• 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.

Phillip W. Spencer III:"Xbox’s aim with Call of Duty is to give players choice, not "do slimy platform things" that make one option more appealing."

analog_future

Resident Crybaby
52967050535_c3ae255a58_c.jpg
 

ManaByte

Rage Bait Youtuber
Can we require games to not use 300gb?
Except it’s not.
 

AJUMP23

Member
Except it’s not.

Dodged a bullet....Thanks ManaByte ManaByte Now get out there and find some entertainment news.
 

Pallas

Member
Both were scummy practices, Phil isn’t innocent nor is Microsoft but same goes with Sony and Jim. Let’s not forget all the Destiny garbage dlc that was held off Xbox for a year or more.

No ones innocent, Phil should just hush when it comes to timed exclusive bullshit.
 
Well let's see the choice here
Me who subbed to gp cheap at 120 dollars for 3 years gets it day 1.
Or pay 70 dollars for the game
Nice one phill nice one.
 

DryvBy

Member
This is certainly a spin. Wasn't it just half a year ago that leaked emails show Spinster (thanks for this name DeepEnigma DeepEnigma ) and company talking about buying things to crush the competition? Now he's acting like they're for the players?

Phil, some of us remember the Xbox E3s that were full of big flashy letters saying "Xbox Exclusive" and the money hat changed from buying a game's rights to buying a publisher. You're only doing this because even with ABK, even with Bethesda, even with the prices slashed to half off on the Xbox, you guys still couldn't beat Switch and PlayStation.
 

Bond007

Member
Sounds like the loser complaining at being beat out of their own practices.
To the point they needed to make acquisitions to try and monopolize- as Microsoft does.


If you been around this industry long enough- most of the douchebaggery started with Microsoft. You could look at XBox Live as one of the first "deals" with pay to play online.
 
Last edited:

laynelane

Member
It’s a choice. We didn’t say to anybody ‘you have to subscribe to play’. If you want to buy Black Ops 6, that’s great. It’s great for us, it’s great for the developer. If you want to subscribe, it’s also great. I want to give you the choice on how you play your games, and who you play with, and not try to do slimy platform things to force you to do what I want you to do.

After all that came out with the ABK acquisition along with the cancellation of PS builds of games, he's still trying to come across as 'good guy Phil'. Warrior that he is, he's seemingly incapable of understanding that passive-aggressive comments about Sony and his own disingenuous statements haven't and will not make the slightest bit of difference.
 

oldergamer

Member
Didn’t Xbox kick all that shit off in the 360 days with the timed exclusive map packs?
No, you must have a short memory. Sony started the practice of paying to keep games off other platforms during the PS2 cycle. This partly killed Dreamcast. You are forgetting about final fantasy, GTA and other games getting deals to not appear day and date with other consoles (or not at all). They also would force smaller developers to add content to their games at no cost to Sony themselves. In order to just have concept approval so you could release on the platform. if a game appeared on Xbox first, that company was blacklisted for a few years, and or forced into a long ""maybe if you add this..." cycle. It was a different case in Europe as Sony was sued and lost the right to prevent games being approved.
So no MS didn't start the practice with Xbox 360.
 
I would love if Sony brought EA Games besides sports but have some games as Multiplat the likes of battlefield etc and have other big games exclusive like they did with starfield like MoH and command & Conquer if they made it
 
Call of Duty for everyone with more choice than ever before. Play it on PS5, Xbox, PC, or subscribe. Soon Switch 2. No timed exclusivity for betas or perks of any kind.

GAF:

images

Its the hypocrisy though. Like we know Microsoft originally wanted to make all these games exclusive and only reversed because of xbox hardware sales tanking and regulation stopping them. It's the having one side behind the scenes and a totally different and fake side to the public. Its just so fake because we know how Microsoft truly feel. I'm not blaming Phil spencer specifically either because he's just a talking head for higher ups. He has to say what they tell him to and has been trained to speak like that in public.
 

Topher

Gold Member
No, you must have a short memory. Sony started the practice of paying to keep games off other platforms during the PS2 cycle. This partly killed Dreamcast. You are forgetting about final fantasy, GTA and other games getting deals to not appear day and date with other consoles (or not at all). They also would force smaller developers to add content to their games at no cost to Sony themselves. In order to just have concept approval so you could release on the platform. if a game appeared on Xbox first, that company was blacklisted for a few years, and or forced into a long ""maybe if you add this..." cycle. It was a different case in Europe as Sony was sued and lost the right to prevent games being approved.
So no MS didn't start the practice with Xbox 360.

Obviously he is talking about the practice in regards to Call of Duty. Both companies have a long sorted history of shitty deals outside of that. Microsoft practically invented half the slimy shit that these corporations engage in back in the early Windows days.
 
Top Bottom