BMaker11 said:
So, given that Adrian Smith of Core Design says that technical limitations prevented a Saturn version of TR, you link to an article in which another employee (the COO, no less) says that it went exclusive partly because the PS1 had better hardware? "Given the worldwide domination of the PlayStation system, it's a natural for Eidos to partner with Sony Computer Entertainment America and Sony Computer Entertainment Europe" and "We want our best-selling franchise to reach the greatest number of consumers and the PlayStation and its powerful CD-ROM software format satisfies this demand. The fact that the PlayStation will be the only game console on which you can enjoy the Tomb Raider franchise is a great statement for the platform." Sounds a lot like "we want this franchise to reach the widest audience and it's not possible to do that on other platforms, both in terms of hardware and marketshare". Doesn't sound at all like Sony tossed them a bunch of money. Like I said in a prior post: it's the same reason FF7 went PS1 exclusive. Or, for example, why Arkham Knight isn't on WiiU. Maybe I'm wrong in how I'm analyzing that article, but let's just say the situation is dubious, at best, for this particular game (they didn't just say "Sony struck up a deal" and left it at that i.e. just giving money. A deal arose because of other factors, it seems like). So, again I ask, do you have another example? If buying up 3rd parties was as rampant as some say, surely you could find something other than Tomb Raider. If not, it's not looking good for the original point you addressed about the "who started it" for buying 3rd party exclusivity. And like I said, I'll happily admit being incorrect on this, but I really can't think of any scenarios from gens prior to gen 7 where 3rd party games were exclusive simply because one company shelled out dough to prevent the compeitition from having it, instead of being exclusive for hardware reasons, marketshare reasons, or dispute reasons (like EA and Dreamcast).
|
Hold on, gonna wait for your goal posts to stop moving before i respond.
...
Ok, they look set. Thats a lot of text you slapped in there trying to explain away an exclusive deal you'd previously spent 2 or 3 posts trying your darndest to convince us all would never happen. I wasnt aware Sony was in the business of entering exclusive deals for products they according to you absolutely do not need because theyre like OMG so dominant.
Furthermore, devs ALWAYS gush about the publishers they sign deals with. Remember, only Microsoft can provide the online infrastructure Titanfall needs, friend!
Lastly, however you want to make excuses or stick your head in the sand as to why Sony struck a deal for Tomb Raider to be console exclusive to their platform, it doesnt change the fact that it exists. Thus, i dont need any other examples. Feel free to post on my wall if you need any more help with this.
