That's about the only major news they had during Gamescom, but Sony hasn't really had a presence there for a few years now. They do Paris Games Week and Tokyo Game Show instead.
@darth There were dudes on Twitter cheerleading this split because they thought for sure Marvel would "retaliate" by taking Spider-Man and making it multiplat or "even Xbox exclusive".
The X-Men never left comics, tf you mean? FF were in comics too long after that Fox deal, the book went on hiatus because sales nosedived.
Wolverine came back long before that Fox deal too.
I'd say intentionally sexualizing underage characters is more wrong, but then again I'm a normal human being.
That's not a concept of capitalism. Capitalism is my initial purchase, an exchange of currency for a good or service.
This is corporatism.
Nono, you got it all wrong. It's not because she's a female character.
It's because she's not his idea of sexy.
If she had that same bust but a tiny waist you can bet he wouldn't care.
Oh, because he dislikes that she wasn't designed to be fap material, got it.
"The developer behind Gears 5 believes the game will set a trend in how AAA games monetise players after launch."
Imagine. Typing this out and thinking "Gosh, this doesn't sound disgusting or offputting at all." Not even monetize the game, but MONETIZE PLAYERS. Literally describing people like they're some commodity to be reaped.
That's plain disgusting, Idc who said it.
They were literally making VR games for PC, among other things.
@Stanjara
Uh... you do know that Marvel literally made those movies, right? Their crews were the ones doing the filming, the character designs, the whole shebang?
THEY are the ones that made that movie earn 1 billion, and after Sony threatened to take the rights back if it didn't. Which they then did anyway.
And no, the deal was not 50/50 revenue. It was 50/50 FINANCING, the revenue portion of the deal was never made public. People ...
No, it's a pun, not an onomatopoeia
Why would she have purple hair?
Yeeeeah, no.
I dunno how many times Marvel, PlayStation, and Insomniac have made it VERY CLEAR that the game deal was NOT tied to the film rights.
Insomniac literally had their pick of characters. They could have selected Iron Man, Captain America, hell, Blade or Iron Fist if they wanted. They CHOSE Spider-Man from a list of options.
No, they didn't. They offered a 50% co-financing split. That's 50% of the COST, not 50% of the profits. The revenue split was never disclosed.
The game is unrelated to the film rights.
Buying Insomniac could be considered arrogance?
How?
"Oh no, other body types exist!"
Bend has their own IP now, they're not picking that up.
Best anyone can hope for is remasters.
...what?