EA

SEGA, first and foremost...

Nippon Ichi, Gust..

capcom's bias seems to lean towards the 360. i really don't understand this because most of their games sell better on the ps3 even with a smaller install base(according to this site, with the exception of lost planet)

i would say konami but the only reason why they seem biased is because of kojima. he's always had a good relationship with sony.

I'd have to give it up to tecmo, nis, and atlus. tecmo brought both ninja gaidens to the ps3. which suprised me because microsoft published the game in the us and they still got it done. i'm crossing my fingers that they bring doa to the ps3 too.

atlus and nis have brought a few things to ps3 so far but i think in the future we'll see a lot more. those two companies have never really shown xbox any love.

i would say konami 1st , then sega 2nd and nis would be 3rd.

I didn't ignore. These are very few exceptions. Just because they got some exclusive titles for non-Sony consoles doesn't hide the fact they were focused on PS2 more than any other platform.

"Point is for every PS exclusive game there is probably an exclusive for another console."

Not really. Capcom support for PS1 were, by a long shot, higher than N64 and Saturn. Same goes for PS2 and their competitors: DC, GC and Xbox, no one came close to the support Capcom gave to PS2. Even on the portables, at the beggining of the war between DS and PSP, Capcom was PSP focused. They're still very restricted toward DS, very few games released for it, adding the fact we're talking about a 100+ million userbase portable.

The only reason now Capcom isn't so Sony biased is because the PS3 is in third-place and still almost every single major game they do is also coming for it (the only real recent exceptions are Monster Hunter Tri and Dead Rising). Which is contradictory, since their support for N64 was almost non-existant and they gave very few support for the original Xbox. Both of them had similar userbase PS3 have now.

That's why I came to the conclusion that Capcom is biased toward Sony.

I don't agree with you guys saying SEGA. True, they really did some PS3 exclusive games, but they also got many Wii exclusives as well.

Fail:

I vividly remember the conference where Capcom signed a deal to make like a gazillion exclusive games for Gamecube. Of course not all of them stayed exclusive due to the lack of success of the Cube, but the games were awesome. I thought Viewtiful Joe kicked serious ass.

So how can Capcom be the most biased? Sure, during PS1 days you *could* have made this statement and gotten away with it, but key moments in vg history seem to prove you wrong. Even during the PS1 gen Capcom put it's games on Saturn and N64. PS1 just happened to be a runaway success. Therefore the increased support.

What about RE:Code Veronica on the Dreamcast? It was the pride and joy of Sega fans and was only ported to other platforms ages later. I could mention other games on DC like Powerstone, but I guess you didn't think of that?

So PS1 gen I would say maybe you could be right, but I would put it down to PS1 success. During PS2 gen I would say HELL NO. And now? I think previous posts have addressed current gen.

Valve, Bungie, and Epic.

SEGA, Nis, and Atlus.

If Sony is publishing their games they are second party not third party. That means Sucker punch and Insomniac and a few others are 2nd party developers not third party developers. If they were big enough to publish their own games or went to another publisher then they would be considered third party. Whether Sony owns them or not only determines if they are 1st party or second party. It's who publishes them that determines if they are 2nd party or third party.