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

Forums - Sony - Sony Gives 64 Million Gamers the Finger

S.T.A.G.E. on 07 May 2009
Reasonable said:
twesterm said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Munkeh111 said:
Many people do care about this game (though I am not one of them) in spite of the terrible game designer, who just loves to hate other games (though he does like Uncharted...)

 

 

This games fanbase has long since grown up and probably had children of their own. Kids today do not know about Ghostbusters, and the adults who grew up with it, don't care anymore. Those people are probably play the Wii with their kids for crying out loud. Sony published a non-factor game.

I'm really not going to comment on the story, but I will mention this: Ghostbusters is much more well known than you think it is in just about every age group.

Not only is the no-ghost symbol well known in just about every age group (and one of the most well known symbols in the world), it's also well loved by just about every age group.  You can walk up to anyone on the street and ask them "Who ya gonna call?" and they will instinctively answer "Ghostbusters" or "He-Man".  Just about any age group.

Fun little anecdote about Ghostbusters.  I have a niece and nephew that are 6 and 8 and they both know and love Ghostbusters, even before my sister knew I was working on the game.  My niece, the one who is 6, knows the first movie and knows almost every line.  She knows what characters she likes and she knows the 2nd movie is good, but not nearly as good as the first.

Ghostbusters is a 25 year old franchise that hasn't had much new in the last 20 years, but great things survive.  Even completely ignoring the game, Ghostbusters has always been alive because it is just a timeless classic.

Now, for people saying it's a typical movie game, do your research first. 

Typical movie games have the actors phone in their lines and have to deal with absolute release dates and short development cycles.  Ghostbusters: the Video Game has had a full development cycle, actors that care about their characters and are actually heavily involved with the game, and doesn't have to rush to release with a movie.  The game may be a sequel to the movies, but it isn't your typical movie game.

 

 

 

 

I know we argued about narrative in games, etc. but I do hope that the input of the actors, etc. really makes a difference in this game.  I've always enjoyed the movies and have high hopes the game manages to deliver a nice mix of fun gameplay with some good lines from the guys.

I find Ghostbusters inhabits that rare territory where people, particularly kids, who have never even seen the movie, still know it and love the concept.  It was only recently I watched the first film on TV with my kids realising that while the referred to it and knew it they'd never actually seen it.

I'm still right about the narrative bit though...

 

 

Kids today cannot still love and know an brand that hasn't been relevant since the early 90's. For them it doesn't exist until you show them or they are lucky enough to find it. Anime owns the TV now.



Around the Network
Euphoria14 on 07 May 2009
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Kids today cannot still love and know an brand that hasn't been relevant since the early 90's. For them it doesn't exist until you show them or they are lucky enough to find it. Anime owns the TV now.

That is why as they grow up they have parents who enjoyed it and find it to be something good for their kids to watch. I already know of a few people on the forums who mentioned this same thing.

I own the Ghostbusters 1 + 2 DVD set, picked it up a little over a year ago. I am pretty sure my little girl will end up watching it. Just like how little girls know what The Wizard of Oz is, even if it is over 70 years old.

Parents.

If a parent needs to buy his/her child a game for their birthday and see something like Ghostbusters sitting on the shelf, they will know what it is. They will know that it isn't bad for their children. Odds are it may be picked up.

 

 



iPhone = Great gaming device. Don't agree? Who cares, because you're wrong.

Currently playing:

Final Fantasy VI (iOS), Final Fantasy: Record Keeper (iOS) & Dragon Quest V (iOS)     

    

Got a retro room? Post it here!

BMaker11 on 07 May 2009

I don't care about Nintendo in this ordeal....and quite frankly I don't care about Ghostbusters. But...M$ deserves to get the shaft for once



makingmusic476 on 07 May 2009
TheSteve said:
Pretty sure a lot of the M$ "timed" exclusives were due to a) M$ having an established market presence b) difficulties coding for PS3. Thus why, even after the wait, Orange Box was unplayable on PS3 until later patches. If M$ outright "bought" exclusives to "ensure" they "never" came out on PS3... then they wouldn't have.

 

Companies can't buy permanent exclusivity of a title unless they somehow work out a publishing deal in which they own the name of the title, but even then there are ways around such agreements (turning Ninja gaiden II into Ninja Gaiden Sigma II, for example), so the only real way to ensure permanent exclusivity is to purchase the entire IP.

Both companies have worked out deals for timed exclusivity this gen.  You can't try to deny the fact that MS has thrown some money around for exclusives just because the games eventually hit ps3.  In order to get a third party IP exclusive to your system, the best you can hope for is timed exclusivity, and that's usually all one of the big three will care about, as after six months to a year, the game going multiplat means little in terms of sales.  Permanent exclusivty is next to impossible unless you make the game second party.

Of course, there's direct evidence of this from sources like 2K:

Originally we announced BioShock as a next-gen game and didn't specify platforms," stated [Markus Wilding, International PR director, 2K]. "Then we were approached by Microsoft and at that time that deal made perfect sense for everybody, so we did it. As far as exclusivity deals go these days, they expire after a certain time, and then it was up to us to decide if it would make sense to release a PS3 version such a long time after the 360 version.

Some games were obviously made exclusive as a result of development struggles (like your Orange Box example, though that version wasn't even handled by Valve), but there are quite a few that weren't.



theprof00 on 07 May 2009

@All

I can't be expected to check outside resources while I'm at work, because my internet connection is simply very terrible.
However, I now understand what you guys are saying. However, am I right in thinking that the game as of yet does not have a publisher for the 360 and pc version?



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 07 May 2009
axumblade said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
axumblade said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
CGI-Quality said:
I think it's pretty sad that some of the same folks who defended Microsoft for actually BUYING exclusives so it would NEVER come to a Playstation (or Nintendo format for that matter), are pissed off about a T_I_M_E_D exclusive in ONE region.

Well, as mentioned, boohoo, Sony & Nintendo fans have been dealing with this kind of stuff the whole gen. It's Micrsosoft who entered a race to "kill off" the competition, THAT'S trying to screw over gamers. At least Ghostbusters is coming to the 360.

Sorry about the rant, I just think this complaining is quite pathetic.

 

Buying exclusives? To the best of my knowledge the things MS has purchased are timed exclusives and exclusive content to make their versions better. Sony was and still is the king of Moneyhatting, so I don't get your point here bro.

Because we know how great the DLC for Fallout 3 really is. x.o

Another thing, Sony are doing it so they can release the movie and game together on 1 blu-ray disc. They have been talking about the idea for months. It's just they didn't mention Ghostbusters, probably because it was supposed to be a surprise. Hense the reason for them gaining the publishing rights. I understand that you think there was no real reason for it but Sony seemed to have a decent idea and tried to go with it. If Sony didn't have the publishing rights, there might have been a possibility the release date would be approaching and they wouldn't have a game to put on the blu-ray. It's not nearly as big of a deal as the 1 year wait that the Sony fans had to do for Eternal Sonata or Bioshock or the few months timed exclusivity of Lost Planet and The Orange Box..I don't think there will be that massive of a change of the release dates of the games.

 

 

I understand the movie thing, but that doesn't change the fact that the game will still sell crap. Fallout 3 was found to be, overall superior on the 360 when compared to the PS3 version, by the reviews. This movie is complete proof that Sony is using the videogame industry to bring relevance to their dwindling electronics brand.

I was referring to the DLC from Fallout 3. I've heard not so many great things about it since it came out. If we're going by reviews, I'm not sure how well justified the 360 exclusive DLC is.

I was referring to the actual game.

As for the movie thing, dwindling electronics brand? It might be but putting a movie and game on the same blu-ray will be cheaper then producing 2 seperate blu-ray discs or products that may or may not sell.

Sony without the gaming division would've been a dwindling brand. Their marketshare is a hell of a thing. Putting a movie and game on Blu Ray isn't cheap at all. Sony wanted to make the Blu Ray version of the Ghosbusters movie relevant.

Where are you getting the idea that it will sell like crap? I really don't think you know how this game will sell because this is one of those games that's popularity is actually up in the air.Nobody actually knows if the Ghostbuster series is dead, dying or waiting to be revitalized...We have no current Ghostbusters trends to compare it to. All we have is a hyped game, and a blu-ray release of the series. Just because you don't care about the game doesn't mean that nobody else does.

If you doubt what i'm saying, show me the demographic in which Ghostbusters is focused on.

 

 



S.T.A.G.E. on 07 May 2009
Vetteman94 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Vetteman94 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
axumblade said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
CGI-Quality said:
I think it's pretty sad that some of the same folks who defended Microsoft for actually BUYING exclusives so it would NEVER come to a Playstation (or Nintendo format for that matter), are pissed off about a T_I_M_E_D exclusive in ONE region.

Well, as mentioned, boohoo, Sony & Nintendo fans have been dealing with this kind of stuff the whole gen. It's Micrsosoft who entered a race to "kill off" the competition, THAT'S trying to screw over gamers. At least Ghostbusters is coming to the 360.

Sorry about the rant, I just think this complaining is quite pathetic.

 

Buying exclusives? To the best of my knowledge the things MS has purchased are timed exclusives and exclusive content to make their versions better. Sony was and still is the king of Moneyhatting, so I don't get your point here bro.

Because we know how great the DLC for Fallout 3 really is. x.o

Another thing, Sony are doing it so they can release the movie and game together on 1 blu-ray disc. They have been talking about the idea for months. It's just they didn't mention Ghostbusters, probably because it was supposed to be a surprise. Hense the reason for them gaining the publishing rights. I understand that you think there was no real reason for it but Sony seemed to have a decent idea and tried to go with it. If Sony didn't have the publishing rights, there might have been a possibility the release date would be approaching and they wouldn't have a game to put on the blu-ray. It's not nearly as big of a deal as the 1 year wait that the Sony fans had to do for Eternal Sonata or Bioshock or the few months timed exclusivity of Lost Planet and The Orange Box..I don't think there will be that massive of a change of the release dates of the games.

 

 

I understand the movie thing, but that doesn't change the fact that the game will still sell crap. Fallout 3 was found to be, overall superior on the 360 when compared to the PS3 version, by the reviews. This movie is complete proof that Sony is using the videogame industry to bring relevance to their dwindling electronics brand.

So this should only happen to quality titles that will sell well?

 

 

 

Technically the only usual reason timed exclusives are purchased are to hurt the sales of another brand offering the same title. It is a demand killer, so yes, it is to gather more consumers to your system if they want the game enough. This is the most underhanded gen i've ever seen.

So basically. its only because Sony is doing it?  Because if it was Microsoft you would be okay with it? Since the number would only be 60-62 million of pissed off fans, you wouldnt be one of those so its alright?  

 

 

 

When I say this is most underhanded gen, do you actually believe I'm using a double standard?



Vetteman94 on 07 May 2009
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Vetteman94 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Vetteman94 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
axumblade said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
CGI-Quality said:
I think it's pretty sad that some of the same folks who defended Microsoft for actually BUYING exclusives so it would NEVER come to a Playstation (or Nintendo format for that matter), are pissed off about a T_I_M_E_D exclusive in ONE region.

Well, as mentioned, boohoo, Sony & Nintendo fans have been dealing with this kind of stuff the whole gen. It's Micrsosoft who entered a race to "kill off" the competition, THAT'S trying to screw over gamers. At least Ghostbusters is coming to the 360.

Sorry about the rant, I just think this complaining is quite pathetic.

 

Buying exclusives? To the best of my knowledge the things MS has purchased are timed exclusives and exclusive content to make their versions better. Sony was and still is the king of Moneyhatting, so I don't get your point here bro.

Because we know how great the DLC for Fallout 3 really is. x.o

Another thing, Sony are doing it so they can release the movie and game together on 1 blu-ray disc. They have been talking about the idea for months. It's just they didn't mention Ghostbusters, probably because it was supposed to be a surprise. Hense the reason for them gaining the publishing rights. I understand that you think there was no real reason for it but Sony seemed to have a decent idea and tried to go with it. If Sony didn't have the publishing rights, there might have been a possibility the release date would be approaching and they wouldn't have a game to put on the blu-ray. It's not nearly as big of a deal as the 1 year wait that the Sony fans had to do for Eternal Sonata or Bioshock or the few months timed exclusivity of Lost Planet and The Orange Box..I don't think there will be that massive of a change of the release dates of the games.

 

 

I understand the movie thing, but that doesn't change the fact that the game will still sell crap. Fallout 3 was found to be, overall superior on the 360 when compared to the PS3 version, by the reviews. This movie is complete proof that Sony is using the videogame industry to bring relevance to their dwindling electronics brand.

So this should only happen to quality titles that will sell well?

 

 

 

Technically the only usual reason timed exclusives are purchased are to hurt the sales of another brand offering the same title. It is a demand killer, so yes, it is to gather more consumers to your system if they want the game enough. This is the most underhanded gen i've ever seen.

So basically. its only because Sony is doing it?  Because if it was Microsoft you would be okay with it? Since the number would only be 60-62 million of pissed off fans, you wouldnt be one of those so its alright?  

 

 

 

When I say this is most underhanded gen, do you actually believe I'm using a double standard?

Coming from you, absolutely

 



S.T.A.G.E. on 07 May 2009
Euphoria14 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Kids today cannot still love and know an brand that hasn't been relevant since the early 90's. For them it doesn't exist until you show them or they are lucky enough to find it. Anime owns the TV now.

That is why as they grow up they have parents who enjoyed it and find it to be something good for their kids to watch. I already know of a few people on the forums who mentioned this same thing.

Yeah...if their parents can even remember Ghostbusters. Do you want to know what most parents today let their kids watch? Disney flix. Ghostbusters?....that consisted of seasons, so its harder to come by and the movies are only seen if the parents have the DVD's which of course Sony is trying to get them to buy again.

I own the Ghostbusters 1 + 2 DVD set, picked it up a little over a year ago. I am pretty sure my little girl will end up watching it. Just like how little girls know what The Wizard of Oz is, even if it is over 70 years old.

Parents.

Wanna pick up Ghostbusters 1+ 2 again on Blu Ray...so you can see their pores?

If a parent needs to buy his/her child a game for their birthday and see something like Ghostbusters sitting on the shelf, they will know what it is. They will know that it isn't bad for their children. Odds are it may be picked up.

That is a rarity, if the child actually knows what it is.

 

 

 



badgenome on 07 May 2009
Vetteman94 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Vetteman94 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Vetteman94 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
axumblade said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
CGI-Quality said:
I think it's pretty sad that some of the same folks who defended Microsoft for actually BUYING exclusives so it would NEVER come to a Playstation (or Nintendo format for that matter), are pissed off about a T_I_M_E_D exclusive in ONE region.

Well, as mentioned, boohoo, Sony & Nintendo fans have been dealing with this kind of stuff the whole gen. It's Micrsosoft who entered a race to "kill off" the competition, THAT'S trying to screw over gamers. At least Ghostbusters is coming to the 360.

Sorry about the rant, I just think this complaining is quite pathetic.

 

Buying exclusives? To the best of my knowledge the things MS has purchased are timed exclusives and exclusive content to make their versions better. Sony was and still is the king of Moneyhatting, so I don't get your point here bro.

Because we know how great the DLC for Fallout 3 really is. x.o

Another thing, Sony are doing it so they can release the movie and game together on 1 blu-ray disc. They have been talking about the idea for months. It's just they didn't mention Ghostbusters, probably because it was supposed to be a surprise. Hense the reason for them gaining the publishing rights. I understand that you think there was no real reason for it but Sony seemed to have a decent idea and tried to go with it. If Sony didn't have the publishing rights, there might have been a possibility the release date would be approaching and they wouldn't have a game to put on the blu-ray. It's not nearly as big of a deal as the 1 year wait that the Sony fans had to do for Eternal Sonata or Bioshock or the few months timed exclusivity of Lost Planet and The Orange Box..I don't think there will be that massive of a change of the release dates of the games.

 

 

I understand the movie thing, but that doesn't change the fact that the game will still sell crap. Fallout 3 was found to be, overall superior on the 360 when compared to the PS3 version, by the reviews. This movie is complete proof that Sony is using the videogame industry to bring relevance to their dwindling electronics brand.

So this should only happen to quality titles that will sell well?

 

 

 

Technically the only usual reason timed exclusives are purchased are to hurt the sales of another brand offering the same title. It is a demand killer, so yes, it is to gather more consumers to your system if they want the game enough. This is the most underhanded gen i've ever seen.

So basically. its only because Sony is doing it? Because if it was Microsoft you would be okay with it? Since the number would only be 60-62 million of pissed off fans, you wouldnt be one of those so its alright?

 

 

 

When I say this is most underhanded gen, do you actually believe I'm using a double standard?

Coming from you, absolutely

 

So if someone other than S.T.A.G.E. said that, you'd not view it as them applying a double standard? That's a double standard!