Black Myth: Wu Kong [PC, Consoles]

[iroboto]

Pretty sure this is incorrect. Larian is on record saying they had issues with the Series S because Microsoft wanted feature parity with the X, but they couldn’t get split-screen to work properly. They ultimately dropped it.

Even when the requirement dropped it still took 6 months after release. They weren’t anywhere close to ready for it for launch.

Anyone that plays and has been following BG3 knows consoles have never been their priority.

Even older Reddit threads confirm this.

https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/comments/zhwewh/why_larian_studios_do_not_mention_console_release

Read the first reply.

Then suddenly ps5 release is 2 months after PC, with tons of issues. Xbox doesn’t release until a full 6 months after PC, and when Xbox is released all the optimization there went towards improving the experience across all platforms.

And in typical Larian form, the physical editions for BG3 on console only released 2 months ago or so. A full year after PC release. This once again follows closely to how they handled their Divinity releases.

 

[Nesh]

Even when the requirement dropped it still took 6 months after release. They weren’t anywhere close to ready for it for launch.

Anyone that plays and has been following BG3 knows consoles have never been their priority.

Even older Reddit threads confirm this.

https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/comments/zhwewh/why_larian_studios_do_not_mention_console_release

Read the first reply.

Then suddenly ps5 release is 2 months after PC, with tons of issues. Xbox doesn’t release until a full 6 months after PC, and when Xbox is released all the optimization there went towards improving the experience across all platforms.

And in typical Larian form, the physical editions for BG3 on console only released 2 months ago or so. A full year after PC release. This once again follows closely to how they handled their Divinity releases.

The fact that the powerful PS5 version had issues 2 months after PC release (not day 1 release) says a lot about the issues they were likely having trying to make Series S work well enough, even after MS agreed to drop the split screen feature.

That still reflects the issue of Series parity that may have on some developers.

If Series S was out of the picture it would have been very likely that PS5 and Series X versions might have seen simultaneous release albeit with issues

 

[rntongo]

Even when the requirement dropped it still took 6 months after release. They weren’t anywhere close to ready for it for launch.

Anyone that plays and has been following BG3 knows consoles have never been their priority.

Even older Reddit threads confirm this.

https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/comments/zhwewh/why_larian_studios_do_not_mention_console_release

Read the first reply.

Then suddenly ps5 release is 2 months after PC, with tons of issues. Xbox doesn’t release until a full 6 months after PC, and when Xbox is released all the optimization there went towards improving the experience across all platforms.

And in typical Larian form, the physical editions for BG3 on console only released 2 months ago or so. A full year after PC release. This once again follows closely to how they handled their Divinity releases.

So why didnt they just release it on the Series X at the same time as the PS5 release. The overwhelming majority of PS5 owners werent complaining about it when it released. It received overwhelmingly positive user scores on the PS5 metacritic of over 500 which is statistically significant. Series X didnt have any reported issues running it according to the devs the issue was with the Series S. MS not allowing anything less than feature parity. They also couldnt let the split screen mode just release as is like it was on the Steam Deck. So the whole 6 months wait could have been avoided by simply letting the X version release or letting the S release as is.

The fact that the powerful PS5 version had issues 2 months after PC release (not day 1 release) says a lot about the issues they were likely having trying to make Series S work well enough, even after MS agreed to drop the split screen feature.

That still reflects the issue of Series parity that may have on some developers.

If Series S was out of the picture it would have been very likely that PS5 and Series X versions might have seen simultaneous release albeit with issues

Yeah and most consumers didnt even notice these issues. Most of the user reviews of the PS5 game were overwhelmingly positive.

 

[Charlietus]

So why didnt they just release it on the Series X at the same time as the PS5 release. The overwhelming majority of PS5 owners werent complaining about it when it released. It received overwhelmingly positive user scores on the PS5 metacritic of over 500 which is statistically significant. Series X didnt have any reported issues running it according to the devs the issue was with the Series S. MS not allowing anything less than feature parity. They also couldnt let the split screen mode just release as is like it was on the Steam Deck. So the whole 6 months wait could have been avoided by simply letting the X version release or letting the S release as is.


Yeah and most consumers didnt even notice these issues. Most of the user reviews of the PS5 game were overwhelmingly positive.

You can't release only on series x, the release has to be simultaneous. There is also the factor that developers value their work, and want the users to have a good experience. They could have released the game simultaneously, but maybe the game was a crashing, low framerate mess on series s.

 

[Below2D]

Even when the requirement dropped it still took 6 months after release. They weren’t anywhere close to ready for it for launch.

Anyone that plays and has been following BG3 knows consoles have never been their priority.

Even older Reddit threads confirm this.

https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/comments/zhwewh/why_larian_studios_do_not_mention_console_release

Read the first reply.

Then suddenly ps5 release is 2 months after PC, with tons of issues. Xbox doesn’t release until a full 6 months after PC, and when Xbox is released all the optimization there went towards improving the experience across all platforms.

And in typical Larian form, the physical editions for BG3 on console only released 2 months ago or so. A full year after PC release. This once again follows closely to how they handled their Divinity releases.

You call 2 months later "suddenly"?

 

[iroboto]

You call 2 months later "suddenly"?

Certification takes 2-3 weeks. So yes. It’s only 1 month after PC release. I would argue is very close.

 

[iroboto]

The fact that the powerful PS5 version had issues 2 months after PC release (not day 1 release) says a lot about the issues they were likely having trying to make Series S work well enough, even after MS agreed to drop the split screen feature.

or that the implication was that they paid or funded to have their release date moved up and it was rushed to meet it. I’m not understanding why this is challenging to accept.

If a developer is willing to release 1 platform before the other, it doesn’t matter the reason, and exclusivity clauses aren’t required or needed. There is no rule that all platforms have to be released at the same time.

It’s just that following along, BG3 was an actual exclusive for Google Stadia, which went belly up. Google was marketing it all this time. Suddenly BG3 shows up on state of play and it’s only launching on PS.

We saw a similar thing happen here. BWK was actually debuted on Xbox showcase only to suddenly show up completely marketed by Sony and it not being released on Xbox platform at launch.

While I don’t deny that the ordering of things matter here, the reality is that there is a correlation of Sony marketing these PC centric titles last minute and having the release on PS5 first.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

or that the implication was that they paid or funded to have their release date moved up and it was rushed to meet it. I’m not understanding why this is challenging to accept.

So...Larian said, "PS5 version isn't ready for launch and won't be for a while," and Sony replied, "here's a million dollars if you just ship it next month whatever state it's in"?

We saw a similar thing happen here. BWK was actually debuted on Xbox showcase only to suddenly show up completely marketed by Sony and it not being released on Xbox platform at launch.

MS had a deal with Game Science then? And Sony, what? Wasn't that deal already in place?? Did GS betray MS and take another deal with Sony to release earlier despite MS's early backing?

Surely the better fit is MS backed the game, the devs hit issues, Sony offered support for the PS5 port. MS didn't? Did they offer? If Sony is moneyhatting, that's one thing. If they are just offering support, that's good developer relations rather than securing exclusivity. And we've heard elsewhere of small devs not porting to XBox simply because of developer issues.

I'm not saying it's one way or the other, but I reckon the evidence very inconclusive and open to interpretation.

 

[Ikshvaku]

Redfall on Xbox tested: a sad tale of unfulfilled potential and profound technical issues

Redfall is an open world first-person shooter that combines mechanics-driven, immersive sim-style design with optional …

www.eurogamer.net

I am surprised that nobody has mentioned the disaster that was this game (opinion based on YT coverage).
If MS can't be bothered to support or put extra resources in their own platform exclusives,
it is tall order to believe that they will be expending resources by sending engineers to other studios
whose games show potential as Sony is claimed to have done for BMW (apparently, they also did this for Stellar Blade).

 

[rntongo]

You can't release only on series x, the release has to be simultaneous. There is also the factor that developers value their work, and want the users to have a good experience. They could have released the game simultaneously, but maybe the game was a crashing, low framerate mess on series s.

Yes which goes back to the most likely possibility you have mentioned, the S version of the title is terrible and is the cause of the delay. Even Jez has decided to backtrack after pushing an exclusivity deal lie. IIRC Jez was the guy behind pushing the exclusivity deal lie about BG3 as well.

 

[iroboto]

So...Larian said, "PS5 version isn't ready for launch and won't be for a while," and Sony replied, "here's a million dollars if you just ship it next month whatever state it's in"?

So It would be closer to Larian set a target date for Feb, but the PC would launch in July. And Sony goes, what would it take for us to get PS5 to launch closer to PC. And then provided the funding to meet it.

MS had a deal with Game Science then? And Sony, what? Wasn't that deal already in place?? Did GS betray MS and take another deal with Sony to release earlier despite MS's early backing?

I would say GS provided a release date for Xbox that was after PC. MS left it as is to meet that date. Sony once again goes; hey what would it take to move our launch up to PC? And that’s all.

MS doesn’t have the money or anything substantial to counter. They have all their money invested in Gamepass at this moment, not to mention all their resources tied up in first party studios. I don’t disparage Sony for doing this, it’s a decent counter to game pass.

But lost in the conversation, is a discussion point that Xbox version is too difficult to release for in time ; which I think is untrue. The original release date was always what it would be. Otherwise MS would indicate a delay, but they didn’t say anything on that.

But more importantly on the latter point, it’s extremely damaging to the Xbox reputation. Firstly, if there was no additional support from Sony here, we would see a lot of titles ship PS5 first than Xbox. And I don’t recall that being a thing, cause I’m certain MS has clauses against being second fiddle. Assuming it is a technical challenge, it could be solved by throwing resources at ensuring best practices and your kit solves a lot of these issues up front. But we’ve only see this happen with particular high profile titles.

So it’s not black and white, but I can’t ever see a scenario where MS is comfortable with developers ripping on them or the general narrative that Xbox is difficult to program for because the hardware or kit sucks.

We’ve never seen it happen before until now, and it’s always PC titles being ported to console.

 

[Charlietus]

Yes which goes back to the most likely possibility you have mentioned, the S version of the title is terrible and is the cause of the delay. Even Jez has decided to backtrack after pushing an exclusivity deal lie. IIRC Jez was the guy behind pushing the exclusivity deal lie about BG3 as well.

Oh my god the backtracking. This guy just gets on every bandwagon to spread chaos.

 

[Globalisateur]

Oh my god the backtracking. This guy just gets on every bandwagon to spread chaos.

Usual gaslighting strategy from Microsoft friends in order to make the news (which worked) and confuse people into believing it. The backtracking obviously won't make the news.

 

[Nesh]

MS doesn’t have the money or anything substantial to counter.

MS has significantly more money to spare than Sony ever will. For MS it's not a matter of having the money. Its a matter of what they find more or less significant to bother based on their strategy.

 

[rntongo]

Oh my god the backtracking. This guy just gets on every bandwagon to spread chaos.

Usual gaslighting strategy from Microsoft friends in order to make the news (which worked) and confuse people into believing it. The backtracking obviously won't make the news.

Yup, there's a saying that a lie gets half way across the world before the truth can put on its pants. Jez uses this to lie and obfuscate when he wants to hide things. He then says he's not a journalist so you cant hold him to journalistic standards. He can simply make up what he heard and then say its what he heard then share it to others like Tassi. Classic Jez

 

[iroboto]

MS has significantly more money to spare than Sony ever will. For MS it's not a matter of having the money. Its a matter of what they find more or less significant to bother based on their strategy.

They don’t actually. There’s not unlimited funds here for Xbox to operate. Mergers and acquisitions don’t have the same relationship as operational spending.

Xbox have their money tied up on other things.

 

[rntongo]

Corden: "Yeah, Black Myth Wukong wont come to xbox on time because sony's moneyhat. My source is someone from microsoft"
Corden: "I dont think Sony paid anything"

 

[Nesh]

They don’t actually. There’s not unlimited funds here for Xbox to operate. Mergers and acquisitions don’t have the same relationship as operational spending.

Xbox have their money tied up on other things.

Of course funds are not unlimited. But they are tremendously FAR more than Sony's. If they want to allocate they have MORE ability to do so.
Sony's Current ratio is .63 with current assets $42B.
MS's Current ratio is 1.23 with current assets $160B. After they spent for the acquisition.
This has NOTHING to do with MS not having the money. Sony has less.

 

[iroboto]

Of course funds are not unlimited. But they are tremendously FAR more than Sony's. If they want to allocate they have MORE ability to do so.
Sony's Current ratio is .63 with current assets $42B.
MS's Current ratio is 1.23 with current assets $160B. After they spent for the acquisition.
This has NOTHING to do with MS not having the money. Sony has less.

I would argue that if you keep things isolated on SIE and Xbox divisions - it would be a very different perspective. For Xbox to be given more funding by MS, it has to prove returns. I’m not seeing the business case right now until for either to be given more money when other areas (like azure) are showing more growth and ROI.

 

[Nesh]

I would argue that if you keep things isolated on SIE and Xbox divisions - it would be a very different perspective. For Xbox to be given more funding by MS, it has to prove returns. I’m not seeing the business case right now until for either to be given more money when other areas (like azure) are showing more growth and ROI.

Which again has nothing to do with MS not having the money or anything substantial to counter. They just don't believe in it to bother.