Come on guys, I can't believe there is a discussion about whether Sony pays for exclusives. OF COURSE they do. Haze was in development for the PS3, 360 and PC simultaneously (this was stated), and then suddenly was a PS3 exclusive.

360 sells shooters like no one else. So if we can assume that Namco is being moneyhatted for ToV (which I agree is logical), why do we not assume the same for Sony? Do you we really think that Free Radical is making an extremely expensive, high budget shooter for the PS3 exclusively because gosh darnit, they love the PS3 so much?

What about UT III? What about the PS3 exclusive advertising for games like Assassin's Creed? Come on, people. Don't be naive. Ubisoft isn't doing PS3 only advertisements because Sony is their bestest buddy.

Nintendo seems to do this the least, but they aren't totally free either -- I think it's fairly clear that some deal was struck for Monster Hunter 3, for example. And do we consider moneyhatting a good thing, or a bad one? I just came out of the Famitsu thread, where those with a preference for the PS3 were explicitly disucssing moneyhatting, and how Sony should be offering financial assistance to third party companies in exchange for exclusives and additional content (which they already are, as I've stated). Now, it appears that Microsoft has facilitated an exclusive deal, and some of the exact same people from the Famitsu thread are complaining about it. Ugh.

I personally think all moneyhats are bad, because it isn't a sustainable business model.  If third party companies need to rely on first party cash just to stay profitable, then something is wrong; likewise, if a console manufacturer literally needs to PAY people to put games on their system, then the economic environment for their system is inherently unhealthy. That means that I believe all moneyhats are bad for the gaming economy, be they for the PS3, 360, or Wii.

Celine, check your messages please!

You can tell the PS3 fanboyism on these boards is already past its acceptable limit when people publically announce that they really want to play a game but wont because its not on a certain console.

When there is PS3 game out there that I really want to play, Ill buy a PS3. All these arguments about console wars should at least not pass the level of using your 'loyalties' to justify your gaming habits. (or at least dont admit publically that you are restricting yourself from your hobby because you are making yourself look silly)

Who knows?

We are still waiting on Eternal Sonata.

What do you call BS on? The logic that is obviously in my post? Or do you think Namco are willing to take in less sales because the people at Microsoft are just really nice guys.

Either way, the only "proof" (besides clear unarguable logic) is this.

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/levelup/archive/2007/06/14/how-microsoft-got-beautiful-katamari-exclusivity.aspx

NamcoBandai holdings do not have any obligation on where they get funding from, so unless someone that works for NamcoBandai that wants to get fired will just scan the documents of the deal and release it around the web..... we won't be seeing any concrete proof otherwise.

@Bodhesatva: No one is saying that Sony doesn't do the same thing. FF13, MGS4, Haze, UT3, etc are all examples of likely deals. The only problem is the people that are trying to pretend Microsoft doesn't do same thing (espeically in with Namco Bandai) without providing any reasonable argument.

@gebx said: I meant your claims that Microsoft does not have a deal with Namco Bandai. Even though your claims has been disputed several times already, I'll repost them just to avoid confusion:

And no, you don't need to worry about getting banned as long as you stay on the topic and argue with reason instead of trying to piss off Sony fans (that would be called trolling).

Soriku said: *~Onna76~* said: I guess I have to focus more on Western RPG's as the Japanese really starting to let me down.... when can we expect the next Elder Scrolls game @Magnific, oh well in my opinion everyone is entiteled to have an opinion, negative or not. If you do, looks like I'll be the only hardcore JRPG player on the site X_X (I mean playing mostly JRPGs)

 I play exclusively JRPG. In fact I call them just RPG as I consider the "WRPG" the most boring form of game in existence.

OT: Damn Namco! :( 

Soriku said: bbsin said: *~Onna76~* said: gebx said: Magnific0 said: gebx, stop trolling, your 360 must be ready by now, unwrap the towel and play some more GTA4. Bah, I'm stuck at work for another five and a half hours... then I'll play more GTA!! oh then I'll play some Ace Combat, and maybe a bit of Eternal Sonata... Thanks Namco!   @Magnific... I'll take those words back, lets start hitting, shall we... @Soriku, not a fair chance, or else you have a lot of catching up to do @Kazs... Sony has said it themselves and I quote: We don't buy exclusive titles, we believe we should earn them. That is a sarcasm joke and you don't really believe that right?...... right I don't think they buy games to be on their systems. They probably just cover expenses on projects and such, not actually buy some games on their platforms.

Yeah... but soriku... that's the exact same thing. I mean, if Sony pays 500,000 for advertising, and microsoft just outright gives you 500,000 what's the difference? It's not like they are giving kickbacks to the CEOS.

That 500,000 is just going to be used for the same advertising Sony is paying for... or 250,000 will go to advertising and 250,000 to future products.

Honestly, i have  a lot more respect for the "microsoft" option because it doesn't constrain the developer.

Ya I'm just sick of all of the usage of ..O they paid for them to go to thier system. That just gets used way to much.