MLB The Show is coming to Game Pass day 1

[Goukosan 2,255]

1 minute ago, Remij said:

Not only that... but this sets up a precedent for other licensed game properties to do the same thing... like Marvel with Spider Man  

 

When does Sony's rights on Spiderman expire? 

[Remij 4,676]

1 minute ago, Goukosan said:

 

When does Sony's rights on Spiderman expire? 

They don't have any rights to it  

[Goukosan 2,255]

6 minutes ago, Remij said:

They don't have any rights to it  

 

Spiderman was recently in that Marvel game on Switch. 

 

You know I was referring to the current exclusive games on PlayStation.  Rights to those games. 

 

 

 

Edited April 2, 2021 by Goukosan

[Remij 4,676]

3 minutes ago, Goukosan said:

 

You know referring to the current exclusive games on PlayStation.  Rights to those games. 

 

 

I never said anything about those games.

 

In the future, it could be, that if Sony wants to continue their partnership with Marvel to develop Spider Man games, then Insomniac might have to develop them for multiple platforms.

 

This sets that precedent.. because it shows that Sony is already willing to cave in to do just that.  Marvel has to have thought about how massive their games could be if they were developed by Sony for multiple platforms like Xbox, Switch, and PC... instead of JUST PS.

 

I'm not saying it's going to happen... as Marvel's probably most happy with their current arrangement, since no other studios can do their IP justice it seems (lmao Avengers )

 

But the possibility is there..  We really are getting to the point where the whole exclusive to a single platform thing is just not filling their pockets enough.. they want more.

Edited April 2, 2021 by Remij

[Tears of the Cows 1,208]

15 minutes ago, Goukosan said:

 

 

You quoted me saying Sony is the developer lol

So Sony is the developer.. of a Xbox game

 

where cows have to pay $70 for a game lemmings pay $0 for  

[Tears of the Cows 1,208]

Oh, if it’s made by a first party studio.. it’s a first party game. 
 

If 343 released halo on ps, but for free, this is what that is like. Lmao. 
 

just shitty baseball and not shitty halo. 

[Remij 4,676]

Just now, ghostz life matters said:

So Sony is the developer.. of a Xbox game

 

where cows have to pay $70 for a game lemmings pay $0 for  

$80 for MLB The Show 21 on PS

 

vs

 

~$150 for a year of Game Pass which gets you

-MLB The Show 21

-Madden 21, NHL 21, FIFA 21..ect ect

-All of MS's games

-3rd party games

-Great Indie games

 

LOL the value proposition is just insane.

 

If you're into these yearly Sports titles... Game Pass is 100% what you need to be on.

[Goukosan 2,255]

12 minutes ago, Remij said:

I never said anything about those games.

 

In the future, it could be, that if Sony wants to continue their partnership with Marvel to develop Spider Man games, then Insomniac might have to develop them for multiple platforms.

 

This sets that precedent.. because it shows that Sony is already willing to cave in to do just that.  Marvel has to have thought about how massive their games could be if they were developed by Sony for multiple platforms like Xbox, Switch, and PC... instead of JUST PS.

 

I'm not saying it's going to happen... as Marvel's probably most happy with their current arrangement, since no other studios can do their IP justice it seems (lmao Avengers )

 

But the possibility is there..  We really are getting to the point where the whole exclusive to a single platform thing is just not filling their pockets enough.. they want more.

 

Spiderman can appear in any game Marvel wants. 

 

Spiderman was just in that Marvel game on Switch last year.   

 

The two Spiderman games on PlayStation are exclusive to PlayStation but the IP can appear in any game Marvel wants. 

 

An IP owner always had the ability to do what they want with their IP.  They can make exclusive deals or have it be Multi. 

 

See James Bond.  Nintendo had it exclusively for one game and then the owner of the IP decided to take it multiplatform and all future James bonds games have been multi since.    But that specific golden eye game remains exclusive to N64 to this day (officially anyway) 

 

This isn't a precedent, it's more business than usual as IP owners always had the ability to do this. 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 2, 2021 by Goukosan

[Goukosan 2,255]

4 minutes ago, ghostz life matters said:

Oh, if it’s made by a first party studio.. it’s a first party game. 
 

If 343 released halo on ps, but for free, this is what that is like. Lmao. 
 

just shitty baseball and not shitty halo. 

 

Difference is Halo is a first part IP, MLB is not.   You don't get that as yet? 🤣😂

[Goukosan 2,255]

8 minutes ago, ghostz life matters said:

So Sony is the developer.. of a Xbox game

 

where cows have to pay $70 for a game lemmings pay $0 for  

 

The highlighted part is the real cow ownage. 

 

But this has nothing to do with first party IPs as some retards have claimed. 

[Remij 4,676]

Just now, Goukosan said:

 

Spiderman can appear in any game Marvel wants. 

 

Spiderman was just in that Marvel game on Switch last year.   

 

The two Spiderman games on PlayStation are exclusive to PlayStation but the IP can appear in any game Marvel wants. 

 

An IP always had the ability to do what they want with their IP.  They can make exclusive deals or have it be Multi. 

 

See James Bond.  Nintendo had it exclusively for one game and then the owner of the IP decided to take it multiplatform and all future James bonds games have been multi since.    But that specific golden eye game remains exclusive to N64 officially to this day (officially anyway) 

 

This is a precedent, it's more business than usual as IP owners always had the ability to do this. 

 

 

 

 

Of course they can do what they want with their IP... but the precedent comes from utilizing your leverage to force first party developers to release the games they develop, on other platforms.

 

Nintendo didn't continue developing Bond for other platforms... once the owner decided they wanted to go multiplat.. Nintendo was done with it..

 

So, it's not really business as usual.  It shows Sony is willing to give in and develop games for other platforms.. so long as someone else is willing to publish there.

 

And I can almost tell you right now... Sony probably WOULD publish it themselves right now.. if they didn't fear the backlash.  It's going to take time... but little by little, they will start to get closer to just that.. because 100% everyone is going multiplat in the future.  It just simply doesn't make sense to limit yourself to one platform when there's TONS of capable devices out there to play your games.

[Remij 4,676]

Gotta laugh

 

 

This is the type of shit that people who say never need to look at again...

 

This shit is happening.. just like Sony games on PC.

 

Nintendo will be the last hold out... as usual.  But eventually (once the old guard their dies out) they too will fold.  Like it or not.. that's what's going to happen.

[Goukosan 2,255]

Just now, Remij said:

Of course they can do what they want with their IP... but the precedent comes from utilizing your leverage to force first party developers to release the games they develop, on other platforms.

 

Nintendo didn't continue developing Bond for other platforms... once the owner decided they wanted to go multiplat.. Nintendo was done with it..

 

So, it's not really business as usual.  It shows Sony is willing to give in and develop games for other platforms.. so long as someone else is willing to publish there.

 

And I can almost tell you right now... Sony probably WOULD publish it themselves right now.. if they didn't fear the backlash.  It's going to take time... but little by little, they will start to get closer to just that.. because 100% everyone is going multiplat in the future.  It just simply doesn't make sense to limit yourself to one platform when there's TONS of capable devices out there to play your games.

 

No Sony couldn't publish it themselves because they ONLY RETAINED DEVELOPMENT portion of the deal.    Essentially Sony entered a 3rd party development deal with the MLB.  Kinda like how other Platinum enters into development contracts for IP holders.  Even though Plat developed it,  the IP holders decide who publishes it and what system it goes on.    This was announced two years ago. 

 

Yes the difference is, instead of Sony losing 100% of the deal, they agreed to keep the development portion. 

[Remij 4,676]

Just now, Goukosan said:

 

No Sony couldn't publish it themselves because they ONLY RETAINED DEVELOPMENT portion of the deal.    Essentially Sony entered a 3rd party development deal with the MLB.  Kinda like how other Platinum enters into development contracts for IP holders.  Even though Plat developed it,  the IP holders decide who publishes it and what system it goes on.    This was announced two years ago. 

 

Yes the difference is, instead of Sony losing 100% of the deal, they agreed to keep the development portion. 

Well no kidding.. but presumably, if Sony wanted to publish it on Xbox.. MLB would have been fine with that.  MLB is only publishing because Sony didn't want to publish on Xbox or GP... because of the optics.

 

That's the whole point..  If Sony didn't have to deal with the fallout.. why the fuck WOULDN'T they want to publish on Xbox and make more of a cut of the money??

[Tears of the Cows 1,208]

9 minutes ago, Remij said:

Gotta laugh

 

 

This is the type of shit that people who say never need to look at again...

 

This shit is happening.. just like Sony games on PC.

 

Nintendo will be the last hold out... as usual.  But eventually (once the old guard their dies out) they too will fold.  Like it or not.. that's what's going to happen.

Fucking ether lmao

[Goukosan 2,255]

1 minute ago, Remij said:

Well no kidding.. but presumably, if Sony wanted to publish it on Xbox.. MLB would have been fine with that.  MLB is only publishing because Sony didn't want to publish on Xbox or GP... because of the optics.

 

That's the whole point..  If Sony didn't have to deal with the fallout.. why the fuck WOULDN'T they want to publish on Xbox and make more of a cut of the money??

 

If backlash/fallout was on Sony's mind they wouldn't have agreed to the development only deal.  The general public won't know the details.  They will still think its a Playstation game on Xbox. 

 

The publishing call  on the new deal from two years ago was MLB's to make, not Sony's. 

[Remij 4,676]

9 minutes ago, Goukosan said:

 

If backlash/fallout was on Sony's mind they wouldn't have agreed to the development only deal.  The general public won't know the details.  They will still think its a Playstation game on Xbox. 

 

The publishing call  on the new deal from two years ago was MLB's to make, not Sony's. 

I dunno the inner workings of the deal.. but I'm sure MLB stepped in for publishing on Xbox because they had to.. not because they wanted to.  I'm sure Sony put their foot down at that point.

 

Could be wrong, but either way.. Sony is developing games for other platforms... and if other IP holders want to test their luck, they could have Sony developing games for other platforms as well.

[Tears of the Cows 1,208]

This is a first party game, just a third party license. 
 

 

either way, tchbo 

[Tears of the Cows 1,208]

 

 

[-GD-X★ 7,735]

can't wait! i usually get these games when they are on sale. it's basically the forza horizon of baseball with a deep and fun campaign.