By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
kain_kusanagi on 08 March 2012
Edit Thread
Hynad said:

kain_kusanagi said:

 No, I do. I just fundamentally believe that games should be available to as many people as possible. For a business it makes sense and for gamers it makes sense. Why would any gamer want a game to be limited to a small number for potential fans when it's developer is independent and could have easily ported or co-developed the same game for as many platforms as possible?

If you'd do, you'd understand that many such occurences happen when a publisher approaches such developer to make the game for them.  Sometimes, it's the other way around, for different reasons like seeking funding.  But many times, it also happens because a publisher is looking for that dev's expertise in one given genre.

You wouldn't want a game you heavily funded to end up on your direct competitor's console.  It just wouldn't make any sense.  Heavy Rain is one such example. 

There's also IPs that are owned by the publisher, like, say, Pokemon, that ends up being developed by a second party dev like Game Freak.  Obviously, they should develop their own games and go multi-platform, right?  

Not all developers have deep pockets, but they have the talent.  So they seek fundings from bigger publishers.  In this day and age, making games is really expensive, and not all smaller devs wish to settle on making iOS games.

Dude, I understand it. But that doesn't mean I agree with. The way I feel about game development the only acceptable "2nd Party" partnership is the "Pokemon" example you gave. Nintendo owns the IP and contracted a developer to do it. That developer doesn't have any control, they are just doing a job for a another company. If they didn't do it Nintendo would just hire someone else to do it or do it themselves internally. I don't have a problem with that. What I don't like, what I fundamentally wish there was less of, are games exclusive to a single platform that aren't owned or developed by the platform holder. Like I said, I fully understand the workings of 3rd Party, "2nd Party", and 1st Party developers, but that's doesn't mean I have to agree with the decisions that developers make when the end results in fewer gamers able to play the games.

At one time Quantic Dream was multiplatform. For some reason that changed after they made a deal with Sony. Now all of a sudden they are exclusive to the PS3 when many of their fans first played their games on PC, Dreamcast, and Xbox. For some reason Quantic Dream is willing to abondon those fans and sell less then they would if they released on all available platforms. Sure Sony's money helps, but they could have made a deal with Activision, EA, Ubisoft, etc. They may not have gotten as much money but they would have probably made more money in the end and created a larger fan base too.