celador said:
Because third party games shouldn't be moneyhatted if they are planned orignally to release mulit-platform, it shows a lack of originality and effort and makes me question MS's long term plans in terms of gaming when they consistently choose the short term option. The wasteland that was X360 exclusives for the last couple years of it's main life and the TV TV TV of last year's reveal also add to that. If MS ever became the dominant force in console gaming I can only see them making the industry worse. |
Why is "moneyhatting" used when investing in a developer to create a game for your system. Games are a business and developers face a lot of risk when funding their games on their own. Not all 3rd party developers have big bank accounts and can afford a miss on a project. Most I would say live game by game and if a game does not sell very well put them at considerable risk.
As a business, its probably a lot easier for a lot of these companies to use the mony from a console maker to fund projects because it reduces the risk of the project. I would say that those companies actually go to the console maker and pitch their game for funding not the console maker actually going to them to make their games exclusive. Sunset Overdrive is a good example. The developer stated they pitched that game to MS and MS invested into it. Quantum Break would also be a good example. Hell on the other side of the table would be The Order and Quatic Dream games. They are pitched to Sony and Sony invest in those games. Neither company are Sony studios.
The whole moneyhatted thing is a concept I have to say is fanboy related. It totally does not look at the situation for the developer but instead is used to demean a perfectly good development strategy.
As a console maker you do not need originality, you need to understand where to invest your resources. Whether its first, 2nd or 3rd, if the company invest their money into a project then they are providing that original content for their system. If you want to take a look at how having to many first party devs under your belt being risky and detrimental, Sony would be a good example. In the last 2 years they closed 5 studios I believe.
There is more to making games then what gamers want. its a business with a lot of risk. Decisions are made because of risk and developers have to be very mindful about such risk or risk closure.
