Quantcast
Sony on 3rd party exclusivity

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony on 3rd party exclusivity

Joelcool7 said:

Yes Microsoft has done it alittle bit lately but anybody remember Final Fantasy back when Sony signed them up to make FF games exclusively for Sony products. I remember they had to find a way around that to release CrystalChronicles on the GameCube. It was a big issue that Sony had paid Square off. Then theirs all of the exclusives Sony gets on a regular basis for pay offs.Anybody hear about Arkham Asylum? Sony does it far more then even Microsoft and Microsoft is getting really good at it these days.

I think Sony would have purchased the exclusive rights to GTA's DLC if Microsoft hadn't paid so much. I can't remember how much Microsoft paid but I think it was around like 50-mill wasn't it. Sony could develope 3 big budget games for that price it was no longer feasable to buy the exclusive rights.

I think this statement just goes to show you how much Sony and Microsoft rely on third parties to sell their hardware when compaired with first party Nintendo who pretty much doesn't even need or care for exclusives. Nintendo can sell its hardware off first party software alone while Microsoft and Sony have to fight tooth and nail to get each others exclusives!

 

Final Fantasy started development on the N64 but it was using technology that was a generation old (like the 360 is now) and the game wouldn't fit on cartridges so they switched to the PS1.  MS fanboys like to lie and say Sony bribed them because they're ashamed that MS is the king of the very low practice of bribery as opposed to actual "competition".  I know with 50 million you could develop 3 games...so why doesn't MS do it???  ...my main point, they'd rather bribe than actually create and compete.  Not even a complete game, 2 episodes...but bribing is such a high priority to them so they did it.



Around the Network
heruamon said:
 

And like I said in the other thread...buying studios is the ultimate moneyhatting move, imho....which sony did ALOT of in it's heyday, now they want to whine about it.  Look at the strong arming tactics they applied to Japanese developers to secure exclusivity, or put them at risk for NOT being able to develop for their console...complete dick move...please Sony, enough with the sad songs.


How do you get off comparing the aquisition of a company that Sony has worked closely for years to Microsoft showing up with a company they have no affiliation with (Rare) and buying %60 of the main owners and putting Nintendo in a minority ownership situation, therefore forcing it to sell Rare???  You are comparing spitting on the sidewalk with murder.  I know it's shameful what Microsoft has been doing in the gaming industry, but I don't understand why you are trying to cover for them.

 

You'd be pissed if Nintendo showed up, bribed Epic and Bungie and told them they can't develop for the 360 anymore.



EdStation3 said:
Joelcool7 said:

Yes Microsoft has done it alittle bit lately but anybody remember Final Fantasy back when Sony signed them up to make FF games exclusively for Sony products. I remember they had to find a way around that to release CrystalChronicles on the GameCube. It was a big issue that Sony had paid Square off. Then theirs all of the exclusives Sony gets on a regular basis for pay offs.Anybody hear about Arkham Asylum? Sony does it far more then even Microsoft and Microsoft is getting really good at it these days.

I think Sony would have purchased the exclusive rights to GTA's DLC if Microsoft hadn't paid so much. I can't remember how much Microsoft paid but I think it was around like 50-mill wasn't it. Sony could develope 3 big budget games for that price it was no longer feasable to buy the exclusive rights.

I think this statement just goes to show you how much Sony and Microsoft rely on third parties to sell their hardware when compaired with first party Nintendo who pretty much doesn't even need or care for exclusives. Nintendo can sell its hardware off first party software alone while Microsoft and Sony have to fight tooth and nail to get each others exclusives!

 

Final Fantasy started development on the N64 but it was using technology that was a generation old (like the 360 is now) and the game wouldn't fit on cartridges so they switched to the PS1.  MS fanboys like to lie and say Sony bribed them because they're ashamed that MS is the king of the very low practice of bribery as opposed to actual "competition".  I know with 50 million you could develop 3 games...so why doesn't MS do it???  ...my main point, they'd rather bribe than actually create and compete.  Not even a complete game, 2 episodes...but bribing is such a high priority to them so they did it.

lol, no.  Sony got FF (and Square) by offering a sweetheart western publishing and advertising deal.  ROM cost concerns were an issue with N64 (though that would've been somewhat mitigated with the 64DD, which is what Zelda and Dragon Quest were originally planned to use), but Sony actually actively courted them and with HUGE sums.  FFVII's US ad campaign alone was muli-millions and basically unheard of in gaming at the time.  If Square had just wanted to go to the leading CD-ROM format at the time, FFVII would've been a Saturn game...

Sony practically invented 3rd party "moneyhatting" in the games space.  Not it's come to bite them in the ass.  Karma.



Seece said:
makingmusic476 said:
Seece said:
Hypocrit, it's exactly the same, except Sony give the money before hand rather than after.

It's not the same at all.  Sony had a critical role in the development of titles like LBP.  They paid for development and had their own producers and developers working on the game.  Sony Cambridge and other studios assisted Media Molecule significantly with engine technology and Phil Harrison himself pushed the studio in the direction of user generated content.  Similarly, Sony Japan had a helping hand in the creation of Demon's Souls, from improving From Software's engine to SCEJ producers directly molding the shape of the game.  Without SCE's money and people, these games would not be what they are.

This method of pursuing exclusive titles fosters creativity and development, unlike merely buying exlcusivity with a check, which does nothing more than make a formerly multiplat game exclusive for a few months.  One method puts new and better titles in the hands of gamers, while the other takes them away.  Or keeps them away for a few months.

If you're going to call them hypocrites, do it for something like Ghostbusters or the Joker challenge maps in Batman.  It's a dick move tossing around a few bucks just to keep people from having access to those.

Just a way of sugar coating it, The game's Microsoft shell out for don't need help, they're capable of making the game without Microsoft's team.

So basically

Sony helps dev's that can't make a brilliant game by putting money and people into it, and Microsoft help those that can make a decent game by putting ... just money into it.

 

When late down the road they all end up on PS3 anyway, The PS3 exclusives however don't. So they're the ones denieing them access.

man you are annoying.



It's pretty hypocrite told by them considering that the Playstation brand gained it's success mostly thanks to third party exclusives.
ResidentEvil/FinalFantasy/Tekken/Metal Gear
While the can afford to keep 3rd party games away form Sega and Nintendo systems they can't compete against Microsoft.



Around the Network
jarrod said:

 

lol, no.  Sony got FF (and Square) by offering a sweetheart western publishing and advertising deal.  ROM cost concerns were an issue with N64 (though that would've been somewhat mitigated with the 64DD, which is what Zelda and Dragon Quest were originally planned to use), but Sony actually actively courted them and with HUGE sums.  FFVII's US ad campaign alone was muli-millions and basically unheard of in gaming at the time.  If Square had just wanted to go to the leading CD-ROM format at the time, FFVII would've been a Saturn game...

Sony practically invented 3rd party "moneyhatting" in the games space.  Not it's come to bite them in the ass.  Karma.


No...Square left Nintendo because they put last gen storage medium which didn't allow developers to develop what they wanted...

 

Sources:

http://www.edge-online.com/magazine/the-making-of-final-fantasy-vii

http://www.lostlevels.org/200510/

"Square was also accused of signing a deal with Sony to produce games exclusively for Sony consoles.

Most of these claims were nothing more than rumors that were spawned as the result of some shoddy journalism; however, many people accepted these rumors as fact, and these faux facts were perpetuated as being truths."

Yeah...so for the record: MS fanboy trying to justify their bribing over companies by saying Sony paid off Square can stop their lying now...

I know it feels good lying about Sony and Final Fantasy to make the spinless take over of Rare seem okay.

 

The ad campaign isn't money hatting since the heavy ads didn't start until the game was well into development...

 

Saturn didn't get it becasue of their ughhh....premature....console dropping, they pissed off a lot of 3rd parties by dropping consoles after erm...2 year and 4 year life cycles...32X and Saturn



freebs2 said:
It's pretty hypocrite told by them considering that the Playstation brand gained it's success mostly thanks to third party exclusives.
ResidentEvil/FinalFantasy/Tekken/Metal Gear
While the can afford to keep 3rd party games away form Sega and Nintendo systems they can't compete against Microsoft.

They gained those by offering limitless storage capacity over its competition...kind of like how today the....oh nevermind.

Microsoft just sneaks up on Rare, takes a majority ownership and then leaves Nintendo with minority and forces them to sell there shares. 



EdStation3 said:
freebs2 said:
It's pretty hypocrite told by them considering that the Playstation brand gained it's success mostly thanks to third party exclusives.
ResidentEvil/FinalFantasy/Tekken/Metal Gear
While the can afford to keep 3rd party games away form Sega and Nintendo systems they can't compete against Microsoft.

They gained those by offering limitless storage capacity over its competition...kind of like how today the....oh nevermind.

Microsoft just sneaks up on Rare, takes a majority ownership and then leaves Nintendo with minority and forces them to sell there shares. 

I've never said microsoft its better and it doesn't change the point.....as for lititless capacity it's true for FF and MGS not for tekken still Sega also had CDs, not to mention all 3rd party exclusives on Ps2 important Final Fantasy, Metal Gear Solid , GTA (for a limited time) and minor ones Soulcalibur3, Devil My Cry, Onimusha, Okami,....



Sega had CD but they were thrown away by Sega's inability to support hardware and their tendency to premature kill there systems...32X used last gen storage and was supported for 2 years...Saturn was supported 4 years. 3rd parties were turned off by these things...One moment they're promoting it...next moment they're killing it. A lot of those companies had developed close working relations. There is no doubt the Kojima loves PS1,2,3 hardware a lot more the competition. Sony didn't show up and say "Here is a $50million if you go around saying you like us more." like MS did with Rockstar.



Seece said:
Signalstar said:
Sony owns the IP though? Do you want them to publish games on other consoles?

Is that aimed at me? If so no, I don't, I understand the important of exclusives, so while I agree Sony is fine to do it, I'm going back to my main point of them being hypocrit's, people can sugarcoat it all they like.

It's not exactly hypocritical in this generation of gaming.  If you'd like to go back to and recall the PS2 era or before, OK maybe.  However, let's look at the number of games each SONY and MS have paid for exclusivity or timed exclusivity on this generation..  I don't have figures in front of me, but I'm willing to bet the difference is quite large in SONY's favor of not having done it.  I'd suffice it to say his words were taken out of context..for anyone to believe that no company can or would ever do that is a statement of ignorance.  It will happen to some degree no matter what..what he was most likely referring to was the rate at which their 'competition' is doing it.  And my blind grandmother can see MS tries to buy everything they can.

Also, people keep saying 'GhostBusters?' Uhmm..no?  Before Sony did what they did, no one else was going to, no?  There was a reason SONY stepped in, it wasn't just to keep it exclusive.  If I'm not mistaken, since they couldn't find a publisher for the game, it made perfect sense since Columbia Pictures (an auxiliary of SONY) produced the motion picture, didn't they? That's a failed argument all the way around.