-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Sony accuses Microsoft of 'writing cheques out of insecurity'
- Thread starter BradleyUK
- Start date
- Status
soul creator
Member
I'm sure he meant to say "ya butt can't cash" instead of "out of insecurity"
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
While I do agree that throwing money around like water isn't the way to handle your relations with third parties, I do think it's better then doing nothing at all. That saying I personally think that console makers need to find the balance between the two. Because so far you have one extreme like Microsoft and the other extreme like Nintendo.
Dreams-Visions
Member
that's my response too.Lebron said:I assume MS response will be something in the line of this
jeremy1456
Junior Member
When you can't afford to do it yourself poke fun at the other guy for it.
Dreams-Visions
Member
fixed.BlackBond said:Companies buying exclusiveness? Get out of here :lol
THE TAG TEAM IS F'ING BACK!
Flying_Phoenix said:
Microsoft just shot themselves in the foot.
I don't know how much the rest of you know about the video game industry (I'm an expert), but friendship and emotions are huge parts of it. It's not like it is in the PC software business where you can become successful just by giving people money. If you try to make friends by paying people off in the video game industry, you bring shame to your company, and the only way to get rid of that shame is repentance.
What this means is the neogaf public, after hearing about this, is not going to want to purchase 360 exclusives, nor will they purchase any 360 systems. This is HUGE. You can laugh all you want, but Microsoft has alienated an entire market with this move.
Microsoft, publicly apologize for money hats or you can kiss your business goodbye.
cartoon_soldier
Member
Mamesj said:
:lol
or was it sarcasm? I am lost.
lol A good post on the 8th page of a PR thread. GET OUTTA HERE!!!legend166 said:
I agree with what youre saying but I will say that its hard to tell what the "correct" approach is these days but I do believe that sony has it half right. These days, the "3rd party exclusive" is going the way of the dodo. In the past few years, we've seen exclusives like Ace combat and DMC got multiplat when they were big sony exclusives last gen. And now we see the tables turning where MS lost Bioshock and games like Mass effect/deadrising/lost planet are all up in the air and this generation isnt even over yet. Hell even Bungie is questionable. I doubt theyll go multiplat but the fact that people are even talking about the possibilities is a bit bad for MS.
So at this point, its a bit foolish to be banking on 3rd parties to fill out your library. With that said, Sony has the right idea when it comes to building up their first party presence but they have to be careful and not alienate the 3rd parties in the process (like nintendo apparently did last gen).
As I said, they have it half right. But they still have to stay close with the 3rd parties.
Truespeed
Member
When will these stupid multi-platform publishers learn from their mistakes. Microsoft can never pay them enough for what they will lose in revenue by not publishing for the other platform. Bioshock would have sold very well on the PS3 had it been released simultaneously, but because it was delayed a year it tanked at retail because no one really wanted to pay $60 for a year old game that was available for the 360 and PC.
cartoon_soldier
Member
xfactor said:
OH SHIT, the Final Fantasy XIII reaction from Evil Lore one. Oh how could I forget.
D
Deleted member 22576
Unconfirmed Member
This might sound impossibly ignorant... but I was reading the posts about how it's obviously better in the long term to rely on 1st party than paying for third party exclusives.
Aside from L&D what third party exclusive titles has microsoft bought in the last 2 years or so?
I mean, nearly every notable third party title I can think of has been Multiplatform.
Aside from L&D what third party exclusive titles has microsoft bought in the last 2 years or so?
I mean, nearly every notable third party title I can think of has been Multiplatform.
jeremy1456 said:
Its like maybe someone at Sony should see their history before making these statements,no?
Many times this company used money to become the big player in the PSX/PS2 days,money that went towards exclusives like the Metal Gear,Final Fantasy,Tomb Raider,Resident Evil,Tekken and RidgeRacer franchises. To outright come out and point a blatant finger at Microsoft now? That takes balls of arrogance. Its ok for this guy to do business that way but not for anyone else,seriously get outta town with that way of thinking. Business doesn't work that way and the cut throat world isn't gonna give you a tissue for crying about it. They need to move on and not be so melodramatic with their competitors.
Marty Chinn
Member
Angelus said:
Ya, Sony did do business this way and look where they are now. Nintendo invested in first party development over the last two decades and look where they are now. You're saying there is no weight to the core point? Better yet, had Nintendo made this statement and not Sony, would the same reaction have happened?
Marty Chinn said:
Sony is is trouble now because they pissed away their market share with a terrible pricing point and poor marketing on their big games,whereas their competitors came in with a better approach to many areas where they didn't. The only "weight" I'm adding is that relying on 3rd parties never was going to be Sony's weakness in the long run,it was their attitude where they thought people would buy into their product no matter its price point. They still have that poor attitude to this day. Now though ou factor in games delays such as GT5 and you see a pattern of consumers who look over and see better things to invest their money in. Not having to buy a PlayStation for say a Resident Evil or Tekken game only makes the problems stated above even worse.
Kasumi1970
my name is Ted
i got the point your a trollY2Kev said:
.GqueB. said:
I'm not trying to say Sony shouldn't focus on 1st party support. Nintendo have shown that if you succeed, it's very, very lucrative. I'm just saying it's a bit rich acting as if their 1st party output is so superior to that of Microsoft* that they don't have to chase 3rd party exclusives, when it's clearly not the case.
*in terms of sales.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
MS has realized that most gamers don't care about the source of their games, they just want to play the best (or most convenient) version.
Really, what is the difference between spending $300 million on a dev studio for 1 game a year (pretty much what they did with Rare), when you can publish one $30 million dollar 3rd party exclusive annually over the same time frame?
As for Multiplatform games, they make up the bulk of PS3/360 purchases week in and week out - how do you get people to buy your console for these games that are also on another console? Small incentives. A map here, a bonus character here, an extra mission there. Or in some cases, you get to play it 6 months to a year early.
The thought process behind these decisions is that every time someone walks into a game store, the 360 shelf is >>> than the PS3 shelf, that every time someone bitches about the PS3 not having game X/Y/Z on a forum that there's one more informed customer reading that who's thinking "hey, why don't I just buy a 360?", and that every time someone gets frustrated waiting for a game to show up on PS3, they consider just giving up on the thing and buying a 360. Nerd rage simply feeds the cycle.
As someone said above, Sony pointing out that MS has exclusive content for GTAIV is exactly what MS wants.
Who does any of this really benefit? 360 owners were going to get the content anyway.
They are doing this to specifically harm the perception of the PS3 and hurt the experience of current PS3 owners, like Sony did with Tomb Raider and Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 in the PS1 days, and make the 360 a more desirable console. That's it. There is no greater motive. MS is doing this to piss you off so you'll buy a 360. Sony crying about it isn't going to stop it from happening unless they manage to outstrip MS in marketshare or start making tons of cash to pony up.
Really, what is the difference between spending $300 million on a dev studio for 1 game a year (pretty much what they did with Rare), when you can publish one $30 million dollar 3rd party exclusive annually over the same time frame?
As for Multiplatform games, they make up the bulk of PS3/360 purchases week in and week out - how do you get people to buy your console for these games that are also on another console? Small incentives. A map here, a bonus character here, an extra mission there. Or in some cases, you get to play it 6 months to a year early.
The thought process behind these decisions is that every time someone walks into a game store, the 360 shelf is >>> than the PS3 shelf, that every time someone bitches about the PS3 not having game X/Y/Z on a forum that there's one more informed customer reading that who's thinking "hey, why don't I just buy a 360?", and that every time someone gets frustrated waiting for a game to show up on PS3, they consider just giving up on the thing and buying a 360. Nerd rage simply feeds the cycle.
As someone said above, Sony pointing out that MS has exclusive content for GTAIV is exactly what MS wants.
Who does any of this really benefit? 360 owners were going to get the content anyway.
They are doing this to specifically harm the perception of the PS3 and hurt the experience of current PS3 owners, like Sony did with Tomb Raider and Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 in the PS1 days, and make the 360 a more desirable console. That's it. There is no greater motive. MS is doing this to piss you off so you'll buy a 360. Sony crying about it isn't going to stop it from happening unless they manage to outstrip MS in marketshare or start making tons of cash to pony up.
Azelover
Titanic was called the Ship of Dreams, and it was. It really was.
YoungHav said:
It's a big issue. Sony was a big pusher, they published FFVII in the US and made a big investment promoting it. But even if you discount that there were many instances where Sony "purchased" exclusive franchises, with timed contracts and everything. The two more public ones are Tomb Raider and GTA.
lowlylowlycook
Member
Sho_Nuff82 said:
There's a lot to what you say but multi-console owners are a small minority so it's more about making people buy the 360 before they by a PS3 than to convince the few PS360 owners out there to buy the 360 version of GTAIV.
If you look at how GTA didn't move either console and how Sony's first party games don't really move PS3s, I'm not sure either MS or Sony is really getting much for their money.
Personally I dont really get what the big deal is. They have different styles of getting exclusive content onto their systems.
Sony spends what? 100-200 million a year? Funding all of their fire party line up?
Microsoft decides instead of funding a shit ton of first party studies they help fund a couple of third party games and get timed exclusives, exclusive content, or outright exclusives. They spend what 20-30 million a year on this?
Sony spends what? 100-200 million a year? Funding all of their fire party line up?
Microsoft decides instead of funding a shit ton of first party studies they help fund a couple of third party games and get timed exclusives, exclusive content, or outright exclusives. They spend what 20-30 million a year on this?
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
BlackBond said:Companies buying exclusiveness? Get out of here :lol
Dreams-Visions said:fixed.
THE TAG TEAM IS F'ING BACK!
What the? What is this Gamespot System Wars Reunion?
Marty Chinn
Member
Angelus said:
Sony definitely got themselves in the situation they're in all due to pricing but that doesn't make the point invalid. Simple mistakes got them to where they are and they lost control of the third parties because of the change in marketshare. It doesn't change the point at how volitile third parties are and how quickly things can change to not be in your favor. Sony realized this before the PS3 was released because they've said numerous times that they were not going to buy exclusives this generation and focus more on investing in first party development because of how volitile it can be. Had they maybe done it sooner it may have helped their situation a little rather than being so bad as it is now. They relied on third parties for two generations and didn't develop their first party enough and now they're paying for it the hard way. Nintendo on the other hand is reaping the benefits from decades of investment.
I honestly don't see how what happened to Nintendo and Sony isn't a clear example of how relying soley on third parties can put you in a bind some time down the future where as having a solid foundation in first party development can be extremely beneficial. Microsoft is clearly focused on third parties right now and there's nothing wrong with it as it will work for them for the near term but they really have to start thinking long term as in past this generation and that is where solid foundations in IPs and first party development will pay off in the long run. They have a few solid IPs but not too many first party development teams. They've even disbanded some of the ones that they had.
Do people really think that there's no point to investing in long term first party solutions and that simply paying for third party development is the way to go for multiple generations of consoles?
blazinglazers
Member
Really well said, I think you nailed it.Sho_Nuff82 said:
But look at those sales on each console this gen, versus last gen. More clearly, if you look at the changes in marketshare, mindshare & bottom line, I think an argument can be made that strategy is successful.lowlylowlycook said:
PepsimanVsJoe
Member
I dunno about cheques and insecurity but seeing Zophar crash and burn really made my day.
He's definitely in the top(bottom?) 5 that's for sure. He's somewhere between CHRP716 and Forsete. If the three of them got together and spent the next year working on a forum post they could probably put together AT LEAST a D+ one.
Haunted said:
He's definitely in the top(bottom?) 5 that's for sure. He's somewhere between CHRP716 and Forsete. If the three of them got together and spent the next year working on a forum post they could probably put together AT LEAST a D+ one.
shykyoichi
Member
Have you forgotten? INTERNET. SERIOUZ BUSINESS.Chumly said:
- Status