Why not? A mixture of both is ideal. I know most of the live service games might not interest me, but it's good they are investing in both single and multi-player games. I also like that, they are not trying to have ass it, but actually put effort into it.
@glennhkboy
Not decades, maybe a couple of years. Theoretically MS can pay for the 68.7 billion cost with cash from a couple months of GamePass subscription fee
Where are you getting this made up logic from? Did you fail 1st grade math? Theoretically MS cannot pay for the 68.7 billion cost with cash from a couple months of GamePass subscription fee
That is a lot of salt and copium
The amount of lies you people tell yourselves to cope with reality is amazing. A game sells 3M within 5 days on one platform and it's called a flop.
@hiphopisdead
You and your ilk are honestly too much. It ruins nothing, just triggers you. You are literally and I mean literally playing a video game that is unrealistic, yet seeing a gay character in a post apocalyptic is what you call unrealistic? A gay person in a video game is very realistic.
What the devs put in theory game is up to them, don't like, don't buy it. Devs should be free to make the games/stories they want and not change things...
Politics has been in games since the very beginning. All the games you listed have Politics in them. You just get triggered by Politics you don't like. Basically things you agree with, you don't view as Politics, but those that hurt your feelings are Politics
Am guessing they saw a gay flag or something. Oh well
I don't think he knows what fantasy means
@maniacmayhem
Anyone with a brain can see Sony would not sign a deal if it wasn't better than the 1st 2 they literally rejected. But we can pretend that never happened if that makes you feel better.
Sony literally said the two deals Microsoft gave them 1st wasn't good enough, so why would they now sign a deal if the new deal didn't have what they wanted? Why would they sign a deal that is worst than the two they rejected? I get thinking is not...
Microsoft literally has a history of paying for timed exclusive deals and games. I wonder why you and your ilk never cared or ignored Microsoft doing the same thing. Also they signed a legally binding agreement. That means Sony is getting something they want, since they literally rejected Microsoft's 1st two deals, or should we pretend MS never approached Sony with 3, then 10 year deal. Hell, until the details leak, we will never know what Microsoft offered to Sony. As far as anyone is co...
At a later date, it would be stupid of Sony to give a Microsoft own studio a dev kit during R&D
Completely forgot this game existed
@Crows90
Yes, you don't live in reality. Also, user reviews? Can you seriously read? Do you know why I specifically used Amazon? Because those are verified and can be proven they actually own the game. You are desperately trying to make a point, using user reviews from metacritic, that anyone with a brain knows a significant majority of them did not play the game. You can be critical all you want, but what you see online, make up a very small amount of the whole base. U...
@Crows90
In what made up world do you live in?And what massive internal shakeup? During that time, not only did Sony give Neil a major promotion, they brought his story to live action and even made him one of the directors and based on Wells retiring, Neil will more than likely be given another major promotion. The last game they made that was successful was TLOU part 2. It only divided some vocal people online, that hold 0 weight in reality. The game, until recently was th...
No they didn't. He is literally the reason TLOU exists to begin with. Sony clearly cares about what Neil wants, enough to not only bring his story to live action, but make him one of directors. And I loved that he doesn't care what some triggered people think of part 2 and the second 2 of the show would follow the game.
The studio is doing well and they will keep doing well. Their success always seems to trigger some people.
@CrimsonWing69
Are those the best examples you can give? Exoprimal is not exactly a game that would have sold much to begin with. And Persona 5 Tactica? That is not even a mainline Persona game, but a spin off that is AA at best. And they put these games there because they are getting paid to do so. Again, I listed some of the biggest games that came out and none of those came out Day 1. Why do you think these companies are not willing to put their best games selling games...
Well, do you see major publishers putting their games Day 1 on game pass? Care to guess why they don't? They only put their game on GP after some time has passed, some even a 1 year or 2 after the sales of the game has slowed and they can make extra money from Microsoft.
The fact that these publishers would not put their games day 1, especially big AAA games, without a huge bag should tell how they feel about it. If they liked it or if GP lead to more sales, Elden Ring...
@CrimsonWing69
Where are you getting these made up numbers from? Sony has 25 games in development. Out of those, Sony said 10 of them are live service games. That is literally the opposite of what you are claiming. The live service gaming becoming a huge success means Sony can take more risk single player games
https://www.theverge.com/20... ...