Psycho_Mantis
Banned
Please elaborate how investing in first parties instead of third parties is a lack of foresight.
-
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.
Hey, how come Sony didn't invest in any big 3rd party exclusives?
- Thread starter DR3AM
- Start date
Please elaborate how investing in first parties instead of third parties is a lack of foresight.
Wouldn't worry, E3 was easy money for KojiPro since MS was buying up conference showings.
The game is still multi-plat and so will the future one's be at the very least (unless Kojima wants to abandon the Japanese fanbase).
Because the money is going to Naughty Dog and other WWS
Sony has invested in a few big 3rd party "exclusives". Microsoft simply has a much bigger warchest to pull from. This has always been one of their big advantages over the other two big consoke hardware makers and is arguably the reason the biggest reason they were able to pull through with the original Xbox.
I think Sony's strategy of attracting and putting a spotlight on indies is an interesting one because it's a lot cheaper in the long run and lets them point to this large bunch of games they'll be able to offer on their system which is something they can use in their advertising. Useful if they want to make it a pure "numbers" game.
I think Sony's strategy of attracting and putting a spotlight on indies is an interesting one because it's a lot cheaper in the long run and lets them point to this large bunch of games they'll be able to offer on their system which is something they can use in their advertising. Useful if they want to make it a pure "numbers" game.
Hahaha, gaming hipsters. Is it impossible for people to enjoy things without having to be labeled shit like fanboys, dudebros, and now this shit? So silly.
I bet you if Sony announced an exciting looking 3rd party developed fighter (at launch), I'd bite!
Me and a myriad of others.......
Stop being so modest bro :]
TheRealTalker
Banned
need I say more....
world wide studios
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
Still doesn't explain why they have a lack of foresight. That 3rd party game could very well become multi platform and there goes one of the big reasons on buying their platform. Now if it was first party it would be forever exclusive to Sony.
Black Republican
Member
put it this way, if they didnt spend much to get the 3rd party exclusives on 360, they woulda sold waay less. Only way too keep up with sony
Stone Ocean
Member
Because investing in 3rd party exclusives is fucking stupid nowadays. Publishers don't want exclusivity unless you spend a lot of money - and by a lot, you'll have to pretty much fund the game -, they want their games released for fucking toasters if possible to get as much money as they can.
Most 3rd party exclusives will go multiplat eventually and there goes your big advantage. Right now MS is banking heavily on Titanfall and we all know that's going multiplat eventually. Meanwhile investing on 1st parties means you'll always have a steady flow of truly exclusive titles.
Most 3rd party exclusives will go multiplat eventually and there goes your big advantage. Right now MS is banking heavily on Titanfall and we all know that's going multiplat eventually. Meanwhile investing on 1st parties means you'll always have a steady flow of truly exclusive titles.
Miles Quaritch
Member
They had some fantastic studios though. Bizarre (really should have bought them instead of letting them to Activision), Ensemble, FASA, ACES.
If Titanfall or any 3rd party exclusive sells millions of consoles and Live subscriptions, then goes multiplatform. Well those consoles have still been sold and MS have still made all that money from the sales.
Timed exclusives aren't stupid at all dude.
H_Prestige
Banned
You're missing the other half of the equation.
The half that has their biggest shareholders fucking pissed.
Do you think thier shareholders are pissed at the $1BN Gears of War made MS this gen? Gears being a 3rd party exclusive btw.
Stone Ocean
Member
Timed exclusives aren't, but banking on them is. Sure they'll get them a lot of sales, but how much money was spent making them exclusive, specially an EA game?
Sure MS has a lot of money to spend, doesn't mean it's wise to.
H_Prestige
Banned
Xbox hasn't earned MS a single dollar, let alone a billion of them. MS paying out the ear to secure exclusives like Gears is part of the reason why.
Gears of War was publish by MS. It's not 3rd Party. it's as 3rd Party as Heavy Rain and The Order 1886 or Heavinly Sword.
Also how much did they paid for publishing it?
D
Deleted member 20920
Unconfirmed Member
Not sure this has been said but why waste money on moneyhatting when they can use the money to make their own games. As far as exclusives goes, it seems like building a stronger first party lineup is more important these days.
Gears of War as a franchise has made MS over 1BN at retail. It's common knowledge.
Do you know how much MS paid Epic btw? If not, how do you know they paid through the ear?
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
So the company that invested long term on internal studio growth, had worse foresight than the company that has to pay for third party exclusives and timed exclusives as they're rolling out? How does that even work? MS has good things going for them since E3, but foresight is the opposite of that.
Anticitizen One
Banned
What Sonic deal? Are you talking about Nintendo or Sony?
MS has not seen profit from their Xbox brand. That's the bottom line. Shareholders don't give a shit about your one franchise example of profitability.
PanicFreak
Member
Plus Microsoft gets to group everything together in its marketing message. At next year's E3 they will say this, essentially word for word: "This [insert TitanFall release month here], TitanFall came out on Xbox One as a next gen exclusive. We're here to announce the DLC coming this summer to Xbox One first (conjecture)! [after a break for a trailer] It's already been a great year for Xbox One and it's going to get even better with Call of Duty and Halo!"
They will sum it up by saying that "Xbox One is the only place for you to play all the world's biggest First Person Shooters!"
Eventually, I see Microsoft heading away from this strategy and toward a more mixed strategy where they have important timed exclusives and a healthy mix of 1st party games, outside of the usual suspects. I believe that the people at Microsoft know that they need more than Halo to push consoles out the door but that won't stop them from leaning heavily on it in the meantime.
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
Verendus said that Sony acquired two Sega exclusives, instead of taking Sonic. We'll see if this tip materializes eventually.
Stone Ocean
Member
Well, do you?
I'd say Sony spends more on game dev funding total than MS. They're funding a lot of 'third party' development of various sizes.
Unknown One
Member
Sony doesn't need 3rd party to bolster up their console appeal. I wonder how much EA is getting from Microsoft.
H_Prestige
Banned
You think Epic was giving away a franchise like Gears for chump change? They're the ones who pay to make these games, and there were potentially millions of sales they could get on ps3 with each installment. MS had to pay enough to cover that.
Mr.Marston
Member
Because there's no need to. Even with those 3rd party "exclusives" Microsoft is struggling in pre-orders.
They also actually have their own first-party network too.
They also actually have their own first-party network too.
PanicFreak
Member
They have profited over a $1,000,000,000 for the last three years off of the Xbox. NPV back to 2001 has been negative but those are all sunk costs. The future is what's important and they have turned the Xbox line into a profit center.
Securing a 3rd party exclusive from a developer like Insomniac or Respawn is a smart move. Studios who consist of developers who've got decades worth of experience in shipping AAA games and have had success across different franchises.
Yea, I wouldn't call it a bad move to moneyhat studios like above.
Yea, I wouldn't call it a bad move to moneyhat studios like above.
Natureboy99
Banned
Sony has always taken the organic approach, creating desireable platforms and raising up/acquiring devs. Moneyhatting costs money, and has little long term effect. This is one reason why the Xbox division loses money.
But it has cost Sony from time to time.
But it has cost Sony from time to time.
Gears is an example of how it's smart to partner with adeveloper as the franchise made a great deal of money.
They will likely do what they did with the 360. Buy out enough exclusives to patch over the smaller first party output for the first few years, beefing up the library, then just stop paying for them once the hardcore are hooked on your machine. They hit a critical mass with sales, then started focusing on capturing a new market and paying for timed DLC on multiplayer games to keep people rooted.
It's certainly not a bad plan but, as a consumer, I'd rather they had continued investing into studios like Ensemble. With bought exclusives you, as a consumer, have no guarantee they will continue into the future. With first party devs, you have the knowledge that they must be continuing to make you more exclusive titles later. At the very least, the financial risk of canning said studios is much higher than just not paying someone for an exclusive next year.
It's certainly not a bad plan but, as a consumer, I'd rather they had continued investing into studios like Ensemble. With bought exclusives you, as a consumer, have no guarantee they will continue into the future. With first party devs, you have the knowledge that they must be continuing to make you more exclusive titles later. At the very least, the financial risk of canning said studios is much higher than just not paying someone for an exclusive next year.
H_Prestige
Banned
Considering how badly the last Ratchet and Resistance games did at retail (and also in terms of quality), I don't think Insomniac is a wise investment.
SwiftDeath
Member
Honestly we don't know the numbers for either system well enough
One of the reasons I always hate the MS has a bigger warchest argument as we have no idea how much money the xbox division has to play with nor the PS division
I think it's most likely that MS has more money at its disposal but to state it as fact as an argument is silly without having substantiated numbers for both
Same is true comparing 1st party games
We don't know all the numbers
Just my thoughts
There was no install base for either console when MS paid Epic to make Gears. Right from the start, it was a coperative contract.
A contract that paid great dividends.
Securing 3rd party games as exclusives is a perfectly valid tactic and one that makes great business sense.
Edit. Anyway, I sense as always people don't really understand the business side of the industery in here so I'm out.
They don't have a bunch of mediocre or unproven first parties like MS, so they don't need to run around securing terrible stuff like Ryse for launch.
Having said that, of course there are third party exclusives.
Having said that, of course there are third party exclusives.
I haven't said that. Two unrelated things there. This seems to be a case of misinterpretation, Watson.
PanicFreak
Member
Xbox is one of Bill Gate's favorite projects and he is still the Chairman of the Board. It only stands to reason that it will get a larger budget than the Playstation. Take it with a grain of salt but Microsoft claimed to have committed a billion dollars to content creation for the next Xbox. While that figure probably includes marketing, it is a huge number that isn't feasible within Sony.
Sony is not going to money hat third parties because they don't have any reason to, but they will spend money on exclusive content which I think is smarter in the long run. You need to come up with a good chunk of change for a third party to compensate for the money they're not going to make on the other platform by going exclusive.
MS needs to money hat third parties to sell people on the console and to stay competitive since they don't have much coming out of the studios that they already own which is baffling to me because they have very talented studios under their umbrella.
Titanfall looks amazing, but is it amazing enough to buy a $500 console and when you can also get the game on PC?
MS needs to money hat third parties to sell people on the console and to stay competitive since they don't have much coming out of the studios that they already own which is baffling to me because they have very talented studios under their umbrella.
Titanfall looks amazing, but is it amazing enough to buy a $500 console and when you can also get the game on PC?
D
Deleted member 125677
Unconfirmed Member
Well well well, in what measurable way could this be anywhere near true? Are you trying to say: "i like their games the most" ?
Similar threads
- Poll