Sony: "We don't buy exclusivity"

By Games Industry.biz Published 4 July, 2007

Tretton explains approach.

SCEA boss Jack Tretton has criticised what he described as the "different approach" of rival platform holders, stating that Sony won't "bribe" developers to make PS3 exclusives.

Speaking in the latest issue of PSM magazine Tretton said, "Microsoft is too dependent upon the third-party community, and Nintendo is too dependent upon first-party. We like to feel that we got a pretty good mix.

"We have a very different approach to exclusives than some of our competitors," he continued.

"We don't buy exclusivity. We don't fund development. We don't, for lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform."

"We earn it by saying, 'You can build a better game on our platform. If you focus your development on our platform, you will ultimately be more successful. We can try to partner up with you from a technology standpoint. We can try to partner up with you from a marketing standpoint. But just economically and technologically, this is the system that makes the most sense for you.'"

Tretton said that Sony is going after a broader demographic sooner than with PS1 or PS2, stating, "I think that when you start to get into that USD 600 price you have to be mindful that there should be multiple consumers to justify the value."

As for the challenges of programming for PS3, Tretton noted that Sony is doing what it can to put the tools in developers' hands - observing that the company has just rolled out a wide range of first-party development tools to the third parties for the first time. Ultimately, though, he has faith in the development community.

"There are a lot of great developers out there, and they always figure it out," Tretton said.

GamesIndustry.biz is our exclusive lover. We don't have to pay.

Picture of Games.

About Games Industry.biz

Read more articles from Games by visiting the Games Industry.biz archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (114) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • JayPee #1 5 years ago

    Just

    SHUT UP!

    ED: And talk about the games themselves.
    Edited by 1 at 04/07/07 @ 08:55

  • Segnit #2 5 years ago

    I reckon 80% of the comments will be against Tretton's statments while only 20% for.

    Want to see how close my prediction will be.

  • ZeroAX #3 5 years ago

    is he stupid????? PS1 was defined by 3rd party exclusives. and ps2 was defined by 3rd party as long as sony's first true good 1rst party games. this is just bullshit.

  • richardiox #4 5 years ago

    Haze?!!!!

  • squarepusher #5 5 years ago

    Don't you lot get bored of this?

  • Avaloner #6 5 years ago

    Segnit: I predict that tonight it will be dark and in the morning it will be lighter.

    Sony does not buy exclusivity because frankly it cannot afford to right now.

  • peasoup #7 5 years ago

    someones telling porky pies

  • presbyterrorion #8 5 years ago

    This statement will make more sense in 2 weeks.

  • Segnit #9 5 years ago

    You miss understand Avaloner.

    I predict exactly 80% to 20%

    Not 79% to 21% or anything else

  • SBfistfun #10 5 years ago

    "There are a lot of great developers out there, and they always figure it out," Tretton said.

    Lol Tretton in "Tough shit" shocker!

  • Scimarad #11 5 years ago

    /runs from thread in terror

  • moggsy #12 5 years ago

    "I think that when you start to get into that USD 600 price you have to be mindful that there should be multiple consumers to justify the value."

    Anyone any idea what this means?
    Edited by 1 at 04/07/07 @ 09:08

  • chicknstu #13 5 years ago

    Does that mean we can have Singstar and Buzz on 360 then?

    Stu xxx

  • NegativeZero #14 5 years ago

    Remind me again which platform has a lack of quality exclusives at the moment?

    Someone should tell Sony to just shut up. I'm getting sick of having to put on my gumboots to wade through the bullshit every time I check my newsfeeds on gaming sites.

  • Eighthours #15 5 years ago

    "If you focus your development on our platform, you will ultimately be more successful... But just economically and technologically, this is the system that makes the most sense for you."

    With PS3 sales as they are, no wonder they're losing so many exclusives with that line of thought.

  • Tim #16 5 years ago

    "We can try to partner up with you from a marketing standpoint."

    In other words, we'll give you some free marketing. In other words, we'll give you money. In other words, we'll bribe you. (For 'want of a better word'.)

  • squarepusher #17 5 years ago

    Expert time.

    It's hear, hear.

    As in "hear him".

    Corporate talking a load of crap, what a shocker. Let me jump up on my high horse and act self-righteous. I, unlike a multi-billion dollar corporation that's sold a few Playstations, understand teh conzol warz!
    Edited by 1 at 04/07/07 @ 09:29

  • Shrui #18 5 years ago

    @moggsy
    Means that if your going to buy a PS3 you need to have several people in the house who will use it to justify the price per person. In a family situation you can't justify spending that much on one person:

    1 person = £400
    2 people = £200 each
    3 people = £133 each

    Could also a way of saying "we've just worked out we've priced it too high an no plans to drop the price yet"

  • alpha-0ne #19 5 years ago

    So sony regularly waives the licence fee for publishers to have the game exclusive of PS2 or PS3 this is basically giving the publisher an extra $10 per game sold, id say that IS buying exclusives...

  • Dizzy #20 5 years ago

    "We earn it by saying, 'You can build a better game on our platform""

    Looks like they failed then?

  • Steroyd #21 5 years ago

    I blink and there's 21 responses already. o_O

  • zooms #22 5 years ago

    And you'll have to work harder and spend more time because our GPU is a bit shit.

  • Dark_Stranger #23 5 years ago

    {cough} bullshit!

  • rudedudejude #24 5 years ago

    ps2 gta?

  • RedPanda #25 5 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • kmittal82 #26 5 years ago

    **sniff sniff**, anyone else smell a big pile of bullshit here?

  • zuljin #27 5 years ago

    @chicknstu
    Singstar and Buzz are developed internally, so unless Sony go bust, I don't reckon you'll see them on any other platform.

  • lindblum_resident #28 5 years ago

    Unbelievable.

    Had he said that they are planning on paying every single developer they can to develop exlusives for them, people would again be all "OMGWTFSonyaretehevil".

    Hating Sony is the new black.

  • lambtron #29 5 years ago

    "We can't buy exclusivity".

    Fixed.

  • Beano #30 5 years ago

    @lindblum_resident: right on!

  • drumbaby #31 5 years ago

    People pay us to be on our console!

  • Zomoniac #32 5 years ago

    Had he said that they are planning on paying every single developer they can to develop exlusives for them, people would again be all "OMGWTFSonyaretehevil".

    Not really. Sony won the last console war by doing just that. MGS, GTA, FF, PES (for the first 3 years, during which the victory was assured), DMC etc. Nobody called them evil. But now due their own stupidity and arrogance all the developers are jumping ship and refuse to exclusively sign all their games over to a machine that nobody's got and nobody can afford to buy, so Sony feel they have to make statements like this to make people think they're losing all their major exclusive out of choice, rather than because they monumentally fucked up. It's just funny.

  • gingerlink #33 5 years ago

    I'm more interested by the fact he's accusing other companies of bribing third parties....

  • Darren #34 5 years ago

    I reckon many many PS2 owners will eventually upgrade to a PS3 when the time is right (when there's a price drop or a triple A game released, e.g. GTA IV) and I doubt they'll care whether the Xbox 360 has exclusives or not so long as the PS3 has games they want to play. The Xbox having Halo, Fable and PGR did little to deter sales of the PS2 and I honestly doubt that the 360 having GTA IV and Pro Evo 2008 as well will have any long-term impact on PS3 sales. The only thing preventing the PS3 from being a resounding success in the short-term is obviously the high price point but also I think the success of the PS2 is another factor - why upgrade when the previous generation is very much alive and has a plentiful supply of cheap, great games?

  • zuljin #35 5 years ago

    @Zomoniac
    "Not really. Sony won the last console war by doing just that. MGS, GTA, FF, PES (for the first 3 years, during which the victory was assured), DMC etc. Nobody called them evil."

    GTA 3 wasn't exclusive. Neither was Vice City. Neither was Metal Gear Solid.

    "But now due their own stupidity and arrogance all the developers are jumping ship and refuse to exclusively sign all their games over..."

    Actually because of development costs, there are very very few exclusives out there which are third party.

    "...to a machine that nobody's got and nobody can afford to buy, so Sony feel they have to make statements like this to make people think they're losing all their major exclusive out of choice, rather than because they monumentally fucked up."

    And here it all becomes about the "oh its too expensive and noone can buy one" moaning again. You either think its worth the money or you don't. Its really not rocket science. And since the PS3 is doing exactly the same as the PS2, I think there are a fair few people at the top of Sony rubbing their hands with glee.

  • Overlush #36 5 years ago

    /whips out blunerbuss filled with broken 360 parts and gunpowder

    BLAM

    /wipes out yet another batch of whinging, smug, 'nothing better to do' 360 bitches

  • ToxicTed #37 5 years ago

    @Zuljin:
    'GTA 3 wasn't exclusive. Neither was Vice City. Neither was Metal Gear Solid.'

    No, but Sony paid (bribed?) the developers/publishers to keep them away from the XBox for a longer period.

  • smirny #38 5 years ago

    the guy is a moron... intentioanlly using the word 'bribe' just seems to be trying to sensationalise what seems to me a pretty reasonable business practice...

  • squarepusher #39 5 years ago

    Some of you enjoy this more than games.

    The herd behaviour is pathetic. I don't even own a PS3 and can't possibly justify purchasing one right now. However the level of sheer stupidity present whenever a Sony this or that speaks is quite incredible.

    What's wrong with you all?

    I own an Xbox 360, which is inevitably going to die.

    So what's worse:

    1). Sony PR people and corporate vice-whateverthefucks spouting the company line. Horrible viral campaigns and faux fansites, a product you can't afford or don't consider value for money. A few memes and some whiney yank cunt singing on youtube.

    2). Peter Moore telling me that, y'know, things break and stuff. And that I need the extended warranty. When that's up I need to pay. When I pay it's a 5 working week lead time to get what I've paid for working again. Then if it damages my property, I have to jump through hoops to get it replaced. Can I play Blue Dragon, Mass Effect, Eternal Sonata etc... will it last that long? Should I have to worry about that, was that part of the consideration when I bought it? Shouldn't it just work?

    And your faith is still in number 2?

    Which one is an inconvenience, costing me money, costing me time (and a fair few others)?
    Edited by 1 at 04/07/07 @ 10:09

  • InfiniteFury #40 5 years ago

    This is a different company than the one who spent $10m+ on securing temporary exclusivity for Vice City/San Andreas then?

  • zuljin #41 5 years ago

    @ToxicTed
    Well a lot of devs do have a "you scratch my back if I scratch yours" mentality. I agree coining the phrase "bribing" is fairly hypocritical though.

    @squarepusher
    Personally I'd rather buy a console from a company that has all the idiots in marketing rather than hardware. I'm smart enough to see through a lot of bs to see what a console can and can't do, but I wouldn't be smart enough to dismantle a console to fix it myself.

    But thats just me :)

  • Zomoniac #42 5 years ago

    And here it all becomes about the "oh its too expensive and noone can buy one" moaning again. You either think its worth the money or you don't. Its really not rocket science. And since the PS3 is doing exactly the same as the PS2, I think there are a fair few people at the top of Sony rubbing their hands with glee.

    But with PS2 it started slowly and took off very suddenly. Within a few months they sliced £100 or more off the price, and got Gran Turismo 3, FFX (in Japan) and GTA3 (an exclusive to all intents and purposes) on the shelves. At this stage Xbox and Gamecube had barely made an appearance and Dreamcast was dead, so they pretty much had the scene to themselves. That 6 month period in 2000/2001 pretty much decided the next four years. Things are different now, MS are an established player in the field, Nintendo are going somewhere new and Sony are losing its western-appealing exclusives (as long as they keep FF and DQ they will sell in Japan).

    When PS2 came out it was them vs nobody and they had all the games. Now their main rival has a 10 million head start, a substantially cheaper machine and all the games. I'm not writing Sony off by any stretch, but unless they have something life-changing up their sleeve (which Home and LBP are not) then I can't see them dominating anything.

  • Waffleaber #43 5 years ago

    Which magical world is he living in where it's more financially viable to produce a game for a single system (let alone the one which has sold the least) without any other financial incentive such as an exclusivity deal?

    In an age where even small developments cost millions you want to release on as many platforms as possible, just look at the resurgence of pc games.

  • MrsPacMan #44 5 years ago

    Just exactly where do you push your square?

  • zuljin #45 5 years ago

    @Zomoniac
    "I'm not writing Sony off by any stretch, but unless they have something life-changing up their sleeve (which Home and LBP are not) then I can't see them dominating anything."

    Fair points. Just two smaller things:
    1. How do you know they aren't lifechanging if you've played neither? As someone whose played both, they're not my thing, but I know plenty of people who will love it. All honesty though LBP will prob not do too well, since quirky games rarely do.

    2. Who cares about world domination? Sony is really not doing badly, in fact MS was way behind because they released a year late before. All I want this time round is for userbases to be more distributed, so that I won't feel i "have to" buy console x just for game y. If that happens then I'll be happy.

  • squarepusher #46 5 years ago

    Sorry MrsPacman. I can't be bothered to reply with something clever. Maybe if you were Miss.

    If this is a catharsis for some of you then fine.

    But we must be the lamest consumer group (ahh fuck im in hell)/demographic/enthusiasts on the planet.
    Edited by 1 at 04/07/07 @ 10:31

  • miiiguel #47 5 years ago

    hummm. all talk and no games, would these guys shut the fuck up and start delivering?
    Do they realize that gamers don't really care if they bribe or do the rain dance, as long as they deliver some freakin games!!!!!

  • Peew971 #48 5 years ago

    @ Darren: Spot on! I have no doubt Sony will "win the Next Gen war" thanks to PS2 owners who will never consider a 360.
    I have many friends who own a PS2 and can afford a 360 but they just can't imagine going to the enemy, even though they only play multiplatform games. It's just for the principle. So eventually, when the PS2 dies, PS3 will sell extremely well. When that happens, exclusives won't matter.
    Edited by 1 at 04/07/07 @ 10:37

  • Daikon #49 5 years ago

    Tretton said that Sony is going after a broader demographic sooner than with PS1 or PS2, stating, "I think that when you start to get into that USD 600 price you have to be mindful that there should be multiple consumers to justify the value."

    What planet is this guy from? If you want to target a "broader demographic" then you should have the same price tag as the Wii has.
    Also some family oriented games would be a plus.

  • Kami #50 5 years ago

    ...

    This is a bargepole. 10-feet long.

    This is the distance I shall be keeping from this.

    *shakes head*

  • Psychotext #51 5 years ago

    I see Sony PR have put on the batshit mental hat again... and they were doing so well. = /

  • spongebob #52 5 years ago

    I like their approach. It's idealistic, but totally naive. If they can buy exclusivity, why not do it? This is a topic that needs to be investigated. EG, why don't you ask some developers from all camps how do they feel about "bribing" and if this kind of honesty from Sony matters. Does it get them brownie points?

    Tretton makes it sound like it's wrong to pay developers for exclusive deals. Instead he seems to think that all console manufacturers should earn their exclusive deals by just making the machine the best they can. As I said earlier, it's idealistic and utopistic, but definitely naive. Games industry is about money in the end. It's a capitalistic venture like any other entertainment industry.

    I guess next they stop throwing PR parties and stop advertising their product. It would be great. Maybe they can give that money to charity.
    Edited by 1 at 04/07/07 @ 10:43

  • Farstarbuck #53 5 years ago

    Pot calling Kettle Black i fear Mr Tretton.

    Didnt Sony have exclusive rights to many a game on the PS and PS2? And paid handsomely for it?


    "We don't fund development."

    Yeah no bullshit there fella!


    Geeeez where do you think they hire these guys from 'Psycho's r Us'?

  • ZeroAX #54 5 years ago

    I don't understand why PS2 owners just HAVE to upgrade to PS3 and not X-box 360 or Wii. The people who support that, it just doesn't make sense. Did all SNES users buy the N64? Did all NES users buy the SNES? No they prefered PS1 and Mega Drive. If it wasn't for the faulty hardware I could see Microsoft beating sony in americas and europe (ofc not japan cause them people are really stupid and naive for not buying anything not japaneese).

    Now the Wii is really a pawning own player. I don't think there is any point in trying to compete with it THIS generation.

  • Avenger1324 #55 5 years ago

    Sony didn't decide to stop buying exclusives, they were caught out by the 360 and now try to spin lies to cover their mistakes :D

  • Peew971 #56 5 years ago

    @ zeroAx: Like I said, principle. Remember many PS2 owners use to hate Xbox1 because of its noise, weight, bigger controller, lack of exclusives... So they just keep in mind that there's no way they'll get a MS console.
    I know that's stupid, especially as I'm sure most of these people only play multiplatform games (I know many) but that's just the way things are.

  • Darkedge #57 5 years ago

    BULLSHIT JACK! Just because you can't afford to this time round and have bollocks the size of grapefruit to say that price doesn't matter - they'll buy it anyway doesn't mean you haven't done it in the past.

    Oh "Singstar and Buzz are developed internally" Nope - Relentess software a 3rd party based in Brighton produces Buzz. Sony probably publish it though

  • repairmanjack #58 5 years ago

    So Sony have actually run out of money then?

  • rhinoxious #59 5 years ago

    It's this sort of bullshit that makes me want to return to PC gaming.

    but then I remember the constant upgrades, the patches, the drivers, the occasional reinstall of Windows etc etc . . .

  • Peew971 #60 5 years ago

    Did he give us a hint that Sony won't announce any 3rd party PS3 exclusives at E3?

  • Rirekon #61 5 years ago

    Regardless of whether MS buy exclusivity or not, please top talking because you're only making people pissed off at you rather than your competitors.

  • Psychotext #62 5 years ago

    "Did he give us a hint that Sony won't announce any 3rd party PS3 exclusives at E3?"

    That's a theory, the other one that's going around is that they've managed to lose a big 3rd party exclusive.

  • playgen #63 5 years ago

    So giving a third party money to make a game exclusive is bad.
    But buying a third party developer, making them first party is all good.

    Sony have lost the plot, it's like they have looked at how the ps1 and ps2 were succesful, and decided to do everything differently this time.

  • Zuiyo #64 5 years ago

    1st place in the console war = Presidency
    Platform holder = Political party
    PR people = Politician
    Retarded hardcore gamer/ alleged opinion maker = Voter
    Bullshit = Bullshit
    Lies = Lies
    Spin = Spin
    Hype = Hype

  • MrsPacMan #65 5 years ago

    I could always divorce MrPacman, I'm sick of all of his roundness anyways.

    I like 90 degree angles now, you know what I mean...

  • Gurgeh #66 5 years ago

    Not sure how accurate this is but a timeline of "Sony's Lost Exclusives"

    [link url=http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/07/sonys-lost-excl.html
    ]http://bl og.wired.com/games/2007/07/sony...[/link]

    which finishes with:

    "What's Next? -- The two major remaining third-party exclusives for PlayStation 3 are Metal Gear Solid 4 and Final Fantasy XIII. Konami has certainly never been resistant to putting Metal Gear titles on different hardware; witness Twin Snakes on GameCube and Substance on Xbox. And Microsoft is likely gunning hard for the game. Also, Konami probably prefers making money to losing truckloads of it. All things considered, I'm pretty sure it's already a done deal, given the fact that we hear very credible rumors about it once a week or so.

    So that really only leaves Final Fantasy XIII. We know that Square Enix is not blind to the changes in the market. Last Remnant, their latest RPG franchise, will be released simultaneously on both platforms. Also, Final Fantasy XIII's release is a long, long way off. The EGM crew says that they will miss their stated goal of having a playable demo ready for E3. And Square Enix says the game won't hit until after March 2008."

  • AcidSnake #67 5 years ago

    @MrsPacman:

    /checks user profile...

    Nice picture...err...Malcolm?


    Anyway I too hope they've lost exclusivity on MGS4...If it happens be sure to see a lot of petitions...

  • ralphwolfenstein #68 5 years ago

    Just laughable. Every time someone senior at Sony opens their mouth, raw bullshit and/or mind numbing drivel tumbles out

    I'm sure Sony would love to have bought GTA exclusvity, even if just for a limited period, but the fact is they simply cannot afford to match whatever MS offer. The trailing platform owner needs to offer more upfront to secure exclusivity in order to offset the lost revenue the 3rd party publisher will incur by selling to a lower install base. Right now, the 360 market is where publishers' next-gen revenues are coming from - you'd have to stump up a considerable fee to compensate for that. If MS put in a counter offer for a 3rd party title, as they did for GTAIV, they quickly price Sony off the table

    Outside Japan, Sony could not afford to buy a meaningful 3rd party exlusive if they wanted to. Why they feel the need to put this painfully transparent spin on it just makes them look even more incompetent

  • FunkyRenegade #69 5 years ago

    @lambtron - total win.

    @Overlush - you spelt blunderbuss wrong, that's what happens when bullshit pours out of your mouth.

  • zuljin #70 5 years ago

    @Wonga
    Not defending anything or so but the general games industry seems to be a sad state of affairs. Theres a lot of developers which have been taken over by publishers, and its all due to us :) I can't remember the exact figures, but I think it was in the past 10 years that the value of the industry has multiplied 10 fold, but the number of studios has halved. That may be small exageration tho. Hence why a fair few studios have been bought up by MS / Sony / EA / THQ...

    *sigh*

  • RichGL #71 5 years ago

    "Who cares about world domination?"

    Erm I'd say Microsoft do, and erm... Maybe Sony yes... Ooh ooh probably Nintendo as well.

    In fact..... Every fucking corporation in the world.

  • zuljin #72 5 years ago

    @RichGL
    Thanks for pointing out the obvious. It was in response to Zomoniac. ("...then I can't see them dominating anything." )

    Who, as gamers, cares about world domination? Do you really want Sony to sell 100+ million this time again? Do you want MS to sell 100+ million? Both cases would be very bad for gamers. Apologies if point was slightly cryptic.

  • johnboy_johsnon #73 5 years ago

    "Just exactly where do you push your square?"

    The name of a band/ guy that was good for two albums and took a very rapid descent down hill.

  • agparrot #74 5 years ago

    moggsy wrote:
    "I think that when you start to get into that USD 600 price you have to be mindful that there should be multiple consumers to justify the value."

    Anyone any idea what this means?

    Shrui replied:
    @moggsy
    Means that if your going to buy a PS3 you need to have several people in the house who will use it to justify the price per person. In a family situation you can't justify spending that much on one person:

    1 person = £400
    2 people = £200 each
    3 people = £133 each

    Could also a way of saying "we've just worked out we've priced it too high an no plans to drop the price yet"

    Is that really what Tretton is trying to say? That they are going after a 'broader demographic' by virtue of the fact that in order to buy a PS3, he is mindful that people club together to get one?

    If that is the case, how does it make it better for developers to develop on it, if you are effectively cutting the potential number of units (and attached software units) sold by accepting that people will buy one PS3 between two or three of them?

    I is confused. I don't want to bitch on about the price, but surely the way to go for a broader demographic earlier is to make it cheaper, not to assume that you have a broader demographic because you think teams of people are buying PS3? It seems a bit of a stretch to me.

  • RichGL #75 5 years ago

    @zuljin
    Your sarcasm needs some work then.

  • squarepusher #76 5 years ago

    I'm still trying to get head around the quote johnboy selected and his response.

    Do the two ends meet anywhere?

  • bioreit #77 5 years ago

    EA of the Dreamcast era disagrees with you, Mr Tretton....

  • Retroid #78 5 years ago

    Is he talking about their new approach or something?

    Because us PAL gamers really quite enjoyed getting PoP: Sands of Time on Xbox & GC at the same time as the PS2 version, not to mention i-Ninja on any other format other than PS2.

    Oh, wait...

  • sanctusmortis #79 5 years ago

    "I have many friends who own a PS2 and can afford a 360 but they just can't imagine going to the enemy"

    And it's that exact reasoning that dooms the games industry.

    They aren't the ENEMY. They are a console manufacturer. You shouldn't be buying a games machine off the merit of the badge, but the games you can play on it. I have no love of Sony (who, despite what they say, have bought plenty of exclusives), but I've still owned a PS1 and PS2. The games came out I wanted to play, and I got the system and played them. The games I want are coming out on 360 right now, so I own a 360.

    The only enemy here is people costing themselves a good gaming experience out of some stupid need to support a brand. Would they only buy one brand of clothing? One make of car? From only one estate agent?

    Anyway, he's talking crap. Rockstar offered them GTA IV on a plate and they turned it down, and plenty of other "exclusives" have walked not out of a lack of cash offered but out of recognition of a wider market, such as Devil May Cry and Fatal Inertia.

    Oh yes, and it was on Destructoid not long ago Sony paid for MGS4 to be a timed exclusive for a single year. Maybe the deal fell through, and now it's a simultaneous release?
    Edited by 1 at 04/07/07 @ 12:33

  • itsjustrockandroll #80 5 years ago

    Exactly Miiguel. Sony are in cloud cuckoo land right now. I own all three machines, and none has me more worried than PS3. Exclusive games make a machine. Why buy a more expensive rival who is offering the same, but less. I bought my PS3 because right now it's the only place where Metal Gear 4 will be. But I've a feeling that I will be buying much more games on Wii and 360 over the next year, so people on a tighter budget probably won't be doing what I have with PS3.

  • MightyMouse #81 5 years ago

    Most of these comments seem to boil down to "he's talking crap because I don't like him". Certainly Sony's PR has been awful in the past, but you really aren't looking at what this guy said.

  • spongebob #82 5 years ago

    And come to think of it. If I am paying for the machine, and I am paying for the games, why can't they pay the developers so I can spend more money on games I really can't play on any other platform?

  • JonFE #83 5 years ago

    Retroid, may I add Beyond Good & Evil on that list, too?

  • chicknstu #84 5 years ago

    @zuljin

    "Singstar and Buzz are developed internally, so unless Sony go bust, I don't reckon you'll see them on any other platform."

    Yeah, but since exclusives 'aren't important to the success of a platform', it wouldn't do any harm surely to sell the rights. :) I'll bet microsoft would pay big bucks for those.

  • Rodriguez #85 5 years ago

    Fanboyism is bad enough, but even worse when it comes from the mouths of these so called 'Executives' and 'PR' people of the games industry. This petty sniping from all companies in the console business has to stop, it's so utterly immature for these big business types to act like primary school children.
    We're ''gamers'' for gods sake, tell us about the ''games''.

  • squarepusher #86 5 years ago

    I think this should be resolved with violence.

  • Darren #87 5 years ago

    I think the reason many PS2 owners will move up to a PS3 rather than an Xbox 360 is that they know that it'll play most of their old games too which makes the transition more bearable. I'd wager a lot of people would rather sell/trade in their old console for a new one rather than have two stuck under the TV, I know I would. Sure, you buy a new console for *its* games not to play old ones but being able to do so is certainly useful and makes the new system seem better value for money.

  • ZeroAX #88 5 years ago

    um i neve heard of a ps2 owner hating the xbox.
    i beleive this time around MS will beat Sony in Europe and America.
    Sony will beat MS in Japan and well Nintendo probably has already won no matter what
    we/you say on the forums

    cause they have NO exclusives. and even ff i got bored of them after 8 (played 6-7-8 with 6 my favorite) and even a hard core ff player friend of mine doesn't want to buy a ps3 for ff13 (he said only if the ff7 remake coems out he'll buy it :p)
    Edited by 1 at 04/07/07 @ 13:35

  • Les #89 5 years ago

    Guess Sony has to adjust to the changed playing field. With MS apparently throwing around money and PS3 having a smaller installed base Sony has to do something to attract publishers to the system, whether they want to or not. Other tactic could be to buy up more developers. But then they'd become like Nintendo which Jack also doesn't seem to like.

    "Sure, you buy a new console for *its* games not to play old ones but being able to do so is certainly useful and makes the new system seem better value for money."

    +1

  • Zomoniac #90 5 years ago

    um i neve heard of a ps2 owner hating the xbox.

    I know plenty. I also know several who plan to buy a PS3 just so they can play GTAIV...

    MS should start their advertising now, with sneaky wording.

    "GTA4 (dlc) - ONLY ON XBOX 360 - OCTOBER 07".

    99% of gamers, in my experience, have precisely no clue what's going on. Their entire knowledge of games comes from shop staff and tv adverts, and the shop staff's entire knowledge of games comes from their customers and tv adverts, and so the endless cycle of people not having a clue continues.

  • spongebob #91 5 years ago

    Paying for exclusive content is morally wrong. As Jack said, Developers flock to the PS3 platform because that is the best place they can express their art and it makes the most sense for them economically. And as you can see from the overwhelming 3rd party support that this opinion is ratified.

    In an ideal world I can see how this is somehow morally wrong. In the world we are living where money talks I don't understand Sony's stance. I really hope that developers appreciate their morally sound ideals. At the same, when game developing is as hard and expensive, many developers might still appreciate the financial help as well.

  • m0thr4 #92 5 years ago

    "We don't fund development."

    So that's why all we have are these half-assed ports?

    Thanks for explaining that to me Mr Asshole.

  • Shrui #93 5 years ago

    @agparrot
    As someone else said my guess is that Tretton wants a broader deomgraphic of games to help counter the price point. My guess is based on when the PS2 had been out a short while. Neither me or my flatmate could afford it individually but we both liked the games on offer (and we liked different games) so clubbed together on the price.

    My initial thought was on situations like mine but then I thought about families as well, in my now older age if I had a family and I was going to spend that kind of money then i would want to make sure that everyone gets something out of it. Films and games for me, Singstar for the wife (altho she would whip my arse at Burnout quite easily as well!) and Manhunt 2 for the kiddies! ;)

    Drop the price tho AND develop a wide demographic and your laughing.

  • BettySwallocks #94 5 years ago

    Sorry Peew971 but when exactly did this become a shooting war? the 360 an enemy? ITS A FUCKING CONSOLE...
    For Sony its less about the exclusives and more about getting some, sorry any

  • johnboy_johsnon #95 5 years ago

    "I'm still trying to get head around the quote johnboy selected and his response.

    Do the two ends meet anywhere? "

    Well I'm taking it that your username is from the artist of the same name, no?

  • agparrot #96 5 years ago

    @Wonga

    I think they were on the subject of games, And Tretton was trying that other popular line of attack. "Xbox has a narrow library of games, a narrow appeal, it's all about Halo". Something along those lines, but it all gets garbled and confused with these guys..

    Yes... maybe that was what he was aiming at - but it certainly seems out of context in the broader spew about exclusivity... hmm - I just assumed that by demographic he meant owners or potential owners of the console

    @Shrui
    As someone else said my guess is that Tretton wants a broader deomgraphic of games to help counter the price point. My guess is based on when the PS2 had been out a short while. Neither me or my flatmate could afford it individually but we both liked the games on offer (and we liked different games) so clubbed together on the price.

    My initial thought was on situations like mine but then I thought about families as well, in my now older age if I had a family and I was going to spend that kind of money then i would want to make sure that everyone gets something out of it. Films and games for me, Singstar for the wife (altho she would whip my arse at Burnout quite easily as well!) and Manhunt 2 for the kiddies! ;)

    Drop the price tho AND develop a wide demographic and your laughing.

    Yeah.. I sort of see this, too - as a day one owner of the PS2 (Still running!) because I was relatively rich back then, I was lucky enough to just buy it and play it and the games I liked.

    I'm still not sure how this helps Trettons argument - "You can build a better game on our platform. If you focus your development on our platform, you will ultimately be more successful." Perhaps I was reading things between the lines that weren't there, but I sort of took that to mean that ultimately this 'more successful' would be measured in money, and that that implied you'd have lots of consumers to sell your game to. But more people sharing one console doesn'y equal more console or game sales... does it? Maybe it's the same. Oh. I don't know.

    Maybe it makes more sense in the broader PSM article.

  • miiiguel #97 5 years ago

    wow, some comments are really unrealistic, like "buying for principle"; "hating xbox"; why, oh why? It's my money, the only principle I have is to spend it wisely, I'm not social security, nor these companies are making social work. Help Sony ? Help MS; be loyal, what the heck???!
    Should I not play Bioshock because it goes against the "principle" of not giving money to developers, for fuck sake!!!, I sold my "day one PS3", loosing money, and I have no problem buying another one, but never ever for loyalty, or some esoteric shit towards multi-million dollars companies. It's really a pain to get up every day at 07:00 in the morning, to go to work, you know?!!!
    I show my principles in the voting booths during ellections, not for the Cristal drinkers suits.

    PS2 owners will never buy a 360? wrong! I'm a huge, huge fan of PS2, great machine. Am I not enjoying 360? oh man, oh man! It feels like PS2 allover again, it is the thing right now!, and in fact am too old and too bored for PS3's TBA bullshit.
    Edited by 1 at 04/07/07 @ 16:01

  • itsjustrockandroll #98 5 years ago

    Yeah, can't believe people still buy into console wars. All three of the machines out there just now have something brilliant to offer.

    It's common sense to have as wide a demographic as possible, nobody wants to limit their market. But it's also common sense that you have to offer something more than your competitors...what exactly is Sony offering over its rivals at the moment???

    A bigger installed user base? No. An easy machine to develop for? No. An innovative platform with a different approach to control, ala Wii? No. So, I'm absolutely bemused as to how Tretton comes to the conclusion that Sony just have to sit back and the developers will come to them.

    Right now, Sony are playing major catch up and investing in some surefire exclusives would be a guaranteed way to get them back in the race.

  • miiiguel #99 5 years ago

    And the wise guy squarepuller, shouts the usual bull: "oh, oh you don't have the money, that's why you don't buy the "gaming" system": "oh, oh, the 360 is faulty...", damn what a joke, I rather (at this time) have a high-availability cluster (3 nodes, or more, or whatever!) 360's than a PS3 at 1/2 of its current shelf price.
    ok, ok, but your parents have a bigger car, ok...

    And of course it's obvious that PS3 wont break, it doesn't have to do anything after all, it just have to collect dust, and it does it really well.

    so:
    1. console that costs 600 Eur, that I'll guarantee it wont break, as a matter of fact it doesn't consume energy at all.
    2. console that costs 350 Eur, that might fail because you just have to play it, because those fascist guys at MS are in fact delivering... shock!!, games!, that you play all the time. But, as EU has legislation that enforces 2 year waranty on any consumer eletronics (don't understand that extend warranty issue?, what's that?, this is not America...), you can replace it during said period. Or you can buy another just like everyone did with the broken PS2's, and it wasn't wasted money, because the machine was in fact good.

    Are you still considering num 2? 1 is the way to go!
    Edited by 3 at 04/07/07 @ 16:27

  • squarepusher #100 5 years ago

    I agree.

  • Farstarbuck #101 5 years ago

    Here is a theory..

    Sony traded the possibility of being the number 1 console on the market again in order to implement a movie player which will become the next standard in media for movies and games etc.

    So really it could be their focus is to get the Blu Ray into the market, sod the games thingy, once they establish Blu Ray and get the Revenue for it, they come back with another Playstation in a few years with money behind them from all the royalties they have been paid from variuos manufacturers for producing Blu Ray products like Philips got from DVD. So this time they have a ton of cash, then they can regain market control?

    Its highly unlikely, but i think its possible.


    What i'm saying is, they couldnt give a toss about the games on it.

    By the way, i'm a xbox 360 Fan boy.

  • Vin #102 5 years ago

    I can't fucking wait for Sony to become 3rd Party.

    BUY A 360.

  • 2099net #103 5 years ago

    What's this then in all but name?

    http://ww w.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...

  • DjFlex52 #104 5 years ago

    What's this then in all but name?

    @2099net

    I hear ya...
    What would you rather have as an exclusive? DMC4, Assassin's Creed, GTA4 or a developer who makes a game every 5 years.

  • Les #105 5 years ago

    "Paying for exclusive content is morally wrong."

    Nothing morally wrong about it. What might be a bit morally wrong is using monopoly-extortion money from one industry to seriously disrupt another with the aims to create a monopoly there as well. But Jack apparently didn't that unless the people that select the quotes are total morons.

    What I think happened is that Sony underestimated how desperate MS is to make something of the 360 as this round probably is their last chance. They're not afraid to sacrifice on build quality for some extra breathing room and they're willing to eat into their margins by spending big money for exclusivity. Because they do Sony will have to follow and their margins will be destroyed as well. Something that they can't really absolve.

    People that are smug about this all are idiots or at least don't understand economics (which is almost the same in this capitalist world). This situation can't last and in the end we're the ones that pay. There's no such thing as a free lunch.

  • Les #106 5 years ago

    "What's this then in all but name?"

    Where exactly did the guy say he's against exclusives? And where in the Quantic Dream article is it mentioned that Sony paid huge amounts of cash? Unless the latter is the case, it's consistent with his story. If you don't understand that, get an education.
    Edited by 1 at 05/07/07 @ 08:14

  • captain-future #107 5 years ago

    Sony: "We don't buy exclusivity"
    We own'em already.

  • Skywise #108 5 years ago

    I don't buy arrogance from the underdog

  • TRUTH #109 5 years ago

    RE: So if developers esp use the 360 power with 3 duel core technology, and full access to large Ram memory, and multi thread processors, and the many shade/vertrex effects missing on PS3 to full effect - will PS3 able to show anything different or keep up (so far nothing has!).

    So-far all multiformat games look/play better on 360...Gears Of War is still the best looking game to date. And games like: Bioshock, Mass Effect, Lost Oddysee, Splinter Cell Convection (360 exclusive), PGR 4, all seem to be pushing the boundaries further in graphics and gameplay. SONY YOU DON'T HAVE MUCH EXCLUSIVES _ BUT THAT@S WHAT 360 DOES HAVE!

    Oh! and 'Haze' is coming to 360 too.
    Edited by 1 at 04/07/07 @ 23:20

  • BartonFink #110 5 years ago

    Ah a good case of pot calling the kettle black it appears from Sony.

  • Vandrius #111 5 years ago

    It's actually a good point.

    Microsoft is simply throwing money at the problem - they'll bankroll exclusives from third parties. Microsoft does have lots of money... But eventually they'll stop doing that. And once they do, I wonder what will happen, given its a pretty even playing field at the moment.

    (Don't talk about the past, 360 boys, talk future. Old people live in the past. Ugly old ones. With wrinkles. That drool.)

  • bioreit #112 5 years ago

    "Microsoft is too dependent upon the third-party community"

    Just saw this bit from Jacky boy.

    What about Halo then? I thought that was supposed to be pretty much the only thing the Xbox franchise had going for it?

    And Project Gotham Racing.

    Ooh and Crackdown.

    Ooooh-ooh-ooh and Viva Pinata.

    I kinda see what he's saying, but if you think about it, Microsoft has a lot of first-party development that is synonymous with the console.

    I'd even go so far as to say that Gears of War is the only example of a third-party title linked inextricably with the 360. Apart from that, ask someone what games they automatically think of when you say 'Xbox 360', and I reckon you'd get most answering with several of those mentioned above.

    In much the same way that Metal Gear Solid or Final Fantasy are associated first and foremost with the PlayStation brand - they're third-party titles, but have a perceived 'ownership' by Sony.

    Long and rambling I know, but basically, I think what I'm trying to say is, Jack is wrong and Microsoft and Sony are in the same kind of position with regards to reliance on first- and third-party titles.

  • miiiguel #113 5 years ago

    "Don't talk about the past, 360 boys, talk future": future is now. TBA sucks!

  • TRUTH #114 5 years ago

    Fable, Forza, Crackdown, Halo, Vina Pitna, Project Gotham Racing, Halo Wars, all three
    Rpg's coming from Mistwalker(Ex Final Fantasy team) are all exclusive brands for the 360: Blue Dargon, Lost Oddysee, Cry-On...All of Rare's back catalogue too. So Microsoft has not just depended on 3rd parties, though many seem to be exclusives to the 360 that inc some of the most original next(now) gen games: Mass Effect & Bioshock