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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sucker Punch explain their exclusivity

Best games are exclusive to the PS3. UnCharted, MGS 4, Killzone 2 and Infamous. Power of the PS3's Cell and Blu-Ray-FTW.



Around the Network

Instead of Concentrating on making a game run well on both PS360 , they can actually concentrate on making a game. That's the advantage Exclusives will always have over Multiplat.



Hephaestos said:
right... then why make the game for PS3?
exclusive 360 has a bigger audience and the same freedom of creativity.
exclusive Wii has a bigger userbase, less reliance on graphics investments and more control possibilities...

And observe how it sells 500k copies lifetime 



PROUD MEMBER OF THE PSP RPG FAN CLUB

I would imagine there is also a certain level of security in sticking to one platform as closely as Sucker Punch do. Sony provides funding, time, advertising and bundles for their games. Given that they're a relatively small studio, going multiplatform could potentially mean stretched resources, less funding, less quality and ergo less overall sales.

The situation with Valve is a bit different. They have over 3 times the staff size of Sucker Punch, and have no close ties with any console company.



 

Ok, please, explain this to me.


According to Fleming, while going cross-platform puts a game in front of more potential eyeballs, "it also introduces a whole bunch of problems and compromises and difficulty that doesn't make making games a lot more fun. In fact, I think it subtracts from that."

Sucker punch + PS3 -> Great!

"The PC and the 360 are just more straightforward. We can focus on what we want to do, which is make game experiences, instead of sweating bullets over obscure architectural decisions they make with their platform."

Valve + X360 -> Lazy devs!

I just don't get the difference (apart of console preference of the forumers)



Around the Network
Kynes said:
Ok, please, explain this to me.


According to Fleming, while going cross-platform puts a game in front of more potential eyeballs, "it also introduces a whole bunch of problems and compromises and difficulty that doesn't make making games a lot more fun. In fact, I think it subtracts from that."

Sucker punch + PS3 -> Great!

"The PC and the 360 are just more straightforward. We can focus on what we want to do, which is make game experiences, instead of sweating bullets over obscure architectural decisions they make with their platform."

Valve + X360 -> Lazy devs!

I just don't get the difference (apart of console preference of the forumers)

 

Um, apparently you didn't read the posts in this thread where people are calling Sucker Punch lazy for not being multiplatform.  Don't cherry pick.

EDIT:  And if you are talking about a specific person who is being a hypocrit by calling Valve lazy and saying Sucker Punch is great for sticking with a single platform, call them out.  Don't assume that everyone calling Valve lazy is calling Sucker Punch great.



@SamuelRSmith

No need to hide ur face in shame :P



Vote to Localize — SEGA and Konami Polls

Vote Today To Help Get A Konami & SEGA Game Localized.This Will Only Work If Lots Of People Vote.

Click on the Image to Head to the Voting Page (A vote for Yakuza is a vote to save gaming)

bobobologna said:
Kynes said:
Ok, please, explain this to me.


According to Fleming, while going cross-platform puts a game in front of more potential eyeballs, "it also introduces a whole bunch of problems and compromises and difficulty that doesn't make making games a lot more fun. In fact, I think it subtracts from that."

Sucker punch + PS3 -> Great!

"The PC and the 360 are just more straightforward. We can focus on what we want to do, which is make game experiences, instead of sweating bullets over obscure architectural decisions they make with their platform."

Valve + X360 -> Lazy devs!

I just don't get the difference (apart of console preference of the forumers)

 

Um, apparently you didn't read the posts in this thread where people are calling Sucker Punch lazy for not being multiplatform.  Don't cherry pick.

EDIT:  And if you are talking about a specific person who is being a hypocrit by calling Valve lazy and saying Sucker Punch is great for sticking with a single platform, call them out.  Don't assume that everyone calling Valve lazy is calling Sucker Punch great.

I'm not talking about a specific person, but about human nature. When it's our prefered console the one which receives the game, the developers are great, they are doing the thing to do if you want to program a great game... when is other console the one which receives the game, they should devote more time and money to program the game to the console that I have, or they are monneyhatted or lazy. And it goes for everyone, we try to justify the things that we think are good for us. That's why this type of threads are flamebait prone, because they are controversial.



Kynes said:
Ok, please, explain this to me.


According to Fleming, while going cross-platform puts a game in front of more potential eyeballs, "it also introduces a whole bunch of problems and compromises and difficulty that doesn't make making games a lot more fun. In fact, I think it subtracts from that."

Sucker punch + PS3 -> Great!

"The PC and the 360 are just more straightforward. We can focus on what we want to do, which is make game experiences, instead of sweating bullets over obscure architectural decisions they make with their platform."

Valve + X360 -> Lazy devs!

I just don't get the difference (apart of console preference of the forumers)

Are you for real?

Where did Sucker Punch anywhere say anything negative about the 360.  They just stated that working on more than one platform will make things more difficult in general.

Meanwhile Valve has continually trashed the PS3 with statments like "it's too difficult" or that Sony's made an "obscure architectural decision".

So where Sucker Punch is saying that it is simply there choice to make exclusives and there is no fault with M$ or Nintendo, Valve continually blames Sony.

See the difference now!



Kynes said:
bobobologna said:
Kynes said:
Ok, please, explain this to me.


According to Fleming, while going cross-platform puts a game in front of more potential eyeballs, "it also introduces a whole bunch of problems and compromises and difficulty that doesn't make making games a lot more fun. In fact, I think it subtracts from that."

Sucker punch + PS3 -> Great!

"The PC and the 360 are just more straightforward. We can focus on what we want to do, which is make game experiences, instead of sweating bullets over obscure architectural decisions they make with their platform."

Valve + X360 -> Lazy devs!

I just don't get the difference (apart of console preference of the forumers)

 

Um, apparently you didn't read the posts in this thread where people are calling Sucker Punch lazy for not being multiplatform.  Don't cherry pick.

EDIT:  And if you are talking about a specific person who is being a hypocrit by calling Valve lazy and saying Sucker Punch is great for sticking with a single platform, call them out.  Don't assume that everyone calling Valve lazy is calling Sucker Punch great.

I'm not talking about a specific person, but about human nature. When it's our prefered console the one which receives the game, the developers are great, they are doing the thing to do if you want to program a great game... when is other console the one which receives the game, they should devote more time and money to program the game to the console that I have, or they are monneyhatted or lazy. And it goes for everyone, we try to justify the things that we think are good for us. That's why this type of threads are flamebait prone, because they are controversial.


I guess I'm not human...