News Sony won't buy exclusive games

[Tim S]

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/07...lusive_games/1

Sony says it won't buy exclusive games for the PS3, but will instead earn exclusive games on the merit of its hardware.

[BioSniper]

The way I see it is most exclusives will be on the hardware that is leading by way of market penetration so that the companies can maximise their sales and as such their revenue. Generally they also tend to favour the cheaper consoles as it's generally assumed that they are in more homes.
This time round the PS3 isn't going to do so well on the exclusives front imo unless Sony start ponying up some cash.

[Gunsmith]

its pains me to see sony failing so much with the ps3 when some of the best gaming moments i've had were on the ps2

[Orgat]

Meanwhile, in other news, Sony announces it has bought the exclusivity to Quantic Dream's next game.

What a larf. Sony clearly pays for exclusive content. They've probably signed more development deals with independent developers than any other. Perhaps Tretton means that they don't directly fund games being published by other people, but that's a trifling distinction. He should get off his high horse.

[samkiller42]

Theres a bad link in your report Tim.
Thats an interesting article, i think sony could actually do with spending some money in order to get some exclusive games.

Sam

[DougEdey]

GTAIV was meant to be a timed exclusive, but then Rockstar said that there wasn't enough market penetration of PS3 to make it a viable solution.

[CardJoe]

Quantic Dreams development of Heavy Rain is no big news - I thought this was common knowledge for ages. The trailer was shown bloody yonks ago.

[LeMaltor]

Sweet, I love homogenisation

[Brooxy]

So basically this means:

"We've spent too much money developing this console, we make a loss as we sell it, so we're not going to shell out for exclusive rights to a game, because our PS3 budget is already overspent. Sorry"

[Orgat]

Originally Posted by CardJoe

Quantic Dreams development of Heavy Rain is no big news - I thought this was common knowledge for ages. The trailer was shown bloody yonks ago.

Yeah, but Sony buying it up is news. When they showed it last E3, they said it was in development for PS3, 360 and PC.

That's assuming the game is Heavy Rain which it probably is. But the Sony announcement doesn't name the game.

Originally Posted by Brooxy

So basically this means:

"We've spent too much money developing this console, we make a loss as we sell it, so we're not going to shell out for exclusive rights to a game, because our PS3 budget is already overspent. Sorry"

Not really. It just means Tretton is a bumbling idiot. Sony spends plenty on deals and development, he just wanted to make it sound like all these developers work for them because their platform is so good. Hmm. Money talks first, and Sony knows it.

[iwog]

More fool them, i cant think of a single successful console that hasn't had exclusives.

[GoodBytes]

Could this be an other Dreamcast? or Atari 5200 (without it's defects)?

[Orgat]

Originally Posted by iwog

More fool them, i cant think of a single successful console that hasn't had exclusives.

Good thing they do have exclusives then There's over 20 exclusive titles scheduled for PS3 by the end of the year.

Originally Posted by GoodBytes

Could this be an other Dreamcast? or Atari 5200 (without it's defects)?

Comments like this are almost as silly as Tretton's Dreamcast was lacking support period, before even talking about exclusive support. The largest third party publisher in the world ignored it. PS3 has the support of all the major publishers, and it has its exclusive stuff too.

In short, Something should seem a little off about comments like this if you consider on the very same day Sony was announcing a new exclusive deal with a developer, not to mention if you look at the deals and development investments they've already made. As for deals with third party publishers, Sony is notorious for offering marketing and promotional support, among other things, in exchange for exclusives or timed exclusives, and Kaz Hirai said just a few weeks ago that they'd be focussing on doing this again. For example, it's not coincidence that Silent Hill was predominantly a PS2 exclusive franchise, and that Sony Pictures funded a movie for it. Sony is known for more creative moneyhats. Interestingly, Sony Pictures recently announced it would be funding the Metal Gear movie project and I wouldn't be surprised if this was brokered by SCE in exchange for at least temporary exclusivity on MGS4.

That doesn't contradict what Tretton said. Sony may well not fund the games of other publishers directly, but they do pass money in other ways. He was choosing his words carefully to place himself on some imagined high horse, which he doesn't really have any business being on.

[Amon]

That gentleman in the article's image looks like Jeffrey Skilling:

The former CEO of Enron Corp.

[DXR_13KE]

any sony console would have died quickly if there were not for exclusive games.

[huFFamOOse]

This is a pretty bit mistake. A huge part of the whole success of the PS2 were exclusives. Lots of people brought the console soley for GTA, Grand Turismo etc. If they're trying to gain some respect from this they they're pretty deluded. I think it's a money issue, M$ have priced them out of the big exclusives. This will likely have the opposite effect on developers. If there's not help from exclusivity money there won't be as big incentive to develop for the 'current hardest to develop for' PS3.

[Spaceraver]

I hate exclusives.. Just give me decent Linux support instead ffs..

[Kipman725]

Could this be an other Dreamcast? or Atari 5200 (without it's defects)?

nah the dreamcast has decent games that are exclusives. THe PS3 has mediocre non exclusives.

[mattthegamer463]

At the rate Sony is going, the PS4 will just be a PSone nailed to the side of a PS3. I almost pity them. But then I remember DRM.

If you focus your development on our platform, you will ultimately be more successful.

How can it be more successful if other companies have sold more consoles than you have? Wouldn't that make for higher profits if they focused development for their system? Silly silly Sony.

[devdevil85]

Originally Posted by mattthegamer463

How can it be more successful if other companies have sold more consoles than you have? Wouldn't that make for higher profits if they focused development for their system? Silly silly Sony.

Well hypothetically, if a game is only on PS3 and it is a great, must-have title then everyone who already owns the PS3 will want one AND any new/future customers that don't own a PS3 that are either a) looking at getting one anyway in the near future or b) will get one now that there is a great must-have title on the PS3 will also buy it, so what is Sony so "silly" about when using that statement? Take the original Halo for example: Xbox was a boring console that didn't really have the spark it needed until Bungie decided to make it's Xbox exclusive, and trust me there weren't THAT many Xbox owners at the time and now look what happened, so you better stop spouting off overly-opinionated comments about how Sony doesn't know what they're talking about, or you're just gonna end up looking like an ignorant, pompous a**.