Microsoft rumored to be buying...... [2020-04, 2020-07, 2020-11]

[Shifty Geezer]

I'm not sure what your trying to say?

Sony bought the rights to Spiderman for movies back in the early 90s when marvel was bankrupt. It allowed Marvel to stay afloat. We got the Sam Rami movie trilogy out of it which is still the best movie versions.

Yes, it was good for Spider Man.

Fox got the x-men rights at the same time for the same reason and we eneded up with the first 2 x-men movies that were great.

Then lots of crap ones and Marvel were unable to create good ones. And then Marvel weren't even allowed to reference Mutants in their other creations like Agents of Shield, requiring 'Inhumans' and the like.

It may be a larger audience but that just means its a better deal for MS.

If MS get the rights to the big IP games, it'd be better for MS but worse for DC fans. Same as if Sony bought the exclusive rights to all Marvel preventing non Sony platforms from getting Marvel games. People who are fans of something don't like that thing being leveraged to make them buy into something else they otherwise don't care for. It's just the same as movie format wars. Having to choose between HD-DVD or BluRay based on which films you want was stupid. That didn't last, of course, and thankfully all movies came the same generic platform. The best thing for gamers would be all games on all platforms. Failing that, the majority of games including non-console IPs coming to all platforms.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't see the difference.

Sony licensed one title, not preventing other people from licensing and making SM games.
It's the different between renting and buying. Sony rented the Spider-Man IP. Someone else can rent it too. Buying the IP and stopping other people renting it locks it out.

Remember if MS buys them you can play it on a pc as well as a console.

Which doesn't help if you want to play Lego Batman the Sequel 3 on PS5 or NSW.

Which is only a problem if 1) MS actually do get the exclusive rights and 2) they decide not to release on other platforms. However, it's a possibility with this acquisition, whereas it wouldn't be a problem if we were discussing a new MS exclusive licensed Batman game, same as Sony's SM game.

 

[eastmen]

Sony licensed one title, not preventing other people from licensing and making SM games.
It's the different between renting and buying. Sony rented the Spider-Man IP. Someone else can rent it too. Buying the IP and stopping other people renting it locks it out.

Which doesn't help if you want to play Lego Batman the Sequel 3 on PS5 or NSW.

Which is only a problem if 1) MS actually do get the exclusive rights and 2) they decide not to release on other platforms. However, it's a possibility with this acquisition, whereas it wouldn't be a problem if we were discussing a new MS exclusive licensed Batman game, same as Sony's SM game.

I am unaware of if another company can license SM to make a game with. I don't see any other ones on the market

If you want to paly it on one of those then your SOL just like if I want to play spiderman on pc or xbox or switch ? What's the difference ?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I am unaware of if another company can license SM to make a game with. I don't see any other ones on the market

Activision used to own the rights exclusively. They lapsed and returned to Marvel. Marvel then agree to do an exclusive with Sony. Apparently Marvel approached Sony for a hero game, and Insomniac chose Spiderman. It's apparently in this podcast

https://kotaku.com/podcast-how-spider-man-ps4-came-together-1796328173

There wasn't any long-term deal signed; it was a one title deal. Subsequent deals will be made between Marvel and games companies,

If you want to paly it on one of those then your SOL just like if I want to play spiderman on pc or xbox or switch ? What's the difference ?

If you don't understand the difference between lots of people renting a car and one person buying the car, I won't be able to explain it to you. Sony rented the SM license to make one game, and if MS want, they can presumably rent the license too. If MS buy the Batman license from WB, then Sony (or anyone else) won't be able to rent it from WB, will they?

 

[Jay]

If MS buy the Batman license from WB, then Sony (or anyone else) won't be able to rent it from WB, will they?

Possibly could from MS though, although I would expect that they would stipulate that it also has to come to their platforms.
Also be a way to get some 3rd'ish party games into gamepass possibly day and date or soon after release.

I don't see much chance of this purchase personally though.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Possibly could from MS though...

Of course. I'm just trying to keep it as simple as possible for those still struggling to understand the difference between Sony licensing one title* and MS (or anyone else) buying up a beloved franchise.

MS could go on to license the IPs, or not, but either way, the power ends up with them, unlike the power to control who makes Spider-Man games residing with Marvel.

* On Marvel's request even, apparently, although that's neither here nor there regards describing the difference between a licensed title and an IP acquisition. It just makes the Spider-Man exclusivity even softer as it wasn't Sony money-hatting a beloved franchise to try and force SM fans onto PS.

 

[Bickle2]

I am unaware of if another company can license SM to make a game with. I don't see any other ones on the market

If you want to paly it on one of those then your SOL just like if I want to play spiderman on pc or xbox or switch ? What's the difference ?

As part of the renegotiation of the movie license, Sony has exclusive PC/console rights at the very least. Mobile is typically separate.

 

[Bickle2]

Activision used to own the rights exclusively. They lapsed and returned to Marvel. Marvel then agree to do an exclusive with Sony. Apparently Marvel approached Sony for a hero game, and Insomniac chose Spiderman. It's apparently in this podcast

https://kotaku.com/podcast-how-spider-man-ps4-came-together-1796328173

There wasn't any long-term deal signed; it was a one title deal. Subsequent deals will be made between Marvel and games companies,

If you don't understand the difference between lots of people renting a car and one person buying the car, I won't be able to explain it to you. Sony rented the SM license to make one game, and if MS want, they can presumably rent the license too. If MS buy the Batman license from WB, then Sony (or anyone else) won't be able to rent it from WB, will they?

Sony didn’t rent the license. It’s tied into their movie contract, and presumably extends at least as long as Spidey is in the MCU. This is also why you have Rush Limbaugh JJJ in there, as Sony keeps entering things they “own”, like Not-MJ, hot Aunt May, Flash Thompson who isn’t a Jock Etc. These are things they “own” and can legally take with them if they make good on their hostage taking threats to leave the MCU. That’s also why people like JJ Abrams make stupid changes like “Resistance” and “First Order”, because he doesn’t get paid every time they say Rebellion and Empire.

Any “one time deal” aspect probably established sales and quality targets to renew it. This is standard.

Microsoft will definitely NOT buy WB games without a long term lease on the major DC properties. At the very least they’re not going to pay nearly as much, and this sale, should it go through is about cash now on an asset that’s currently a year or more away from a big hot title that’s always run a bit hot and cold on hits.

Anyone who thinks Microsoft will squat on a Batman game isn’t thinking. Until XCloud is ubiquitous and very popular, they can’t afford to isolate a title like that. So they’ll put a 3-6 month clock on it, or trade it for Spider-Man just like they did with baseball. You get all the benefits of exclusivity, the “gotta have it” window, and still make your money.

 

[eastmen]

Activision used to own the rights exclusively. They lapsed and returned to Marvel. Marvel then agree to do an exclusive with Sony. Apparently Marvel approached Sony for a hero game, and Insomniac chose Spiderman. It's apparently in this podcast

https://kotaku.com/podcast-how-spider-man-ps4-came-together-1796328173

There wasn't any long-term deal signed; it was a one title deal. Subsequent deals will be made between Marvel and games companies,

If you don't understand the difference between lots of people renting a car and one person buying the car, I won't be able to explain it to you. Sony rented the SM license to make one game, and if MS want, they can presumably rent the license too. If MS buy the Batman license from WB, then Sony (or anyone else) won't be able to rent it from WB, will they?

Insomniac was approached by marvel through sony yes. And was asked what they wanted to work on. But there is nothing being said about another company being able to work with Spiderman.

It would make the license worthless for Insomniac if there were 3 or 4 other spiderman games coming out around the same time frame.

I still fail to see how the situation is any different. Marvel to Sony to Insomniac to PS4 and now Ps5. Its not available on any other system and there are no announced Spider-Man titles for the switch or Xbox. In the scenario that MS buys Warner brothers and then creates WB property games for x amount of time. In both scenarios if you buy the wrong platform your SOL however with Microsoft the games would hit PC. With Sony its extremely doubtful

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Sony didn’t rent the license.

It's not. Did you not look at the evidence linked to?

“Long story short: Sony came to us and asked if we wanted to work with Marvel. Sony and Marvel let us decide what character/universe we wanted to make a game based on. We chose Spider-Man.” Insomniac was essentially given free range to choose where they wanted to focus their energy in the Marvel universe, and they landed on Marvel’s Spider-Man themselves, rather than having it assigned to them.​

Marvel went to Sony and said, "can we have a super hero game."
Sony went to Insomniac and said, "what you do want to do?"
Insomniac said ,"Spider-Man please!"

Sony do not and have never had exclusive rights to SM games. This is a myth. Unless you have a copy of the new renegotiation showing otherwise...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I still fail to see how the situation is any different.

Because you are wilfully avoiding understanding the difference.

The difference is Sony cannot stop a SM game being made for NSW or XB or anything else, whereas MS could stop Batman and superman and Justice League games coming on any platforms. It's about who owns control and can decide which platforms do and don't get access to a beloved IP.

If Marvel want to go to another company for a SM game, they can and will. Just because it hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it won't in future. The fact there aren't any other SM games on consoles so far is just because it hasn't happened yet, not because the IP is being restricted. Seriously, when was the last proper SM game before PS4's? The Amazing SM2 in 2014. If one SM game every 5 years, don't expect a new cross-platform title until 2023... Go blame the publishers for not getting a deal with Marvel as its their choice, not Sony's. Sony aren't locking anyone out of the SM IP; they can't, they have absolutely no controlling stake in the video game IP. whereas MS owning Batman, they could if they wanted. Similarly, if Sony bought the exclusive rights to SM and took control, that would be different to what they have now and would be similar to this hypothetical MS deal. Although even then, it's be one character instead of the whole DC universe.

 

[smithg]

Because you are wilfully avoiding understanding the difference.

The difference is Sony cannot stop a SM game being made for NSW or XB or anything else, whereas MS could stop Batman and superman and Justice League games coming on any platforms. It's about who owns control and can decide which platforms do and don't get access to a beloved IP.

If Marvel want to go to another company for a SM game, they can and will. Just because it hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it won't in future. The fact there aren't any other SM games on consoles so far is just because it hasn't happened yet, not because the IP is being restricted. Seriously, when was the last proper SM game before PS4's? The Amazing SM2 in 2014. If one SM game every 5 years, don't expect a new cross-platform title until 2023... Go blame the publishers for not getting a deal with Marvel as its their choice, not Sony's. Sony aren't locking anyone out of the SM IP; they can't, they have absolutely no controlling stake in the video game IP. whereas MS owning Batman, they could if they wanted. Similarly, if Sony bought the exclusive rights to SM and took control, that would be different to what they have now and would be similar to this hypothetical MS deal. Although even then, it's be one character instead of the whole DC universe.

That’s all fine, but the experience of the consumer is that the only flagship Spider-Man game anywhere to be found is on PlayStation, and this is likely going to be the case for as long as Sony/Marvel/Insomniac have the will to keep it going. Is the Spider-Man loving XBox owner comforted by the less legally binding Spider-Man exclusivity? At the end of the day he still doesn’t have Spider-Man, and won’t for the foreseeable future.

In practice this is no different than Microsoft buying Batman game rights.

 

[eastmen]

Because you are wilfully avoiding understanding the difference.

The difference is Sony cannot stop a SM game being made for NSW or XB or anything else, whereas MS could stop Batman and superman and Justice League games coming on any platforms. It's about who owns control and can decide which platforms do and don't get access to a beloved IP.

If Marvel want to go to another company for a SM game, they can and will. Just because it hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it won't in future. The fact there aren't any other SM games on consoles so far is just because it hasn't happened yet, not because the IP is being restricted. Seriously, when was the last proper SM game before PS4's? The Amazing SM2 in 2014. If one SM game every 5 years, don't expect a new cross-platform title until 2023... Go blame the publishers for not getting a deal with Marvel as its their choice, not Sony's. Sony aren't locking anyone out of the SM IP; they can't, they have absolutely no controlling stake in the video game IP. whereas MS owning Batman, they could if they wanted. Similarly, if Sony bought the exclusive rights to SM and took control, that would be different to what they have now and would be similar to this hypothetical MS deal. Although even then, it's be one character instead of the whole DC universe.

You still haven't shown me a contract that states others can license the ip and release games at the same time insomniac has the license and there are no other spiderman games out there for home consoles.

Can you point to anything other than sports or car ip's that are in multiple games at the same time by different companies ?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

That’s all fine, but the experience of the consumer is that the only flagship Spider-Man game anywhere to be found is on PlayStation, and this is likely going to be the case for as long as Sony/Marvel/Insomniac have the will to keep it going.

Says who? Where's the licensing deal making SM games exclusive to Sony?.

 

[AzBat]

That’s all fine, but the experience of the consumer is that the only flagship Spider-Man game anywhere to be found is on PlayStation, and this is likely going to be the case for as long as Sony/Marvel/Insomniac have the will to keep it going. Is the Spider-Man loving XBox owner comforted by the less legally binding Spider-Man exclusivity? At the end of the day he still doesn’t have Spider-Man, and won’t for the foreseeable future.

In practice this is no different than Microsoft buying Batman game rights.

In my experience it doesn't matter the difference. I like Spider-Man, but my choice of console hasn't let me play a quality Spider-Man game since the 2010 Spider-Man Shattered Dimensions for the 360(though not as good as Spider-Man 2 on the original Xbox). I don't care if Sony had exclusive rights or not, or Insomnia or Marvel made the decision to make it for PS4 & PS5 only. I can't play the game period. BTW, it was originally 1 game, now it's 2 with the new PS5 game? Do I understand why or how it happened? I do now. That still doesn't let me play the game unless I buy a PS4/5. Will I? No. I like Spider-Man & he may be the only real Marvel character I like, but there's a reason I'm called AzBat. I'm a HUGE Batman fan. AzBat stands for Azrael/Batman. I'm more interested in finally getting a Batman game on my choice of console where I'm not second citizen. Whether Microsoft buys the character's game appearance outright or licenses it for the first game or set amount of time, I don't care. I just care that I will get to play it & I might get the kind of exclusives that Playstation 3/4 were privy too. Not just characters or maps, but maybe a Batman-themed console or controller. I'm still pissed about the exclusive AzBat costume in Arkham Origins for PS3 and the exclusive Arkham Knight PS4 console.

Tommy McClain

 

[Shifty Geezer]

You still haven't shown me a contract that states others can license the ip and release games at the same time insomniac has the license and there are no other spiderman games out there for home consoles.

And you haven't shown the contract that says people can't. You also state, "insomniac has the license," without any evidence there is a license beyond what we've actually been told, they were invited to make a game.

Does Sony have an exclusive license? Link?

Here's a PR announcement of Activision's long-term licensing deal from 2003 : https://investor.activision.com/new...marvel-enterprises-expand-alliance-and-extend

Can you furnish us with the same thing from either Marvel or Sony saying there's a video game licensing partnership?

I think people are very confused over the movie license which is independent. Sony secured the movie license in 1998. Activision secured the game license in 2003. The movie license currently resides with Sony and the game license has returned to Marvel.

 

[manux]

It's also interesting that marvel promotes those spiderman games on their own youtube channel. It's almost like they independent of sony want to promote spiderman games.

There isn't lack of established interesting superheros with wide popularity. It's much more of an how to fund and create a good game problem. Spiderman does no good if the game is not excellent. Maybe something like luke cage could be a huge hit if someone figured out how to make a fun game out of it. Maybe one issue is that if someone decides to make a superhero game today it takes 3-5 years. What's hot today might be cold in 3-5 years. Big risk, have to pay licence and play ball with owner of IP(limits creativity)

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I'm still pissed about the exclusive AzBat costume in Arkham Origins for PS3 and the exclusive Arkham Knight PS4 console.

Yep. Exclusives suck. The bigger the brand, the more the suckage. Sony securing SM for PS only was a bit of a kick in the teeth for non-PS owning SM fans, but Sony didn't actively court that and it was just a deal Marvel wanted and they went to Sony, presumably because PS is the biggest game brand at the moment. Had Marvel gone to MS, it'd be the same thing, just a different audience excluded.

If Sony were to go ahead and secure the SM license in perpetuity, that'd be crap for gamers and SM fans. If Sony were to secure the entire Marvel Universe for PS, that'd be way more crap for gamers and a really shitty thing to do. If any company buys up a big, existing, loved IP to try and direct people onto their platform, that'd be super-crapola.

At the moment, thankfully, Sony don't have exclusive rights and maybe at some point next-gen there'll be a big cross-platform Spidey game. Seeing the success of their movie studios, I imagine Marvel are thinking of the same with video games at some point.

 

[eastmen]

In my experience it doesn't matter the difference. I like Spider-Man, but my choice of console hasn't let me play a quality Spider-Man game since the 2010 Spider-Man Shattered Dimensions for the 360(though not as good as Spider-Man 2 on the original Xbox). I don't care if Sony had exclusive rights or not, or Insomnia or Marvel made the decision to make it for PS4 & PS5 only. I can't play the game period. BTW, it was originally 1 game, now it's 2 with the new PS5 game? Do I understand why or how it happened? I do now. That still doesn't let me play the game unless I buy a PS4/5. Will I? No. I like Spider-Man & he may be the only real Marvel character I like, but there's a reason I'm called AzBat. I'm a HUGE Batman fan. AzBat stands for Azrael/Batman. I'm more interested in finally getting a Batman game on my choice of console where I'm not second citizen. Whether Microsoft buys the character's game appearance outright or licenses it for the first game or set amount of time, I don't care. I just care that I will get to play it & I might get the kind of exclusives that Playstation 3/4 were privy too. Not just characters or maps, but maybe a Batman-themed console or controller. I'm still pissed about the exclusive AzBat costume in Arkham Origins for PS3 and the exclusive Arkham Knight PS4 console.

Tommy McClain

oh so your a 90s batman fan. I still have all of knightfall

 

[smithg]

Says who? Where's the licensing deal making SM games exclusive to Sony?.

So you’re arguing that Microsoft just hasn’t approached Marvel about making Spider-Man even after seeing how well it sold on PS4? Or are you suggesting that there could be a completely different Spider-Man game, exclusive to XBox that will be announced on July 23rd?

Do you honestly think that the only thing standing in the way of an XBox exclusive Spider-Man game in 2020 is that Microsoft just isn’t interested enough?