By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
LudicrousSpeed on 12 June 2015
Edit Thread

BMaker11 said:

LudicrousSpeed said:

Thats a lot of text trying to analyze a very simple comment. Again, one person says MS started the whole 3rd party exclusive thing, i simply corrected him. What MS is doing with Tomb Raider 2015 or what Sony is doing with SFV in terms of funding are irrelevant to both the comment i quoted and my response to it.

Last post I will make on this subject.

You used Tomb Raider as an example of moneyhatted 3rd party exclusivity. Tomb Raider 2 on the Saturn got the axe due to technical limitations, not Sony moneyhatting.

If you can think of another example for your "correction", I'd like to know, and I'd happily admit that my assessment right now was incorrect, but I can't think of any off the top of my head. The mantra of "Sony didn't have to buy exclusivity" was a thing for a reason (referring to Sony having to buy 3rd party exclusivity for PS3 when the didn't have to for the prior systems). Those reasons being better hardware (PS1) or utter market dominance (PS1 and PS2) making it the go to console.

I know you're trying to brush the false equivalency (co-developing vs. throwing money to keep it off the competition) under the rug of "who started 3rd party exclusivity" by simply saying "I was just correcting a comment", but then, your "correction" was with a false example. So the point of the original comment, which is the only thing you wanted to address, still stands.


Breh...

http://www.tombnews.com/news/1997/09/1801/

Hope that helps.