Support NeoGAF

[Steroyd]

I'm just saying how Insomniac calls themselves: an independent 3rd party developer. They just have an exclusive deal with Sony.

But that's Sony the publisher.

I think it was more to do with paying for third party stuff even though the game will end up on a rival console (which is money better spent somewhere else IMO), look at GTA IV MS moneyhatted the exclusive Content that will get launched a while after it's initially launched, but GTA IV is still available on the PS3.

I guess it's all relative to exactly what MS is moneyhatting, example if Fatal Inertia and Beautiful katamary are really going to Xbox 360 (exlcusive?) because of the bigger install base than well played, but if they've been moneyhatted by MS, then well... is it really worth for two games that won't make a big impact anyway, and will most probably be a timed exclusive at the end of it all?

 

[VonGak!]

"We don't buy exclusives." - Jack

"We don't buy PS3s." - Consumers

"We will go and explore areas other devs do not dare" - Phil

"Gimme gimme" - consumers

There's not an unlimited budget so what 1'st party titles besides sport would you like cut and what 3'rd party titles should be money hatted?

 

[Oblivion]

Wait, now I'm wondering something. At first I assumed Sony was upping their first party content cause they knew there were gonna be problems getting third party exclusives. But with all the money they're spending on first party games...wouldn't that be better if they just used that to get exclusives instead?

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

If that's what it takes to build an internal development and IP portfolio of Sony's caliber, then I'm all for it. None of the other companies can match the combination of genuine variety and quality of Sony first party and by other means exclusive IP portfolio, so obviously the company is doing something right. Well, at least for the [future] benefit of Playstation owners, and that's all I care about.

 

[Mojovonio]

Probably. And considering how much they are in debt (up to their eyeballs) with the PS3 - I don't see how they can afford to shop around for exclusive IPs either.

Even if they weren't in debt, MS could throw around a much bigger bag of money. Loyalty means nothing when you have wads of hundred dollar bills being thrown at you.

 

[Miniboss1232]

"Microsoft is too dependent on the third-party community, and Nintendo is too depended on first-party. And right now, we have neither."

Fixed.

 

[JDSN]

Good for them!

 

[dionysus]

I look at it from a different perspective. If established franchise X is already coming to my console, I do not begrudge other consoles getting the game. Instead of my console company wasting 20 million dollars making the game exclusive to my console, I would rather see them invest in a new IP. I would much rather see new IPs like LBP or HS get money from Sony than an established franchise, which PS3 is going to get in some form or another, receive money. The console makers have finite budgets, and paying for established franchises to remain exclusive on your console is a waste of money when you consider how else it could be spent. This is written from a gamers perspective who wants to see new and diverse games, not a blind fanboy who wants to see one of the big 3 dominate all competition.

Also, I believe Jack was saying that they will not pay for exclusivity of 3rd party PUBLISHED games. Every console maker pays 3rd party DEVELOPERS to do "2nd party" development and then publishes the games exclusively for their own consoles. The difference is that SCEA will not pay 3rd party PUBLISHERS to keep IPs exclusive.

 

[szaromir]

They apparently only follow EA and Ubisoft in terms of the size of their development/publishing effort - claimed to be larger than MS's and Nintendo's combined. Look at the volume of titles they produce. Maintaining an operation like that costs money. They have signed up quite a lot of new independents to deals also - Factor5, Media Molecule, Slant Six Games, Zoe Mode, Relentless, Ninja Theory, most recently Quantic Dream..

As far as I can see, the sheer size of their investment in development and games is second to none among the platform holders.

It's not the only way you assure exclusive content though (paying 3rd party publishers for exclusives counts, too) and you don't know for sure how much each company is spending on these things.

 

[neojubei]

"We don't buy exclusives." - Jack

"We don't buy PS3s." - Consumers

not true.

 

[jrricky]

Hey, it does..:lol :lol :lol

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

Seriously, did he just say that........Seriously .......

 

[mentalfloss]

Humans: "We don't buy $600 consoles."


Edit: 3 pg thread = DAMN YOU GAFFERS

 

[Hunahan]

FFXIII ON

Spoiler

PS3 money-hat exclusivity because Tretton is full of bullshit

CONFIRMED!

 

[Confusion Illusion]

Fixed.

I'd say they got a pretty good 1st party.

 

[daegan]

I look at it from a different perspective. If established franchise X is already coming to my console, I do not begrudge other consoles getting the game. Instead of my console company wasting 20 million dollars making the game exclusive to my console, I would rather see them invest in a new IP. I would much rather see new IPs like LBP or HS get money from Sony than an established franchise, which PS3 is going to get in some form or another, receive money. The console makers have finite budgets, and paying for established franchises to remain exclusive on your console is a waste of money when you consider how else it could be spent. This is written from a gamers perspective who wants to see new and diverse games, not a blind fanboy who wants to see one of the big 3 dominate all competition.

Also, I believe Jack was saying that they will not pay for exclusivity of 3rd party PUBLISHED games. Every console maker pays 3rd party DEVELOPERS to do "2nd party" development and then publishes the games exclusively for their own consoles. The difference is that SCEA will not pay 3rd party PUBLISHERS to keep IPs exclusive.

QFT Total.

 

[Chinner]

I don't see how Microsoft buying exclusives should effect the consumer at all.

 

[szaromir]

not true.

Yup, Sony is paying for exclusive in a way.

 

[justjohn]

sony cant compete with microsoft when it comes money. if they go head to head with microsoft when it comes to money it will destroy the company. it doesnt make sense to spend 50 million dollars on some crappy downlaoded content when it can be used to fund a brand new game.
ask yourself which would you rather want? 50 million fot gta downloadable content or a brand new game like uncharted. i think the answer is obvious

 

[Steroyd]

Wait, now I'm wondering something. At first I assumed Sony was upping their first party content cause they knew there were gonna be problems getting third party exclusives. But with all the money they're spending on first party games...wouldn't that be better if they just used that to get exclusives instead?

Why?

There's only four or five games that are worth moneyhatting, and even then there's nothing stopping them from going to rival consoles when they've spent all that moneyhat money, it would be much better to have a Halo than a GTA.

Sony sees more income as a publisher of a game than paying a third party dev.

 

[gofreak]

It's not the only way you assure exclusive content though (paying 3rd party publishers for exclusives counts, too) and you don't know for sure how much each company is spending on these things.

No, and actually particularly when MS is throwing around $50m moneyhats for, say, DLC :lol But outliers like that aside, I could take a fair guess as to who appears to be operating a larger effort on the publishing/development front. Unfortunately with under-the-table third party deals might make it difficult to account for everything these guys are doing, but just from what we've seen so far, I'd stand by that assessment.

sony cant compete with microsoft when it comes money.

We've been oft-reminded when questioning various 'stingy' moves by MS, that the xbox division doesn't operate with a free pass to MS's coffers. I think it's questionable who has the bigger budgets/resources here.

 

[dionysus]

FFXIII ON

Spoiler

PS3 money-hat exclusivity because Tretton is full of bullshit

CONFIRMED!

I believe if FFXIII gets moneyhatted, it would be by Sony Japan. Jack is president of SCEA. A for America.

 

[Confusion Illusion]

sony cant compete with microsoft when it comes money. if they go head to head with microsoft when it comes to money it will destroy the company. it doesnt make sense to spend 50 million dollars on some crappy downlaoded content when it can be used to fund a brand new game.
ask yourself which would you rather want? 50 million fot gta downloadable content or a brand new game like uncharted. i think the answer is obvious

Where did this 50 mil for GTA DLC come from?

 

[PleoMax]

What's the point of saying this in any case?

Accusing others of bribing...seems very low of them. Like some kid complaining how unfair it is that the other kid is doing a better job than him.

 

[speculawyer]

Tretton was obviously wrong, LAIR, Heavenly Sword, I think Motorstorm and now that Quandric Dream company, all were made by independant Dev who were independant and making games for other platforms before, but now making "exclusive" games for PS3. Its fairly obvious they are doing something to get exclusive games it may not be as specific as just a straight up money hat.

LAIR Published by: Sony Computer Entertainment

Heavenly Sword Published by: Sony Computer Entertainment

Motorstorm Published by: Sony Computer Entertainment

Published = paid for development.

 

[SouthernDragon]

"We will go and explore areas other devs do not dare" - Phil

"Gimme gimme" - consumers

Hopefully. Sony has shown great breadth and depth in their first party offerings, but they can't cover all the bases. And if they aren't willing to fight for 3rd parties, they'll be sorely lacking in diversity.

If they mean "earn" as in "we'll earn them with console sales," that's... a terrible thing to suggest to anyone that knows about the sales figures. Maybe there'll be a turn around next year. However, it looks unlikely.

not true.

Yeah, I know. I mean, consumers are purchasing around 116,000 PS3s a month between U.S. and Japan.

 

[Pistolero]

Coming back to his point, the delivery of the message was pathetic, but it was just him saying the inevitable : No company could get into a fronta battle with Microsoft for cash. How would anyone expect Sony to distract developers that cherich "deals" from MS pockets ? The only way is to get a great stable of in-house offerings...Sony knew that and proceeded to integrate its activities, rally some parteners before the "war started"...Wise decisison me say : Bring on new IPs !

 

[mood]

:lol Ok Tretton thanks for the info. I guess Ill stick with the 360 and Wii then

 

[jrricky]

I look at it from a different perspective. If established franchise X is already coming to my console, I do not begrudge other consoles getting the game. Instead of my console company wasting 20 million dollars making the game exclusive to my console, I would rather see them invest in a new IP. I would much rather see new IPs like LBP or HS get money from Sony than an established franchise, which PS3 is going to get in some form or another, receive money. The console makers have finite budgets, and paying for established franchises to remain exclusive on your console is a waste of money when you consider how else it could be spent. This is written from a gamers perspective who wants to see new and diverse games, not a blind fanboy who wants to see one of the big 3 dominate all competition.

Also, I believe Jack was saying that they will not pay for exclusivity of 3rd party PUBLISHED games. Every console maker pays 3rd party DEVELOPERS to do "2nd party" development and then publishes the games exclusively for their own consoles. The difference is that SCEA will not pay 3rd party PUBLISHERS to keep IPs exclusive.

whatever floats your boat or lets you sleep at night or whatever, my friend.

 

[krypt0nian]

Maybe they should start.

1st post ends thread.

 

[Steroyd]

Where did this 50 mil for GTA DLC come from?

It was in a Take Two Shareholders thread, where Take Two (or Rockstar) "inexplicably" got $50 million in hand from... "somewhere".

 

[Oblivion]

Why?

There's only four or five games that are worth moneyhatting, and even then there's nothing stopping them from going to rival consoles when they've spent all that moneyhat money, it would be much better to have a Halo than a GTA.

Sony sees more income as a publisher of a game than paying a third party dev.

Because I don't see a good chunk of Sony's games actually selling enough to justify the investment. Lair being among the games. The 20-30 million it cost probably might have done better to have a timed exclusive for some already established franchise.

 

[szaromir]

No, and actually particularly when MS is throwing around $50m moneyhats for, say, DLC :lol But outliers like that aside, I could take a fair guess as to who appears to be operating a larger effort on the publishing/development front. Unfortunately with under-the-table third party deals might make it difficult to account for everything these guys are doing, but just from what we've seen so far, I'd stand by that assessment.

What are you laughing at? Microsoft will get this money back once the DLC is online.And Microsoft's and Nintendo's first party investments are just fine and rather spectacular, too. Nintendo specifically is the most brilliant when it comes to first party development - they can invest so little in Nintendogs or New Super Mario Bros and yet the can sell 10M copies of these. It doesn't matter how mych money you throw at something, it matters how well do you spend these money. Playstation 3 without for example Lair would be just as fine.

 

[kaching]

They means Sony. Jack Tretton represents Sony. He is a face for them. I think "they" applies just fine. If it isn't "they" as in Sony - JT should STFU then so he doesn't give that impression.

When I go to a customers site, and say things - I'm representing my company when I say said things. So I watch my f'ing mouth as a result.

Yeah, I know what "they" means, Dr. But, as you say, you represent the company, so the onus is on you to represent the company accurately. If you don't I should take issue with you first. Same with Tretton.

 

[VonGak!]

Wait, now I'm wondering something. At first I assumed Sony was upping their first party content cause they knew there were gonna be problems getting third party exclusives. But with all the money they're spending on first party games...wouldn't that be better if they just used that to get exclusives instead?

Only in the short term, think of the money put into "1'st" party (the way SCE interpret it) as a long term investment.

- SCE gets the technology invented and can share it with 3'rd party (ie EDGE)
- Things like motion capture equipment, computers and such can be re-used for other exclusive projects
- Development of creative talent, people become more experienced and efficient over time which is the most important resource in the creative industry.

SCE had no quality 1'st party in the beginning of the Plastation era but see how big they have become and how they manage to push the PS3 more than other developers even though the SCE games do not have bigger teams or budgets than high profile 3'rd party titles.

 

[GeoramA]

Why?

There's only four or five games that are worth moneyhatting, and even then there's nothing stopping them from going to rival consoles when they've spent all that moneyhat money, it would be much better to have a Halo than a GTA.

Sony sees more income as a publisher of a game than paying a third party dev.

Yep. Sony owns quite a number of first-party studios and I'd rather see them funded first.

 

[Secks4Food]

What do you think will happen if Sony loses exclusivity to MGS 4 and Final Fantasy?

The average consumer will recognize that PS3 is the main platform of development, and despite the 360 port, they'll be more than willing to pay the extra $200 for the superior version, on top of the other triple A PS3 exclusives like the incredibly fun Lair and the completely original Uncharted: Drake's Fortune.

Or "third parties want way more to go PS3 exclusive than they need to go 360 exclusive."

...what? I don't understand your logic. Why would they pick PS3 over 360? Wouldn't you think if there was no money hat involved they would want to go multiplatform?

Oh, and @ Sony, this isn't about honor, or earning it, or showing your pokemans because you did so unbelievably well last gen, it's about getting great games that are only playable on your console. Do what you must, go another 5 billion dollars in debt, just get some good exclusives. You are running a business after all, so called "bribery" is neccesary to actually have a successful system and make money.

 

[Big Shirtless Ron]

whatever floats your boat or lets you sleep at night or whatever, my friend.

his post made a bunch of sense, dude. i don't know why you're mocking him.

 

[Haunted]

good second post.

Fixed.

:lol

 

[LJ11]

Wait, now I'm wondering something. At first I assumed Sony was upping their first party content cause they knew there were gonna be problems getting third party exclusives. But with all the money they're spending on first party games...wouldn't that be better if they just used that to get exclusives instead?

Sony wants control over the IP. They basically own any IP they publish. They're mimicking their movie business in a sense, it's all about the portfolio. Sony would much rather pay to publish and develop a game that will net them that particular IP, than give that money to a 3rd party for an exclusive game only to have them turnaround and bring it to different platforms in the future. I think it's more about control than anything else. Whether their plan works or not is another story entirely.

Edit: Insomniac has produced quality games over the past few years, yet they don't own R&C or Resistance. On the other hand, Gears is still property of Epic.

 

[dionysus]

whatever floats your boat or lets you sleep at night or whatever, my friend.

Ah yes, I give an argument with some logical reasons behind it that at least some people agree with it.

You just insult me. You win the internetz.

Care to provide a counter argument at least.

 

[Lorul2]

Everyone is missing the most overlooked question of this thread!!!!


Where are all the funny Gifs?!?

 

[Steroyd]

Because I don't see a good chunk of Sony's games actually selling enough to justify the investment. Lair being among the games. The 20-30 million it cost probably might have done better to have a timed exclusive for some already established franchise.

GTA didn't sell 100 million PS2's you know.

 

[jrricky]

The average consumer will recognize that PS3 is the main platform of development, and despite the 360 port, they'll be more than willing to pay the extra $200 for the superior version, on top of the other triple A PS3 exclusives like the incredibly fun Lair and the completely original Uncharted: Drake's Fortune.

What?.....Define average please.

Ah yes, I give an argument with some logical reasons behind it that at least some people agree with it.

You just insult me. You win the internetz.

Care to provide a counter argument at least.

Take what I said at face value. I never meant to come off harsh. Its just that thats one interpretation you can come up with and it is something that I dont agree with(though possible), thats all.

 

[Oblivion]

GTA didn't sell 100 million PS2's you know.

And neither will Lair.

 

[gofreak]

What are you laughing at? Microsoft will get this money back once the DLC is online.And Microsoft's and Nintendo's first party investments are just fine and rather spectacular, too. Nintendo specifically is the most brilliant when it comes to first party development - they can invest so little in Nintendogs or New Super Mario Bros and yet the can sell 10M copies of these. It doesn't matter how mych money you throw at something, it matters how well do you spend these money.

This is totally true. But I think Sony's investment in their publishing effort is quite obvious. I think they've been getting pretty good value, the investment is evident in both volume and creative success overall IMO. Of course, not every game is perfect, a hit, this is true for every publisher.

As for the $50m, I laugh because of somewhat similar points as you go on to make about prudent investment. Now, perhaps MS will get their money back on that. Perhaps they'll make it worth it via PR and marketing of their exclusivity on that content. But from a pure resource vs content point of view, $50m seems like overkill for a couple of episodes, when the same money could have funded two or three very high budget games. People sometimes wonder with certain Sony games how MS could have let them get away, and maybe stuff like this is part of your answer.

 

[J-Rzez]

Fixed.

This post will probably win most idiotic post of the day, that's for sure... You mean to say they don't have any 1st party titles out there, and coming out worth a damn? **********.com or txb.com are more fitting for you then...

 

[WickedLaharl]

i guess we'll see how many sony earns with no hats. currently they're not doing so hot...

 

[rhino4evr]

We don't buy exclusivity

Which is why no one wil buy a Sony console. Sony needs to try a little harder. It's embarassing that Microsoft got GTA4 DLC and Sony didn't. With botched 360 ports and fewer exclusives whats the point to own a PS3 besides Team Ico?

 

[justjohn]

whats the point to own a PS3 besides Team Ico?

sigh

 

[soul creator]

how about we get rid of the whole notion of platform exclusivity, and embrace the OCF?

Spoiler

heh heh