By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
FOOD said:
Legend11 said:
Wow those words would have had more punch to them if he had he not used the words "may have". But I guess this is coming from Sony's VP of marketing so it must be true.

We should believe their claims though because like their claim of not paying for exclusives, it has to be true. I mean doesn't it make sense to you that a FPS like Haze had it's PC and 360 versions cut late in development and the PS3 version kept? Especially at a time when the PS3 was getting hammered in sales by the 360? I mean if it was your money on the line and Sony wasn't paying for the exclusive in some way wouldn't you agree to such a decision?

Until the hard facts are publicly available, I guess we can assume Free Radical likes the PS3. All that matters is that, as a PS3 owner, it feels good to have an exclusive available for my purchase. Doesn't mean I'll play it, though. That would only add salt to my friends' wounds who have 360s and want to play it. :P

 


No need for facts when its simple common sense. Ubisoft is the publisher of Haze. When is the last time Ubisoft has published an exclusive without an incentive? Assassin's Creed wasn't an exclusive because Sony wouldn't pay Ubisoft. Why would Ubisoft have a sudden change of heart, when the PS3 was being soundly beaten by the 360 during the announcement. Have you looked at the sales numbers for Ubisoft titles on 360? Legend is dead on with his post.