Doobie_wop said:
Most of those are either to be expected or are of no benefit to Third Party studios in general. Hiring a studio to make a game for your IP isn't benefiting third parties, it's just farming out development, if I was to include your example, then Sony has helped 20 different development studios this generation. Funding The Last Story when it's your IP is not benefiting Third Parties. Bundling games should be standard practice. Also, even if everything you've listed was accurate, it still in no way stacks up to the amount of effort Sony and Microsoft has put into gaining third party support. Paying for the marketing of multiple games such as Assassins Creed 1 2 3, the Call of Duties, Final Fantasy 13, Fallout: New Vegas, Dead Space 2, Batman: Arkham Asylum, Medal of Honour, Gears of War, Rock Band and Resident Evil 5. Creating a free to use engine that lowers development costs and makes third party development significantly easier for the PS3. This engine has had 25 games made on it and it's received some fantastic results. Making deals with third party publishers to gain exclusive games, content or release dates. Sony sending out pocket teams from Sony Santa Monica, SCE Foster City Studio and Cambridge to work with many third party developers and help them with the hardware. Sony allowing easy access through their PSN network and Microsoft vigorously advertising and promoting third party Live Arcade games on their network. I could go on and on, but if Third Parties were to look at which publishers are offering more money, support and ease of use, then they are definently going to ignore Nintendo. |
Why should platform holders pay for the marketing of third party games??? 3 of the games you mention come from Ubisoft, Activision and EA - they are huge companies who can afford to market their own games.