Support NeoGAF

[antiquegamer]

yeah but are those ferrari allows on the PS3 version? if not then MS deserve it!! yeah karma is a bitch!!

Wow did half you that spouting bullshit not reading at least the OP, let alone the thread and the original article.

If you can't be bother to read then don't fricking bother to response. Microsoft DO NOT, repeat after me, DO NOT control Ferrari license on other platform. It was right there in the interview.

 

[amar212]

Yeah, Sony selling a demo for money is really something you should support.

Demo or not-demo, but GT5: Prologue provided me the amount of playtime which even GT5 still have to match in terms of pure hours invested.

I spend hundreds of hours in constantly renewing online races and time-trials and if seen purely from prism of *value for money*, Prologue remains the best this-gen investment in my collection on all platforms comparable only with nonsense amount of hours spent in CoD4 Team Tactical matches.

And I can assure you I am not alone in such experience.

 

[antiquegamer]

Of course am I speculating. What else should I do?

We just have Microsoft's version, which is "we tried but they didn't want to".

So you are just making shit up. I got it, that's all you have to said. And we not going to get anything from EA, just like when they pull the games out of Steam to justify Origin.

Read the OP and the original article. They negotiate for 18 months, sending people that they feel have a sway in changing EA stand, but EA just flat out refuse to negotiate.

 

[sleeping_dragon]

Yeah, Sony selling a demo for money is really something you should support.

Why not? the demo has more cars than any other racing game(on the ps3)when it was released.

 

[Dead Man]

Forza 2 couldn't even outsell a Gran Turismo "demo". People know where to look for a car sim.

You are a bad poster.

Yeah, Sony selling a demo for money is really something you should support.

As are you.

 

[ResidentDante]

Demo or not-demo, but GT5: Prologue provided me the amount of playtime which even GT5 still have to match in terms of pure hours invested.

I spend hundreds of hours in constantly renewing online races and time-trials and if seen purely from prism of *value for money*, Prologue remains the best this-gen investment in my collection on all platforms comparable only with nonsense amount of hours spent in CoD4 Team Tactical matches.

And I can assure you I am not alone in such experience.

Considering the time GT5 was in development they needed to give out something, but I can never really back up this Prologue strategy. A lot of casuals I know bought a PS3 with Prologue thinking it was GT5. It just angered me to see them get a handful of tracks and cars. GT HD demo was great though, lots of cars to unlock and free.

 

[Wax Free Vanilla]

But at the end of the day, we’ve always found that we just weren’t willing to block other racing games from having Ferraris outright

why did microsoft refuse ferrari challenge and supercar challenge an xbox 360 release?

 

[Diablohead]

why did microsoft refuse ferrari challenge and supercar challenge an xbox 360 release?

they did? all I can think is that maybe they were scared it would rival forza 2 at the time.

 

[Wax Free Vanilla]

they did? all I can think is that maybe they were scared it would rival forza 2 at the time.

yes, they wouldn't grant system 3 the use of ferraris on xbox 360.

 

[Shaneus]

I thought it's because they were both PS3 exclusives. Maybe not.

 

[Fortinbras]

yes, they wouldn't grant system 3 the use of ferraris on xbox 360.

Is there a source for this?

 

[Metalmurphy]

Is there a source for this?

Why else would they make it PS3/Wii only?

 

[sadaiyappan]

WTF is Porsche doing. What happened to the ten year licensing deal?

 

[Trunchisholm]

Why else would they make it PS3/Wii only?

According to the developers, the 360 wasn't powerful enough to handle their game:

http://www.gamesradar.com/the-ps3-game-your-360-could-never-do/

Anyway, I doubt Microsoft had anything to do with System 3 not making a 360 version. They would have gained nothing from it, seeing as they would make money both from the license and the game-related royalties. Also, the game was released in 2008, so it wasn't as if it was competition to any Microsoft-published racing title.

 

[Metalmurphy]

According to the developers, the 360 wasn't powerful enough to handle their game:

http://www.gamesradar.com/the-ps3-game-your-360-could-never-do/

Anyway, I doubt Microsoft had anything to do with System 3 not making a 360 version. They would have gained nothing from it, seeing as they would make money both from the license and the game-related royalties. Also, the game was released in 2008, so it wasn't as if it was competition to any Microsoft-published racing title.

But the Wii was? lol


Anyway, here's what I think happen with both System 3 and EA.
MS: "I'll sell u a sub license, but you can't put it on PS3!"
EA: "Hum... ok maybe we'll just make it DLC for 360 only on SHIFT1!" (explains why DLC never appeared on PS3)
System3: "Haha... yeah no."
EA: "Listen... we want Ferraris again for SHIFT2 but we're putting them on PS3 as well!"
MS: "No, you can't do that!"
EA: "Oh yeah? No Porsches for you then!"
MS: "Fine!"
EA: "FINE!"

 

[SolidSnakex]

According to the developers, the 360 wasn't powerful enough to handle their game:

http://www.gamesradar.com/the-ps3-game-your-360-could-never-do/

Anyway, I doubt Microsoft had anything to do with System 3 not making a 360 version. They would have gained nothing from it, seeing as they would make money both from the license and the game-related royalties. Also, the game was released in 2008, so it wasn't as if it was competition to any Microsoft-published racing title.

Nick_JC1 asks: What is the real reason why your game was not put on the Xbox 360? It is the console of choice for racing fans with more quality racing games this generation than any other system. After viewing the game I do not buy the official line that the game is to powerful for Xbox 360. Seems like there is a lot more to this than you are letting on.

Mark Cale: As much as we'd love to create this game for Xbox 360, we don't have the licence to produce this for the console. I know this may disappoint some fans, but unfortunately, for the time being, it's a PlayStation and Nintendo game only.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/ferrari-challenges-mark-cale-live-q-and-a

 

[Trunchisholm]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/ferrari-challenges-mark-cale-live-q-and-a

Thanks for the link. That clears things up a bit and makes the developer comments even more laughable.

Still, we don't know the full story, so I wouldn't automatically blame Microsoft on this one, when they've had sublicensing deals with other developers.

 

[eek5]

But the Wii was? lol


Anyway, here's what I think happen with both System 3 and EA.
MS: "I'll sell u a sub license, but you can't put it on PS3!"
EA: "Hum... ok maybe we'll just make it DLC for 360 only on SHIFT1!" (explains why DLC never appeared on PS3)
System3: "Haha... yeah no."
EA: "Listen... we want Ferraris again for SHIFT2 but we're putting them on PS3 as well!"
MS: "No, you can't do that!"
EA: "Oh yeah? No Porsches for you then!"
MS: "Fine!"
EA: "FINE!"

Damn sounds like you were there!

 

[Xena]

EA is just not wanting to collaborate with anybody these days, heh? Keep this attitude, EA, and you see what happens.. karma

 

[brotkasten]

Damn sounds like you were there!

He was there, dressed as a secretary, so he could spy for Kaz.

 

[Metalmurphy]

He was there, dressed as a secretary, so he could spy for Kaz.

If I was spying for Kaz then GT5 wouldn't be the GT5 we know lol

 

[brotkasten]

If I was spying for Kaz then GT5 wouldn't be the GT5 we know lol

You're too young, why would Kaz listen to your silly new ways of making games? You can't fool me!

 

[Wax Free Vanilla]

NFS Shift developer:

Ian, could you comment on the possible consequences of the Porsche licensing issue of FM4 (or cars licensing in general) for C.A.R.S.?

Microsoft have a Ferrari exclusive, EA a Porsche one. I imagine that the cost involved in sublicensing the Ferrari license from Microsoft imposed on EA has seen them return the favour. Can't say I blame them.

How did Ferrari cars appear in Shift1? Was it a result of the tie up with EA?

Microsoft were paid and multiple hoops were jumped through. I can't go into details as it's NDA.

This is fairly hypocritical from Microsoft I have to say, knowing the facts.

 

[Trunchisholm]

Link:

http://www.nogripracing.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1440464

 

[Metalmurphy]

NFS Shift developer:

Ian, could you comment on the possible consequences of the Porsche licensing issue of FM4 (or cars licensing in general) for C.A.R.S.?



How did Ferrari cars appear in Shift1? Was it a result of the tie up with EA?

Link:

http://www.nogripracing.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1440464

Unsurprising

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

NFS Shift developer:

Ian, could you comment on the possible consequences of the Porsche licensing issue of FM4 (or cars licensing in general) for C.A.R.S.?



How did Ferrari cars appear in Shift1? Was it a result of the tie up with EA?

Well everyone can now shut up. I knew (I think everyone knew) this was what happened, am also willing to bet MS/T10 has something to do with the disappearance of Top gear events in GT5.

EDIT: btw who started this whole exclusive licencing (In racing games) shit? they need to be flogged.

 

[Ardenyal]

So EA had to pay MS money and sublicense the porsches earlier and now when EA won't pay more money Dan Greenawalt goes on a fanboy army recruitment spree. Class act.

 

[Trunchisholm]

Well everyone can now shut up. I knew (I think everyone knew) this was what happened, am also willing to bet MS/T10 has something to do with the disappearance of Top gear events in GT5.

What do we exactly know? All we have now is a "he says/she says" account of things, without knowing anything about the specifics. Hardly conclusive. The only thing we know is that the current licensing agreements suck big time, and the same can be said of third-party exclusives.

 

[brotkasten]

So EA had to pay MS money and sublicense the porsches earlier and now when EA won't pay more money Dan Greenawalt goes on a fanboy army recruitment spree. Class act.

EA had to pay MS for the Ferrari license, just like MS had to pay EA for the Porsche license.

 

[soundscream]

So EA had to pay MS money and sublicense the porsches earlier and now when EA won't pay more money Dan Greenawalt goes on a fanboy army recruitment spree. Class act.

What?

 

[SolidSnakex]

EDIT: btw who started this whole exclusive licencing (In racing games) shit? they need to be flogged.

Ferrari, Lamborghini, and Porsche have always been the hot exclusive license manufacturers for game companies. EA's had the Porsche license since some time in the 90's. Thankfully Lamborghini doesn't seem to be into doing that shit anymore. It's now just Ferrari and Porsche that are willing to sell their brands to companies.

 

[°°ToMmY°°]

two comments from Ian Bell over the Gamesindustry.biz article:

Frankly this is so much hypocrisy from Microsoft I'm shocked. Suffice to say I suspect EA are doing no more than giving Microsoft a taste of their own medicine here. Being involved in the Shift franchise for EA, I'm aware of the hoops that EA had to jump through and the cost associated with getting a Ferrari sublicense from Microsoft (which they retain an exclusive on).

I suspect it's come back to bite them and they don't like it.

Check out the last two racing games from EA (Shift 2 and Hot Pursuit) and count the number of Ferrari's in there.

(It's none BTW)

Microsoft are making the noise but the reality is something else.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2011-08-26-ea-refuses-forza-4-use-of-porsche-license

 

[Wax Free Vanilla]

waiting for a reply from ea

hopefully sony make them a nice offer, we know polyphony are sitting on a collection of modelled porsches...



another casualty of microsoft's exclusive cross platform ferrari license:

they're worse than ea.

 

[Iknos]

they're worse than ea.

This doesn't make sense. EA doesn't seem interested in sharing. MS was selling their sub-license...which is more than not sharing.

 

[Niks]

Yeah, definitively awaiting EAs response to all of this.

 

[inky]

So EA had to pay MS money and sublicense the porsches earlier and now when EA won't pay more money Dan Greenawalt goes on a fanboy army recruitment spree. Class act.

You should really read up on who has the license to what before calling anyone out on this. Just sayin'

 

[Metalmurphy]

You should really read up on who has the license to what before calling anyone out on this. Just sayin'

Nothing wrong with what he said.



Someone should ask those guys from EA making comments that, if EA is so willing to "share" the Porsche license, how come GT games never had them?

 

[Iknos]

Nothing wrong with what he said.

Everything is wrong with what he said.

 

[Metalmurphy]

Everything is wrong with what he said.

"EA had to pay MS money AND sub-license the porsches", which they own the license to.

"You should really read up on who has the license to what before calling anyone out on this. Just sayin'"

He had it right.

Also, did you miss this?

"Frankly this is so much hypocrisy from Microsoft I'm shocked. Suffice to say I suspect EA are doing no more than giving Microsoft a taste of their own medicine here. Being involved in the Shift franchise for EA, I'm aware of the hoops that EA had to jump through and the cost associated with getting a Ferrari sublicense from Microsoft (which they retain an exclusive on).

I suspect it's come back to bite them and they don't like it."

You guys shouldn't eat up whatever Dan says as the only truth, specially when there's so much evidence against it.

 

[Iknos]

"EA had to pay MS money AND sub-license the porsches", which they own the license to.

"You should really read up on who has the license to what before calling anyone out on this. Just sayin'"

He had it right.

Dude...quote the whole thing.

It's not about EA not paying MS...it's about MS not paying EA.

 

[Metalmurphy]

Dude...quote the whole thing.

It's not about EA not paying MS...it's about MS not paying EA.

You don't know that, and that's irrelevant to the point of who owns which license, which was what inky was disputing.

 

[U n i o n 0015]

It's not about EA not paying MS...it's about MS not paying EA.

Sounds to me like the two sides just can't agree on a price. They're placing the value of their licenses at different amounts and balking at what the other is asking.

 

[funkystudent]

Not shocked to see MS being dicks with the Ferrari licence played a part in this mess

Turn 10 are a great studio who have been pumping out great games at a consistent rate but Dan Greenawalt can talk BS with gaming PR's best.


Ill hand it to him that he has handled the Forza 4 hype train better then 3.
When ever someone asks him about the completion he just says "yeah we play all racing games.. gotta know what others are doing" instead of flat out saying THEY SUCK BALLS, talking notes of our demo lulz" DEFINITIVE!!!!!" but he was gonna say something dumb sooner or later... weird that it was for a interview for the official forza site instead of some out of context quote used by CVG to get hits

 

[Shaneus]

Sounds to me like the two sides just can't agree on a price. They're placing the value of their licenses at different amounts and balking at what the other is asking.

That's what I think. It's not that one side wasn't willing to share with the other, it's that the monetary value exceeded the perceived value for each license according to the respective devs.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Someone should ask those guys from EA making comments that, if EA is so willing to "share" the Porsche license, how come GT games never had them?

There's a real possibility that PD doesn't want to sub-license through EA. Kaz mentioned that they were in discussions with Porsche when EA's original contract with them ended, but once it was back on he said that the brand wouldn't be in GT5. They waited things out with Ferrari, so they'll probably do the same with Porsche.

 

[inky]

He had it right.

Also, did you miss this?

You guys shouldn't eat up whatever Dan says as the only truth, specially when there's so much evidence against it.

I didn't miss it, but Ardenyal's post was before that specific one, and he is certainly implying that Porsche's are not in Forza due to EA not wanting to pay more money so, when worded that way, it certainly reads like he got the licensees confused, as we already know that it is MS who has to pay EA for Porsche. What I did miss was that it was also mentioned a few posts before that, so I take it he was commenting on that all along, thus meaning that EA was not paying for Ferrari first, then denying MS the use of Porsche.

I don't eat what Dan says btw, I don't really care to "defend" anyone in this situation, I just thought Ardenyal was throwing out blame without knowing the facts. No offense intended to anyone, just an honest mistake due to the wording of his post.

 

[Metalmurphy]

There's a real possibility that PD doesn't want to sub-license through EA. Kaz mentioned that they were in discussions with Porsche when EA's original contract with them ended, but once it was back on he said that the brand wouldn't be in GT5. They waited things out with Ferrari, so they'll probably do the same with Porsche.

Meh... EA seems to have a good relationship with Sony, pretty sure they could work something out that would please both.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Meh... EA seems to have a good relationship with Sony, pretty sure they could work something out that would please both.

Well, I don't think PD holds any licenses to spice things up, so it would just be pure money on their part. Just reading all this makes it sound like it's a real headache dealing with sub-licences from game companies.

 

[ConcealedBlaze]

Sometimes I like to believe that GAF is fanboy free... Then I see threads like this and the illusion is totally shattered. Way to ruin my blissful ignorance you assholes.

Also, I'm going to avoid passing judgment about the situation based on one statement, from one of the parties about business dealings we know very little about.

 

[Dead Man]

Sometimes I like to believe that GAF is fanboy free... Then I see threads like this and the illusion is totally shattered. Way to ruin my blissful ignorance you assholes.

Also, I'm going to avoid passing judgment about the situation based on one statement, from one of the parties about business dealings we know very little about.

I'm running with the theory that both companies are shit. It seems to be pretty accurate.