• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Let's Talk About Sony's Timed Exclusives and Lack of Disclosures

P

Primethius

Banned
MS was taken to task with RotR and that was great. I feel that resulted in a more transparent environment with something like Dead Rising 4.

But Sony? They've been pulling this stuff, sometimes even worse than MS, and it's all sort of ignored.

Just off the top of my head, recently:
- Their "Console Exclusive" or "Only on PlayStation" labels are garbage. They are often incorrect and also vary between regions (???). Nioh is a great example. Published by Sony, labels missing in some regions, not in others.
- UMvC3 is a timed exclusive, though to be fair, the disclosure was immediate
- Crash is a timed exclusive, as many suspected, but we have to rely on a Twitter accounts for the reveal
- FFVII:R is timed, not seeing a lot of complaints of that one.


And I'm sure I'm forgetting other examples. I think we, and maybe even journalists, need to demand some sort of transparency like as happened with RotR.

I understand marketing deals but Sony is veering off into wilful obfuscation. They just make all their stuff so vague and hard to understand that it's hard to pin down the status of any one thing.

Edit: Let's look at it from the business perspective. Sure, companies want to sell their own product and software on the platform. But even along those lines, Sony is incredibly inconsistent in maximizing business. They announce some games as console exclusives, some as first on PlayStation and are deliberately silent on others.

I don't think it's unfair to ask for a bit of consistency so that the confusion can be cleared up.

I can't think of a reason where you announce FFVII:R as first on PS4 but hide the Crash timed deal if the purpose is to promote Sony business. One would think, given how big FFVII, they would've been silent on the former as well.
 
C

cheesekao

Member
They never announced crash as an exclusive on their very own stage. FF7 was announced as a timed exclusive immediately after the reveal.
 
N

Nicky Ali

Member
Sony are great at hyping things up. When it comes to delivering... not so much.


EDIT: I'm gonna make an amendment to this just to clear up my thoughts.

I'm thinking in terms of Sony's supposed "E3 of legends" 2015, where they showed off The Last Guardian, Shenmue III and Final Fantasy VII Remake - so far only one of these has actually been released; a full year after it was shown. To me it seems as though Sony care more about hype than showing things when they're actually ready to be shown off. Showing off a Kickstarter at your conference is probably just the dumbest and shadiest thing.

Fast forward to E3 2016 where they dropped the news that Crash was coming back... in quite possibly the most pathetic way possible. Not a screenshot, not a trailer, just Skylanders and "oh hey, we're also remaking Crash and we're not even getting one of our first party studios to do it lol bye". Then we have PSX 2016 where we get our first look at the game... and it looks pre-alpha as fuck and I am not convinced that it's ready to be released this June. It's as if Sony paid for timed exclusivity rights and nothing else. We even have The Last of Us 2 announced with no clear release date in the near future.

tl;dr: Sony need to chill with showing games off long before their expected release date, or at least show off something substantial instead of using cheap name-drop tactics to generate hype.
 
G

GAMEPROFF

Banned
I thought it was more about how it was communicated? Eidos had to publish a very nebolus message on their blog, while MS lied to the people and Sony timed games where ones, where someone just said, yeah, its timed?
 
jmaine_ph

jmaine_ph

Member
I thought the point of timed exclusivity was to not disclose that it's a timed exclusive as long as you possibly can?
 
B

black070

Member
Their labels need work, other then that I don't think they've had a particular case as bad as Rise of the Tomb Raider.
 
B

Blackleg-sanji1

Banned
It's simple really

Microsoft:Tomb raider will be coming exclusively to Xbox one

Tomb raider will be coming exclusively to Xbox one holiday 2015

Tomb raider is timed exclusive

Sony:We have partnered with acti to bring the original crash,crash 2 and warped to PlayStation, PSX not a word about exclusive, interviews not a word about exclusive, if they said we have partnered with acti to bring crash exclusively to ps4 than later o no it's timed they would get shit.

SFv was transparent,nioh the devs confirmed that one,Ni no kuni2 never had an exclusive label (on the trailer i thing they goofed on stage can't remember) Nioh was said to be ps4 exclusive by the devs themselves.

Ppl bring it up over and over again but there's a reason tomb raider got so much heat compared to the many other third party deals we've been thru for decades

Sorry for wall of text
 
D

dude

dude
There's something to be said about the Nier Automata fiasco as well. I mean, we're days from launch and it seems like the people working on the game are banned from even mentioning the PC version under the threat of death.
 
K

kadotsu

Banned
It's not Sony's role to disclose that stuff. That's the job of the press. Game company PR departments will always try to get the most favorable narrative. They aren't bound by principle.
 
M

McMoneyman

Member
Phoenix944 said:
Yakuza 0 is also labelled "Console exclusive". Is it ?
Click to expand...

My copy in Europe has "Only on Playstation". So does the both Kingdom Hearts collections on PS4 and not in America. Which is odd.

Edit: World of Final Fantasy too. "Only on Playstation" in Europe, nothing in America.
 
H

Hanmik

Member
"Hey. I am selling a product, you can buy it from me."

Versus

"Hey. I am selling a product, you can buy it from me, and other consoles soon."

As a business person, what makes the most sense?
 
S

Shari

Member
jwk94 said:
I'm pretty sure we've known Crash was a timed exclusive.
Click to expand...

I learned that yesterday.

I learned that Nioh ain't exclusive the moment the label wasn't on the box, on release.

I learned that FFX/X-2 wasn't exclusive through a steamdb leak.

The multipass that Sony gets in this forum while Microsoft eats shit on first offence (and deservedly so) its amazing.

I hate this new trend of marketing moneyhatting but I have to say that I have mad respect for Sony for their choices and their acknowledgement that marketing and launch windows sales are really important in this business. Really really good business decisions even if, in my opinion, they're really anticonsumer.
 
B

bidguy

Banned
i think its simple, you have what, over 50 million ps4's vs over 25 million xbones ? so people naturally expect ps4 to get every single game and go crazy whenever its announced first on xbone

its not as bad with indies but look at the newly announced cellar door game, path of exile thread or system shock. full of people asking themselves why theyre not coming to ps4, demanding answers immidiately

meanwhile crash gets announced without any form of info on exclusivity and no one cares, the people who do care get drowned out by the positive reaction to another sony get

i still have no idea whats happening with nioh.
 
dl77

dl77

Member
I've found Sony have been a lot better this generation tbh. I think at most press events they've used a phrase along the lines of 'first to console' for titles where they have an exclusivity period.

The problem with RotTR, to my memory, is that MS initially called it as an exclusive for the XB1. It was only later on that Phil Spencer admitted that it was exclusive only for a period of time.
 
B

brunomartynhak

Member
This all comes from marketing deals. This type of thing is too much anti-consumer. It should be easy to know in which platforms a game is going to be released and approximately when.
 
A

arcticice

Member
Aren't all timed exclusives are announced as such. I remember Microsoft revealing Rise of the Tomb Raider as an Xbox exclusive @ E3. It was later clarified that the game would be on other platforms as well.
 
G

get2sammyb

Member
I think the key difference here is that Crash was never announced as an exclusive, not once. Yes, you have to read between the lines by what's said and what's not said, but at the end of the day it's not Shawn Layden (or anyone from Sony's job) to get up on stage and announce what's happening with other platforms.

I agree with you on the labels, but I genuinely believe that's been a case of just silly errors rather than anything sinister. They need to get it right, though.
 
S

silva1991

Member
Absolutely ridiculous especially for games like Final fantasy 7 and Crash, because everyone knows they will sell much much better on their platform anyways.
 
L

Loudninja

Member
bidguy said:
i think its simple, you have what, over 50 million ps4's vs over 25 million xbones ? so people naturally expect ps4 to get every single game and go crazy whenever its announced first on xbone

its not as bad with indies but look at the newly announced cellar door game, path of exile thread or system shock. full of people asking themselves why theyre not coming to ps4, demanding answers immidiately

meanwhile crash gets announced without any form of info on exclusivity and no one cares, the people who do care get drowned out by the positive reaction to another sony get

i still have no idea whats happening with nioh.
Click to expand...
Action RPG Nioh to be published by SIE
https://blog.eu.playstation.com/201...blished-by-sie-ps4-pro-enhancements-detailed/

Still dont know what is confusing here.
 
I

InsaneTiger

Member
I don't think Crash was coming back in it's own. Sony and Activision had to have talked to bring it back. Now how long it stays away from other platforms is TBD.
 
F

FlutterPuffs

Member
Primethius said:
I understand marketing deals but Sony is veering off into wilful obfuscation. They just make all their stuff so vague and hard to understand that it's hard to pin down the status of any one thing.
Click to expand...

As the saying goes,

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity,
 
S

Shari

Member
Nightengale said:
Sony trick is basically to not say anything.
Click to expand...

Sony's trick is basically to pay thirds to not to speak/promote about them launching games on other platforms.

FTFY.

It hurts the publisher getting less copies on the other platforms thanks to no marketing and the customer by disallowing information thus making decision making really hard.
 
F

Footos22

Member
Primethius said:
MS was taken to task with RotR and that was great. I feel that resulted in a more transparent environment with something like Dead Rising 4.

But Sony? They've been pulling this stuff, sometimes even worse than MS, and it's all sort of ignored.

Just off the top of my head, recently:
- Their "Console Exclusive" or "Only on PlayStation" labels are garbage. They are often incorrect and also vary between regions (???). Nioh is a great example. Published by Sony, labels missing in some regions, not in others.
- UMvC3 is a timed exclusive, though to be fair, the disclosure was immediate
- Crash is a timed exclusive, as many suspected, but we have to rely on a Twitter accounts for the reveal
- FFVII:R is timed, not seeing a lot of complaints of that one.


And I'm sure I'm forgetting other examples. I think we, and maybe even journalists, need to demand some sort of transparency like as happened with RotR.

I understand marketing deals but Sony is veering off into wilful obfuscation. They just make all their stuff so vague and hard to understand that it's hard to pin down the status of any one thing.
Click to expand...

Do the labels on a box matter? Your either going to buy it or you aren't anyway. Different regions use different covers/ labels. This isn't anything new.

UMvC never once said "only on playstation" so why you've included it in this is beyond me.

Crash bandicoot was never announced as exclusive in any way shape or form officially. I see no wrong here,its not like they are openly going to say "oh yeah" don't buy it on PS4 buy it on a competitors console instead"

FFVII was always announced as first on PS.

This thread is pointless to be honest.
 
S

sora87

Member
It is strange in some games. I'm shocked they didn't lock down Crash for instance.
But with games like Nier and Ni No Kuni 2 I just don't think they care, they see PC as this totally different area and they probably think most people will buy them on console.
 
H

Hatefilled Vengeance

Member
The same happened with Ace Combat 7 and (I think) Tekken 7, if I remember correctly. They gave the impression they were exclusive, but then a few months later it turned out they weren't.
 
G

Guymelef

Member
Shari said:
Sony's trick is basically to pay thirds to not to speak/promote about them launching games on other platforms.

FTFY.

It hurts the publisher getting less copies on the other platforms thanks to no marketing and the customer by disallowing information thus making decision making really hard.
Click to expand...

So it hurst third party but they take that money according to you.

It makes 0 sense.
 
G

GhostTrick

Banned
I wouldn't say the lack transparency for everything. As for Nioh for exemple, it's been pretty clear that they're basically doing a marketing/distributing publishing, hence the lack of "Only on PlayStation" in Western boxarts.

They also have been for FFVIIr and World of Final Fantasy, announcing them as First on PlayStation.

Where they've been lacking transparency though is with some games like Ace Combat 7 or Ni no Kuni II, where it feels like platform choice was set from the begining.


Guymelef said:
So it hurst third party but they take that money according to you.

It makes 0 sense.
Click to expand...



I wouldn't say it makes 0 sense. Not every business decisions make sense although some of these deals made sense. For exemple, in the case of Bamco, it gave them enough time to own some mindshare and convince early adopters while announcing the final platforms a long before the games get released.
 
L

lupinko

Member
Phoenix944 said:
Yakuza 0 is also labelled "Console exclusive". Is it ?
Click to expand...

The Yakuza games besides the one time Nintendo moneyhat test on WiiU are PlayStation only games. Not because of Sony moneyhats but because Nagoshi only deems his babies to be PlayStation games.

That and when the series was first conceptualized, Nintendo and Microsoft turned it down or something. So there's also that brand loyalty too.
 
L

LukasTaves

Member
Shenmue 3 right from the start seemed fishy, and the later interviews only added to the suspicion.

I really think that for that game it will be a Diablo 3 situation.
 
S

Shari

Member
People have a lot of trouble here understanding the difference between Sony not promoting other platforms versions and Sony paying devs to censor communication about versions/launch dates for other platforms.

There's a difference between actively promoting and actively blocking information.

Guymelef said:
So it hurst third party but they take that money according to you.

It makes 0 sense.
Click to expand...

Well it all boils down to how much money do Sony pay vs how much money would the game make on other platforms while if Sony's deal wouldn't be on the table.

I'm sure that when this exact scenario happened with MS/RotR you were there saying that moneyhatting theory made 0 sense. Sure of it.
 
K

Kolx

Member
Nioh in a full exclusive so I can't see the problem here. FF:VII remake was revealed to be timed right from the beginning. UMvC3 as well as you said. Tomb Raider wasn't revealed to be timed by MS. They just said it was an exclusive and didn't say anything after, until Square came out months after and revealed it was timed. I don't see the comparison here?
 
B

BlackBuzzard

Banned
Shari said:
People have a lot of trouble here understanding the difference between Sony not promoting other platforms versions and Sony paying devs to censor communication about versions/launch dates for other platforms.

There's a difference between actively promoting and actively blocking information.
Click to expand...

Tales from your ass or you got proof?
 
K

Kazuo Hirai

I really want everyone to know how much more Titanfall 2 sold than Nioh. It was a staggering amount.
Triggerhappytel said:
I mean, they mean practically the same thing, but is it because there is a PS3 release of the game in Japan/Asia?

EDIT - yep. Apparently it also came out on PS3 in Asia, so there's your answer. In the west it only released on PS4, therefore it's 'console exclusive' over here.
Click to expand...

Nioh also is "Only on Playstation" here and Playstation US Official site , but no label in US box
 
J

jxN3

Member
I thought the problem with rotr was that it was a sequel to a game that was multi-platform and financially/critically successful.

There was absolutely no reason for that game to magically be exclusive.
 
N

Nightengale

Member
arcticice said:
Aren't all timed exclusives are announced as such. I remember Microsoft revealing Rise of the Tomb Raider as an Xbox exclusive @ E3. It was later clarified that the game would be on other platforms as well.
Click to expand...

Not for ROTR.

ROTR is a case study of how not to do it, where Xbox tried to take a mile and stretch it ten miles, and honestly, that incident made me lose a lot of respect for Xbox and Phil Spencer, since it highlights how deep the rabbit hole they were willing to go to defend and spin their way around timed exclusivity.

I wrote this a long time ago in an already closed thread, so I can't quote it, but here goes:

I’ve always been one of the more vocal critic around this deal. But not the exclusivity deal itself. Timed exclusives has been a thing since multiple console generations ago, and while I think it’s a poor decision on Square’s part to do this for TR, it’s ultimately their decision to accept MS’s money.

But there is one thing about this deal that I found personally very revolting, and that was the concentrated attempt to pretend like this was more than a timed-exclusive, with the usage of mixed messaging, clever PR spins and very carefully selected language.

Let’s look at the overall chronology of how this exclusivity story came about :

1. Multiple indie games were announced at Gamescom as “First on Xbox.” There was very clear implication that the exclusivity of said games were timed.
2. ROTR was announced as “Exclusive on Xbox, launching Holiday 2015.” There was massive confusion from the get-go, because Point (1)’s language was used to announced timed-exclusives, but ROTR had a different language that implied bonafide exclusivity.

So, from the get-go, through the manipulation of the different exclusivity language used, MS tried to pretend ROTR wasn’t a timed-exclusive, however :

3. Games media didn’t immediately buy into the announcement. When MS PR was pressed for a statement on the matter, folks like Geoff, etc clarify that MS refused to budge from the very “fixed statement” of “Exclusive on Xbox, launching holiday 2015.”

At this point, people were already guessing it’s likely timed, however :

4. Crystal Dynamics posted an article explaining the exclusivity, except they called it an exclusive, ( without the holiday 2015 line and no PR-safe terminology), which immediately prompted fans to suddenly get confused over the state of the game’s exclusivity.
5. What’s worse was that in the same post, CD effectively threw shade at Playstation/PC fans by saying “Don’t worry, Temple of Osiris for y’all to play!”, pissing off a larger majority of the TR audience.
6. Aaron Greenberg also referred to the post by CD to imply that ROTR is an actual exclusive, to further add fuel to fire.

At this points, the outrage was at a fever high. Mixed-messaging on both sides, one side acting like it’s timed, the other acting like it’s actually exclusive, and fans demanded to know the actual truth of the story :

7. Come Phil Spencer interview where he had to respond to the queries.

This was an interview that was referenced by both sides of the camp, those who believe it’s a timed exclusive, and those who believe it’s a bonafide Xbox-exclusive that will only come to PC later, never PS4. Why was this interview so polarising to that extent?

8. In said interview, Phil defended his purchase of ROTR’s exclusivity, making references to Uncharted, etc. He also used terms like “I didn’t buy the franchise, I don’t own the IP in perpetuity” and compared the deal, calling it “similar” to Ryse/Dead Rising 3, both games that are never coming to PS4, because it was fully funded by MS. He ultimately ended it by saying “the deal has a duration”

So basically, Phil basically admitted it was a timed-exclusive, but used very clever PR-language, referring the Tomb Raider IP (instead of referring to just the game) when talking about the exclusivity deal and saying the deal is ‘similar’ (similar =/= same) to Dead Rising and Ryse, knowing full well those 2 games are never coming to PS4.

9. In respect to the interview above, Crystal amended its original post, but they said “Phil Spencer confirmed that ROTR is a timed-exclusive.”
10. Not too long later, the same post above is amended from “timed-exclusive” to “the deal has a duration.”

Everything from point (1) to point (10) was an extremely concerted effort to pretend like ROTR wasn’t a timed-exclusive. And I think it’s a pretty pathetic display from MS/Square.

12-months exclusivity for a AAA-game like TR is a huge win on MS’s side. Sure, you’ll piss off PS-fans by doing it, but admitting it from the get-go will absolve you of all the drama that occurred, and have fans being more trustworthy of you.

Personally, this whole deal has left me with a higher degree of scrutiny when it comes to anything that’s spoken out of Phil Spencer/MS’s mouth. And I hate having to swim through a sea of PR bullshit to reach the truth in messaging.

And I didn’t even go into the hilarity like “Microsoft’s Passion for Tomb Raider”, etc etc, which, while foolish, isn’t part of the exclusivity subterfuge, but just hilarious justification of why this deal happened in the first place.
Click to expand...
 
P

Pooya

Member
Nier situation is really pathetic. Developers are barred from talking about PC release and when it was a slip up with the video, instead of issuing comment whether it is true or not, they're just pretending it never happened! They even went on stage at PSX and said it's PS exclusive. That was just blatant false marketing.

Ace Combat and Ni No Kuni 2 are somewhat similar, Namco couldn't talk about existence of other versions for a year even though there were some hints that they are not exclusive, the wording were used in a way to sound like they are. Like with Ace Combat, it was exclusive PS VR something like that and when there are no other platform mentioned, average person thinks it's a exclusive. Just throw the word exclusive in there and seemingly does the job!

Footos22 said:
But they never said as much, fanboys just assume like usual.
Click to expand...


That's the thing, it's deliberately misleading. Easy to mistake, while a more experienced person following the trends and news very closely could tell you they're not, average person can't, and it's not their fault, they were misled to believe that they are with some sad ambiguous tactics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

It’s Time for Sony to Bring Back Killzone and Resistance - IGN
2 3 4
172
5K
Fahdis replied
  • Poll
SONY/SIE: The Balance Of Chasing Margins, Multiplat Expansion, And Maximizing The Console
Opinion Business Analysis 2 3
101
8K
vaibhavpisal replied
AMD CEO Lisa Su reminisces about designing the PS3's infamous Cell processor during her time at IBM
Hardware
31
3K
winjer replied
  • Poll
[RUMOR] Sony Relationship With Square-Enix Might Considerably Strengthen (Investment?)
Rumor Poll Business 2 3
146
12K
Panajev2001a replied
Shinobi602 on the "lack" of First Party reveals by PlayStation: "I think some still haven't really grasped just how long big games take to make now"
Opinion News Drama 5 6 7 8 9
449
18K
ArtHands replied
Top Bottom