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

Forums - Gaming - Why is moneyhatting frowned upon?

overman1 on 13 August 2014
Machiavellian said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Machiavellian said:
The Fury said:
IamAwsome said:

They opened a dozen new studios over the years. They're working on something. Microsoft also has new stuff like Scalebound, Sunset Overdrive, and Project Spark. There isn't a shortage of new projects at Microsoft Studios. 

The Wii U's first party games aren't enough to power it past the PS4. Microsoft knows you need more than first party games to sell, and this is why they moneyhat. 

Working on something. Nice to know. Shame we don't know what. Scalebound and Sunset Overdrive are not being made by their studios. They are a deal where MS fund development and it appears on MS console, very simple business and not a concern.It's this obvious taking away a game from others that is.

Maybe Wii U first party aren't enough to take it past the PS4 but its enough to have it keep on toe with Xbox One even without this 3rd party support. I want to see MS make big games themselves, not have 3rd parties do it for them. Forza is a great start but so far Xbone's biggest games are all 3rd party. Xbox gamers deserve more than just paying off 3rd parties for exclusives that already existed anyway.

@Bolded:  Neither is Bloodborn, The Order, Deep Down, Wild, HellBlade or a host of other exclusives that are coming out for the PS4.  Pretty much every thread I read, I do not see anyone who is Pro Sony have any problems with those studios making exclusives for Sony.  

Basically people pick and choose how they see 3rd party developers making games for the console of their choice.  We see the list of these games pop up all the time but no real concern they are not Sony studios or for some even exclusives but timed.


Bloodborne is being co developed by sony japan and from software using a similar formula they used to create demon sould. Ready at dawn is second party co developing with first party in sony santa monica. Those are full first party games. They are collaborative efforts.

Both Japan Studio and Santa Monica are basically publishing arms of Sony Worldwide Studios. What you call co-develop is in actuality just another publishing deal. 

Either way, From software a 3rd party developer is contracted to create this game or sign a contract from Sony to develop the game on their platform.  Its pretty much the same thing as Sunset Overdrive.  Developers making deals with platform holders to create games. 

how the hell do YOU know that?

Everyone is suddenly has access to privy information now? 

how do you know the true extent of SOny Japan's involvement in developing the project. 



Around the Network
LudicrousSpeed on 13 August 2014

overman1 said:

Ready at Dawn is a SECOND PARTY DEVELOPER NOT THIRD PARTY!!!!! the project was also done together with SANTA MONICA STUDIOS A EFFFING FIRST PARTY.  BOTH BLOODBORNE AND THE ORDER ARE SONY OWNED IPS FUNDED AND HELPED DEVELOPED BY SONY FIRST PARTY DEVELOPERS (SJS AND SMS RESPECTIVELY) BUNGIE WAS NEVER A FIRST PARTY STUDIO FOR MS. THEY WERE SECOND PARTY JUST LIKE READY AT DAWN IS TO SONY.  Ready at Dawn WHO HAS NEVER MAKE ANY GAME FOR ANY OTHER SYSTEM BUT THE PS BRAND. where are you getting all these freaking lies? 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Order:_1886 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodborne

 

 

In 1997, many developers (most notably Square Soft) move from Nintendo to Sony BECAUSE OF THE EFFING CD FORMAT WHICH WAS CHEAPER AND EASIER TO CODE FOR THAN NINRENDO'S CARTRIDGE FORMAT FOR THE N64. That is Nintedo's fault not Sony's. maybe you need to go do some serious research before you come here with your lies and overtly baised opinions.

God damn...atleast try to make your bullshit convincing 

 

 

#1 I know I said I was done, but your anger is ridiculous. Calm down, go have a Coke and a smile. No one has been rude or hostile or demeaning to you.

#2 who fucking cares about formats and blah blah. If it were such an easy and obvious thing that Eidos would abandon Sega and Nintendo consoles, there would be no reason for Sony to pay for a console exclusive agreement. Yep, these console exclusive moneyhats date all the way back to Sony in the 90's LOL.

So you can keep arguing that Tomb Raider released on no other consoles because DUH NINTEDNDO SUX and I will just keep pointing to links about Sony's exclusive deal and ask why If you gave an order that Santiago wasn't to be touched, and your orders are always followed, then why would Santiago be in danger? Why would it be necessary to transfer him off the base?



The Fury on 13 August 2014
Machiavellian said:

@Bolded:  Neither is Bloodborn, The Order, Deep Down, Wild, HellBlade or a host of other exclusives that are coming out for the PS4.  Pretty much every thread I read, I do not see anyone who is Pro Sony have any problems with those studios making exclusives for Sony.  

Basically people pick and choose how they see 3rd party developers making games for the console of their choice.  We see the list of these games pop up all the time but no real concern they are not Sony studios or for some even exclusives but timed.

The conversation went a bit further back then that, I asked the other guy to name some games the first parties were working on. Other than Halo and the new Gears I mean. They supposedly had all these studios but they are only working on "something". Then he told me about 3rd party games again. I understand the deals in place for Sunset or others, I have no issue with those. I think they are infact good business for both MS and the developer.



Hmm, pie.

The Fury on 13 August 2014
Dannythegamer said:
I do not know why Sony fanboys are so angry with such practice, when in the past Sony also did this, ironically with the same franchise (e.g. Tomb Raider Angel of Darkness)

But that game was on PC (released the very same day) and Mac. I think that one was just a development decision, try looking into TR2 instead but even that still appeared on PC. The lack of PC version is the most mind boggling of the first thought of deal for many.



Hmm, pie.

overman1 on 13 August 2014
LudicrousSpeed said:

overman1 said:

Ready at Dawn is a SECOND PARTY DEVELOPER NOT THIRD PARTY!!!!! the project was also done together with SANTA MONICA STUDIOS A EFFFING FIRST PARTY.  BOTH BLOODBORNE AND THE ORDER ARE SONY OWNED IPS FUNDED AND HELPED DEVELOPED BY SONY FIRST PARTY DEVELOPERS (SJS AND SMS RESPECTIVELY) BUNGIE WAS NEVER A FIRST PARTY STUDIO FOR MS. THEY WERE SECOND PARTY JUST LIKE READY AT DAWN IS TO SONY.  Ready at Dawn WHO HAS NEVER MAKE ANY GAME FOR ANY OTHER SYSTEM BUT THE PS BRAND. where are you getting all these freaking lies? 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Order:_1886 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodborne

 

 

In 1997, many developers (most notably Square Soft) move from Nintendo to Sony BECAUSE OF THE EFFING CD FORMAT WHICH WAS CHEAPER AND EASIER TO CODE FOR THAN NINRENDO'S CARTRIDGE FORMAT FOR THE N64. That is Nintedo's fault not Sony's. maybe you need to go do some serious research before you come here with your lies and overtly baised opinions.

God damn...atleast try to make your bullshit convincing 

 

 

#1 I know I said I was done, but your anger is ridiculous. Calm down, go have a Coke and a smile. No one has been rude or hostile or demeaning to you.

#2 who fucking cares about formats and blah blah. If it were such an easy and obvious thing that Eidos would abandon Sega and Nintendo consoles, there would be no reason for Sony to pay for a console exclusive agreement. Yep, these console exclusive moneyhats date all the way back to Sony in the 90's LOL.

#3 So you can keep arguing that Tomb Raider released on no other consoles because DUH NINTEDNDO SUX and I will just keep pointing to links about Sony's exclusive deal and ask why If you gave an order that Santiago wasn't to be touched, and your orders are always followed, then why would Santiago be in danger? Why would it be necessary to transfer him off the base?

#1 Dont be a patronizing idiot...

#2 If FF7 was to be made for the N64 it would need over 8-10 cartridges for the size of game...(look it up)

#3 the hell are you talking about?

you are too baised and havent even stated one single fact to back your shit up

/thread.

~Mod Edit~

This post has been moderated.

-Smeags



Around the Network
Scoobes on 13 August 2014
Soundwave said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:



Sony never locked third parties away from sega, nintendo did that. Sega screwed themselves by rushing their launch window for the saturn when they heard the first playstation was coming and pissed third parties off to the heavens. Sony monyhatte but not on a level of MS. They are quite a self sufficient company but know that sometimes you need outside help. MS has devs and still gives all the good jobs to third parties. Final fantasy went to playstation because of market dominance and also format reasons. Read up your history of nintendos and disagreements with third parties and format.


BS ... Squaresoft had a money based contract with Sony that did not allow them to publish games on other platforms (MONEY HAT HELLO). 

That's why when Nintendo/Square finally made a deal for Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles they had to make a phony "paper company" called Game Dev Studio publisher because otherwise it would violate the Sony/Square contract. 

Sony moneyhatted tons of games in the past, they just can't afford to do so anymore (cry me a river). 

There is no format issue with Nintendo and third parties after the N64, yet GameCube still rountinely got screwed on games, so did Sega, so Microsoft. 

The hypocrisy is so thick here it's laughable.  It's actually thanks to Microsoft largely that most third parties abandoned the concept of making franchises Playstation-only ... like Final Fantasy, MGS, Devil May Cry, Kingdom Hearts, which at one time where all money-hatted and kept under lock and key by Sony. 

If you're going to make claims like this, then you should at least put some links in your post to back them up. I've seen a few posts like this but with no references to back them up.

@ bolded

Considering those games were released in the PS2 days, only releasing on PS2 was actually financially very feasible (Sony paying for them would make little sense considering they had sold so many more consoles than their rivals). Also, GameCube still had format problems with the mini DVD and the franchises you listed were all Japanese titles where the Xbox did very poorly. It would have made no sense to release them on Xbox.




Get your Portable ID!

LudicrousSpeed on 13 August 2014
overman1 said:

#1 Dont be a patronizing idiot...

#2 If FF7 was to be made for the N64 it would need over 8-10 cartridges for the size of game...(look it up)

#3 the hell are you talking about?

you are too baised and havent even stated one single fact to back your shit up

/thread.

1. Nice insults bro. Looks like you didn't take my advice about calming down and we officially have some rustled jimmies.

2. Irrelevant. Again, if it was so obvious that the game wouldn't be releasing on other consoles anyway, there would have been no need for Sony to pay for an exclusive deal.

3. Guess you are too young to know A Few Good Men. The logic is lost on you.



S.T.A.G.E. on 13 August 2014
Soundwave said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Soundwave said:

Never heard any complaints from Sony fans when Sony used to moneyhat basically every big third party game. MGS2, Final Fantasy X/XI/XII, GTA3, Soul Calibur 3, Kingdom Hearts 1/2, Silent Hill, etc. etc. would've been nice to have on the GameCube for example.

Or when they locked out many third parties from Sega.

They just can't afford to do that these days since they aren't financially anywhere close to the company they used to be.



Sony never locked third parties away from sega, nintendo did that. Sega screwed themselves by rushing their launch window for the saturn when they heard the first playstation was coming and pissed third parties off to the heavens. Sony monyhatte but not on a level of MS. They are quite a self sufficient company but know that sometimes you need outside help. MS has devs and still gives all the good jobs to third parties. Final fantasy went to playstation because of market dominance and also format reasons. Read up your history of nintendos and disagreements with third parties and format.


BS ... Squaresoft had a money based contract with Sony that did not allow them to publish games on other platforms (MONEY HAT HELLO). 

That's why when Nintendo/Square finally made a deal for Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles they had to make a phony "paper company" called Game Dev Studio publisher because otherwise it would violate the Sony/Square contract. 

Sony moneyhatted tons of games in the past, they just can't afford to do so anymore (cry me a river). 

There is no format issue with Nintendo and third parties after the N64, yet GameCube still rountinely got screwed on games, so did Sega, so Microsoft. 

The hypocrisy is so thick here it's laughable.  It's actually thanks to Microsoft largely that most third parties abandoned the concept of making franchises Playstation-only ... like Final Fantasy, MGS, Devil May Cry, Kingdom Hearts, which at one time where all money-hatted and kept under lock and key by Sony. 

"When Squaresoft found out that the next-generation Nintendo 64 Disk Drive would not be a CD-ROM system but was going to be yet another cartridge-based system, they decided it was time to move on. In 1996, Squaresoft suddenly announced that they were leaving Nintendo and defecting over to Sony, and that the Final Fantasy VII would be released for the Sony Playstation console, a less powerful 3D console than the Nintendo 64 but which uses CD-ROMs. The news shocked the industry, although it was already known by industry watchers for some time that Squaresoft was planning to leave Nintendo. Thus was finally ended Squaresoft’s 10-year long relationship with Nintendo. Sony’s CD-ROM system provided Squaresoft with the freedom and capacity it needed to make the next-generation Final Fantasy games without worrying about cartridge sizes."

http://xenon.stanford.edu/~geksiong/papers/sts145/Squaresoft%20and%20FF7.htm

 

Nintendo commissioned Sony to make their CD ROM and after they walked out on Sony at CES Sony continued to work on it and made the Playstation. Nintendo stuck with cartridges and Sony went on to dominate the industry because many devs were moving onto CD's. Because Square defected, Nintendo sold their shares of Square stock and Sony bought it and gave a Square a discount on CD's since they made the format discs.

Learn from history.



overman1 on 13 August 2014
LudicrousSpeed said:
overman1 said:

#1 Dont be a patronizing idiot...

#2 If FF7 was to be made for the N64 it would need over 8-10 cartridges for the size of game...(look it up)

#3 the hell are you talking about?

you are too baised and havent even stated one single fact to back your shit up

/thread.

1. Nice insults bro. Looks like you didn't take my advice about calming down and we officially have some rustled jimmies.

2. Irrelevant. Again, if it was so obvious that the game wouldn't be releasing on other consoles anyway, there would have been no need for Sony to pay for an exclusive deal.

3. Guess you are too young to know A Few Good Men. The logic is lost on you.


3.  I guess so...



S.T.A.G.E. on 13 August 2014
JayWood2010 said:
Teeqoz said:


MS has to own the studio for it to be a 1st party game. That's the definition of a 1st party game. I'm not sure for all of them but for Sunset Overdrive MS doesn't own the IP, Insomniac does. I doubt MS owns the IP for Project Spark because it's coming to PC. You're using 3rd party games as an argument for MS 1st party.


First party ip -  Killer Instinct - Scalebound - Crackdown - Phantom Dust are all examples of first party games.  They call this 2nd party developement but they are indeed first party ip.

Project Spark is owned by MSFT as well as the studio making it (Microsoft Team Dakota)

But yes they are all first party games just as Bloodborne and Heavy Rain is a first party game for Sony.  

Its obvious that he doesn't understand the difference between a first party IP and a first party developer. There is no disambiguation for him.