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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Konami's way of accepting Sony's Money for MGS4 exclusivity

dbot on 11 June 2008
TheBigFatJ said:
dbot said:
@bbsin - I think you are saying that Sony bought exclusivity indirectly by paying Konami for product placement. Correct?

 

Here is an example of what may have happened:

(1) Konami pretends (or seriously considers) that it may release MGS 4 for the Xbox 360.  To add weight to these statements, they announce publically that they're considering it and that they're not happy with PS3 sales performance. 

(2) Konami wants Sony to give them marketing budget, favorable licensing rates, a bundle and/or cash to keep the game exclusive.  Konami wants kickbacks if the bundle sells very well implying that the game is selling PS3s.

(3) Sony eventually caves, but wants Konami to serve Sony with a lot of product placement.  

(4) Konami agrees, they have a contract for exclusivity over some period of time (say, 1 year minimum but perhaps as much as 3 years).

Konami will obviously never agree to a permanent exclusivity contract with Sony for one of its games, because they may want to release an essential collection for multiple patforms in the future, or maybe they'll want to put MGS 4 on cell phones in a few years.  Whatever, but they're obviously not going to permanently sign away the rights for the game. 


Ok.  That's quite a stretch from having a PSP in the game but you never know.  Again, if Sony had to pay for an exclusive and they did that's fine by me.  I guess we will never know.  I think every third party publisher will try to sell timed exclusives in the future.  It's quickly becoming part of the next-gen business model. 



Thanks for the input, Jeff.

 

 

Around the Network
ils411 on 11 June 2008
bbsin said:
TheBigFatJ said:
bbsin said:

again, you're reading out of context. I think Konami granted exclusivity for much more reasons besides these product placements (which i explained up top and many times before). The product placements only solidifies PS3 exclusivity, if you still don't see where I'm going with this then I'd say that you're blinded by your own confusion.


How exactly does a few product placements solidify exclusivity?


I don't think anyone understands what I'm trying to say in this thread.... Look:

Product placements (cell processor, Dualshock 3, Sony cellphones, PSP, BluRay) = Sponsor = Sony = $$$ = 3d party exclusive.

^ + more $$$ + dev funding + marketing support + hardware bundling around the world = lock down exclusive.


ok, i think i get what your trying to say. sony is seccuring exclusivity of mgs4 through numerous product placements which in effect is actually helping konami lower production cost of the game.  it like an x deal. konami gets lots of cash from sony in the form of payments for product placement, royalties for exclusivity and ensured x amount of sales of mgs4 thourgh the mgs4 ps3 bundle (naturaly, sony would be buying the game from konami to put into their budle), plus konami gets some advertising from sony, again in the form of the ps3 mgs4 bundle.

on the other hand, sony gets exclusivity (timed or just for this gen is up in the air), product placements (their se phone line, psp) which will help push their other products, plus the ps3 mgs4 bundle.

it would seem that konami got more out of the deal than sony did. but in each of these company's perspective, they got what they need. konami got funding plus compensations to what ever profit they could have made by going multi plus they also get free advertising from sony. sony gets an exclusive aaa (probably) game which they believe will help tilt the market in their favor. 

just correct me if i'm mistaken.  



d21lewis on 11 June 2008

The first MGS had a PS1 in it. Twin Snakes had a Gamecube, and portraits of Nintendo VIPs. It's no big deal.



Loud_Hot_White_Box on 11 June 2008
d21lewis said:
The first MGS had a PS1 in it. Twin Snakes had a Gamecube, and portraits of Nintendo VIPs. It's no big deal.

 /thread.

 



arsenal009 on 11 June 2008

lol, what's funny is that ppl don't think sony funded konami to make this game.



Around the Network
EHSTEVE on 11 June 2008
d21lewis said:
The first MGS had a PS1 in it. Twin Snakes had a Gamecube, and portraits of Nintendo VIPs. It's no big deal.

 It did?!?! I'm just about finished playing it... I never saw it...



akuma587 on 11 June 2008

My attitude towards product placement is if the context which it is concluded is either intentionally comical or subtle enough to where it doesn't detract from anything I could care less. If I feel like I am being marketed to, I am pissed off. At least with Kojima you can expect some humor out of it, but I will wait to pass judgement.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

MontanaHatchet on 11 June 2008

This reminds me of the scene in Casino Royale where Bond checks the time of a call on the Sony Ericsson he stole from a guy in Madagascar, reaches into a drawer for a Blu-ray disc, and plays the recording of the disc on a Sony Bravia. Not to mention the Sony Viao that M16 owns (or was it Bond)? I think you understand the point I'm trying to make here.



 

 

FaRmLaNd on 11 June 2008

Its pretty simple. Sony pays konami for the product placements = lower development costs. Im guessing sony also paid them for exclusivity because quite frankly they're stupid to make it exclusive without getting money from sony. Thus money from advertising + money from exclusivity contract = far lower development costs = less games needed to be sold in order to attain profit.



dbot on 12 June 2008

I wonder how much Sony paid to have the ipod included instead of the insanely popular Zune?



Thanks for the input, Jeff.