fall under what would classically be considered either first or third.

FallenAngel19842899d ago

Yes it is a designation of who owns the IP. If an independent company develops a game that’s owned by any of the hardware manufacturers it’s a 2nd party title, not a third party title. When the independent company owns the IP to that game it’s a 3rd party title. It’s not hard to comprehend.

You’re seriously trying to argue the likes of Pokémon, Fire Emblem and Kirby actually third party which highlights how absurd your logic is.

Mako is making it sound like Gears of War & Fable as a whole somehow became third party franchises which is what I’m correcting him/her on.

First and third party refers to who owns the IP. Second party is an actual thing since we’ve seen various times of independent developers working alongside hardware publishers. Developers like Insomniac, Intellingent Systems, Game Freak, Quantic Dream, Rareware(in the past), & Clap Hands are known for producing second party titles. However since second party titles are in most cases owned by the hardware publishers(except for Rareware which later actually held onto the rights to all of their original IPs) they’re simply grouped alongside other first party titles.

RabbitFly2898d ago

@FallenAngel1984

Now you are just backtracking. Kinda agreeing, while denying you ever were in disagreement.

It's all semantics anyway and does not really matter. However you are trying to redefine commonly understood terms within the industry.

No one is calling well established franchises "third party" because honestly it wouldn't make sense. Your confusement seems to be why it doesn't make sense.

Being that a franchise isn't a party, it is an IP.

Spider-Man Ps4 is considered second party because Insomniac is a third party developer working on an exclusive game being published by Sony. But second party is just a figure of speech, it isn't actually a technical term.

Just like you can refer to someone either in first person or in third person. There isn't actually any second person.

You are also contradicting yourself. If the party being refrenced was the owner of a franchise, There would be no need for an expression like "second party". It would all be first or third.

But, again. It doesn't really matter to the discussion at hand. Wether Microsoft wants to invest in first or third party publishers. What matters is that they invest. Some people just don't like that investing in exclusives is being equaled to investing in first party studios. Considering the difference in the landscapes between Sony and Microsoft at this moment, it seems to make for an unfair comparison.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 2898d ago
showtimefolks2903d ago

I fear because of recent success of ps4 and switch games ms maybe pressured into a corner to either buy a small publisher or buy times exclusive game

Let's see

Fantomex2903d ago

MS should do the former TBH. The latter wouldn't work out for several reasons. You could get time exclusive deals for example the next Tales of RPG but that would just have anger more people than convince them to buy an Xbox.

gangsta_red2903d ago

So this whole time you constantly complain about MS not having enough first parties or exclusive games. But now you fear they might do something about that?

Is it because you'll have nothing to complain about anymore?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2898d ago
Nyxus2904d ago

I can't think of anything that can go up against The Last of Us II, Death Stranding, Ghost of Tsushima and Spider-Man.

ABizzel12904d ago

Different taste but....

Pokemon Switch, Metroid, Animal Crossing, Smash Bros., Bayonetta 3, and more.

MS has to have some groundbreaking announcements to win E3 IMO, or the other 2 have to just completely fail. If there's something MS may be able to squeeze out it's game of the show or best conference from simply having a bunch of 3rd party titles on stage, but game of the show is going to be insanely hard going up again The Last of Us 2, Death Stranding, Anthem, and Red Dead.

Magnetar2903d ago (Edited 2903d ago )

I’ve always found it amusing how Sony can show the same games for years and people lose their minds about how awesome their showings are.

While I enjoying seeing progress on their games, showing the same games year after year doesn’t blow my mind. I’m sure they’ll have at least one unannounced exclusive to show though.

Nyxus2903d ago

Well it's the first time we'll see gameplay for three out of four of those games. They are also among the most anticipated games in the industry, so it really isn't that surprising. Besides, what company doesn't show the same games multiple times?

RpgSama2903d ago

You mean like Ms that also shows games year over year, over year, all the games released or still to release this year (Crackdown 3) were showed for the first time at least 3 years ago

Skull5212903d ago

We will actually be getting a sneak peak at next gen since some of Sony’s games will undoubtedly be making their debut on the PS5.

2903d ago
rainslacker2903d ago

They often show new stuff too though. Expanding on what's been shown before can be exciting too. Sony has had their bad conferences in the past, but this gen, they've been good to incredible.

showtimefolks2903d ago

Magn

I am sorry where did we see death stranding, the last of us 2 and ghost game play? Can you please post some videos or game play?

trooper_2903d ago

Because Sony actually makes quality games.

Dragonscale2903d ago

@skull, you lot would love that. Whats wrong, can't stand to think that PS4 is gonna carry on killing it. Sony's e3 line up is PS4's future line up tbh.

Skull5212903d ago

I just know Sony’s record with games like Last Guardian.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 2903d ago
xRacer74x2904d ago

Both sides will claim victory. So really the gamers win. Im more interested in PC, XBOX and Switch stuff but that is me.

2904d ago Replies(2)
GamesMaster19822904d ago

Not beign a troll or anything but with all the excellent exclusives and upcoming exclusives on PS4 and even Switch, and all the upcoming Microsoft games playable on PC is there any reason to even own a X1 now ?.

Bobafret2903d ago

Millions of people do not like PC gaming. Shocking, I know.

2903d ago
Tazzy2903d ago

Personally I think that's why their sales dropped from over 84 million Xbox 360s sold to just a little over 30+ million Xbox Ones PC gamers don't need to own an Xbox One X for anything they get better graphics.

choujij2902d ago (Edited 2902d ago )

"Not beign a troll or anything but with all the excellent exclusives and upcoming exclusives on PS4 and even Switch, and all the upcoming Microsoft games playable on PC is there any reason to even own a X1 now ?."

That is a very loaded question. lol

I'll try to throw my 2 cents in though. IMO, there isn't much, aside from a few factors.
I believe there are some titles at this time that are still exclusive to Xbox on console (like Halo 5).
Aside from that, some people prefer Xbox on console with the belief it's less expensive comparing upfront costs. I am of the mindset, where I consider value and total cost of ownership. So for example, let's say buying/building a reasonably equivalent PC was even twice the cost of the Xbox you're interested in (or whatever it is). I would also factor in the yearly savings of not necessarily having to purchase an XBL subscription, plus the fact that I would have access to a far larger library of PC titles available. Xbox controllers are also well supported on PC. And a Gaming PC in your living room (or wherever you play your consoles) makes for an amazing media player, which now gets into everything else you can do with your gaming PC, aside from gaming.

So in my book, no, there is not much reason for someone like myself to ever purchase an Xbox console again, but I'm sure others have their own preferences for their reasons. PC, PS4 and Switch is my current preference.

Show all comments (89)
40°

Games Done Quick is coming to Europe for the first time with 3 days of Gamescom speedruns

The charity event will be streamed live from Gamescom in August.

Read Full Story >>
videogameschronicle.com
50°

Microsoft Lowers the Price of Xbox Game Pass Ultimate And PC Game Pass, But What’s Next For Xbox?

Xbox Game Pass Ultimate is getting cheaper but Call of Duty is leaving day-one access. Here’s what we think the price drop means for Xbox, PC Game Pass, and the future of the service.

Read Full Story >>
theouterhaven.net
6d ago
VaNdAl6d ago

Phil Spencer killed the Xbox Let It Go move on to PC

Jingsing6d ago

They would be better breaking up what valued assets they still have and put them out to auction for the competition.
There is no more financial gain for them on any trajectory in the entertainment space.

180°

PlayStation Confirms New DRM, Digital Games Will Vanish If Players Don't Log-In For 30 Days

Tech4Gamers writes: "A PlayStation Support assistant has confirmed that the 30-day timer implemented by the new DRM policy is part of an update and isn’t a bug. While responding to a fan’s query, PS support revealed that all games purchased digitally after March 2026 will be affected by this time limit.

If your PS4 or PS5 does not connect to the internet within 30 days, the game’s license will expire, and it won’t launch on the console unless the connection is restored. Hence, every digital game you purchase from now on will require an online check-in, or else you will lose ownership."

Read Full Story >>
tech4gamers.com
Goodguy018d ago

That is wild lol. Steam already does this for some games depending on the developer...but man...all digital games on ps5...

Eonjay8d ago

FYI, it hasn't actually been confirmed. This is just a lot of assumptions. If this is the case i would expect Sony to come out and say so. Chat bot response doesn't count as official confirmation.

People are also saying this is also an inadvertent mistake. If this is the case Sony and its customers would be best served by coming out and saying so.

If this isn't a mistake I think they need to confirm it and Playstation gamers should complain.

darthv728d ago

Sounds like Sony quietly did what MS openly said they were going to do with the once a month check in... and MS got so much flak they had to change course.

People need to give Sony even more flak if its true.

blacktiger8d ago

If the response is from Sony whether irresponsible employee or chatbot. That's from SONY until Sony reiterate

Dandizzle8d ago

seriously, a large company like sony wouldnt do that without an announcement or else it would result in bombardment of customer service

BlackOni8d ago

Sony's chatbot is notoriously garbage at providing even basic information and functioning properly. I wouldn't take anything it says seriously.

That said, if this is true, this is serious af. Major L for gamers across the board.

1Victor7d ago

It’s no mistake someone got paid to code that in the update and it wasn’t just for the lol

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 7d ago
phatak8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

This is beyond nuts, this was pretty much the exact thing that the playstation execs during the ps4 era mocked the xbox one over and xbox never recovered after it, this is why you need stiff competition folks, Sony high on their own supply just like the early ps3 days where we apparently needed 2 jobs to afford one, I was a massive Ps3 fanboy mainly due to the fact that the xbox 360 pushed sony into a corner resulting in them actually trying real hard to get market share back and as a result we got crazy good exclusives, just for old times sakes like I used to do back in 2012 right here on n4g ill relist some of the major exclusives of ps3 again

Demons souls
Metal gear solid 4
uncharted 1,2,3
infamous 1,2, festival of blood
little big planet 1,2 & little big planet karting
gran turismo 5 and 6 & ridge racer 7
killzone 2,3
twisted metal
journey
ratchet and clank tools of destruction, quest for booty, crack in time, all for one, into the nexus
resistance 1,2,3
last of us 1
god of war 3 and ascension
motorstorm collection
ico & shadow of the colossus collection
folklore
modnation racers
warhawk & starhawk
sly collection & jack and daxter collection
Puppeteer & comet crash & tokyo jungle & rain & gravity crash & Echochrome & the last guy
Heavenly Sword
3D Dot Game Heroes
Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale
Mag & Socom 4
Fat Princess
Ni no Kuni, Valkyria Chronicles, Yakuza 3,4,5 (these all came to pc later )

But just think and compare this catalog of games to ps5 ?
Saros, astro bot, demons souls remake, ghost of yotei, I would have included gran turismo 7 but that came on ps4 as well so not really an absolute exclusive that one needs to buy a ps5 to play like the other 4.

We are almost in the 6th year of the ps5, the 6th year of the ps3 was around 2012 and almost all the games from the list above were already released on the ps3, now if they are really pulling this online crap every 30 days non sense its only because of a lack of competition from xbox and so they have console players by the ba**s, now I don't know whether this is confirmed or not but regardless if this is in general where their headspace is at it seems like we should be worried, its the real playstation gamers that will be affected if its true, Im not even a playstation gamer anymore but my recommendation is put your money where you mouth is and really abandon playstation if this ends up being true.

Extermin8or3_7d ago

No it isnt. The xbox one require you to check in online every 24 hours. Also alot has changed in terms of Internet infrastructure and provision globally since 2013.....

hiawa237d ago

Looking at what consoles cost now, many need 2 jobs.

cytricks7d ago (Edited 7d ago )

Not quiet. Xbox wanted to do DRM for physical games so they would be locked to your account and not sharable

Zerobalance7d ago

Most of those games are trash. Deal bro🤣 Ponies gotta pony up. Muma Sony wants some more cash. PC bro! Good ol' games. Look it up.

Ashunderfire867d ago

O man you remember that PS3 statement from crazy Ken Kutagri whatever is last name is, was so cringe for saying,”Your gonna want PS3 so bad you need 2 jobs!” That guy overhype the crap out of PS3, that was the most expensive console, an a lot of misinformation about the graphics and performance delta over 360.

Kyizen7d ago

Xbox drm was for physical games also and 24 hours with no sharing

vTuro247d ago

Yeah stuff like this is why competition is needed. The ps360 era was peak gaming. Microsoft and Sony waging a full on war and Nintendo just kinda doing their own thing. The gamers only benefited from that. Then Microsoft shot themselves in the dick with the Xbone and that gen felt like a step down from the previous (imo), though it wasn't bad still.
Then you have the current gen, which honestly feels like one big nothingburger. Barely anything interesting gets released while prices keep going up which to me is just insane. Astro Bot is basically their only exclusive that I'd be interested in buying, but I'm not buying an console just for that. Especially not one as expensive as the ps5... I would add Demon's Souls to that, but I already played the original. Loved the game, but a remake isn't a system seller for me.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 7d ago
Loktai8d ago

@darthv72 Yeah LIKE 14 years ago. Its like saying "Give sony flak for raising game prices, because it would have made you mad in 2012"

PRIMORDUS7d ago

Pirate on PC what you can, you will own it, nothing will be taken from you. I feel like your just throwing money away and have nothing to show for it, with digital games.

1Victor7d ago

Well all I’m going to say is I’ll vote with my wallet and keep refusing to buy digital and will cancel my ps extra this is bs and you all that still think digital is the future should take note because once the servers goes down so does your digital game library. Good luck and good bye

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 7d ago
Jin_Sakai8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

This has to be a mistake.

“Received word from an anonymous insider. The Sony DRM issue is unintentional. From what we gathered, Sony accidentally broke something while fixing an exploit. They've known about the confusing UI for a while, but didn't see it as urgent. Hoping for a clarifying statement now.”

Eonjay8d ago

I find their communication to be very poor. If this is an error on their part why let people get worried about it? I understand they don't respond to rumor but sometimes they make it worse by not responding and this is an unforced error on top of and apparent unforced error.

Kribwalker8d ago

There’s people that talked directly to people, not chat bots, that confirmed it’s real 🤷‍♂️
I expect those fans that were so against Xbox doing it to eat a whole lot of crow

Outside_ofthe_Box8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

Damn, we having diehards coming out of the woodworks for this. 😳

But you're right this is literally what led to the demise of the Xbox One and led to some calling it the Xbone.

There is literally no need for this and Sony has been doing just fine without it. If I don't turn on my console for 30 days and want to play offline I should be able to play the game that I paid for, no if and or buts about it.

Jin_Sakai7d ago

If it’s real it won’t last long. Almost every PlayStation YouTube video is full of revolt comments about it.

CrashMania8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

The screenshot from the article is from an AI chat bot, there are plenty of screenshots floating around from actual human chat reps stating the opposite.

SkilledGamer7d ago

It's also worth noting that the text stating a 30 day license seems to only be visible on PS4, PS5 users aren't seeing it at all.

Warrior948d ago

It this is real then I will never buy digital again and if the PS6 is digital only then it will be the first Playstation Console I wont buy

VersusDMC8d ago

"Games will vanish" is click baity as hell...all you have to do is log in and the license is restored.

phatak8d ago

@ VersusDMC The entire goal for us gamers is to want to avoid that lol, what if sony's servers are down or having some maintenance, many times ive just played my installed games without even signing into psn, from now one it means every 30 days I have to at the very least sign it to psn to even play my installed games, cannot even play single player games without singing in, so for example if sony just decides to ban me from psn, I cannot even play the games locally already installed on my drive that I purchased after march 2026, you don't think thats insane ? you just want to accept that ? abandon playstation right now if this story gets confirmed.
we officially have started renting games from march 2026, it was a good run we had 1994 to 2026.

VersusDMC7d ago

Maintenance doesn't last 30 days

Who doesn't sign in to psn for 30 days? Missing out on game updates, new games, messages, demos, etc...

You already lost all your purchases if you got permanently banned from psn so that's not new.

And if for some reason you don't have internet for 30 days you can use your smartphone as a Hotspot to connect your ps5 to the internet.

phatak7d ago (Edited 7d ago )

@VersusDMC my point isn't not about the 30 days maintenance man, the fact that you are willing to accept this 30 days sign in means they totally OWN you now, what if they change this later to 7 days, im sure you will be making the exact same point right " who doesnt sign into psn every 7 days" ? eventually say it becomes every 24 hours you cool with that too ? by psn banning you I mean to say if I get banned on psn right now for some weird reason that they decide, but I have 20 installed games already downloaded and ready to play just by clicking X, basically all the exclusives from ps4 and ps5, even if my psn is banned I still get to play the games already installed right now same like putting the disc into a banned console, from march 2026 will I be able to play my locally installed games with a banned PSN ? Its not about the length of time, its the fact that the corporation gets total control over how I choose to even play my single player offline games with mandatory sign ins, a simple thing such as forgetting my password would mean I cant even play ghost of yotei offline without signing into psn.

You ever heard the phrase "give someone an inch and they will take a yard", thats what will happen here, it doesn't just end at 30 days sign in, that's just the start

cytricks7d ago (Edited 7d ago )

Is it that difficult to sign in for one second every 30 days? Especially if you are ps plus member who wants to get their free games?

phatak7d ago (Edited 7d ago )

@cytricks You are focusing again on the 30 days too, "oh sony said its only 30 days so we are safe" While its not a probability YET, just know that your playstation turns into a brick if sony decides to turn off those servers.

Sony's lack of communication is telling my conspiracy filled mind lol that they're testing to see if they can get away with this. If it was truly a mistake, they would have acknowledged it, apologised, and stated they're working on a fix.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 7d ago
Show all comments (81)