By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales Discussion - Sony and MS's approach to exclusive contents: which is better?

Munkeh111 said:
Lord N said:
Munkeh111 said:
Lord N said:
Munkeh111 said:
Insomniac is not 1st party, I don't get how Sony have managed to get so many exclusives from them and still haven't bought them, I don't think Insomniac have made a game on a non-Sony platform

 

Sony owns the IP's that they develop. (Ratchet & Resistance)

I am not sure about that, I definitely read an interview with Brian (I think) Hastings, who said that they are 100% independent from Sony, it was in an older OPM, though he could be lying

 

I said that they own the IP's, not the developer.

Insomniac couldn't make a Ratchet or Resistance game without Sony's permission.

 

By 100% independent I mean Sony have no control over them, and it would also imply they own their own IPs. To be honest, I am not sure

@ the god of war, the studio is for more Quest for Booty style things, and experimenting with new ideas

 

No, it doesn't imply that they own the IPs at all.

Here is a list of Sony owned franchises:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Computer_Entertainment   

If that's not enough for you, get a copy of a Ratchet game, look at the small print on the back of the case, and it will clearly state that Ratchet is a trademark of Sony Computer Entertainment America.

Insomniac didn't even develop the portable titles (Size Matters, Secret Agent Clank. They were developed by High Impact Games and published by Sony. That wouldn't be the case if Insomniac owned the IPs.

Seriously, I thought this was common knowledge by now. Media Molecule isn't first or second party, but that doesn't change the fact that Sony owns the Little Big Planet franchise.

 

 

 



 

Consoles owned: Saturn, Dreamcast, PS1, PS2, PSP, DS, PS3

Around the Network

Well that is very good news, though it does not stop the possibility of them working on 3rd party games unfortunately.

If insomniac did own the IPs then they could always allow High Impact to work on them (especially as it was started by former insomniac employees)




Yes, Insomniac can indeed create their own IP's and make them multiplatform.

If Insomniac owned the IPs and allowed High Impact to develop Ratchet games, then they themselves would have published them.

 

Consoles owned: Saturn, Dreamcast, PS1, PS2, PSP, DS, PS3

Insomniac seem to take the view that focusing on one platform allows them to be cost efficient (only one set of tools/tech to understand) and only one platform to develop their engine on.

Given the number of titles they've squeezed out and the accumulated sales they've seen so far its hard to fault their choice.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

I believe they are financially supported by Sony to a degree and certainly they've recieved and given an abundance of technical aids and assitance to and from many of Sony's in house studio, you could almost call them a defacto second party.

Insomniac prefer to remain indepedent, this is probably one of the biggest factor in Sony not acquiring them as Sony have shown in the past that they have no issue swallowing larger studios.




Around the Network
RVDondaPC said:
There is no better choice. Either one could work or fail. Sony's is a higher risk with a potential higher reward. Sony is more in control of their exclusive games. MS is a lower risk, lower reward system. They are not as in control of their exclusive content however they are in a much better situation to easily adapt and adjust to the market.

I would probably go with Sony's from a business perspective, especially if you plan on being in this industry for the long run. But I do see the benefits of MS's strategy.

I Think you are spot on. this is exactly what I would say

SWA_JM_Obi-Wan said:
RVDondaPC said:
There is no better choice. Either one could work or fail. Sony's is a higher risk with a potential higher reward. Sony is more in control of their exclusive games. MS is a lower risk, lower reward system. They are not as in control of their exclusive content however they are in a much better situation to easily adapt and adjust to the market.

I would probably go with Sony's from a business perspective, especially if you plan on being in this industry for the long run. But I do see the benefits of MS's strategy.

 

I Think you are spot on. this is exactly what I would say

 

it's probably best to have a good mix of the two