You're assuming it's a lack of faith. Was it a lack of faith when any of the Resident Evils were exclusive? How about Monster Hunter? I think it's just a matter of SF being one of the only titles they could do this deal with. I can't imagine anyone beating down the doors to make the next RE or DMC exclusive. By doing this, they save development costs which can be invested elsewhere and still profit.
@mhunterjr
"I'm not sure how you conclude MS forced Sony to do this."
You're not? Proof is in the pudding:
Ryse.
Dead Rising.
Titanfall.
Sunset Overdrive.
Tomb Raider.
Those are some big, AAA, 3rd party titles. Most of those in just the first year. I could argue Gears of War should be added to that list. MS bought the rights just to keep it from going multiplat. That's not...
@xX1NORM1Xx
Agreed. That's why I lament the situation. Resources are being wasted paying for something that was previously free, all because of artificial demand. Even with Sony helping with the development of SF, I'm still kind of suspicious about these deals. I'm always going to question just how sincere a dev/pub is when they say they wouldn't have been able to make a game if a console maker hadn't stepped in. It's like, would SF, Titanfall, etc. ha...
@halfblackcanadian
My apologies. I assumed when I said "passed" it was understood to mean within the context of passing on the demands being made to have those games on the system.
Of course Sony isn't just going "Meh. Pass," the same way MS didn't go "Meh. We have KI. Pass" on SF. So if you want to break it down, Sony looked at what Respawn was demanding and passed on a home console version of TF, but said they're w...
@tdogchristy90
What about Nintendo? What about Steam? What about (fill in the blank). So, yeah, it really does come off as complaining that Sony isn't being attacked, especially considering the attacks specifically targeting Sony a few years ago.
You got anything supporting that "fact?" Because Capcom tells a different story.
Meanwhile, I can link you to a number of Xbox exclusives Sony passed on.
Titanfall http://www.totalxbox.com/75...
Sunset Overdrive
@marlinfan10
I'll just leave this here.
http://n4g.com/news/1635288...
There must have been some entries after Uncharted 3 only you were privy to.
@lifeisgamesok
I think the tears in your eyes are affecting your vision.
Yeah, but unfortunately, once one side starts doing these deals, the only alternative is you get even less 3rd party games if your console manufacturer keeps playing by the old rules.
Your first criticism can be said about a lot of genres. You are right that the first steps have been taken for them, but Tales from the Borderlands fleshes out that world and story in a way the source just hasn't. I've read every issue of Walking Dead and seen every episode. The game is the better, and there are many that agree.
"Side note what happened to Sony guys saying that this was an underhanded tactic but now Sony has done it, it's now just how things are."
I refer you to my comment above. You can't put all the expectation upon one set of gamers (PS fans) to sacrifice for the greater good while others carry on selfishly.
"Well for the millionth time Respawn offered Titanfall to Sony and Sony did not want it."
Exactly. Just like Phil Spencer said the TR deal was available to Sony. If Sony can't say no to a 3rd party without worrying that a multiplat will turn into an MS exclusive, what are they supposed to do?
"Microsoft FUNDED Dead Rising 3 in the same way Nintendo funded Bayonetta."
This may not be the case every time, but mark my wor...
It's not just "karma;" it's survival. Sony declined to do exclusive deals with a number of 3rd party games that became Xbox exclusives. MS essentially made the 3rd party landscape an "us or them" scenario. If Sony can't count on MS to join them in a unified "no" when 3rd parties start shopping titles to save their pubs money, is Sony supposed to sit back and keep losing titles? Are PS fans supposed to go beyond lamenting that things are this way to be...
@mhunterjr
Such a simplistic argument springs from a failure to understand nuance. That's simply not how the world works, and you know it. You can be the biggest pacifist and still not be outraged when someone being repeatedly punched in the face strikes back in self defense. Same action; different circumstances. Not every situation is a one-to-one correlation with the next. There is a such thing as context. Ignoring that allows you to conveniently sidestep the questions ...
It's not a shift in attitude at all. It's indifference to the whining of those who eagerly took us down this road. I'll be the first to tell you bidding for 3rd parties is bad for the industry. I'd rather see the money spent elsewhere. But, do you think I'm going to sit here and get outraged on behalf of people that were yukking it up when a game was kept out of my hands? Especially knowing that a number of 3rd party titles Sony didn't money-hat this gen went exclusive...
Put it like this: People, yourself included, had a chance to oppose the rule change. We needed a consensus to say we don't want to play the game by those rules. If you didn't speak up then, keep your mouth closed now. The game isn't going to be played by two different rule sets. Don't get mad when the game gets played by the rules you condoned.
On top of what sonic989 said, MS already started the fight. If a bully started punching you in the face, trying to knock you out, would you just stand there with your hands down?
@ShinMaster
"Why do people expect PS4 gamers to be any more outraged about Street Fighter than Xbox gamers were about Tomb Raider being exclusive to their system?"
Sheer narcissism, that's why.
It's even worse when you realize there are way more TR fans on PS.