By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony to Focus on Exclusive Content for Multi-Platform Titles

mantlepiecek on 19 February 2011
AussieGecko said:
mantlepiecek said:

You guys forget that MS usually demands you pay for the exclusive or timed exclusive content, whereas, Sony has their exclusive content for free. I think I choose Sony's method thank you very much.


oh so you have proof of this?


You serious?

PS3

Medal of Honor, free game.

Dead Space 2 - Extraction for free.

AC Brotherhood: 15 minute DLC for free.

Red Dead Redemption has some clothes for free I think, I am not sure.

Batman AA - Free joker stuff.

360

Call of Duty - $15 map packs.

Fallout DLCs : A lot of $$

If you want you can look up more 360 exclusive DLCs.

Personally I don't care for DLCs at all, unless I get it for free. Or in games like Dragon Age and ME.



Around the Network
oldschoolfool on 19 February 2011

Haven't they already been doing that?



AussieGecko on 19 February 2011
mantlepiecek said:


You serious?

PS3

Medal of Honor, free game.

Dead Space 2 - Extraction for free.

AC Brotherhood: 15 minute DLC for free.

Red Dead Redemption has some clothes for free I think, I am not sure.

Batman AA - Free joker stuff.

360

Call of Duty - $15 map packs.

Fallout DLCs : A lot of $$

If you want you can look up more 360 exclusive DLCs.

Personally I don't care for DLCs at all, unless I get it for free. Or in games like Dragon Age and ME.


wait my bad, i mis-read that. I thought you said sony didnt pay for them. My bad



 

Bet with Conegamer and Doobie_wop 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3879752

mantlepiecek on 19 February 2011
AussieGecko said:


wait my bad, i mis-read that. I thought you said sony didnt pay for them. My bad

No prob man. Mistakes happen.



Hephaestos on 19 February 2011
Demonslayersoultaker said:
Hephaestos said:
LivingMetal said:

Interview with Sony's Scott McCarthy.

"The battle for 3rd party exclusives seems to be dwindling down this generation. More 3rd parties are choosing the multiplatform route. You guys have a few in your lineup — No More Heroes and Ar Tonelico 3 come to mind. Is Sony still working with 3rd parties to secure exclusives or…?

We work very closely with our 3rd parties publishers, not necessarily to lock down games exclusively, but to lock up exclusive parts of games. A good example is Batman: Arkham Asylum, where you could only play as the Joker on PlayStation 3. When you make a title exclusive, you limit its promotional power; we don’t want to do that. We want games to be as big as possible — it’s great for the industry. However, we want to make sure that you play it on the best system possible, so we like to take parts of games and make them exclusive to the PlayStation system."

The complete interview can be read here:

http://scrawlfx.com/2011/02/interview-sonys-scott-mccarthy-on-mlb-11-the-show-ps3-lineup-and-3rd-parties


gee I don't see the PS fans complaining to this as much as they did early in the gen when MS was doing the same thing. What did they call it, money hatting?

Sony's line-up is keeping us from complaining and anything they say off hand, and I'd also like to point out they haven't actually done it yet, so theres nothing really to complain about anyways 

yeah it's not like the Joker in batman was PS3 exclusive (is it now on 360 also?) or if Ghostbusters was timed exclusive in europe ^^ (i'm sure there are other examples of them not having done it yet).



OoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoO

Around the Network
Demonslayersoultaker on 19 February 2011
Hephaestos said:
Demonslayersoultaker said:
Hephaestos said:
LivingMetal said:

Interview with Sony's Scott McCarthy.

"The battle for 3rd party exclusives seems to be dwindling down this generation. More 3rd parties are choosing the multiplatform route. You guys have a few in your lineup — No More Heroes and Ar Tonelico 3 come to mind. Is Sony still working with 3rd parties to secure exclusives or…?

We work very closely with our 3rd parties publishers, not necessarily to lock down games exclusively, but to lock up exclusive parts of games. A good example is Batman: Arkham Asylum, where you could only play as the Joker on PlayStation 3. When you make a title exclusive, you limit its promotional power; we don’t want to do that. We want games to be as big as possible — it’s great for the industry. However, we want to make sure that you play it on the best system possible, so we like to take parts of games and make them exclusive to the PlayStation system."

The complete interview can be read here:

http://scrawlfx.com/2011/02/interview-sonys-scott-mccarthy-on-mlb-11-the-show-ps3-lineup-and-3rd-parties


gee I don't see the PS fans complaining to this as much as they did early in the gen when MS was doing the same thing. What did they call it, money hatting?

Sony's line-up is keeping us from complaining and anything they say off hand, and I'd also like to point out they haven't actually done it yet, so theres nothing really to complain about anyways 

yeah it's not like the Joker in batman was PS3 exclusive (is it now on 360 also?) or if Ghostbusters was timed exclusive in europe ^^ (i'm sure there are other examples of them not having done it yet).

Compared to what MS has done that's nothing and you know it, why complain about the one who's just trying to compete when the other one is far worse?



Kasz216 on 19 February 2011
kitler53 said:
...

We want games to be as big as possible — it’s great for the industry. However, we want to make sure that you play it on the best system possible, so we like to take parts of games and make them exclusive to the PlayStation system."

...


i like that part of the answer. political PR BS for sure but it worked on me. xD

I'm not sure that it is BS.  I mean look at the PS3 early on.  It's exclusives were selling less then Multiplatform PS3 games even though there was no quality difference, in fact you could argue the exclusives were performing better since PS3 versions often had problems the 360 versions didn't.

The truth is, one BIG seller when it comes to videogames is word of mouth.  We forget this because we visit videogame sites often, most people don't.

 

Multiplatform games allow 360 players to inform and cultivate purchasing decsisions in PS3 fans and vice versa, hence why early on when the PS3's base was low, multiplatform games sold sooo much better.  Most PS3 owners just knew more people with 360s, so the games they wanted to buy were 360 games as well... and the Playstation exclusives kinda floundered early on despite being technically better.  Even now with health platform ownership, multiplatform reccomendations no doubt do still push out more sales it's just less apparent due to there being enough PS3 fans in the public to recommend games to each other.



AussieGecko on 19 February 2011
Demonslayersoultaker said:

Compared to what MS has done that's nothing and you know it, why complain about the one who's just trying to compete when the other one is far worse?


every single thread I have been on you are bagging 360 for one thing or another... are you a multi?



 

Bet with Conegamer and Doobie_wop 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3879752

Capulous on 19 February 2011
mantlepiecek said:
AussieGecko said:
mantlepiecek said:

You guys forget that MS usually demands you pay for the exclusive or timed exclusive content, whereas, Sony has their exclusive content for free. I think I choose Sony's method thank you very much.


oh so you have proof of this?


You serious?

PS3

Medal of Honor, free game.

Dead Space 2 - Extraction for free.

AC Brotherhood: 15 minute DLC for free.

Red Dead Redemption has some clothes for free I think, I am not sure.

Batman AA - Free joker stuff.

360

Call of Duty - $15 map packs.

Fallout DLCs : A lot of $$

If you want you can look up more 360 exclusive DLCs.

Personally I don't care for DLCs at all, unless I get it for free. Or in games like Dragon Age and ME.

Seriously? If the Call of Duty/Fallout DLC came out on the PS3 first, you would pay for them.  There is no way those would have been free.



mantlepiecek on 19 February 2011
Capulous said:
mantlepiecek said:


You serious?

PS3

Medal of Honor, free game.

Dead Space 2 - Extraction for free.

AC Brotherhood: 15 minute DLC for free.

Red Dead Redemption has some clothes for free I think, I am not sure.

Batman AA - Free joker stuff.

360

Call of Duty - $15 map packs.

Fallout DLCs : A lot of $$

If you want you can look up more 360 exclusive DLCs.

Personally I don't care for DLCs at all, unless I get it for free. Or in games like Dragon Age and ME.

Seriously? If the Call of Duty/Fallout DLC came out on the PS3 first, you would pay for them.  There is no way those would have been free.


So the whole extraction game and a medal of honor reboot can be free, but not the Call of Duty map packs? I think I understand the fallout argument, but Valve, and even Activision themself have released free DLCs for the PC, so I think I am right in imagining CoD map packs being available for free.