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

Forums - Gaming - Leaked Bungie contract basically confirms Fall 2013 Xbox 720 release

VGKing on 24 May 2012
d21lewis said:
VGKing said:
d21lewis said:
Dallinor said:
Why alienate a section of the market by releasing only on the 360/720 for the first game? Hasn't seemed to have worked out too well with other IP's this gen.


Saints Row, Dead Rising, Bioshock, Mass Effect, Call of Duty 2, Lost Planet, Ghost Recon Advance Warfighter


The only real success there is Call of Duty. But COD 2 came out as a 360 launch title while PS3 didn't exist yet. 
Mass Effect sells so much less on PS3 though. It's clear that the 360-exclusive ME1, and late ME2 port damaged the sales of ME3 on PS3.

If all 3 ME games were to be released on PS3 and 360 simultaneously the franchise as a whole would have been much more successful than it is now.

Read his post and read my reply.

Yes, every game could have benefitted from a multi-platform release.  Those are franchises that were Xbox 360 exclusive at first and things seem to have worked out well for them.  They all went multi-platform and they all (well, maybe not Lost Planet but I was running out of examples so I slipped it in there) are alive and well.  If I wanted to name franchises that started with Xbox and stayed with Xbox, I would have named Splinter Cell or something.  Also, I feel that the PS4 will release after the next Xbox console so, again, it would make sense for games to go to that console but not get a Playstation release based on that, alone.

In your face!!

If the Xbox 720 releases before the PS4, then yeah it makes sense for that Destiny game to only release on the 720. Would be stupid to delay the 720 version.

But I think the PS4 will come out the same year as the 720. Sony even said themselves that it would be undesirable to let Microsoft get a headstart again.



Around the Network
VGKing on 24 May 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Dallinor said:
Why alienate a section of the market by releasing only on the 360/720 for the first game? Hasn't seemed to have worked out too well with other IP's this gen.


Not a big deal, Sony makes their own games anyway Microsoft kinda needs the help. Microsoft and Activision have been kinda close this whole gen especially when pertaining to Xbox Live. The whole purpose is to keep the 720's product more attractive to the consumer on their console. It's like with COD, Pachter calls multiplatforms like that a "Defacto-exclusive" to the Xbox because of early expansions and map packs.

Microsoft has a lot more money at this point. They have no one to blame but themselves for not having a lot of core IP.

They decided to take the casual route with Kinect instead. Shows you how much they really care about gamers.



crissindahouse on 24 May 2012
VGKing said:
crissindahouse said:

interesting how people always complain about timed exclusives for a console they don't own but if sony or microsoft buy the whole developer to release all games in the future only for one console and with that, some will never play the games, yeah, this is super great for most. no clue but for me it's better to play the game later than never^^  if sony would have bought bungie i don't believe the people who only own a ps3 would complain about that, but if someone only gives money to get the release earlier, that's soo bad...

i mean, for people who get the game later, it's better than never and people who say it's better to buy the developer, if microsoft/sony would buy the developer, the developer wouldn't release more games and with that money they can put more money in the development so the money isn't lost.


No one complains about exclusives. I don't see anyone complaining that Halo is not on PS3 or that Uncharted is not on 360.

However when you are a multi-platform developer (which Bungie is now) you are supposed to make games for both platforms. You aren't supposed to show bias towards one of the console companies.

i said exactly that, no one is complaining about exclusives, no one is complaining if microsoft or sony buy whole studios to make all future games of that developer exclusives but if they only buy the timed exclusivity everyone is complaining even if it's much better for people owning only the other console.

example:

if microsoft would have bought bungie, sony fans would have said "hmm expected" and microsoft fans would say "yeah great" even if this wouldn't change anything for them...

but if smicrosft buys timed exclusive releases from bungie, sony fans say "ohh what a shit is that? i hate microsoft these bastards!"

so what i said is, people complain more about a situation which is better for them instead of complaining about sony and microsoft if they buy a developer like guerilla games or whatever.  sony fans will get new games from bungie now and they start to rage because of timed exclusivity. but getting the game never? no prob for them!

and what's wrong if microsoft is paying for timed exclusivity? the developer is getting money for that which he can invest in the game development or in future developments. more money for developers means more money for future investments which is good for gamers.

and what is the problem if some people gets a game earlier than others? is it really such a problem for them to see other people getting something earlier? ohh man those people have more than first world problems...like they couldn't have fun with the game anymore because other people played it half an year earlier lol

same situation would be vice versa with sony buying timed exclusivity, not that someone thinks i just mean sony fans, was only talking about this situation now.



errorpwns on 24 May 2012
Cobretti2 said:
BasilZero said:
I cant seem to understand why developers and companies tend to release the first game exclusive on a certain system but than they release the sequels on all playable platforms.

(i.e. Mass Effect and Dead Rising).


Except for Wii U.

Nothing will change next gen. looks like some 3rd party already ignoring Wii U.


Contract was made in 2010, can you read?  Not like the Wii U was announced in 2010.



Cobretti2 on 25 May 2012
errorpwns said:
Cobretti2 said:
BasilZero said:
I cant seem to understand why developers and companies tend to release the first game exclusive on a certain system but than they release the sequels on all playable platforms.

(i.e. Mass Effect and Dead Rising).


Except for Wii U.

Nothing will change next gen. looks like some 3rd party already ignoring Wii U.


Contract was made in 2010, can you read?  Not like the Wii U was announced in 2010.


I can, but I did not go to the link as it was blocked at work. I relied on the summary by OP. Clearly OP forgot to summarise that part.

 



 

 

Around the Network
Staude on 25 May 2012
d21lewis said:
NotStan said:
d21lewis said:
Jay520 said:
superchunk said:
Ok so its not fake.

But I don't think it guarantees 720 in fall of 2013.


lol...this guy.

Some people just can't accept things I guess. You can show them a turd, but they won't accept that it's a turd. You can have them get close enough to smell the turd, but they still want accept that it's a turd. You can even have them touch the turd, but they STILL won't accept that it's a turd. No, it's not until the turd is right there, in their mouth, where they can taste it. Here is when they finally accept that it's a turd.

I'll see you at E3.


I still won't accept that it's a turd until I swallow it and poop it out.  Only then can I be 100% sure.  That's just me, though.  I have a questioning attitude.

Questionable spelling and fetishes too it seems

It's a d21 trademark!

 

BTW, what did I misspell?


Well if you were trying to type in spanish, I'm pretty sure you misspelled the majority :P

On another note. Activisions contracts are pretty crasy. But I would guess most big companies are alike in that regard.



Check out my game about moles ^

Millenium on 27 May 2012

It seems people have done some pretty deep digging. Various members of the Internet community have discovered a snippet of the Activision – Bungie contract which expressly prohibits Valve, Epic Games, or Gearbox Software from developing Destiny.

[The] Licensor hereby expressly disapproves of Valve, Epic and Gearbox as potential third
party developers for Conversions (unless such third party developer should become an Activision
majority or wholly-owned studio), and Licensor cannot disapprove of the use by Activision of an
Activision majority or wholly-owned studio).

All in good fun right? We’d like to think so, but you never know. Regardless, we got a chuckle out of it.

Source: LMG

================

Not sure if true, but pretty funny non-the less. :P



NightDragon83 on 27 May 2012
VGKing said:
crissindahouse said:

interesting how people always complain about timed exclusives for a console they don't own but if sony or microsoft buy the whole developer to release all games in the future only for one console and with that, some will never play the games, yeah, this is super great for most. no clue but for me it's better to play the game later than never^^  if sony would have bought bungie i don't believe the people who only own a ps3 would complain about that, but if someone only gives money to get the release earlier, that's soo bad...

i mean, for people who get the game later, it's better than never and people who say it's better to buy the developer, if microsoft/sony would buy the developer, the developer wouldn't release more games and with that money they can put more money in the development so the money isn't lost.


No one complains about exclusives. I don't see anyone complaining that Halo is not on PS3 or that Uncharted is not on 360.

However when you are a multi-platform developer (which Bungie is now) you are supposed to make games for both platforms. You aren't supposed to show bias towards one of the console companies.

O RLY?

Gee, wouldn't that have been nice back during the N64 and GC days when both systems were routinely shafted by third parties on non-exclusive games, despite both being superior in hardware to their PS counterparts.  Took years for N64 fans just to get games like Resident Evil, Tony Hawk, and even legit EA Sports games, and how many times did we see third parties release games only for PS2 or PS2 and Xbox but no GC last gen?

What goes around comes around... the fact of the matter is no developer or publisher is obligated to put their games on every current platform out there.  They do what's in their best interests from a business standpoint.  In this case, Bungie has only been developing for M$ and PC platforms for the past decade, so is it any surprise that they're initially only going to develop for these platforms?



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

Harrybarry on 30 May 2012

The official name isn't going to be Xbox 720, is it?