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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Microsoft comments on lack of new Xbox 360 exclusive IPs

happydolphin on 22 January 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mr Puggsly said:
LivingMetal said:
Mr Puggsly said:
The PS3 gets praise for getting so many exclusives, but it should be noted most of them aren't particularly great and have modest sales. Some of their IPs have even seen a sharp decline.

Ultimately, the 360 has Halo, Gears, Forza, Fable, and Kinect. I personally think that outweighs Sony's line up which is why 360 is still going strong.


I'm not a fan of shooters, racers, and motion controlled games so the PS3 will have more going for me than the Xbox 360.  But in terms on catering to the masses in general, the titles you mention will outweigh the PS3's line up.  In fact, Alan Wake and Fable appeal FAR more to me than the other titles you mentioned, but they are nowhere near as financially successful than the titles you mentioned.  So sales in not the issue here.

There are more good 360 exclusives than the ones I mentioned, but I was more so focusing on titles that push hardware.

Eitherway, the 360 library as a whole has plenty of variety. The exclusives account for a small fraction of overall sales on both HD platforms.


The first three years of the 360's life had variety and then it all went down hill after that. it was the same games from that point forward. Shooter, shooter, shooter. I'm also hearing they want another shooter thats like Uncharted 3.  Awesome Microsoft, way to think for yourself. :) 

UC3 came from a decision from sony to MS-ize a middle-aged fantasy game ND was hard at work on. Call it a way to return the favor ;)

(can't find the source, but it was in one of the threads on vgchartz. Looked for it in depth but couldn't find it :S )

Edit: thanks Rol for the source @ http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-09-22-uncharted-started-out-as-a-fantasy-game

Also see Nsanity's post @ http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4392371



Around the Network
denniswaterman on 22 January 2012
pezus said:

1. When did Sony "lose" MGS?

2009 

pezus said:

2. I didn't list any non-exclusives.

Well you listed Ico and SotC which I can play on my PS2 and PC. According to gamerankings the only other  PS3 Software to exceed a 90% aggregate was Uncharted 3 (presently PS3 exclusive) MLB 2011: The Show (available on PS2 and PSP also) and Little Big Planet 2 (currently being ported to PSVita).  We're only talkign exclusive here. Not games availble on 2 other platforms.

pezus said:

3. Denial

No, sorry. Maybe they matter to you as a gamer, but there's just as much people who care about Dance Central and Kinect Sports then they do Infamous 2 or Resistance 3..moreso from the sales evidence even. It's just dull seeing certain cycles repeat over and over and seeing the same results. M'kay Sony released  slightly more filler in 2011 than Microsoft, but ...well if fillers what you're after stop scrathing you're heads wondering why they don't sell as much as 360 exclusives.



o_O.Q on 22 January 2012
happydolphin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mr Puggsly said:
LivingMetal said:
Mr Puggsly said:
The PS3 gets praise for getting so many exclusives, but it should be noted most of them aren't particularly great and have modest sales. Some of their IPs have even seen a sharp decline.

Ultimately, the 360 has Halo, Gears, Forza, Fable, and Kinect. I personally think that outweighs Sony's line up which is why 360 is still going strong.


I'm not a fan of shooters, racers, and motion controlled games so the PS3 will have more going for me than the Xbox 360.  But in terms on catering to the masses in general, the titles you mention will outweigh the PS3's line up.  In fact, Alan Wake and Fable appeal FAR more to me than the other titles you mentioned, but they are nowhere near as financially successful than the titles you mentioned.  So sales in not the issue here.

There are more good 360 exclusives than the ones I mentioned, but I was more so focusing on titles that push hardware.

Eitherway, the 360 library as a whole has plenty of variety. The exclusives account for a small fraction of overall sales on both HD platforms.


The first three years of the 360's life had variety and then it all went down hill after that. it was the same games from that point forward. Shooter, shooter, shooter. I'm also hearing they want another shooter thats like Uncharted 3.  Awesome Microsoft, way to think for yourself. :) 

UC3 came from a decision from sony to MS-ize a middle-aged fantasy game ND was hard at work on. Call it a way to return the favor ;)

(can't find the source, but it was in one of the threads on vgchartz. Lookedmfor it in depth but couldn't find it :S )

where was the confirmation from any rep at naughty dog or sony on that?

or was it just a random rumour?



Nsanity on 22 January 2012
o_O.Q said:
happydolphin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mr Puggsly said:
LivingMetal said:
Mr Puggsly said:
The PS3 gets praise for getting so many exclusives, but it should be noted most of them aren't particularly great and have modest sales. Some of their IPs have even seen a sharp decline.

Ultimately, the 360 has Halo, Gears, Forza, Fable, and Kinect. I personally think that outweighs Sony's line up which is why 360 is still going strong.


I'm not a fan of shooters, racers, and motion controlled games so the PS3 will have more going for me than the Xbox 360.  But in terms on catering to the masses in general, the titles you mention will outweigh the PS3's line up.  In fact, Alan Wake and Fable appeal FAR more to me than the other titles you mentioned, but they are nowhere near as financially successful than the titles you mentioned.  So sales in not the issue here.

There are more good 360 exclusives than the ones I mentioned, but I was more so focusing on titles that push hardware.

Eitherway, the 360 library as a whole has plenty of variety. The exclusives account for a small fraction of overall sales on both HD platforms.


The first three years of the 360's life had variety and then it all went down hill after that. it was the same games from that point forward. Shooter, shooter, shooter. I'm also hearing they want another shooter thats like Uncharted 3.  Awesome Microsoft, way to think for yourself. :) 

UC3 came from a decision from sony to MS-ize a middle-aged fantasy game ND was hard at work on. Call it a way to return the favor ;)

(can't find the source, but it was in one of the threads on vgchartz. Lookedmfor it in depth but couldn't find it :S )

where was the confirmation from any rep at naughty dog or sony on that?

or was it just a random rumour?

Nowgamer

Talking exclusively to Play, Don Poole, former Environment Modeller at Naughty Dog, explains how Uncharted: Drake's Fortune was originally a 'fantasy' game until orders came from Sony to make it more 'realistic'.

"We were talking about a more 'realistic' game in terms of how it was modelled and rendered but the concepts were much more far out. One was a forest world where the antagonists lived underground," explained Poole. 

"It had elements of Tolkien in for sure. Sony kept pushing for a more realistic game in all respects. The market had changed a lot by then. The demographic was older and gritty shooters were really dominating. Sony wanted very much to get into that market share, it pushed all of its developers in this direction."

"So the big push from Sony, not just at Naughty Dog but at all of Sony's development companies at the time, was to craft games for PlayStation 3 that were much more realistic. The pressure from Xbox's success with gritty shooters was a very real force on our direction at that time."

We had a lot of internal grumbling about the realist bent. More of the old dogs were from the Crash and Jak era and preferred that more whimsical style. But alas, that was a losing battle."

http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1063301/naughty_dog_gritty_xbox_shooters_shaped_uncharted.html?



denniswaterman on 22 January 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Gears is finished for this gen and their exclusivity contract with Microsoft is up, so on that third party exclusivity is over until they say otherwise.

They've said otherwise. Gears is carrying on, much to your disappointment i'm sure. I'm also not sure what kinda garbage you're referring to with an exclusivity contract. No such thing exists. Epic is not a publisher, they can't release console games without a publisher which happens to be Microsoft and they helped Gears of War 3 sell more copies in a fortnight then Sonys biggest IP could in all of 2010.

S.T.A.G.E. said:

Halo 4 for this year as a whole in the year of 2012. On the other hand I'll be enjoying Sly 4 and new experiences Starhawk, Dust 514, Twisted Metal, TLG

Well scrub Dust, you can get that on Vitaso it's not exclusive and TLG still doesn't have a release date.  Although this is what i'm talking about.

You're saying:

Starhawk, , Twisted Metal, Sly 4 (none of which are new IP's )  are more appealing to you then Halo 4. And thats fine in your own personal views, if thats what you like.

Whereas the truth is - new studio or not - Halo 4 will appeal to a greater mass then all of the above combined and tripled.

You're Brett Ratner taunting James Cameron.



Around the Network
Jay520 on 22 January 2012
denniswaterman said:
pezus said:

1. When did Sony "lose" MGS?

2009 

pezus said:

2. I didn't list any non-exclusives.

Well you listed Ico and SotC which I can play on my PS2 and PC. According to gamerankings the only other  PS3 Software to exceed a 90% aggregate was Uncharted 3 (presently PS3 exclusive) MLB 2011: The Show (available on PS2 and PSP also) and Little Big Planet 2 (currently being ported to PSVita).  We're only talkign exclusive here. Not games availble on 2 other platforms.



This is wrong. The difference in content offered between the PS2/PSP/PSV versions and the PS3 version is drastic enough to identify them as separate games. I really shouldn't have to say this.

happydolphin on 22 January 2012
DarthVolod said:

These Xbox 360 vs. PS3 arguments over exclusives leave me wondering about the future when Nintendo will, presumably, enter the HD market on equal footing with Microsoft and Sony with the WiiU. This gen has seen Nintendo largely written off from the exclusive debates because motion controls and non-HD graphics put their games into a different category in the eyes of core gamers.

Nintendo's greatest strength has always been its memorable and timeless first party exclusives that seem to attract both gamers and non gamers alike. Assuming that the WiiU has a comprable online system, I wonder how Sony and Microsoft will compete. If all of the big multiplats will be on WiiU it will come down to exclusives which Nintendo easily wins out on in terms of number and quality. If people can buy a WiiU and play their Madden, CoD, and ect. along with all of the Nintendo first party exclusives (and maybe a third party exclusive here and there) I don't see any reason to own a Xbox 720 or Playstation 4 unless Sony and Microsoft can develop some new quality first party exclusives.

Microsoft may move some 720s on Halo and Gears, and Sony has its supporters, but if Nintendo does things right (securing a quality online framework) they could have a very good thing going for them next gen ... all of the power and HD/online abilities of Microsoft and Sony coupled with the extensive exclusive lineup that Nintendo has always and will always have unless they go bankrupt.

Speaking as someone who doesn't care for any exclusives really (third party games make up my favorite and must play list). I could see those unloyal to a particular brand would find Nintendo rather appealing since it will get all the third party games anyways along with all the Nintendo exclusives ... which, I think we can all agree, are at least a decent lineup of titles. It was Zelda, Mario, Brawl, and ect that got me to turn on my Wii even though my gaming options on Xbox and PS3 were of much higher quality at least graphically and onine connectivity wise.

I agree with this and this is why I think S.T.A.G.E has a point. The market is asking for quality in exclusives, multiplats and value-adds on a console, but when these exclusives don't need to be new IPs per se, could this lead to deterioration of the relevance of gaming as a form of media, where new content and new worlds are no longer asked for?

But the questions gets slapped in the face and in the back of the head, when Sony, despite launching a good number of new IPs this gen, has been unable to muster as much interest as MS with a different strategy. It begs two questions.

 

1) Are Sony's new IPs, though being undeniably high quality, enjoyable and capable of mass appeal? Compare Sony games to a piece from hollywood: Avatar. Avatar is a new hollywood IP which attracted much interest from the general audience. If Sony hasn't reached that kind of interest with its IPs, are they missing something or doing something wrong?

2) Is there some kind of middle ground Sony isn't meeting between new IPs and exclusive/multiplats/value-adds from a marketing perspective? Again I insist, the industry is not a charity. You can't just make deep content for the sake of it, if it doesn't bring substantial revenue.

 

Though what S.T.A.G.E is advocating for is noble, is there a way to achieve it more properly than how Sony is going about it at the moment? That's my question. And maybe MS (or Nintendo) have found the answer, until they are totally dominant enough to take the risks Sony is currently taking in the realm of new IPs, my two cents for what they're worth ;)



S.T.A.G.E. on 22 January 2012
happydolphin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mr Puggsly said:
LivingMetal said:
Mr Puggsly said:
The PS3 gets praise for getting so many exclusives, but it should be noted most of them aren't particularly great and have modest sales. Some of their IPs have even seen a sharp decline.

Ultimately, the 360 has Halo, Gears, Forza, Fable, and Kinect. I personally think that outweighs Sony's line up which is why 360 is still going strong.


I'm not a fan of shooters, racers, and motion controlled games so the PS3 will have more going for me than the Xbox 360.  But in terms on catering to the masses in general, the titles you mention will outweigh the PS3's line up.  In fact, Alan Wake and Fable appeal FAR more to me than the other titles you mentioned, but they are nowhere near as financially successful than the titles you mentioned.  So sales in not the issue here.

There are more good 360 exclusives than the ones I mentioned, but I was more so focusing on titles that push hardware.

Eitherway, the 360 library as a whole has plenty of variety. The exclusives account for a small fraction of overall sales on both HD platforms.


The first three years of the 360's life had variety and then it all went down hill after that. it was the same games from that point forward. Shooter, shooter, shooter. I'm also hearing they want another shooter thats like Uncharted 3.  Awesome Microsoft, way to think for yourself. :) 

UC3 came from a decision from sony to MS-ize a middle-aged fantasy game ND was hard at work on. Call it a way to return the favor ;)

(can't find the source, but it was in one of the threads on vgchartz. Lookedmfor it in depth but couldn't find it :S )


You're not getting my point. How many shooters did Sony have before that point? I know Uncharted was supposed to be a fantasy game, but Sony saw the western fanfare for shooters and decided to invest in it AS WELL. Microsofts built its name solely off of shooters and Sony has built its name off of having a wealth and variety of titles. Sony may have more shooters, but we all know where they are aiming to get sales from. 



S.T.A.G.E. on 22 January 2012
denniswaterman said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Gears is finished for this gen and their exclusivity contract with Microsoft is up, so on that third party exclusivity is over until they say otherwise.

They've said otherwise. Gears is carrying on, much to your disappointment i'm sure. I'm also not sure what kinda garbage you're referring to with an exclusivity contract. No such thing exists. Epic is not a publisher, they can't release console games without a publisher which happens to be Microsoft and they helped Gears of War 3 sell more copies in a fortnight then Sonys biggest IP could in all of 2010.

S.T.A.G.E. said:

Halo 4 for this year as a whole in the year of 2012. On the other hand I'll be enjoying Sly 4 and new experiences Starhawk, Dust 514, Twisted Metal, TLG

Well scrub Dust, you can get that on Vitaso it's not exclusive and TLG still doesn't have a release date.  Although this is what i'm talking about.

You're saying:

Starhawk, , Twisted Metal, Sly 4 (none of which are new IP's )  are more appealing to you then Halo 4. And thats fine in your own personal views, if thats what you like.

Whereas the truth is - new studio or not - Halo 4 will appeal to a greater mass then all of the above combined and tripled.

You're Brett Ratner taunting James Cameron.


1. I said Gears is finished for this gen, not finished for good. The exclusivity contract is up plain and simple, that is what is confirmed and I never said anything outside of what I've read. Secondly, how could I be disappointed? The more games for the 360 the better. Third of all, Microsoft isn't Epics first publisher and they certainly wont be the last. As of late they've been talking about wanting to focus on PC games, but Bleszinski has stated that another Gears could be in the cards. They however, own the Gears IP and can do whatever the hell they want with it. Its out of Microsofts hands.

2. How is Dust being on the Vita suddenly make it not exclusive? Starhawk and Twisted Metal are providing experiences gamers havent had this gen. Prove me wrong. Secondly, I will most likely be playing Halo 4 and do not care whether it will have more popularity. To a gamer is the system that relies  on a few games a console of choice? Thats up to you to decide. 

You must not have read the part in this topic where I said I do not hate the 360, it despise Microsofts recent decisions with it (within the last 2-3 years). Learn to separate the two. 



Jay520 on 22 January 2012
RolStoppable said:
pezus said:
denniswaterman said:

They've said otherwise. Gears is carrying on, much to your disappointment i'm sure. I'm also not sure what kinda garbage you're referring to with an exclusivity contract. No such thing exists. Epic is not a publisher, they can't release console games without a publisher which happens to be Microsoft and they helped Gears of War 3 sell more copies in a fortnight then Sonys biggest IP could in all of 2010.

Well no wonder since Sony's biggest IP wasn't out in 2010. You seem sorely misinformed

You aren't any better. Gran Turismo 5 was indeed released in 2010. The trick to his statement is that he says "all of 2010" when GT5 wasn't even on sale for more than two months.



You've been spying this thread for quite some time, waiting for someone to make a mistake, haven't you?