kowenicki said:
VGKing said:
kowenicki said:
VGKing said:
kowenicki said:
VGKing said:
kowenicki said:
VGKing said:
kowenicki said:
VGKing said:
Machiavellian said:
VGKing said:
No 3rd party developer is stupid enough to have a game exclusive to 1 platform. This goes especially for already established franchises. Have you see how Bioshock and Mass Effect sell? The sales don't match the hype and reviews. |
When it comes to 3rd parties developing for one system it comes down to how big and experience the developer is for the multiple systems they want to devlelop for. It cost a lot of money, time and resources to develop for more than one platform. Sometimes publishers will contract out that work to another developer. What you are probably thinking is no BIG time publisher will commit to just one platform as that can limit their profitbility. A developer on the other hand is best to concentrate on one system as trying to release a game on many different hardware because it splits your time and development for the number of people you have and can reduce the quality of your games.
There are plenty of developers that only concentrate on one or 2 platforms. Also MS has their own IPs sitting around waiting for MS to either have internal team or external teams get to work on.
I do agree that established IPS that are multiplat already will not be up for grabs.
|
This gen will be easier than ever to port between platforms.
|
So basically you think MS wont retain any 3rd party exclusives, can't attract any 3rd party exclusives and cat buy any 3rd part exclusives.
What a surprise.
|
When the hell did I say that?
|
You said they couldn't buy any in response to me. But that dosn matter because my statemrnt is covered by this statement you made:
"No 3rd party developer is stupid enough to have a game exclusive to 1 platform. This goes especially for already established franchises"
That seems pretty final. I imagine it doesn't apply to anything Sony related though...... Obviously.
|
I said they couldn't buy any as in whatever they wanted. How did you take this out of context? My comment was pretty clear.
@bold
Yes this is what I wrote. I stand by it. I even provided examples of games like Bioshock and Mass Effect which underwhelm with their sales.
|
So no exclusives 3rd party games next gen then, except from stupid developers.
|
The big publishers won't have AAA games with huge budgets exclusive to one platform. We'll probably see some indie titles and some risky new IP though.
Basically, don't expect the Battlefields, FIFAs or Call of Duties to be exclusive to any one platform. Not even timed.
|
So now its gone from "any" to FIFA, COD and Battlefield.
Thats better. We got there in the end.
|
Going back through all my comments I realized I never actually said the word "any". I never said Microsoft can't get "any" exclusives. You are putting words in my mouth. You are wrong. Notice how I used Black Ops 2 as an example. Again, you are hell-bent on on starting something and completely misinterpreting my comments. Watch it. This is your original comment followed by my reply.
And here is your original comment
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=5318392
"Well in theory they could buy anything they please. Everything has a price. I hope they do.... Could be funny.
It's no different to buying up a studio."
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=5318432
"Let's use Black Ops 2 as an example. The game sold 10million+ on PS3. For Microsoft to make that exclusive they would have to pony up $600million dollars. Of course this doesn't take into account the cut that retail gets so in reality Activision wouldn't get the whole $600m. But still, its a high price to pay and that doesn't even include DLC sales. Then you have to factor in the damage this would do to the brand on that platform and the fact that not everyone will buy an Xbox to play COD. It's also worth considering that those $10m Black Ops 2 sales on PS3 wouldn't have tansferred to the 360 version.
So in order for this to be worth it for Activision, Microsoft would need to pay per game. So $600m * 5 games over 5 years = $3Billion
So no, Microsoft can't really buy EVERYTHING. Not everything is up for sale."
Read that last sentence of my comment as that is the most important part and that sentence alone should have ended this conversation. You should have just admitted you were wrong and moved on. Call of Duty isn't for sale. Neither is Battlefield or FIFA. Even if Microsoft somehow managed to buy the rights to the IP, they would need to have access to the developers as well, which makes the concept of buying WHATEVER THEY WANTED even more ridiculous. NOT. EVERYTHING. IS. FOR. SALE.
|
Please... stop tap dancing.
you said:
"No 3rd party developer is stupid enough to have a game exclusive to 1 platform. This goes especially for already established franchises" That is a very definitive statemt and effectively paints you into a corner with no exit.
"No" in this context is the same as saying "any". If "no" 3rd parties wil be stupid enough to allow exclusives then MS cant possibly get "any". OBVIOUSLY.
Stop backtracking and admit your original statement was little bit silly.
And I'm sorry... but everything in business is for sale. Thats life. You will realise this if you ever enter business.
Thank you.
|
I had already elaborated on my first comment with the one I linked to above. Of course you ignored that one.
Not everything is for sale. If it was, don't you think Microsoft would buy something instead of just maked deals?
Microsoft: Hey guys, how much for Call of Duty?
Activision: Sorry its not for sale, its our most valued brand.
Microsoft: What about $1 Billion?
Activsion: Sorry, we're thinking long-term. Not for sale.
Microsoft: Ok then how about we get some timed-DLC?
Activison: Sure, lets work something out!
