Why do you think MS prefers to buy timed exclusives instead of buying studios ?

#1BruceLee1974Posted 4/6/2014 8:10:16 PM
I owned a Xbox since the beginning and owned a 360 since the start, but this gen I decided to chose the PS4 because I didn't like how MS seems to only get timed exclusives and seems to be happy with the same old games over and over.

They would rather pay a whole lot of money for 1 or 2 games instead of working on their own studios, but when they do buy studios they seem to waste them with RARE working on mainly Kinect stuff and same with Lionhead.

Do you think the reason they do this is because they weren't sure how long they were going to be in the console business ? Others like Sony and Nintendo have a lot of first party studios and continue to build while MS prefers this way.
#2Lawboy2Posted 4/6/2014 8:11:32 PM
Honestly what is the difference...buying studios is probably more risky...u have to pay the studio whether they suck or not
#3Homie_202Posted 4/6/2014 8:15:49 PM
Lawboy2 posted...
Honestly what is the difference...buying studios is probably more risky...u have to pay the studio whether they suck or not


The difference is we would get new IPs. Rather then CoD maps early. I Would much prefer more games. Ms seems to have fallen in a rut and the only thing that sort of revitalized them is the launch of a new console. Yet they seem to be going back to the same rut.
#4Lawboy2Posted 4/6/2014 8:18:17 PM
Homie_202 posted...
Lawboy2 posted...
Honestly what is the difference...buying studios is probably more risky...u have to pay the studio whether they suck or not


The difference is we would get new IPs. Rather then CoD maps early. I Would much prefer more games. Ms seems to have fallen in a rut and the only thing that sort of revitalized them is the launch of a new console. Yet they seem to be going back to the same rut.


I sorta disagree two big exclusives that are coming out are third party studios...titanfall and the order 1886...also quantum break and sunset are third parties