-
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.
Eurogamer: For Sony, Destiny treated as if it's a first-party release this xmas
- Thread starter Man
- Start date
Activision doesn't distribute games in Japan.
Usually Square-Enix does.
Activision's games like Transformers, Spider-Man 2 or Diablo III are "PS exclusive" there, this time is the same with Sony instead of Square-Enix.
They don't 'have' to do anything, really. The big releases this fall/winter are mostly multiplatform titles, played best on a PS4.
COD:AW, Dragon Age: Inquisition, Far Cry 4, NBA 2K15, GTAV, Battlefield Hardline, AC: Unity, etcetera.
And it's not like Sony's first-parties are asleep. February drops both The Order 1886 and Bloodborne. God, I'm already feeling tingly just thinking about that last one.
Makes no sense. It's multi-platform. What a weird thing to say. If they want to kickstart Christmas like he says, they should release some actual first party games. The console is almost 12 months old and been in r&d for 2 years before. You would think that they would have a games schedule that had started dropping some heavy hitters by now.
timetokill
Banned
Sorta bizarre, but I guess it makes sense since they don't really have much of their own to really push consoles.
Surface of Me
I'm not an NPC. And neither are we.
It's like MS has been doing for years with CoD, brand association. Lots of casuals might think Destiny is a PS exclusive because of the marketing. Im sure MS is doing the best it can to inform the masses, but they can only do so much around the contracts, like Sony can do with CoD.
MaulerX
Member
Trust me. I'm a PhD
Member
When those court documents leaked in 2012 it listed the game as an Xbox exclusive for one year; not as a promotion deal or anything, but because that was the only system Bungie had worked on. Fast forward to 2013 and they have shifted form just 360 to all four major systems and a marking deal with Sony! My educated guess? Microsoft saw the leak and thought "we already got this" while Sony saw it and said "Awwwww hell no!" One said was active and the other a little complacent. That sentence could accurately describe this entire gen up to this E3...
Sony is hitching itself to the coat-tails of a potential 10-year franchise in a way so intimate it could be a Japanese Vita game.
The value inherent in that for the Playstation brand is huge - Sony gets its own gargantuan 3rd party FPS that it can market like a 1st party product, and could potentially be selling units on the back of that into the next-gen.
The value inherent in that for the Playstation brand is huge - Sony gets its own gargantuan 3rd party FPS that it can market like a 1st party product, and could potentially be selling units on the back of that into the next-gen.
ethomaz
Banned
DF showed most multiplatform titles had better framerate on PS4.
OT. The White bundle seems to be sold out in Spain and Germany.
RespectThySole
Member
What a ridiculous statement. What makes it a first party title? it's a multiplatform game on two other consoles outside of your brand and it may also come to PC. Is it the marketing deal? If that's the case there's not that many "AAA" games that aren't first party titles. Is it a combination of that and the bundle? Titles like CoD and most likely Rise of the Tomb Raider will also have the exact same thing. Does this make them first party titles as well? At the end of the day they are multiplatform titles that can be played on many other platforms. Pump an actual exclusive instead of stating such nonsense.
Trust me. I'm a PhD
Member
Where the hell have you been this gen? What would make you think Microsoft closed a 30%+ hardware gap? PS4 multiplats look or play better. This is just kind of how the hardware works...
Trust me. I'm a PhD
Member
Cannot the same thing be levied at Microsoft? ^^
iceatcs
Junior Member
That's understanding because transform to new kind system with same small team - x86 which total new and too cheap for PS3 coders therefore they need spent more time on it, and expensive PS3 coders are no need. ND hired Yu for new kind programming.
That's why some are still look like cross-title or rush game that gameplay could done more.
tokyobanana
Banned
I'm not sure if English is your first language, or if you read OP.
"We're treating it, for all intents and purposes internally, as if it's a first-party release," he said.
The words "as if" mean that it's really not first party but they are treating it like one. But they know it's not. Hence "as if".
Brad Grenz
Member
The weird thing is, I thought it was leaked back in some lawsuit documents that Microsoft actually did have a deal with Activision around Destiny. Indeed, that the first Destiny would come initially only to Xbox (360 & next-gen), then later to PS3 the following year (depending on technical analysis). Then the sequels would be day one on all the next gen systems.
I think it's interesting to ask whatever happened to that... it made the Sony announcement at the PS4 reveal all the more surprising.
Fake edit: see here http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=474970
Maybe because the timetable slipped the agreement was void and Sony swooped in?
Or perhaps this was not any formal agreement but just a 'default' fallout of Bungie's affinity/history with MS hardware, and the slipped schedule just made them more open to Sony SKUs and then ultimately a Sony marketing deal?
You, like a lot of people, have completely misread that document. It doesn't imply any contractual exclusivity at all. It only outlines how Bungie is to deliver certain version at certain points in time. There was never anything to prevent them from delivering the PlayStation versions sooner, and it's likely that was always the preferred scenario for both parties. But the fact is Bungie had been Xbox exclusive for a decade and they had the contract constructed to protect them should PS3 development lag behind the Xbox versions. That's all there is to it.
Furthermore, even if MS had wanted to outbid Sony for the exclusive co-marketing of Destiny, it's not necessarily the case that Activision would have accepted. They have very cannily hedged their bets by not putting all their eggs in the Xbox One basket like EA did. This is paying them pretty big dividends right now to Microsoft's obvious chagrin.
is the 30 day PS+ stackable or for new users only?
People seem to forget about this. Sony spreads their releases throughout the year, whereas MS seem to focus more heavily on Q4.
People seem to forget about this. Sony spreads their releases throughout the year, whereas MS seem to focus more heavily on Q4.
RespectThySole
Member
I agree with this, but it's foolish to call a multiplatform game on many platforms "first party" regardless of timed exclusive content, marketing and the bundle. If this was criteria for being first party, then not many "AAA" games wouldn't be under this umbrella. Brand recognition and the above things obviously work as Microsoft and Sony wouldn't engage in such tactics if they didn't. CoD and many other titles have proven that to be the case. However, that still does not make it a first party game.
They are not calling it first party.
MaulerX
Member
Where did I say anything about closing hardware gaps etc...? Those are unreleased games and to prematurely say they'll "play better" is absurd imo.
Maybe it just means they're handling it internally like a first party title - eg their go to market plans are being executed as though it is first party, they might get access to above the line marketing that normal 3rd party co-marketing wouldn't etc.
Obviously it isn't literally 1st party, and the guy from Sony explains that pretty clearly I think.
tokyobanana
Banned
Hello there, how are you?
I'm not sure if English is your first language, or if you read OP.
"We're treating it, for all intents and purposes internally, as if it's a first-party release," he said.
The words "as if" mean that it's really not first party but they are treating it like one. But they know it's not. Hence "as if".
Slow your roll. They're treating it as if it's a 1st party title, in terms of marketing support and buy-in at every level. Nobody's taking Destiny away from your other platform - and Sony certainly didn't pay for X months full exclusivity, unlike some other titles I could mention.
Man. You're really upset!
Katana_Strikes
Member
Treated as if a first party = first party?
RespectThySole
Member
Ah to be honest, while reading through some posts in the thread I forgot that qualifier, but I still don't think it's a statement that makes much sense. It would be ridiculous for Microsoft to say such a statement for CoD, when it will sell many millions on other platforms, just like it is for Sony to say that with Destiny.
I'm not really mad actually I'm currently enjoying destiny
as we speak, I just thought it was a weird thing to say although I do see what they were going for.Edit: Also, Bish Tomb Raider has nothing to do with this and I have never said it was a good thing or anything of the like so that's really irrelevant to the conversation. No one claimed anyone is taking anything away with Destiny and I've never even come close to suggesting this. I just thought it was a weird statement.
It's no different than COD, advertised as an Xbox game, walk into any store and it's also for Playstation
Unlike COD though, the dark below releases the same day on Sony as it does on Xbox
tokyobanana
Banned
To be honest? Wait you were not being honest all this while???
Oh sorry English is my first language I can't talk like that
RespectThySole
Member
That's not what I meant to imply at all, but if you can't see that then whatever. Your not really saying anything with that post.
AbandonedTrolley
Member
Never been stackable before here in the UK, had codes from GoW:A and Soul Sacrifice that I ended up giving away. Same as the 14 day trial that you could redeem with the PS4 wasn't available for those already with +
Surface of Me
I'm not an NPC. And neither are we.
Yeah, I'm guessing Sony swooped it up. It makes so much sense for Sony to get a deal with a game from the makers of Halo, your main competitor's biggest franchise. I wouldnt be surprised if Sony spent more on this deal than any other deal that wasnt full exclusivity.
Trust me. I'm a PhD
Member
You are setting yourself up for a lot of heartache if you are waiting for Digital Foundry to tell you what we all ready know, but do as you please^^
RespectThySole
Member
Exactly Activision gets both slices of the pie with this deal, which is great for them unlike what EA is doing.
Woo-Fu
Banned
The average consumer won't even be seeing that. They'll be buying the game on the platform that most of their friends are on so they can play the game with them.
Does it really matter what they say? From their actions alone, its very easy to see the manner in which they treat titles like Destiny or COD or any other marketing partnership.
Moon_frogger
Member
It's dumb, but it happened with xbox and every single call of duty game so yeah
alright and what if the friends haven't bought a system yet? better graphics is something the average consumer knows and wants even if most of them couldn't really tell the difference. those kind of things end up being important when choosing what system to buy.
Nothing 'makes' it a 1st party title. They TREAT it like a 1st party title, meanin things like marketing, sony produced featurettes in the blog, official support of the gold headset, stuff like that. They're not saying we should treat it like its their 1st party title. The amount of bucking in this thread is hilarious. Go grab a cup of tea or something.
Yep, and what they'll do with GTA V, Battlefield Hardline, and Batman: Arkham Knight.
And you know they're going to market the next huge indie, No Man's Sky.