-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Phil Spencer: "Not a fan of marketing deals with exclusive content"
- Thread starter MauroNL
- Start date
No, but sadly some People here are serious and think that this is how it works.
Miles Quaritch
Member
This is just stupid. He talks a lot of shit, but he's no Trump.
ScientificPizza
Banned
If I was 12 would it make the joke good
alright buddy let's just maybe take a break for a bit
Ocarina_117
Banned
Yeah I'm not really wanting to play a game of arguing one is worse than the other. Both are shitty practices as worse as eachother in my eyes.
Ghost Slayer
Member
Ah okay then. Sorry for misunderstood you, my sarcasm detector is useless on GAF nowadays
Then pretend the day that the timed DLC finally comes out is the real day 1. Before that, it's...early access or something.
Why are people are trying so hard to differentiate playing a "complete" game 1 year later vs releasing a game 1 year later.
Mr. Phellps
Member
Let's also remember that their deal for Rise of The Tomb Raider included hiding all signs of Square Enix as the publisher of the game to mislead people to believe the game was a definitive exclusive, dodging every question about timed exclusivity and even going as far as to demand a six-month delay of the PS4 version so Square Enix could at least announce it was coming after all the shit storm that arose from this fiasco.
So come on, Phill. You could've just said you're trying to give more content to your customers by making these deals and called it a day. Would've been more decent.
So come on, Phill. You could've just said you're trying to give more content to your customers by making these deals and called it a day. Would've been more decent.
zackmorris
Member
Did they not do this with Call of Duty for years? 30 day exclusive DLC. So now that they lost those deals it's a bad practice? Right.
Fallout-with-swords
Banned
Don't know how people will defend timed exclusive games but are fine shitty on timed exclusive content.
So you'd be fine if Sony paid for full Destiny 2 exclusivity for a year. Instead of just
the strike and the multiplayer map.
So you'd be fine if Sony paid for full Destiny 2 exclusivity for a year. Instead of just
the strike and the multiplayer map.
Yes, but the person making this statement is not Phil Spencer, an individual. In this context, the statement is made by Phil Spencer, the lead of Xbox division.
WaterAstro
Member
I wonder if they cancelled Scalebound just to use the budget to get all these timed exclusives.
Phil said, "Including 22 games with console exclusivity on Xbox One."
Which is pretty much a straight up lie because timed exclusive isn't console exclusive. He didn't say "console exclusivity in some way."
Phil said, "Including 22 games with console exclusivity on Xbox One."
Which is pretty much a straight up lie because timed exclusive isn't console exclusive. He didn't say "console exclusivity in some way."
RadialBlur
Member
Personally, I can get over the timed exclusives issue, whether it's for the entire game or just DLC.
But what I find incredibly annoying is the possible rising trend of gimping a game, artificially, so that it plays equal or worse on a more powerful platform. That's much worse to me as it directly affects gameplay. If I have a system that can play a game faster or better, then I expect the game I buy to take advantage of it.
I can wait 6 months for a timed exclusivity deal to run out as long as what I get runs as well as possible on the system of my choice.
But what I find incredibly annoying is the possible rising trend of gimping a game, artificially, so that it plays equal or worse on a more powerful platform. That's much worse to me as it directly affects gameplay. If I have a system that can play a game faster or better, then I expect the game I buy to take advantage of it.
I can wait 6 months for a timed exclusivity deal to run out as long as what I get runs as well as possible on the system of my choice.
Militant17
Member
No it would just make it understandable and excusable. We all say dumb shit when we're 12.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
Nevermind, lets agree to disagree.
Ninja Scooter
Member
Same principles drive both: which to lock content to your platform for a certain amount of time as a means to entice consumers. It's the same shit. You can spin it to maginify the differences and try and downplay the Similarities (and that's phils job, to spin) but the basic concept of both as a marketing strategy is the same. Some people would rather have the game, regardless of exclusive dlc, others would rather have the full game. There's no right or wrong answer there.
Exactly! Of course I understand both are awful. Maybe I should have clarified that in my original post.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
MS did that all day every day last gen, and have done it this gen too. Like when they bought timed exclusivity of RotTR to prevent PS4 players from getting it for a year. But that was before Spencer took over, I guess?
Wandering Robot
Member
So what will Phil say when Microsoft does it again, assuming they will have the opportunity in the next few years?
Ugh.
Ugh.
Someones finally connected the dots. Bravo!
Lunafreya Nox Fleuret
Member
This guy is a huge fucking liar.
Uno Venova
Banned
We are witnessing a change in the evangelical image of Phil Spencer right before our very eyes. It turns out he isn't responsible for every decision that comes out of Xbox.
It's quite odd though, how come there isn't this much debate about whether Phil is responsible or not in threads about good Xbox news?
Uh having a WW release of a game and parts of the game exclusive to one platform is worst than having time exclusivity....
Timed exclusivity just means the whole game first on one platform for a set time
The other is worst because there's no parity. U pay the same 60 bucks as other platform users and u not getting the same content as them.
Ya all crazy in here.
Ain't mothing wrong with timed exclusive. What sony is doing with destiny 2 is definitely not right. Why does sony owners get more than I do and we paying the same?? FoH
Timed exclusivity just means the whole game first on one platform for a set time
The other is worst because there's no parity. U pay the same 60 bucks as other platform users and u not getting the same content as them.
Ya all crazy in here.
Ain't mothing wrong with timed exclusive. What sony is doing with destiny 2 is definitely not right. Why does sony owners get more than I do and we paying the same?? FoH
graywolf323
Member
Spencer was head of Microsoft Game Studios since 2008 and took over the Gaming Division in late 2013/early 2014? hes been responsible for their first party output for nearly a decade now and the direction of Xbox as a whole for ~4+ years yet people always act like bad stuff going on at Microsoft now is somehow not his fault
hes really the ultimate used car salesman...
ScientificPizza
Banned
So? I don't understand your point. You can be critical of business practices that you've engaged in.
Like, I don't want to get it twisted and make it sound like I think Phil Spencer is some infallible gaming god or something. I don't. I just don't think that what he is saying should be dismissed because Microsoft have engaged in the same practices. It's not hypocritical (whether it be individually or on behalf of Xbox) to change, and this message would have probably come off 100% better if he had added "it's a practice we once engaged in but saw that it was hurting consumers and have moved away from it". People probably still would have read into it as them not being able to get deals or whatever, but it would have read with a little more humility than just taking a jab at Sony or whatever.
Regardless of why he's saying it or what Microsoft have done in the past this is still a good message and Microsoft have shown this E3 that they are actively moving away from those kinds of deals by not having exclusive content in the games they have marketing for.
So because I'm over a certain age it makes my jokes inexcusable. I'm sorry you had to suffer through this are you okay
Your whole point is laughable.
If the head of your company (or the guy in charge) tells you that these deals aren't done anymore, you don't run around and make these deals.
It doesn't matter if he has to approve them or not, if he wants them to stop, they stop.
hairygreenpeas
Neo Member
Yikes! Phil, what are you doing!
RedlineRonin
Member
Phil, the fuck you talkin bout? Didn't you money hat tomb raider for like 8 mos?
So parts of games are off limits but entire games are cool?
Man, I am a big Phil fan, but between this and the "true 4K" nonsense, there's an ultra not great look goin on here.
As a guy playin D2 on PC, of course I'm pissed I'm getting content locked away for a year, but acting like MS hasn't done the same seems weird.
Did MS fund dev of RotTR? I didn't think they did.
So parts of games are off limits but entire games are cool?
Man, I am a big Phil fan, but between this and the "true 4K" nonsense, there's an ultra not great look goin on here.
As a guy playin D2 on PC, of course I'm pissed I'm getting content locked away for a year, but acting like MS hasn't done the same seems weird.
Did MS fund dev of RotTR? I didn't think they did.
Pretty much
Hidden One
Member
He just says shit to get on Gamers good side and they eat it up. He knows damn well if the XB1 was leading the charge like the XB360 did Activision would be having them market Cod and Destiny and he wouldnt be saying well gee I think we should have content available for everyone at the same time guys.
Phil complaining about things they're doing. *shrugs*
Huh? Up until now, devs have used the systems to the best of their abilities. Why would it be an issue now?
Drillary Clinton
Banned
A timed exclusive game is completely different from timed or altogether exclusive content on a game readily available on multiple platforms
Let me structure your sentence so you can see another way of looking at it:
U pay the same 60 bucks as other platform users and u not getting the game at the same time as them
How is this any better?
Taliban Stan
Member
Just going off the examples he listed, a strike or a skin being on one system doesn't really seem like it's holding back technical innovation of game developers.
Snarky, but a real hold back on technical innovation is to tell devs they have this system called XBX that's way more powerful than a XB1 but they have to limit the games to be scaleable to XB1 and they can never build something from the ground up that requires the power of a XBX to run. XBX can exclusively provide bells and whistles, never meat and potatoes.
You want to do something about mean companies putting a damper on technical innovation, fix that.
Then don't buy the game on Xbox One until next year, when the exclusive content is hopefully released for other platforms.
There. You just automagically turned the timed exclusive content deal into a timed exclusive deal. Feel better?
TheDarkKnight774
Member
Which Phil has also participated in. See FIFA
Shadow Broker
Banned
I understand what he's saying but I also understand Sony wanting more than marketing for the amount they're probably paying for.
Honestly, I would also make the the deal for exclusive content if I were in their position. It's all about making your product looking like the best one on the market.
Honestly, I would also make the the deal for exclusive content if I were in their position. It's all about making your product looking like the best one on the market.