• Hello everybody! We have tons of new awards for the new year that can be requested through our Awards System thanks to Antifa Lockhart! Some are limited-time awards so go claim them before they are gone forever...

    CLICK HERE FOR AWARDS

PS3 Exclusive Theory



REGISTER TO REMOVE ADS
Status
Not open for further replies.

sephy 9 2 5

New member
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
665
Location
on a corner
Okay I've been spectating acting along with everyone else watching PS3 exclusives go left and right. So with the latest DMC4 I got pissed at Sony and was like why? But now that I've thought about it I think I understand why Sony let DMC 4 get away and why Sony will likely let others get away if developers choose to go multi-platform.

This might sound a little crazy but I believe Sony is actually abandoning 3rd party exclusives/support in general. They do not care if GTA IV and DMC 4 go multi-platform. Why?

  1. Sony's internal studios are working hard to produce innovative 1st party titles.
  2. Sony is approaching promising new developers and offering to be their publisher resulting in 2nd party exclusives.

I cannot really go too deep into number one since Sony is keeping a lot of those new innovations like LocoRoco PS3, HD EyeToy, and Singstar under wraps. Must wait until E3.

As for number two, we know that new dev companies struggle to get published because avg devs can't afford the cost to do so themselves.

Potential publishers are turned off from the idea of publishing games for an unproven developer often thinking in a near-sighted manner. So with that said, it’s real easy for Sony to find smaller companies in desperate need of a publisher. Sony publishes the game so long as it is exclusive to the PS3, making it a 2nd party game. The result?

  • Lair
  • LittleBigPlanet
  • Killzone 2
  • Heavenly Sword
  • WarDevil
  • Drake’s Fortune
  • L.A. Noire
  • Warhawk
  • Eyedentify
  • Eight Days
  • Afrika
  • WhiteKnight Story
  • Chain Limit
  • Calling all Cars
  • Unknown Realms
  • Second Season 01
  • Siren 3

Devs of course would be pleased because they need a publisher desperately, and since it’s by Sony that means they are going to obtain substantial publicity. Look at how hyped Killzone was and that game flopped.


So I really believe Sony's big plan or "ace" is going after the smaller companies. Although, the cost will be losing exclusives, there's hope that in the long run new franchises will be established and DMC will become a thing of the past.


That's one positive. I can think of three.

Another positive would be establishing new partnerships obviously and showing loyalty between the dev companies and Sony. Sony helped them get on their feet, and they get Sony back on its feet and in the long-term are willing to develop many exclusives for the PlayStation brand in the future. That right there is all that matters.

My final positive is that it would easily take less money to obtain a smaller company with the potential to become great and become the next God of War. Then on the other hand kissing up to one of the big guns like SE to stay exclusive. MS had a hard enough time getting Capcom go multiplat. Remember Capcom denied a 360 game many...many...many times. To keep DMC4 would have been a lot of money out of SCE's pockets.


So there you go I think

  • Sony is intentionally letting exclusives go
  • Working hard on 1st party titles
  • Scooping up small devs to make newly established franchises (GoW, Resistance, and Ratchet and Clank)


And finally I say look at the Playstation and PS2's games. History seems to be repeating itself when it comes to 1st and 2nd party. Who employs the most developers?
 

digital gopher

lock the gates
Joined
Feb 7, 2006
Messages
4,047
Awards
1
Website
www.ea.com
I think I understand why Sony let DMC 4 get away and why Sony will likely let others get away if developers choose to go multi-platform.
Obviously you don't know much. Why? Because Sony didn't have a choice in the matter. You obviously seem to know what a third party is. Re-read what you wrote. Sony doesn't have a choice.

This might sound a little crazy but I believe Sony is actually abandoning 3rd party exclusives/support in general. They do not care if GTA IV and DMC 4 go multi-platform. Why?
Oh, yea. Great idea. Let third party developers go. It really helped Nintendo with the Gamecube. And it looks like it could happen again with the Wii. If Sony tries to diminish the importance of third parties they will not have a chance with the Playstation 3. We all know that. Nintendo knows that. That's why if Sony wants to be successful, they won't take your advice.

  • 1. Sony's internal studios are working hard to produce innovative 1st party titles.
  • 2. Sony is approaching promising new developers and offering to be their publisher resulting in 2nd party exclusives.

  • Working hard on innovative first party titles? Oh, yea. LittleBigPlanet. That's one. Where are the others? Are you telling me that Sony's entire development team is working on one game? Even if they are working on more titles. What if LittleBigPlanet is as big of a success as people are speculating? Does that mean every year we're going to see a rehash of the same game by Sony? LittleBigPlanet2 2008 confirmed.

    I cannot really go too deep into number one since Sony is keeping a lot of those new innovations like LocoRoco PS3, HD EyeToy, and Singstar under wraps. Must wait until E3.
    If I had a thumbs down sound, I would play it. Those titles you just said are the only ones. LocoRoco PS3, EyeToy, and Singstar. Oh, great lineup. Real innovative.

    As for number two, we know that new dev companies struggle to get published because avg devs can't afford the cost to do so themselves.
    That made no sense. I think you forgot to say "Average developers can't afford to be self publishers"

    Potential publishers are turned off from the idea of publishing games for an unproven developer often thinking in a near-sighted manner. So with that said, it’s real easy for Sony to find smaller companies in desperate need of a publisher. Sony publishes the game so long as it is exclusive to the PS3, making it a 2nd party game. The result?
    * Lair
    * LittleBigPlanet
    * Killzone 2
    * Heavenly Sword
    * WarDevil
    * Drake’s Fortune
    * L.A. Noire
    * Warhawk
    * Eyedentify
    * Eight Days
    * Afrika
    * WhiteKnight Story
    * Chain Limit
    * Calling all Cars
    * Unknown Realms
    * Second Season 01
    * Siren 3
    Yes, those are exclusives. You actually forgot one of Sony's biggest first party franchises. The SOCOM series was their best online shooters. They bought Zipper INT for that reason alone. So, you might want to add SOCOM 4 to that list.
    Devs of course would be pleased because they need a publisher desperately, and since it’s by Sony that means they are going to obtain substantial publicity. Look at how hyped Killzone was and that game flopped.
    So, what makes everyone think Killzone 2 is going to be much better? One of those phenomenons I guess.
    So I really believe Sony's big plan or "ace" is going after the smaller companies. Although, the cost will be losing exclusives, there's hope that in the long run new franchises will be established and DMC will become a thing of the past.
    What makes you think that Microsoft won't, or isn't doing the same thing? Microsoft would have a better pitch at the smaller developers too. Their system is much easier to develop for. If the game ends up not being a full fledged game, it can go on the Xbox Live Arcade. And the install base is much larger. Therefore, there will be more sales.

    Another positive would be establishing new partnerships obviously and showing loyalty between the dev companies and Sony. Sony helped them get on their feet, and they get Sony back on its feet and in the long-term are willing to develop many exclusives for the PlayStation brand in the future. That right there is all that matters.
    Business isn't like that though. It's fend for yourself. If a game turns big, and the developer has the opportunity to make the sequel multi platform, why wouldn't they?

    MS had a hard enough time getting Capcom go multiplat. Remember Capcom denied a 360 game many...many...many times. To keep DMC4 would have been a lot of money out of SCE's pockets.
    Again, Capcom made the decision to go mutliplatform. Obviously they were thinking about this a long time ago because it's a simultaneous release on PS3, 360 and PC. So, this was known a long time ago. Probably when, or a few moths after development had begun.

    Sony can do whatever they want. But what makes you think that Microsoft can't do the exact same thing? Microsoft [obviously] has bigger pockets. Microsoft has the bigger install base. The only real exclusives that will matter this generation are first party ones. Halo is the biggest franchise out there. Bigger than any Sony developed game.
    I'm not trying to bash Sony here. It may seem like that, but I'm just trying to play devil's advocate.
 

sephy 9 2 5

New member
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
665
Location
on a corner
Obviously you don't know much. Why? Because Sony didn't have a choice in the matter.

You obviously do not know what your talking about. Before the PS3 was released Sony was working on a time-exclusive deal with Capcom and Rockstar for 6~12 months. Mr. Ken a la father of PS messed all that up. A deal never came to pass. So in the end Capcom and Rockstar takes interest in appealing to a wider audience. Mutli-platform 360/PS3 title is the result. That's why.



Digital Gopher said:
Oh, yea. Great idea. Let third party developers go. It really helped Nintendo with the Gamecube. And it looks like it could happen again with the Wii. If Sony tries to diminish the importance of third parties they will not have a chance with the Playstation 3. We all know that. Nintendo knows that. That's why if Sony wants to be successful, they won't take your advice.

Sony apparently doesn't care about losing exclusives. Their non-chalant approach/attitude to each loss indicates they have a completely different agenda. I assume it must involve their 1st and 2nd party titles. If they can manage to get excellent titles out of those two areas their 3rd party issue will eventually take care of its self.


Digital Gopher said:
Working hard on innovative first party titles? Oh, yea. LittleBigPlanet. That's one. Where are the others?

LittleBigPlanet is not a 1st party title. It's developed by Media Studios. 2nd party. =\



Digital Gopher said:
Are you telling me that Sony's entire development team is working on one game?

No. Common sense indicates that would never be the case. Y

Digital Gopher said:
What if LittleBigPlanet is as big of a success as people are speculating? Does that mean every year we're going to see a rehash of the same game by Sony?

And this is an issue? Success = sequel. I'll see a rehash of GoW, God of War, Halo, and Resistance too. So what.


Digital Gopher said:
If I had a thumbs down sound, I would play it. Those titles you just said are the only ones. LocoRoco PS3, EyeToy, and Singstar. Oh, great lineup. Real innovative.

I hope your not implying Nintendo or MS has more/better innovative 1st party titles than Sony. Singstar is the best of its genre. EyeToy is the best in its classification. Yeah, it is great and real innovative.


Digital Gopher said:
That made no sense. I think you forgot to say "Average developers can't afford to be self publishers"

That's what I said. Small dev companies struggle to get big-time publishers. This is a problem because they can not publish a game on their own. I indicated they are the majority of devs.


Digital Gopher said:
Yes, those are exclusives. You actually forgot one of Sony's biggest first party franchises. The SOCOM series was their best online shooters. They bought Zipper INT for that reason alone. So, you might want to add SOCOM 4 to that list.

I chose to add titles that either are being sequeled for the 1st time or are completely new.

Digital Gopher said:
So, what makes everyone think Killzone 2 is going to be much better? One of those phenomenons I guess.

Did I ever say Killzone 2 was going to be better? No. I showed an example of how Sony helps unknown devs.

Digital Gopher said:
What makes you think that Microsoft won't, or isn't doing the same thing?

I currently see MS buying developers or acquiring third party exclusives. The majority of Microsoft's recent activities hasn't involved publishing for unknown devs. Their approach to 1st/2nd party is a bit different.

Digital Gopher said:
Microsoft would have a better pitch at the smaller developers too.

Do they go after small devs on a regular basis? At the present time, no.

Digital Gopher said:
Their system is much easier to develop for.

Debatable.

Digital Gopher said:
Business isn't like that though. It's fend for yourself. If a game turns big, and the developer has the opportunity to make the sequel multi platform, why wouldn't they?

Most devs stick with what they know in terms of architecture. Venturing out isn't their style especially when their native platform has been kind enough to help them out when nobody else would. Egos don't usually get in the way unless you become a powerhouse.


Digital Gopher said:
But what makes you think that Microsoft can't do the exact same thing? Microsoft [obviously] has bigger pockets.

I think Microsoft can't because they apparently choose not to.

Digital said:
The only real exclusives that will matter this generation are first party ones.

Um I think that was my point. 3rd party doesn't matter at least for Sony and MS.

Digital Gopher said:
Halo is the biggest franchise out there. Bigger than any Sony developed game.

No it is not. Rethink that statement. Halo is not bigger than the best title offered on the Wii exclusively or Playstation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top