SPIDER-MAN 2 Creative Director Teases "Epic" SPIDER-MAN 3 Plans And Responds To Complaints About Game Length

@FireandBlood - it's overrated. DLC will be a welcome addition, but that damn dialog is hideous, MJ looks like cloned Caitlyn, the fighting is repetitive as double-dutching and Miles has the personality of a plank. I expect it to sell well, and it has some good qualities, but I expected this to be Spidey’s version of Arkham Asylum- Arkham City progression, and it feels like they went autopilot and rode off the fumes of symbiote popularity and last gen concepts.

@Origame - funny how you mentioned the 'boring af mission with miles' deaf girlfriend', I didn't realize miles had a non-deaf girlfriend too.

@Origame - I haven't beaten it yet, but I'm loving it just like I loved the first. And I'd have to agree it doesn't need to be a hugely long game. I'm pretty casual with my gaming, so it's nice not to have to commit those kinds of hours just to see the end of the story.

But it certainly isn't without its flaws, but even with those flaws I still love every bit of it. Minus the stupid boring missions as MJ or Miles gf like you mentioned. You think they would have learned their lesson from all the hate they got for those missions in the first one. But at least there isn't as many of them.

I've come across a few bugs, which I don't think I noticed any in Spidey 1. So that's a shame, especially the ones that stop those little side missions from being complete. But all that being said, I still love the game, and can see myself spending countless hours swinging through New York. I don't know about you, but swinging around is so relaxing to me. I can seriously lose myself in it.

@Origame - yeah man I was genuinely surprised to see those missions pop up. Like I fully expected to not see anything of the sort in the sequel. It killed the pace, and flow of the first one. And then to do it again? It's like they just needed some filler or something...

The deaf mission was a strange choice. I get that they wanted players to feel some immersion while playing as a deaf person. But is a spiderman game... why am I playing as a deaf graffiti artist in a spiderman game? Lol

@Evansly - I've got to agree with the miles morales game. It just didn't do enough to warrant a full release. It was definitely dlc.

And yeah. I don't like Sony pushing the PC version years down the line. No reason it can't be day and date with consoles.

@Evansly - exactly. And we would've gotten gamepass on playstation if it wasn't for playstation itself.

It's ridiculous people think the abk merger is bad for consumers. God forbid a company be in a position to compete.

@Origame - Cause you brought up miles' deaf girlfriend as if he had any other kind, could have just said Miles' girlfriend.

Also, Playstation is a brand, Xbox is a product. God forbid a company be in a position to compete? That company is ten times bigger than Sony first of all, makes 10times more money than Sony in any given year. And you want Playstation to ruin their chances even more by supporting their rival's OS by giving them exclusive games, day and date? How's that gonna make it exclusive? Buddy, Microsoft wins even if you buy an XBOX or not, even if you buy a gamepass or not. As long as you buy a PC, they win. Their structure focuses on people moving into their platform be it gamepass, xbox or pc. As long as people play on anything other than playstation, they win. After Activision, they win mobile too. So, yeah, thats very bad for competition.

@SpiderParker - 1) no, I mentioned her being deaf because it's relevant to why the mission sucks. If you played the mission you'd understand.

2) dude, they are both brands and products. Stop acting like Sony has anything over Microsoft other than consoles sold.

3) not in terms of the gaming market, which is where this discussion is concerned.

@Origame - Gamepass never had the chance to be on Playstation. If it did, it would only drive people more towards Microsoft even if they buy PS. Everyone knows the real revenue is from games. Which is why, there's reports everywhere that Microsoft is actually winning this generation even with low Xbox sales cause people are buying the games on PC and the Gamepass too.

So in terms of gaming market, Microsoft is not really behind, in fact, it is ahead. Xbox console is behind. Which is why I said, Xbox is a product to drive people towards the brand. Even Microsoft doesn't treat itself as a brand anymore. But, Playstation is treating itself as a brand, even after putting the games on PC, they are giving a grace period to keep the brand alive, they are only doing that in an effort to stay relevant cause Microsoft is playing dirty, using Xbox to drive gamer market towards gamepass and pc.

Basically, Sony is being bullied into it, same as when PS plus refresh came in an effort to stay relevant against Gamepass. Surely, they profit too, but the profit would be much more neither platforms were there cause PS are sold more. Ofcourse, consumers are winning now, but its a monopoly by Microsoft, they are playing the long con after failing to capture console market, they changed their strategy. I'm a PC gamer first, and after years of gaming on PC, my first console was Playstation not Xbox. No one in their right mind would ever switch from PC to XBOX and that's cause Microsoft doesn't value XBOX as a brand.

@Origame - Oh, god, you don't understand anything about business. Do you? It's known for ages that Microsoft doesn't value Xbox, pretty much everyone knows this, its only a gateway to their other products. Dualsense Edge is a gateway to playstation, PS Plus is a gateway to PS, PS exclusives are a gateway to PS, but for Microsoft, Xbox doesn't matter. Microsoft is the brand, Xbox is the product.

I won't try much to explain this to you so if you understand it in short, thats good, else, whatever dude. Sony already had a hit with PS5, they didn't need subscription model to lure people in, Microsoft lost the console war, they had shitty games and low xbox sales and they already put everything on gamepass so they went all in. Sony had to retaliate or would have lost the Endgame. Xbox is winning everyother way than Console. They are winning by game purchase profits, subscription profit, active users, etc. In the end, from the gaming market, Microsoft is making more money than Sony even though Sony won the console wars. Microsoft never intended to win it.

Nintendo has no skin in this other than the fact that COD might release on switch. They have no reason to cry either way as the consumer base is different for Nintendo and Microsoft can't steal anything from Nintendo even if it tried. MS has and continues to steal the consumer base from Sony though, people with PS5 are on Gamepass, people with no xbox are on gamepass and soon COD, the most popular game on earth with highest sales on console and PC will soon be exclusive to XBOX, the game's profit will be Microsoft's, even if XBOX pulls out of the console war and it is just PS5 and Nintendo, MS is still winning by profits as the console are less profit than the games itself. Microsoft will become the biggest game studio after the purchase so let me know how its not a monopoly, how you critiquing Disney for the same doesn't apply to Microsoft? Also, by the way, many people tried to stop it, Sony gave up the same way the others gave up, FTC still goes on and doesn't want to give in.

Anyway, I'm curious to know if you are on the Apple or Android team.

@Origame - It is bullying considering Microsoft had enough money to bleed to make Gamepass a success even at the initial losses incurred just to stay relevant. Any other company couldn't have gone through it cause of the amount of investment needed. They could afford it and recover it down the line, same reason why they went for Activision. They are the biggest game studio now. If they valued the Xbox Console, they would have kept the exclusive games and reason for people to buy the Xbox. Their endgame is profit not the Xbox console which has been apparent for decades. They didn't try to build Xbox brand and are pouring everything into Gamepass now. They are offering streaming rights and sharing COD for now but after it expires, its all theirs to exploit, even now they will reap the benefits. Way to flip my argument over to me by saying PS is doing what I said Xbox is doing. Sony wants people to stay on PS, MS wants people to use any of their million products, not necessarily Xbox console, which is what they have been doing for ages.

Also, if Gamepass is offered on PS, the profits are reaped by MS not Sony. And like you said, most people go harder after weed so that's what MS is hoping for too but its not a point as long as people buy on their platform, they win.

I hate apple but I can't argue that they haven't built their brand nicely. Sony is doing the same with PS. MS is doing the opposite. They care about profit not the brand which could look to you as the same thing but its not. Sony is bleeding but kept the brand quality even if it meant sacrificing profits. MS bled for gamepass momentarily but they could afford it and now they are reaping benefits.

As the biggest game studio, MS will have a monopoly even if they pull out of the console wars, in fact, they might as destroy the whole console gaming industry in a few years. Which normally would be expected but as being the biggest studio, gives them an awful advantage already even though that's still in far-future. Stadia shutdown because they couldn't compete with the better competitions, many others will meet the same fate in future at the hands of Microsoft.
The next generation of console is probably going to be the last and guess who is going to be the winner after that if not earlier?

@Origame - Actually, Microsoft has more exclusives than Sony in the year 2023.

MS didn't value Xbox is why they are in this spot in the first place, cutting off competition doesn't benefit consumers in the long run. CMA, FTC and many other argued the same but ultimately gave up cause that's how much of a behemoth Microsoft already is.

Microsoft will never agree to Gamepass on PS in the first place but even if it did, again the lion's share would be to MS. Again, its a stupid dream to say MS will do that but even if they did, Sony would only get a percentage if its bought through PS store, which will be unlikely, even then it would also drive people into Gamepass even more which would hurt Sony both in the short run and long run, people will stop buying PS in the next generation. Also, Microsoft is already planning Gamepass for streaming devices and smart TVs so in the long run, Microsoft will get out of the console bussiness all together so why would Sony shoot themselves in their own foot and speed track it? Let alone, why would MS need to share profit with Sony, when they can keep all to themselves anyway? Also, as the biggest game studio, it has a huge library that people can access through TVs, why would they need Xbox? They have been hurting their Xbox consoles since the start but right now they are planning to replace it with Gamepass.

COD does expire on PS in 2033 which is basically a 10year commitment. After which, its a Xbox and gamepass exclusive.

Microsoft is the biggest studio right now.

Also, PS5 was actually sold on a loss by Sony since Microsoft priced the Xbox competitively to bully Sony so Sony had to lower the price. Which is why the Slim isn't priced any differently. Microsoft is 10 times is bigger than Sony and that's me being modest. So they can bully and waste as much money they want cause in the long run they will recover it, Sony can't do that cause they don't even have that much money to begin with.

@Origame - So, are you on a PS, Xbox or PC?

Congrats on getting the exclusive games on another platform owned by Microsft!

Having your cloud competitor be on your platform is advantageous to you? They are focusing on cloud gaming, putting them on PS will not only kill XBOX but will also kill PS, it would build their player base and they can ditch PS anytime, in fact, players will ditch PS if they can just cloud game on a $30 streaming stick. Also, its a fiction, Microsoft will never allow Gamepass on PS5.

Dumbass, after the 10years, Microsoft has no obligation to provide COD on any other platform and they can't be sued for it. Just how old are you? You speak like a guy living in his head with zero sense about anything. As for the brand, XBOX is a console brand, you talking about the console dying and being replaced with XBOX gamepass are doing nothing but proving my point that they don't value the brand. And you are so deaf that you can't differentiate the two. Imagine, Apple paves the way for its replacement Mac Cloud PC, Microsoft already did that by the way. Do you think, anyone will buy a Macbook if they can get the same performance on a Android Tablet? Or rather, will anyone ever need to upgrade from a 10year old Macbook if they can just get performance boost from the cloud? Microsoft doesn't want to be in the hardware business cause they keep failing in it or rather they keep hurting their hardware by contradicting approach.

@Origame - Oh shut the [frick] up, the brand is [frick]ed. Diluted. Its main competitor is not PS, its gamepass. Competing against itself. Consoles will become irrelevant sooner than later thanks to Microsoft and it will have the monopoly. And again, for the love of god, stop arguing about the time length COD will stay on PS, Phil Spencer has himself said it before and after the merger, it will stay for 10years according to the agreement. And those are the terms. Nothing more, nothing less.

PC is relevant only cause consoles are relevant. Once consoles are no longer relevant, PC gaming won't be relevant either. Think about it dummy, if people switch to cloud gaming, what is the need for hardware? What is the need for high end PC? While, I'm not saying I'm against it, cause I do often stream games on my own too, but Microsoft killing it on purpose sooner than later cause they have the infrastructure, power and money to go toe to toe with anyone else is just gonna kill the competition and the creativity. And what happens when you have the monopoly? That's when the price hikes comes. Ask Netflix & Disney+ what I'm talking about.

Also, yes you can do that on a $30 streaming stick. Heck, I'm doing that pretty much everyday. Also, considering the fact that you have a dell, you are not much of a PC gamer then, are you? So, pretty much a no lifer big talker who doesn't even believe his own words but just wanna pick fights cause he can. Also, which spider-man game did you pick up the PS for again? Saw you crying about the mission with Miles' girlfriend, I mean, that was a side mission, not even an important one, in fact, a very short one. And you came online to cry about it, how about you enjoy your shit for once than complaining all the time? Whining is not a good look. In fact, people who whine are more likely to dislike things than those who do not. Also, whiners are annoying AF. Also, the way you talk, its clear you are a big troll, for example, Hardware isn't a brand? I mean lol dude, I'm trying to understand, do you think you are in any way an intellectual? Xbox brand started with the hardware genius. Its like saying Apple should stop making Computers and provide cloud computing only. Trust me buddy, I'm not a console gamer first, but PS is always gonna be the better option between the two, even for the casual gamers, even for the hardcore. And, Microsoft put PS up there, I couldn't care less TBH, not a fan of COD and people like you with 3 gaming options plus mobile gaming for sure too are the ones who will suffer the most. And considering how much you whine, you will get your reasons soon enough. Also, just to be honest, my main problem isn't even about the monopoly that Microsoft will have, but rather the low quality monopoly it will have. Its like this buddy, Marvel has been carrying the entire CBM lineup for years and DC has been [frick]ing up all over, but DC still kept going on cause Marvel pulled the weight and the fatigue was no where to be seen. But now that both are [frick]ing up, even decent movies are getting hate. The CBM industry went down cause the market leader stopped giving hits, imagine now, DCEU started in 2008 and Marvel wasn't even there, CBMs would have been over like a decade ago.

@Origame - Not really, Sony [frick]s up the movies, doesn't mean it's [frick]ing up the gaming industry. I'm a admirer of quality not brand.

@Origame - Ah, missing the point once again, as I hoped you would. I don't care about the brand, doesn't mean brand is not important to the company itself or to the consumers. Sony is a good brand but I'm not a loyalist. They have both good and bad. I choose only the good. As with any other brand. Playstation is a very good brand, there's barely much bad with it and Sony treats it with respect so people treat it with respect. Apple is anti-consumer and anti-competition brand but again a good brand, treats itself with respect so people give it respect. Microsoft is a decent brand but it treat Xbox with no respect and is competing against xbox by providing Gamepass. Xbox is a bad brand cause of the no respect choices by MS. Is it a good product? Maybe. Maybe not.

Good or bad brand doesn't make the product good or bad. Its the choices and the way they go about it. Not sharing their assets also gives the brand leverage and reason for people to come back. Otherwise, a billion people would have made a better Justice League movie and DC would not even be needed. Marvel on the other hand, made a few bad movies in recent times, yet it keeps earning the money back. There's your difference between treating your brand with respect versus without.

Also, diluting your assets will bite you back later if not sooner. Also, you just want the free snacks, but the less money they make, the less quality the product will get eventually. Cuts here and there, soon it will be low quality shit. Just look at Netflix, Disney+, etc. They flood the market with mediocrity and only have hits once in a while. Which is why they are hiking prices everywhere. So yeah, I would rather choose option 2.

@Origame - I clearly stated, good brand doesn't mean good products. Apple products are subpar most times. But from a business stand point, thats how you roll. Never said they are doing right by consumers. Apple products are made for dummies. Its a fact. But the way the do business, they are still prioritised by other companies and devs. Playstation on the other hand, has good products and are prioritised by other companies and devs cause of the same reasons.

MS did it for the mobile market and the cloud market. Exclusivity for their console is the last thing on their mind, they are already building the next gen cloud gaming platform. Basically, it will be a streaming stick, lol.

I got no side. Doing good for the brand is just as important as doing good for the consumers. Cause the best thing a company can do for the consumers is make everything free, and guess what? Its also the worst thing it can do for the brand. It takes money to run the company and who will suffer if the company doesn't make money? That's right, the consumers. If 30million people are gonna buy COD on xbox and 30million people are gonna buy it on PC, thats 60million people spending 60$ on one game, guess what will happen if that same game is on a $10 subscription service on day one. MS is building gamepass userbase by burning money, in the long run, quality will suffer when they decide its time to earn back the money. Not only that, the console will die like this. Even the competing companies will get anxious and make the same mistakes.

If you think I'm joking, just check a billion other such cases. Same thing happened with all streaming services. Heck, this is the play drug dealers go with everytime they wanna introduce a drug. Flood the market with low cost high potent drug, get people hooked then hike the prices and lower the quality of the drug. This is the most anti-consumer and anti-competition BS any company pulls in the name of being consumer friendly. Heck, even Apple did the same when they flooded most US public and private sectors with free and cheap Apple devices and got people hooked. After people are hooked, any other "superior" product will look inferior. So, yes, the gamepass might live on and might even be successful at the cost of the console and sacrifice of quality WRT cost.

@Origame - Thats because, PepsiCo tried to change the ways and couldn't do it in the same brand as people reacted to it repeatedly. Pepsi is popular for underhanded marketing to steal CocoCola's market share and even though they have chipped at it, they didn't surpass coke. So, Sierra Mist is just another example how Brand matters just as much as it failed repeatedly to beat Sprite and had to discontinue and start from scratch even though they tried alternatives and it didn't work.

Brand doesn't matter to a smart consumer when choosing wisely whats good or not in every aspect. But that doesn't mean brand doesn't matter at all. For example, Apple may make 100 products and you will see some dumbass loyalist with all Apple devices when in fact, there is only one Apple product worth having which is a Macbook. Why do people go for it? Cause the brand itself is very alluring and centered around its own system. If I didn't have an option for an equally worthy but better option in Samsung, I would have chosen Apple cause others brands are way inferior. So when I say brands don't matter, I mean, it doesn't matter when deciding a product line WRT cost, service, quality and features. But if the brand is doing good in all of those for a product, then the brand is good for that product line as long as it keeps doing good there. But that doesn't mean the brand itself is exceptional for every other product. So, yes brand matters, but blindly following a brand one way or the other is what dumb consumers do. In some ways that blind faith can lead to return, in other it can lead to lead to burn. Gaming is a time consuming and high cost market. If you see the streaming market being flooded with low quality products, the game streaming market will be worse when Streaming is the only option. MS is just gonna burn the Activision brand and has already burned xbox brand before and will continue to do so, all to get to the game streaming leadership. Abundance of content doesn't mean abundance of quality and pushing for it too much is whats bringing down the market. You wanna blame Sony for putting out a unpolished product? Well, MS is also to blame for that as it is putting pressure on the market. This loop will lead to a burn out of both brands and consumers in actions and reactions. So, I applaud Apple for staying true to its brand and not reacting too hard to put a subpar product out to market pressure but then again, their lead and loyality is too much for them to see any real change during market pressure.

@Origame - First of all, I clearly stated brand does matter, I said brand doesn't matter when choosing a product as long as a smart consumer will clearly check for individual qualities of a product in which case brand's principles and way of business related to that specific product are also taken into account, which most often doesn't apply to a separate product by that brand. You are just inept at understanding the micro and macro of a brand.

A common person would think, just because a Macbook is a good product, cause the brand (Apple) handled it well means a iPhone is also a good product. A smart consumer knows Macbook is just as much a brand as a product line and the parent brand could be handling other products and brands in a terrible fashion. Ever imagined why a cheap product from a well known brand can attract alot of negativity while a expensive product could also be very well recieved? Many times people confuse the two and think one way or the other about the whole brand. Some companies fight it by keeping different product lines (Samsung), others fight it by creating new brands (vivo, oppo, xiaomi). So, kindly understand that product lines are also brands.

Microsoft and you hoping for good name for gamepass will serve them well for their main brand of Xbox has equal chances of bad name of Xbox putting them down. And like I explained, gamepass is just trying to hook people with its offering and since it doesn't have many quality offerings, it got a big company like Activision Blizzard, which even if it attracts users, it will not last and could ruin Activision in the long run as revenue will certainly go down when it hits Streaming in the long run even if in short run it makes money.

It's pretty easy to see that Sony has been trying to play catch up with MS in the game streaming zone while also providing exclusives. And while PS Plus is still a better offer than Gamepass, it is still threatened as the competition has more to offer even if the more is not worth it. I am buying less games, I'm seeing that most games arrive pretty fast, which even though is actually quite slow compared to Gamepass, is still too fast. So, PS is getting less of my money, which although is good for me as a consumer, I'm sure their revenue will go down, which is not surprising considering that they had to increase prices. So, the amount of money they must be losing should be quite high, which as a smaller company would be bothersome to Sony but if you think about it logically, Microsoft would be losing much more than Sony considering they are taking a even riskier approach, so even if as a bigger company they can handle it, it would be quite a bother in the long run and quality of their games would suffer just as it did with Spider-Man. So, in the long run, we as consumers will suffer on both side of the fence even if in the short run, we are the one benefitting from it.

Sony didn't put a pressure on MS by putting them in last place, thats just business which was up until that point was quite profitable for both even if one was more than the other. But even after being in last place and wasting more money in a cash grab way to get users is a very risky move that puts both companies at a risk and makes both of them less profitable and lower quality. This is why many consumer and competition regulators have opposed the this deal. Not only does it give MS abundance of control on Cloud Gaming, it also harms not only the consumers of Activision games but also consumers of cloud games or games that are not released on cloud but are expected to hit soon after.

@GhostDog -