Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram Live Sex ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

Defining Duke, Episode 117 | The Death of E3 Is Upon Us (Video) (Patreon)

Published:
2023-03-30 16:01:01
Imported:
2023-03

Content

For your viewing pleasure.

Timestamps to skip ads:
0:00:35

0:28:18

Files

The Death of E3 Is Upon Us | Defining Duke, Episode 117

There's no denying the Dukes have tried to rally behind E3, but doubt began to seep in following Xbox's exit from the show floor. This week, we learned of three major players pulling out of E3. Those being SEGA, Ubisoft, and Tencent. With reports from IGN stating that there has been next to zero communication from the ESA and ReedPop as well as no one else attending, it very well may be curtains for E3. What comes next to fill E3 shoes and what led to the fate of a once prestigious and celebrated show? Elsewhere, we get into the thick of it following a letter submitted to the Biden administration by 11 members of Congress. Have the tables turned? It's possible as one of Xbox's greatest opponents in approving the deal, the CMA, looks to be moving toward an approval. Meanwhile, Japan gives the deal a thumbs up, ID @ Xbox is printing physical games, Hellblade 2 looks incredible, Redfall sees numerous important updates as it approaches launch, and Game Pass drops its $1 deal. Join us in another plump week of gaming news! Get early access to Defining Duke and all Last Stand Media shows at: https://www.patreon.com/LastStandMedia Get some Defining Duke merch! LastStandMedia.store Follow the hosts! https://www.Twitter.com/G27Status​ https://www.Twitter.com/lordcognito 0:00:00 - Intro 0:04:07 - Reviews 0:08:31 - What is the worst flight experience we’ve had? 0:16:50 - The Last Ronin game is in development 0:28:18 - Game Pass for $1 is ending 0:37:00 - A UE5 facial capture demo for Hellblade 2 was shown off at GDC 0:42:52 - Redfall updates 0:53:02 - Sarah Bond Tweeted about LoTR 0:54:56 - Chris Avellone’s libel case has been settled 1:04:54 - Mark Darrah is back as a consultant for Dreadwolf 1:15:00 - Microsoft Rewards is changing 1:22:55 - Multiverse’s open beta is closing 1:29:11 - Final Fantasy XVI gameplay was shown at PAX East 1:35:15 - Resident Evil 4 has sold three million copies in two days 1:35:57 - Ubisoft unveiled their AI tool called Ghostwriter 1:43:17 - The Fallout TV show wrapped filming in March 1:43:34 - Party Animals has received an ESRB rating 1:44:02 - Epic has revealed Unreal Editor for Fortnite 1:44:59 - Saints Row is getting multiple expansion passes 1:45:29 - Atomic Heart has reached 5 million players in under a month 1:45:55 - Metal Gear Solid 3 Remake is now a 2024 title 1:46:31 - Playground Games’ co-founder has started a new studio 1:48:45 - LEGO 2K Drive is a live service game 1:50:27 - What have we been playing? 2:19:09 - What are some of our favorites from PAX East? 2:35:25 - Does Tears of the Kingdom look underwhelming? 2:42:10 - Multiple publishers have pulled out of E3 2:55:09 - Congress is getting involved in the console wars 3:02:20 - The CMA appears to be moving towards approval of the ABK deal 3:13:14 - ID @ Xbox is clearing the way for physical indie games 3:16:55 - Game Pass Pick of the Week 3:23:53 - Why are the Trails games not on Xbox?

Comments

Midnight

Chad thumbnail

peter42O

Agree completely in regards to Redfall. It was announced in June 2021 after the ZeniMax acquisition was legally finalized. How could Microsoft pull a game off a platform that it was never announced for? Microsoft hasn't removed a single active game (TESO, Fallout 76, etc.), previously released games like Dishonored, Doom, etc. Best of all, the regulators already knew all this beforehand. It's almost as if whenever Microsoft acquires a studio/publisher or pays for a timed console exclusive, it's horrible and shouldn't be permitted but yet, whenever Sony does anything that's meant to hurt the Xbox brand, no one says a word. Funny how that works. As an Xbox fan, im loving what Microsoft have been doing this generation and I hope they don't let up whatsoever.

ToiletDrummer
>>105277833

I feel like there's been quite the disconnect in the discussion around this. Most reactions I've seen aren't calling out the exclusivity itself but how it clashes with Phil Spencers "When everybody plays, we all win" and "Exclusives are completely counter to what gaming is about" - front. It's pretty hypocritical and for some reason people are desperately fighting those callouts by going deep into semantics.

Kbr Sports
>>105277833

Part of the problem is that people misquote Phil Spencer whenever convenient. “When everybody plays, we all win” can be achieved without releasing on another console ecosystem. MSFT provides you with a way to play in almost every aspect apart of their ecosystem which is available to everyone who has a phone and a controller. If you prefer to play on console, they have two console options for you. “Exclusives are completely counter to what gaming is about” wasn’t even about exclusivity as a whole. It was about having exclusives locked to next gen hardware to force people to buy the new system as the interview happened leading into the next gen consoles. It’s from this gameindustry.biz interview. https://www.gamesindustry.biz/are-xbox-series-x-developers-being-held-back-by-xbox-one . Everyone tries to say Phil is a liar or something but never include full context or stats that would make the conversation even interesting.

ToiletDrummer
>>105277833

"As a player you are the centre of our strategy," Spencer concludes. "Our device is not the centre of our strategy, our game is not the centre of the strategy. We want to enable you to play the games you want to play, with the friends you want to play with, on any device.“ (...) "Sorry, I am a bit soapboxy with this one. Gaming is about entertainment and community and diversion and learning new stories and new perspectives, and I find it completely counter to what gaming is about to say that part of that is to lock people away from being able to experience those games. Or to force someone to buy my specific device on the day that I want them to go buy it, in order to partake in what gaming is about." „or“ being the keyword here. But this is exactly what's annoying people. We're talking semantics while the hypocritical stance by MS is just flatout obvious. They're pro-consumer as long as it's their ecosystem yet they act like they are on a humanitarian mission. A very convenient stance for a company with (almost) monopolies in OS and Cloud. They're being heroized as this Robin Hood-like figure of the Gaming Industry even though they're pushing consolidation and exclusivity to completely new heights. „When everybody plays in our ecosystem and under our conditions, we all win" should be their mantra. And once again – this hypocrisy is only part of this conversation. The deliberate ignorance by people to acknowledge this is what ticks people off. Just acknowledge they aren't better than Sony. They're just bigger.

Kbr Sports
>>105277833

It’s not about being bigger or better though lol if you want to say “ When everybody plays, we all win” is hypocritical because that doesn’t extend to putting games on other consoles that’s fine but in the same vein it’s weird to not acknowledge every place you CAN find their games. Focusing on just the exclusion of people who ONLY will play on PlayStation or Nintendo players is funny. Since MSFT provides ways to play to more devices that would include more people technically than just a console audience. Of course, they’re a company so they want you to do it in their ecosystem. Every platform holder is and does. Acting like it’s some sort of gotcha for MSFT is weird IMO. If the fuss was really about people being able to play anywhere then people would acknowledge just as loud that they provide numerous options to game outside of just the Xbox. But in reality, people only care about it being on THEIR platform of choice. Which is fine but stop acting like you’re just calling out MSFT on some altruistic mission when your own agenda is clear as day too.

peter42O
>>105277833

There's a difference between semantics and facts. Problem is that no one ever actually reads and comprehends what Phil actually says. They just go with the headline like with Redfall but as usual, never do any actual research. If people actually read what he says they would know he never says PlayStation outside of COD. He always says where Game Pass exists or their Xbox platform/eco-system. The exclusives being counter productive to what gaming is was actually in reference to Xbox Series having cross generation games for two years as it relates to Xbox One which was another aspect that people bashed Microsoft and Phil for and many articles including Kotaku which was from their own interview in 2020 amazingly always leave out the most important aspects because it doesn't play into their agenda and narrative. Phil has made things very clear since 2020 with Bethesda. If anything, it's more of the PlayStation guys expecting to have everything on their platform and not realizing that those days are done.

peter42O
>>105277833

Everything you quote from Phil never mentions Sony or PlayStation. Devices is open to interpretation and if people actually think about it, Phil is talking about the Xbox eco-system and platform which includes THEIR consoles, PC, Cloud, subscriptions, tablets, phones and soon TV apps. That's what Phil actually means but instead of people admitting this because they all know this is what he means, they say, he's lying when in reality, he's not. He's just not telling you what you want to hear.

peter42O

KBR is understanding exactly Phil means when he says "every device" which people always assume to think means PlayStation when in reality it doesn't. It means devices where you can play Xbox or have access to Game Pass.

ToiletDrummer
>>105277833

The thing about MS is that it is a great offer if you consider hardware options and a bad offer in terms of centralized power over content. It's still one company owning your whole library. If you don't want to be part of their eco-system - well too bad. Sink or swim. It's big daddy Microsoft hovering over everything, just like Disney. And as I said in my first comment – this behaviour by MS is expected, they're a company like any other. It's just people vehemently defending their hypocrisy that annoys people. And your point is...those people should acknowledge their own hypocrisy because they just don't want to be part of the great Microsoft family? Sorry but that just reminds me of cult thinking/reasoning lol Also @peter420 "facts" and statements that "are open to interpretation" is kinda contradictory. But yeah sure, guess Phil Spencer statements will always just be a Rorschach test for fanboys lol

Kbr Sports
>>105277833

It’s funny that you say it’s cult thinking because I swear every time a game is exclusive to PlayStation or Nintendo people say “just buy a PlayStation” or “just buy a switch” lol is your point that MSFT shouldn’t have ecosystem exclusives? Because those are really the only games you’d have to buy into their ecosystem to play. Idc what /where you play but my point and the FACT is that MSFT exclusives can be played from practically any device whether, that is PC, cloud, console, etc. If that is an issue because it doesn’t include PlayStation and Nintendo idk what to tell you. Also, every company you (digitally) buy from controls your library. I understand the concern over consolidation. We can agree there but this whole thing about hypocrisy regarding exclusives and devices is where you lose me.

ToiletDrummer
>>105277833

It's rather easy honestly: exclusivity to an eco-system can be just as much a hurdle if you don't want to be part of that eco-system. Why? Honestly the reasons should be irrelevant. The mere fact that there isn't (or rather won't be) another option is the problem and wherein the hypocrisy of their attitude lies. Not to mention that buying publishers is inherently more intrusive than just making exclusivity deals. And of course you have crazy (cultish) fanboys for every platform. Only difference that nobody is defending Sony/Nintendo as being "pro-consumer" with their exclusivity deals. And...well it's not even exclusivity deals with MS, we are talking about future line ups of the biggest publishers in the industry which consumers on other plattforms are getting locked out of. "We're not taking anything away from Playstation."... once again a quote that is not wrong as long as you apply it to games currently existing on Playstation. Yet well...you probably see what I mean?

Animated

Great show Dukes!

peter42O
>>105277833

Difference is that Microsoft gives the consumer multiple options. Two consoles. One high end, one low end with the price reflecting that. PC for those who want the absolute best and most options. Cloud for those who are on the move a lot and still want access to their games. Game Pass subscription allows you to play all of their first party games day one for a $10 monthly rental which in all honesty, is what I do. I don't stay subscribed. Just because I prefer Xbox Series X this generation doesn't mean that im going to give Microsoft more money than I have to. Microsoft stopped doing major exclusivity deals because first and foremost, they would get bashed for them including from Ryan McCaffrey who's an Xbox guy yet praised Sony for getting FF XVI. It's like, how does that work? They also decided that with a subscription focused platform, it's obviously far better to own your content than to keep paying for it. Also, ZeniMax and ABK were for sale. What is Microsoft supposed to do? Say no thanks? That would be stupid and reason for shareholders to want Nadella gone because he wouldn't be doing his job. Sony has far stronger name/brand power, far more market share everywhere excluding NA where it's the only region that's close and for Microsoft to ever do anything with Xbox, they have spend money and get more games and content. If Sony acquired ABK and/or Bethesda, do you believe that they wouldn't have made them exclusive? Of course, they would. Anyone would and should. Also, as someone who had the PS4 as his primary gaming console after switching from Xbox 360, I asked for Microsoft to acquire studios, have more exclusive games and content. While I never expected Bethesda and especially ABK, as a fan of Xbox, how can I complain about them doing what I asked them to do for years? And majority of Xbox fans asked for the same. Even PlayStation fans including those who were once Xbox fans and switched asked for Microsoft to do more. Now that they finally are, everyone still complains and says, it's not fair or some crap like that. Makes no sense to me. Gamers in general either A) want Microsoft to compete and make the Xbox platform and eco-system better and thus stronger than what it's been or B) want them to just "hang around" like with Xbox One. Obviously, I prefer A. And finally, if you don't want to be in the Xbox eco-system, that's up to you and your decision but anyone who's an actual gamer would be willing to own both consoles if that's their preference in how to play the games because the games is what should be the most important and that you want to play them. I own Series X which is my primary console and PS5 which is for Sony's exclusives. What am I supposed to do? Not play Sony's games just because im an Xbox guy this generation? Nah. That makes no sense.

ToiletDrummer
>>105277833

I don't want Xbox to just "hang around". I want them to foster studios, create new IP, boost talent. You know, competing on their own merit. What they're doing right now is just moneyhatting long standing third party content by using the money of their mother company. I play on PS5, NSwitch and PC/Steam Deck. I honestly got all bases covered and just don't need an Xbox, but that's not my problem with their eco-system. I don't like their vision of subscription based consumption of the medium. They're disincentivizing consumers from ownership via DRM and price dumping while wanting to be the single middle man between publisher and costumer. They're undercutting the competition with a heavily subsidized subscription service which they feed with acquired IP they're taking away from other plattforms. They're trying to reshape the market by not only killing retail, but also physical media and with it game preservation. Not to mention that subscription as primary way of consumption may push fundamental game design even further towards greedy monetization and instant gratification structures since your game competes with every other game on the service at all time - similar to how the mobile gaming market works. All of this and I haven't even started on their history with monopoly nor their hypocrisy when it comes to their current "good guy" front. And now they're even trying to lobby their way into the japanese market by pointing fingers at Sony, completely ignoring the actual dominating force which is Nintendo. I could go on about how they mismanaged their studios and IP but I'll just put a sock in it and opt for a agree to disagree and a relaxing weekend because I honestly am pretty tired of always going down the same old lane of goalpost moving once you dare putting out mild criticism of this company.

peter42O
>>105277833

They're creating new IP's, building up their studios, etc. You think Sony built their studios from the ground up? Sony's top 5 of 6 studios were acquired. The only exception being Santa Monica. Where do you think Sony/Microsoft got the money to start PlayStation/Xbox? It was from all their other divisions. Microsoft should be putting money into Xbox. That's how you build it up. Subscription is an option. You're not forced to use it and can still buy games. Here's something you probably don't know - only 2 or 3 of Microsoft's first party games ever sold 10m+ prior to Game Pass existing. Their games didn't sell well even during Xbox 360 and after Xbox One, they had to change up their business direction which is Game Pass. This is what drives competition. Doing something that your competitor isn't doing. Why would they stay with the same business model when it wasn't working? As for ownership, im not a collector and I see ownership as overrated anyway since 360/PS3. Why do I need to collect a disc just to watch it decrease in value with every passing day sitting on my shelf? As for physical, Sony's games sell 80% digital. Both Sony and Microsoft would eliminate physical games today right now if they could get away with it. Microsoft eliminated the DRM on consoles. You no longer need to verify any of your disc or digital purchases. How are they taking away publishers that never ever belonged to Sony in the first place? Come on man. It's amazing, PlayStation fans are so spoiled that they believe they're entitled to every game, even those that are years and decades away. SMH. And what if Google would have acquired Bethesda? They were in on the bidding and they chose not to spend the money to acquire them. But let's say they did. $70 for Bethesda games on Stadia. Streaming only. No subscription option and you still can't play them on PlayStation. What then? You think that would have been a better option? Cause I sure as hell don't. Game design isn't going to change due to Game Pass. If anything, it's going to create more new IP's like Hi Fi Rush and Pentiment which no publisher is going to take a risk on due to being dependent and reliant on sales. Look at Sony. where's their innovation and better game design? They're open worlds are basically Ubisoft and their originality ended after PS3. They all use the TLOU template. With or without Game Pass, EVERY publisher is going to try to nickel and dime you including Sony. Look at the micro-transactions they had in TLOU 2013. But let me guess, that doesn't count right? All the companies do the same shit. Comparing Microsoft from the 90's to today is two separate things. All those people are long gone. And don't act like Sony is perfect either because they're far from it. As for Microsoft lobbying to get politicians looking at Sony in Japan, first, both have their lobbyists and do the same exact crap. Second, U.S. is in some kind of fair trade negotiations with Japan so any advantage that either country can use to get a more favorable deal, they're going to use. Proof at the end that you don't know facts. Microsoft and U.S. are ignoring Nintendo because of SONY. Sony pushed the high end console market to FTC who with others fell for it. So don't blame Microsoft for that. Blame Sony because they're literally the company that pushed to not include Nintendo which blew up in their face. I'm not moving goal posts at all. As proven by blaming Microsoft for not including Nintendo, you with other PlayStation fans and gaming media, never read or comprehend what Microsoft actually says. It's like everyone takes what Microsoft says, picks certain words and then fit it to push their own bullshit narrative. But hey, we can finally agree on something - to agree to disagree. :)

ToiletDrummer
>>105277833

It's always funny how these conversations take a turn once you mention you're playing on a PS5. It's suddenly all about Sony. MS is in the process of acquiring as many Studios over the span of what? 4 years? as Sony has since they've entered the market. Most of the studios Playstation acquired had a longstanding relationship and exclusive projects way before they got bought ultimately, making these acquisitions natural and less intrusive to the market and consumer. Of course subscription is an option. My whole point is that it's going to be a necessity because MS is in the process of killing the conventional market by making the prospect of buying a full priced product farcical. Their great „drive for competition“ is a distribution model only they and the biggest companies can afford. Phil Spencer already stated which companies are their „real competition“ and it's neither Sony nor Nintendo. Yet here they are, crying that they can't compete without spending almost as much as Sonys whole net worth. If you think ownership is overrated – good for you. Good luck with that when your favorite games are being cut from digital storefronts because of outdated licenses or just some fallout between developers and publishers (P.T.). I agree that Sony is as much behind going all digital as MS is. I didn't say Sony is the total opposite of MS company politics but I guess I'm now the perpetual advocate for everything Sony does/did because I criticize Microsoft. It's always arguing in binaries with these convos. And sorry but wth is that Google comparison? Bethesda could've also just been bought by someone who would let them remain a third party publisher – win win, right? Crazy. „Come on man. It's amazing, PlayStation fans are so spoiled that they believe they're entitled to every game, even those that are years and decades away. SMH“ you mean like Starfield, Redfall, Hi-Fi Rush etc? Yeah, those sure were decades away. Where is Sonys innovation? You mean the company that pushes VR, Dualsense, made Dreams and norished development of Returnal – a game that was anything but a safe cashgrab? They're pushing the medium forward compared to Microsoft. Not as much as Nintendo or even Valve argueably but definitely more than MS. They have a third person narrative game template, I give you that, yet they're exploring narrative in the gaming space on a AAA budget like Idk - Ninja Theory or Asobo? Those studios Xbox fans have been super positive about? But hey, Halo got a grappling hook. Pretty cool. Just where are Xboxs shining examples of first party innovation? Gears, Forza and Halo? They're infamous for having a management problem. Just look at what happened to Rare before they surprisingly made a content-deprived longburner with Sea of Thieves. And when it comes to the japanese market. Sonys exclusion of Nintendo applied because Call of Duty is irrelevant to Nintendo plattforms. This doesn't mean Microsoft can just exclude Nintendo and claim the most ridiculous bullshit. And even if Sony would've been completely guilty of forming this narrative – it suddenly doesn't make more sense to exclude Nintendo in their claim does it? People loooove to say Sony is crying, yet apparently Microsoft going to their pocketed politicians is a rightous fight against the evil Sony empire lol That a subscription based distribution will change the quality of the medium is fact. Just look at how Netflix changed movies and tv. With the small difference being that most games aren't made to be finished in 1-3 hours. But since you have no form of sunk cost as a consumer you're more likely to drop the game without instant gratification. It is literally the mobile f2p gaming market. And lastly: I've started by pointing out how I perceived the reactions to Redfalls scrapped PS5 version in relation to Spencers good guy messaging and then I've been talking semantics, which suddenly turned into „facts“, which then suddenly turned into talking against brand loyalist trying to defend their favorite trillion dollar company at all costs and now, since I said that I play on a PS5 everything suddenly revolves around what Sony did and what they didn't. MS monopolistic behaviour in the 90s doesn't count but Sony acquiring Studios in the infancy of Playstation does and ofc is just as bad and intrusive as buying two of the largest third party publishers in the industry. You can go towards your fantastic all digital future without ownership and total company dependency. It's the future we're all going towards sadly, I'm fully aware of that. Microsoft is doing its best to propel us towards this future as fast as possible by consolidating the industry and putting everything into one big autocratical dopamine slide. And as you said, they're a company and any company would do this since it's the best, most profitable play. And frankly competing with Sony on equal footing didn't turn out too well for them. My only issue from the beginning was that I think people are very, very desperately defending them in their hypocrisy. Which well, I see proven once again. But yeah, agree to disagree. Enough time of a perfectly fine Saturday invested into a petty online argument. Enjoy the weekend.

peter42O
>>105277833

All I will say is that im not defending Microsoft. It's just that people wanted them to spend money and compete when they weren't and now that they are, these same people still complain. It's like Microsoft can't win these people over regardless of what they do or don't do. I agree with a few things you said but also disagree with some. To each their own and yeah, we'll definitely continue to agree to disagree when it comes to Microsoft acquiring studios and/or publishers. Anyway, I enjoyed the debates back and forth. Take care. :)