Sony has less First Party Studios than Microsoft. 21 vs 15

[mjk45]

J_Allard said:

Turkish said:

J_Allard said:
If the platform holder is not publishing the title, then how is there a partnership just because the game only releases on that platform? That's just silly.

So in order for it to be a partnership, the platformer holder needs to publish the game at all costs? MGS4 is not on 360 because Konami doesn't want extra sales? Thats just silly.

You seem like a guy who should be smart enough to understand what partnership means.

As for MGS4, is there a partnership? Who knows. Do you know? No. Do I know? No. Is there precedence for a Japanese company not releasing a game on 360 because the cost may not be worth the potential revenue? Yes.

360 has more than a couple RTS games not on PS3 but not published by MS. Do these developers/publishers have a "partnership" with MS? No.

You were dead wrong about Sine Mora. Just get over it and quit finding inane stuff to complain about.

The trouble is using the word Partnership it tends to be seen as  something more than obtaining a timed exclusive , to most people it would be looked at as a form of business relationship that ties the two or more parties closely together and had some form of cooperate effort , when  i see that word used in the list on either side I would immediately think of there being some type of ongoing relationship ,that sees them as being tied to one camp or the other and if they no longer are it would be a former partnership and irrelevant .