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

Forums - Microsoft - "Bioshock 2 possibly a timed exclusive?"

hotrodx on 31 December 2008

There's the psychological nature of Microsoft "buying off" exclusives (I'll be using the term loosely): by buying exclusivity from publishers, it gives PS3 owners the feeling that the publishers are treating the PS3 as "second rate" or have abandoned them.

There's also the economic one: in these trying times, it's easier to buy off exclusives than maintain studios creating one. There are lull times between projects, as well as long conceptual pre-production-- you have to maintain the development team during these times. Some have considered Hollywood-style per project contracts on the devs. But still, if a company has money (like Microsoft), they can look at currently developed projects and pick one they think will be a hit (or supports their marketing strategy).



Proud member of the Sonic Support Squad.

Around the Network
JamesCizuz on 31 December 2008
Khuutra said:
JamesCizuz said:

"The gaps to large!"

Are you serious? 68 weeks on the market, it's also on the PC. Most people who wanted it, bought it. Most people who had a 360 and PS3 or a PC that could run it, would already have it for the 360 or 360 so why pick it up when it comes out for the PS3 when they already have it? People wanting it now will look at both, 360 version being 30$ cheaper. God sometimes you people make me want to kill myself.

Timed exclusives, or exclusives that later become multiplatform will always do worse on the platform it comes on next.

Oh, and I should'nt be saying exclusive, bioshock was always multiplatform.

Again, Resident Evil 4 stands as a stalwart counter to this argument. It has to do with markets, and the shooter market on the PS3 just doesn't compare to that of the 360.

 

Point out where in the arguement I said the shooter market is better on the PS3 then the 360.

I never said that.

Maybe you should re-read what I said.

30% of PS3 owners have a 360. If they had a 360 when bioshock came out and never got it then, then why wouldn't they get it for 360 now since they have one and it would be the cheaper version?

 

Oh, and wow, you found one game as a counter. To bad that was bait I left for you. Everyone knows you don't go into a arguement in this style with one exception. Exceptions always exist. I could bring up the fact that burnout paradice sold more on 360 then ps3, even though 360 is known for racing and has a larger atache rate, or that UT3 sold better on PS3 then 360. Exceptions exist, but who cares? My arguement remains the same and is right.



Commando on 31 December 2008
JamesCizuz said:

"The gaps to large!"

Are you serious? 68 weeks on the market, it's also on the PC. Most people who wanted it, bought it. Most people who had a 360 and PS3 or a PC that could run it, would already have it for the 360 or 360 so why pick it up when it comes out for the PS3 when they already have it? People wanting it now will look at both, 360 version being 30$ cheaper. God sometimes you people make me want to kill myself.

Timed exclusives, or exclusives that later become multiplatform will always do worse on the platform it comes on next.

Oh, and I should'nt be saying exclusive, bioshock was always multiplatform.

 

Wow did he create an account just to type this response?   gg



"Let justice be done though the heavens fall." - Jim Garrison

"Ask not your horse, if ye should ride into battle" - myself

Seraphic_Sixaxis on 31 December 2008

Lies!



JamesCizuz on 31 December 2008
Commando said:
JamesCizuz said:

"The gaps to large!"

Are you serious? 68 weeks on the market, it's also on the PC. Most people who wanted it, bought it. Most people who had a 360 and PS3 or a PC that could run it, would already have it for the 360 or 360 so why pick it up when it comes out for the PS3 when they already have it? People wanting it now will look at both, 360 version being 30$ cheaper. God sometimes you people make me want to kill myself.

Timed exclusives, or exclusives that later become multiplatform will always do worse on the platform it comes on next.

Oh, and I should'nt be saying exclusive, bioshock was always multiplatform.

 

Wow did he create an account just to type this response?   gg

Actually it was for the WKC thread I made it. Was lurking here for awhile but never raged enough to make an account.

 



Around the Network
Seraphic_Sixaxis on 31 December 2008

^ nice one lol.



Khuutra on 31 December 2008
JamesCizuz said:

Point out where in the arguement I said the shooter market is better on the PS3 then the 360.

I never said that.

Maybe you should re-read what I said.

30% of PS3 owners have a 360. If they had a 360 when bioshock came out and never got it then, then why wouldn't they get it for 360 now since they have one and it would be the cheaper version?

 

Oh, and wow, you found one game as a counter. To bad that was bait I left for you. Everyone knows you don't go into a arguement in this style with one exception. Exceptions always exist. I could bring up the fact that burnout paradice sold more on 360 then ps3, even though 360 is known for racing and has a larger atache rate, or that UT3 sold better on PS3 then 360. Exceptions exist, but who cares? My arguement remains the same and is right.

Wow, are you for real?

I'm not arguing about the shooter market on the 360 and I never claimed you were, I'm saying that timed exclusives do not always necessarily do worse on the second system, which was your original assertion. The timed exclusive is an almost entirely new concept, and we don't have enough data points to claim that there is an especially large trend in these sales patterns independent of market segmentation in either direction.

That's not "bait". With a number of data points this small, it only takes one exception to disprove a supposition, especially when said supposition is an absolute. One exception is all it takes, but there have been several. Hell, RE4 on the Wii sold better than the Gamecube version in the same timeframe, too, and that wrote the book on being delayed.

And you're going to have to cite that 30% figure, because I'm calling bullshit.



Commando on 31 December 2008
JamesCizuz said:
Commando said:
JamesCizuz said:

"The gaps to large!"

Are you serious? 68 weeks on the market, it's also on the PC. Most people who wanted it, bought it. Most people who had a 360 and PS3 or a PC that could run it, would already have it for the 360 or 360 so why pick it up when it comes out for the PS3 when they already have it? People wanting it now will look at both, 360 version being 30$ cheaper. God sometimes you people make me want to kill myself.

Timed exclusives, or exclusives that later become multiplatform will always do worse on the platform it comes on next.

Oh, and I should'nt be saying exclusive, bioshock was always multiplatform.

 

Wow did he create an account just to type this response?   gg

Actually it was for the WKC thread I made it. Was lurking here for awhile but never raged enough to make an account.

 

 

 ahhh ok.  Well Welcome to the site!



"Let justice be done though the heavens fall." - Jim Garrison

"Ask not your horse, if ye should ride into battle" - myself

Seraphic_Sixaxis on 31 December 2008

:s



Staude on 31 December 2008

I hope all version will be out at the same time.. otherwise i'll probably just get it for the pc. It should be obvious to anyone that when you can get the game for less than half price, you won't pay full price for it just because it's being sent out on your console. Especially if you have a pc or a 360.

I just ordered it but only because i could get it for less than half price.



Check out my game about moles ^