Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?
-
Seems like all the weirdness got even worse when this game became cross-platform, imo.
I'm glad XBox users can play since they no longer had a console baseball game, but things did get a bit crazier with the servers especially with new consoles on-board.
Gran Turismo stayed exclusive, so did Forza. Should the show have?
Do they look greedy for expanding?
It's hard to say, but I think what I'm saying is true. -
Sony didn't have a choice anyway so its a moot point
-
Why would a game company look greedy for expanding to other consoles? Personally I think it's a great thing that they did. More players are better. The main problem is that there is so many big issues in the games right now that makes them look bad.
As @the_dragon1912 said, MLB was the ones that said they had to do it so they certainly don't look greedy but game companies or anything for that matter is in it for money so I don't get how they can look greedy unless they move to the EA style of ultimate teams.
I just don't think that they were 100% ready last year for it and this year is looking the same
-
Let's get facts straight here with the servers 2021 they were nor ready for the expanded player base and 2nd console.
2022 they were ready and I would argue that the servers in 2022 have been better then any other launch of the game as we have not had any extended outages of the game.
-
@cdnmoneymaker93_nsw said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
Let's get facts straight here with the servers 2021 they were nor ready for the expanded player base and 2nd console.
2022 they were ready and I would argue that the servers in 2022 have been better then any other launch of the game as we have not had any extended outages of the game.
You are right about that, the servers have been much better this year at least for stability.
-
No, what MLB should have done is abolish exclusive rights and allow multiple developers to develop baseball games for any platform. It's common knowledge that any form of market competition will always benefit the consumer, and any lack of competition will always hurt the consumer. Which is why cartel behavior by any (group of) organization(s) is penalized quite severely, to ensure that consumers aren't being taken advantage of in a non-freemarket setting. This whole exclusive rights in the video game industry started off with good intentions, like drawing new customers by developing a masterpiece game (for example someone buys a playstation just to be able to play God of War or The Last of Us). But this idea has been taken advantage of by every professional sports league by handing out exclusive rights to certain developers (EA, 2K, SDS) not because they want to make sure the fans of those leagues get the best enjoyable product possible for them to play, but to milk them for each and every penny that they are willing to put into the game. A negative side effect is the developers becoming lazy and unmotivated to improve their product, because they know they have exclusive rights. So no matter the complaints, the power they have by being the only one on the market, hurts the consumers and in my opinion should become illegal.
-
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
No, what MLB should have done is abolish exclusive rights and allow multiple developers to develop baseball games for any platform. It's common knowledge that any form of market competition will always benefit the consumer, and any lack of competition will always hurt the consumer. Which is why cartel behavior by any (group of) organization(s) is penalized quite severely, to ensure that consumers aren't being taken advantage of in a non-freemarket setting. This whole exclusive rights in the video game industry started off with good intentions, like drawing new customers by developing a masterpiece game (for example someone buys a playstation just to be able to play God of War or The Last of Us). But this idea has been taken advantage of by every professional sports league by handing out exclusive rights to certain developers (EA, 2K, SDS) not because they want to make sure the fans of those leagues get the best enjoyable product possible for them to play, but to milk them for each and every penny that they are willing to put into the game. A negative side effect is the developers becoming lazy and unmotivated to improve their product, because they know they have exclusive rights. So no matter the complaints, the power they have by being the only one on the market, hurts the consumers and in my opinion should become illegal.
I dont think that San Diego Studios has an exclusivity deal with MLB. I could be wrong but I don't think they do. Same as NHL with EA. They don't have one there either but there is no company willing to get in financial trouble to try and take on the big boy. Don't think 2k has the NBA exclusive either because NBA by EA was out and crashed hard because it couldn't compete with 2k and no one bought it.
-
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
No, what MLB should have done is abolish exclusive rights and allow multiple developers to develop baseball games for any platform. It's common knowledge that any form of market competition will always benefit the consumer, and any lack of competition will always hurt the consumer. Which is why cartel behavior by any (group of) organization(s) is penalized quite severely, to ensure that consumers aren't being taken advantage of in a non-freemarket setting. This whole exclusive rights in the video game industry started off with good intentions, like drawing new customers by developing a masterpiece game (for example someone buys a playstation just to be able to play God of War or The Last of Us). But this idea has been taken advantage of by every professional sports league by handing out exclusive rights to certain developers (EA, 2K, SDS) not because they want to make sure the fans of those leagues get the best enjoyable product possible for them to play, but to milk them for each and every penny that they are willing to put into the game. A negative side effect is the developers becoming lazy and unmotivated to improve their product, because they know they have exclusive rights. So no matter the complaints, the power they have by being the only one on the market, hurts the consumers and in my opinion should become illegal.
I dont think that San Diego Studios has an exclusivity deal with MLB. I could be wrong but I don't think they do. Same as NHL with EA. They don't have one there either but there is no company willing to get in financial trouble to try and take on the big boy. Don't think 2k has the NBA exclusive either because NBA by EA was out and crashed hard because it couldn't compete with 2k and no one bought it.
https://www.si.com/.amp/nba/2019/01/15/nba-2k-take-two-licensing-agreement
Making the fees for licensing this high is essentially the same thing as giving exclusive rights, because no company in the world is able to match it with the risks involved. They could give developers the opportunity to develop whatever they want and ask a percentage for every copy sold in return, but that would be peanuts compared to these staggering amounts. Don't get fooled by corporate greed.
-
@thegoaler_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
Seems like all the weirdness got even worse when this game became cross-platform, imo.
I'm glad XBox users can play since they no longer had a console baseball game, but things did get a bit crazier with the servers especially with new consoles on-board.
Gran Turismo stayed exclusive, so did Forza. Should the show have?
Do they look greedy for expanding?
It's hard to say, but I think what I'm saying is true.You do know that it was MLB that told them to release the game on other platforms.
-
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
No, what MLB should have done is abolish exclusive rights and allow multiple developers to develop baseball games for any platform. It's common knowledge that any form of market competition will always benefit the consumer, and any lack of competition will always hurt the consumer. Which is why cartel behavior by any (group of) organization(s) is penalized quite severely, to ensure that consumers aren't being taken advantage of in a non-freemarket setting. This whole exclusive rights in the video game industry started off with good intentions, like drawing new customers by developing a masterpiece game (for example someone buys a playstation just to be able to play God of War or The Last of Us). But this idea has been taken advantage of by every professional sports league by handing out exclusive rights to certain developers (EA, 2K, SDS) not because they want to make sure the fans of those leagues get the best enjoyable product possible for them to play, but to milk them for each and every penny that they are willing to put into the game. A negative side effect is the developers becoming lazy and unmotivated to improve their product, because they know they have exclusive rights. So no matter the complaints, the power they have by being the only one on the market, hurts the consumers and in my opinion should become illegal.
I dont think that San Diego Studios has an exclusivity deal with MLB. I could be wrong but I don't think they do. Same as NHL with EA. They don't have one there either but there is no company willing to get in financial trouble to try and take on the big boy. Don't think 2k has the NBA exclusive either because NBA by EA was out and crashed hard because it couldn't compete with 2k and no one bought it.
https://www.si.com/.amp/nba/2019/01/15/nba-2k-take-two-licensing-agreement
Making the fees for licensing this high is essentially the same thing as giving exclusive rights, because no company in the world is able to match it with the risks involved. They could give developers the opportunity to develop whatever they want and ask a percentage for every copy sold in return, but that would be peanuts compared to these staggering amounts. Don't get fooled by corporate greed.
They absolutely could do it that way but it is what it is. It's not exclusivity is all I was saying.
-
@dj-sparky-2k22_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@thegoaler_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
Seems like all the weirdness got even worse when this game became cross-platform, imo.
I'm glad XBox users can play since they no longer had a console baseball game, but things did get a bit crazier with the servers especially with new consoles on-board.
Gran Turismo stayed exclusive, so did Forza. Should the show have?
Do they look greedy for expanding?
It's hard to say, but I think what I'm saying is true.You do know that it was MLB that told them to release the game on other platforms.
It's never come out but likely Sony agreed to the deal to go multiple platform likely because it's agreement depended on it and if Sony didn't agree they would have either not renewed the agreement or and I what is a more likely outcome told Sony that they would extend the lic to other developers and Sony wanted to be the soul beneficiary of the license so agree to make it for all platforms
-
@thegoaler_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
Seems like all the weirdness got even worse when this game became cross-platform, imo.
Sorry we broke the game.
I'm grateful though to have experienced enjoying The Show finally after all these years without having to buy a new system and switch. It's been pretty fun these last 2 years. -
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
No, what MLB should have done is abolish exclusive rights and allow multiple developers to develop baseball games for any platform. It's common knowledge that any form of market competition will always benefit the consumer, and any lack of competition will always hurt the consumer. Which is why cartel behavior by any (group of) organization(s) is penalized quite severely, to ensure that consumers aren't being taken advantage of in a non-freemarket setting. This whole exclusive rights in the video game industry started off with good intentions, like drawing new customers by developing a masterpiece game (for example someone buys a playstation just to be able to play God of War or The Last of Us). But this idea has been taken advantage of by every professional sports league by handing out exclusive rights to certain developers (EA, 2K, SDS) not because they want to make sure the fans of those leagues get the best enjoyable product possible for them to play, but to milk them for each and every penny that they are willing to put into the game. A negative side effect is the developers becoming lazy and unmotivated to improve their product, because they know they have exclusive rights. So no matter the complaints, the power they have by being the only one on the market, hurts the consumers and in my opinion should become illegal.
I dont think that San Diego Studios has an exclusivity deal with MLB. I could be wrong but I don't think they do. Same as NHL with EA. They don't have one there either but there is no company willing to get in financial trouble to try and take on the big boy. Don't think 2k has the NBA exclusive either because NBA by EA was out and crashed hard because it couldn't compete with 2k and no one bought it.
https://www.si.com/.amp/nba/2019/01/15/nba-2k-take-two-licensing-agreement
Making the fees for licensing this high is essentially the same thing as giving exclusive rights, because no company in the world is able to match it with the risks involved. They could give developers the opportunity to develop whatever they want and ask a percentage for every copy sold in return, but that would be peanuts compared to these staggering amounts. Don't get fooled by corporate greed.
They absolutely could do it that way but it is what it is. It's not exclusivity is all I was saying.
If you fail to comprehend what I was saying, then I fear you have either fallen victim to the conformation of corporate greed, or you lack the critical thinking ability to see the point that I'm making. I can you give you another example if you'd like, to add maybe just that bit of extra context for you to understand what it is I'm saying?
-
@thegoaler_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
Seems like all the weirdness got even worse when this game became cross-platform, imo.
I'm glad XBox users can play since they no longer had a console baseball game, but things did get a bit crazier with the servers especially with new consoles on-board.
Gran Turismo stayed exclusive, so did Forza. Should the show have?
Do they look greedy for expanding?
It's hard to say, but I think what I'm saying is true.It’s funny to me that people have an emotional attachment to a random Japanese conglomerate corporation.
-
Can we maybe look at a positive here and see some good that game of this. The fact that this change to multiple platform lead to a full fledged feature rich sports game on the Switch. Nintendo sports fan deserve so much better and finally got one and one that works very well. I love love MLB on the switch and being able to play switch and then move over to Xbox and everything is there.
-
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
No, what MLB should have done is abolish exclusive rights and allow multiple developers to develop baseball games for any platform. It's common knowledge that any form of market competition will always benefit the consumer, and any lack of competition will always hurt the consumer. Which is why cartel behavior by any (group of) organization(s) is penalized quite severely, to ensure that consumers aren't being taken advantage of in a non-freemarket setting. This whole exclusive rights in the video game industry started off with good intentions, like drawing new customers by developing a masterpiece game (for example someone buys a playstation just to be able to play God of War or The Last of Us). But this idea has been taken advantage of by every professional sports league by handing out exclusive rights to certain developers (EA, 2K, SDS) not because they want to make sure the fans of those leagues get the best enjoyable product possible for them to play, but to milk them for each and every penny that they are willing to put into the game. A negative side effect is the developers becoming lazy and unmotivated to improve their product, because they know they have exclusive rights. So no matter the complaints, the power they have by being the only one on the market, hurts the consumers and in my opinion should become illegal.
I dont think that San Diego Studios has an exclusivity deal with MLB. I could be wrong but I don't think they do. Same as NHL with EA. They don't have one there either but there is no company willing to get in financial trouble to try and take on the big boy. Don't think 2k has the NBA exclusive either because NBA by EA was out and crashed hard because it couldn't compete with 2k and no one bought it.
https://www.si.com/.amp/nba/2019/01/15/nba-2k-take-two-licensing-agreement
Making the fees for licensing this high is essentially the same thing as giving exclusive rights, because no company in the world is able to match it with the risks involved. They could give developers the opportunity to develop whatever they want and ask a percentage for every copy sold in return, but that would be peanuts compared to these staggering amounts. Don't get fooled by corporate greed.
They absolutely could do it that way but it is what it is. It's not exclusivity is all I was saying.
Double post
-
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
No, what MLB should have done is abolish exclusive rights and allow multiple developers to develop baseball games for any platform. It's common knowledge that any form of market competition will always benefit the consumer, and any lack of competition will always hurt the consumer. Which is why cartel behavior by any (group of) organization(s) is penalized quite severely, to ensure that consumers aren't being taken advantage of in a non-freemarket setting. This whole exclusive rights in the video game industry started off with good intentions, like drawing new customers by developing a masterpiece game (for example someone buys a playstation just to be able to play God of War or The Last of Us). But this idea has been taken advantage of by every professional sports league by handing out exclusive rights to certain developers (EA, 2K, SDS) not because they want to make sure the fans of those leagues get the best enjoyable product possible for them to play, but to milk them for each and every penny that they are willing to put into the game. A negative side effect is the developers becoming lazy and unmotivated to improve their product, because they know they have exclusive rights. So no matter the complaints, the power they have by being the only one on the market, hurts the consumers and in my opinion should become illegal.
I dont think that San Diego Studios has an exclusivity deal with MLB. I could be wrong but I don't think they do. Same as NHL with EA. They don't have one there either but there is no company willing to get in financial trouble to try and take on the big boy. Don't think 2k has the NBA exclusive either because NBA by EA was out and crashed hard because it couldn't compete with 2k and no one bought it.
https://www.si.com/.amp/nba/2019/01/15/nba-2k-take-two-licensing-agreement
Making the fees for licensing this high is essentially the same thing as giving exclusive rights, because no company in the world is able to match it with the risks involved. They could give developers the opportunity to develop whatever they want and ask a percentage for every copy sold in return, but that would be peanuts compared to these staggering amounts. Don't get fooled by corporate greed.
They absolutely could do it that way but it is what it is. It's not exclusivity is all I was saying.
It really technically is the same thing. If you fail to understand that principle, then I'd be more than happy to provide you with an additional example of how a system might be considered fair according to laws but in reality really isn't but had been exploited by a maze.
Keep talking down to me as much as you please but technically and it is 100% isn't the same. I know what you are saying, what I said is that there is not an exclusive contract. ANYONE who wants to make the game can if they Pony up the money so there is no exclusivity. I get that the money for a license is amazingly high stopping 99.9% of companies from making the game but that doesn't change the fact of what I said.
-
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
No, what MLB should have done is abolish exclusive rights and allow multiple developers to develop baseball games for any platform. It's common knowledge that any form of market competition will always benefit the consumer, and any lack of competition will always hurt the consumer. Which is why cartel behavior by any (group of) organization(s) is penalized quite severely, to ensure that consumers aren't being taken advantage of in a non-freemarket setting. This whole exclusive rights in the video game industry started off with good intentions, like drawing new customers by developing a masterpiece game (for example someone buys a playstation just to be able to play God of War or The Last of Us). But this idea has been taken advantage of by every professional sports league by handing out exclusive rights to certain developers (EA, 2K, SDS) not because they want to make sure the fans of those leagues get the best enjoyable product possible for them to play, but to milk them for each and every penny that they are willing to put into the game. A negative side effect is the developers becoming lazy and unmotivated to improve their product, because they know they have exclusive rights. So no matter the complaints, the power they have by being the only one on the market, hurts the consumers and in my opinion should become illegal.
I dont think that San Diego Studios has an exclusivity deal with MLB. I could be wrong but I don't think they do. Same as NHL with EA. They don't have one there either but there is no company willing to get in financial trouble to try and take on the big boy. Don't think 2k has the NBA exclusive either because NBA by EA was out and crashed hard because it couldn't compete with 2k and no one bought it.
https://www.si.com/.amp/nba/2019/01/15/nba-2k-take-two-licensing-agreement
Making the fees for licensing this high is essentially the same thing as giving exclusive rights, because no company in the world is able to match it with the risks involved. They could give developers the opportunity to develop whatever they want and ask a percentage for every copy sold in return, but that would be peanuts compared to these staggering amounts. Don't get fooled by corporate greed.
They absolutely could do it that way but it is what it is. It's not exclusivity is all I was saying.
It really technically is the same thing. If you fail to understand that principle, then I'd be more than happy to provide you with an additional example of how a system might be considered fair according to laws but in reality really isn't but had been exploited by a maze.
Keep talking down to me as much as you please but technically and it is 100% isn't the same. I know what you are saying, what I said is that there is not an exclusive contract. ANYONE who wants to make the game can if they Pony up the money so there is no exclusivity. I get that the money for a license is amazingly high stopping 99.9% of companies from making the game but that doesn't change the fact of what I said.
What does is matter how it is called - if the effect is the very same? Don't be so blind.
-
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@rabid55wolverine said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
@raesone_psn said in Should The Show Have Remained PSN Exclusive?:
No, what MLB should have done is abolish exclusive rights and allow multiple developers to develop baseball games for any platform. It's common knowledge that any form of market competition will always benefit the consumer, and any lack of competition will always hurt the consumer. Which is why cartel behavior by any (group of) organization(s) is penalized quite severely, to ensure that consumers aren't being taken advantage of in a non-freemarket setting. This whole exclusive rights in the video game industry started off with good intentions, like drawing new customers by developing a masterpiece game (for example someone buys a playstation just to be able to play God of War or The Last of Us). But this idea has been taken advantage of by every professional sports league by handing out exclusive rights to certain developers (EA, 2K, SDS) not because they want to make sure the fans of those leagues get the best enjoyable product possible for them to play, but to milk them for each and every penny that they are willing to put into the game. A negative side effect is the developers becoming lazy and unmotivated to improve their product, because they know they have exclusive rights. So no matter the complaints, the power they have by being the only one on the market, hurts the consumers and in my opinion should become illegal.
I dont think that San Diego Studios has an exclusivity deal with MLB. I could be wrong but I don't think they do. Same as NHL with EA. They don't have one there either but there is no company willing to get in financial trouble to try and take on the big boy. Don't think 2k has the NBA exclusive either because NBA by EA was out and crashed hard because it couldn't compete with 2k and no one bought it.
https://www.si.com/.amp/nba/2019/01/15/nba-2k-take-two-licensing-agreement
Making the fees for licensing this high is essentially the same thing as giving exclusive rights, because no company in the world is able to match it with the risks involved. They could give developers the opportunity to develop whatever they want and ask a percentage for every copy sold in return, but that would be peanuts compared to these staggering amounts. Don't get fooled by corporate greed.
They absolutely could do it that way but it is what it is. It's not exclusivity is all I was saying.
It really technically is the same thing. If you fail to understand that principle, then I'd be more than happy to provide you with an additional example of how a system might be considered fair according to laws but in reality really isn't but had been exploited by a maze.
Keep talking down to me as much as you please but technically and it is 100% isn't the same. I know what you are saying, what I said is that there is not an exclusive contract. ANYONE who wants to make the game can if they Pony up the money so there is no exclusivity. I get that the money for a license is amazingly high stopping 99.9% of companies from making the game but that doesn't change the fact of what I said.
What does is matter how it is called - if the effect is the very same? Don't be so blind.
If it didn't matter you wouldn't be arguing so to you it does but again, keep talking down to me, I'm sure it makes you feel better
