Recent comments in /f/technology

archontwo t1_jd6z2x8 wrote

There was an interesting study done by a large fashion house on the cheap knock off handbags and how they affected sales. They spent millions of dollars to find out that the people who bought knock off bags at a flea market for $50, where not the same people who payed for a $5000 bag from Louis Vitton or some such.

Imagine that!

It was part of a TED talk a few years back by Johanna Blakely

8

riff-computer t1_jd6yvtl wrote

I do know the difference. For example, Rare , Obsidian and Tango have produced high quality, new IP for Microsoft since being acquired. This includes Hi-Fi rush, Sea of Thieves, Grounded and Pentiment. That’s talent acquired, as you describe, not franchises.

Not a single franchise that already existed on Playstation has yet to be removed from Sony’s platform. I can still download all existing Bethesda games on my PS4 if I like. Can you name me a title which was confirmed and announced for PS5 or PS4, from an acquired studio, which has since been cancelled on Sony’s platform?

6

donsanedrin t1_jd6y3gd wrote

No, its not an "emotional" argument.

You are trying to dismiss Sony Computer Entertainments contributions to gaming.

It absolutely has a bearing. They earned those exclusives, by having a hand in developing them. Those are their home-grown products.

You're trying to gloss over this, because you are trying to make a false-equivalency but you know it falls apart if we actually look at the details.

By your logic, Nintendo doesn't to have the right to do whatever they want to do with their Mario and Zelda IPs.

−8

donsanedrin t1_jd6xxed wrote

They didn't buy any of these games that we call "exclusives".

They bought studios for their talent, and created new IPs from them.

They did not TAKE CONTROL over an existing popular IP.

Yes, they did build things from the ground up.

Yes, it absolutely is different behavior.

Why are you pretending that you don't know the obvious difference?

−6

DinobotsGacha t1_jd6ws6t wrote

They were the worst too. One would be hyper interested, then ghost only to have another reach out 1 hour later as if it was first contact. There was zero coordination and it was clear they neither cared about the roles nor candidates.

50

riff-computer t1_jd6twp3 wrote

Sony acquired 21 video game studios from 1993 - 2022, including Insomniac, Guerrilla, Naughty Dog, and even an entire publisher, Psygnosis. Let’s not pretend everything PlayStation did was built from the ground up by Sony. This doesn’t even consider timed exclusivity deals with third party studios. Feel free to browse the list here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Sony

I’m not saying Microsoft should not be critiqued but you can’t say Sony’s behaviour was any different as they established their footing in the industry.

Edit - spelling

13

donsanedrin t1_jd6mugf wrote

I really don't understand how people can even think you are making a good argument.

A company creates his own things, that get universally praised and are successful.

A company fails to create good things, and goes on a massive buying spree to secure OTHER things, made by OTHER companies, for the purposes of trying to control a market.

And you think that's the same thing?

Its obvious you try to gloss over that by using the phrase "having tons of exclusives."

They made those games. Their people conceived the game idea. They created the studio to design, produce, animate, program the product.

And you think Sony "scammed" you and the gaming community by making their OWN EXCLUSIVES?

They "have them", because they went through the effort to "make them." Maybe Microsoft and the Xbox division should try doing that, if they want to compete?

−18