Try our new beta! Click here
Submitted by rotcerid 945d ago | opinion piece

Respawn news puts third-party exclusives back on the table

StickSkills says, "We, as a community of gamers, are smarter than we were eight years ago, and our combined intelligence is going to change the console debate from last generation. This holiday season—assuming the next Xbox gets a holiday release date—chances are, sales won’t be about brand familiarity or social features. Instead, we’ll decide what system we’ll pledge our dough to based on the simplest factor at all: what games we want to play." (Xbox One)

Lionheart377  +   945d ago
This could really be massive for Microsoft, even if the company doesn't need another sci-fi fist-person shooter.
fr0sty  +   945d ago
We saw them try the third party exclusive thing last gen. It didn't work out very well for them. The only third party high profile exclusive they managed to hang onto for the full generation was Gears of War. All the rest, most notably the Mass Effect series, went on to appear on multiple other consoles. Hell, Microsoft even had to watch Bungie walk out on stage at the PS4 reveal.

Instead of wasting money on third party partnerships that will be undone as soon as the developer can find some loophole in the contract enabling them to sell their game to another console's audience (mass effect, ninja gaiden, etc), Microsoft needs to do what Sony did and beef up their first party studios. This has always been the Xbox brand's biggest flaw, you can never rely too heavily on third party games. The age of third party exclusivity is dead, unless you publish and fund the game yourself.

However, if the rumors of MS wanting to take Xbox into a more entertainment centered market are true, it could explain why they want to rely so heavily on third parties. Rather than investing in making new games, they are investing in TV shows for Xbox Live. These rumors make it seem like they think they can get by signing exclusivity contracts with popular third party developers. We'll see how that pans out.
ALLWRONG  +   944d ago
"We saw them try the third party exclusive thing last gen. It didn't work out very well for them"

First: it still "this" gen.

Second: Yes it did work out for them because most third party content sells more on the 360. In fact most software sells more on the 360.

Everything I said is true so make sure you hide my comment. I know how that isn't aloud here.
Gildarts  +   944d ago
that can not be further from the truth. Microsoft has been investing heavily in first-party studios these last couple of years, surpassing sony in numbers. And we are about to see the results.
Why o why  +   944d ago
' Yes it did work out for them because most third party content sells more on the 360. In fact most software sells more on the 360.'

lol, have any proof of that. Anything outside of NA even?
fr0sty  +   944d ago

MS has more studios if you count the raw number, but once you break them down you come to realize that 5 of those studios are making casual kinect titles, and only 4-5 of them have ever released a multi-million copy selling game.

Sony invested in studios that had proven themselves before they were bought. Microsoft, not so much.


Your comment was about as intelligent as your spelling. You shouldn't be "aloud" on here. Most third party content sells on 360 because it has a better multiplayer environment and many multiplat games ran better on it due to it's ease of programming. Other than the halo games, Sony crushes MS first party sales in most cases. Compare Forza to Gran Turismo, for example.
#1.1.4 (Edited 944d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(9) | Report
JeffGUNZ  +   944d ago
@ Frosty

Compare Gears to Uncharted.
gaffyh  +   944d ago
@JeffGunz - If you think Gears can be compared to Uncharted, you've obviously never played Uncharted. The games are completely different. The only thing that is comparable to Gears is Quantum Theory.

On topic - If true, GREAT move by MS as it may make me by the console, but I don't think it would stay exclusive for more than a year, simply because of the similarities between the architectures 720 and PS4, and the fact that these guys are used to making their games across both platforms.

It's also unknown how well this game would sell, It will probably easily pass 5 million, but I don't think it will be anywhere near as popular as COD, which sells simply because of the name.
ichimaru  +   944d ago
Mass effect as a series was not owned by MS, EA didn't simply publish it like Respawn's new title
fox2   944d ago | Spam
AngelicIceDiamond  +   944d ago
Respawns new game and 72 exclusive would be huge step in the right direction.

But since Respawn has an EA stamp on it, I expect this game to be always online, joining Bungie's new FPS ip Destiny.

I hope there's a 360 version.

EDIT: I hope this is true. If so it'll join Black tusks 4 new Ip's.

And whatever new multiple Ip's Rare's cookin up.
#1.2 (Edited 944d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
yesmynameissumo  +   944d ago
"This could really be massive for Microsoft, even if the company doesn't need another sci-fi fist-person shooter."

This makes no sense to me. Could be massive, but they don't need the game? Any new console needs as many worthwhile games as possible.

I just don't see this happening. First, the publisher...EA. Notice the studio closures? They're not leaving money on the table. Even being exclusive, they wouldn't make anywhere near what they would on at least PC and one other console. With them all sharing similar architecture this next gen, these companies are going to want to strike as many different platforms as possible. If anything, this is exclusive DLC, launch or both.
showtimefolks  +   944d ago
i know its not the sexy or more attractive choice but maybe instead of wasting money on these timed exclusives they should actually buy few small development teams and give them resources and time to work on some new IP's even if for xblive

but maybe i am just old school gamer who see sony and nintendo being very successful for having so many studios and some excellent Ip's

but let's see, i would be very surprised if this REspawn deal happens since EA invested quite a lot so why all of the sudden let it go? even if their partners program is ending still games already in development under the program are fine like Respawn's new game along with Fuse

only thing that's gonna get rid of these rumors is the date May 21st than E3
#1.4 (Edited 944d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
CEOSteveBallmer  +   944d ago
"Reality isn't so kind. Everything doesn't work out the way you want it to. That's why... As long as you don’t get your hopes up, you can take anything... You feel less pain".
stage88  +   944d ago
And of course it's Microsoft pulling this shit again...
GraveLord  +   944d ago
You haven't seen the game yet. For all we know this could be another Haze. Respawn Entertainment is an unproven developer and one of the lead developers left a couple months ago. The game seems to be in development hell considering it was rumored to be coming out this year. We haven't even seen a single piece of footage.
Last time it seems EA favors sony. If EA and Activision start sleeping with MS then damn.
#1.8 (Edited 944d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Ken22  +   945d ago
Lol basing this off a rumor.
StrongMan  +   945d ago | Well said
Yeah, just watch the usuals that spout "don't believe rumors" come in here and believe this rumor.
The_Infected  +   945d ago

So true! Bubble for you:)
Riderz1337  +   945d ago
Lol it's very entertaining to watch. When it's a negative rumor "Don't listen to rumors". When it's a positive rumor "OMG I IZ EXCITED FOR DA 720 DERP". Predictable, yet entertaining to watch.
FrigidDARKNESS  +   945d ago
It has been known for some time that EA/MS forming a partnership but will be announced on May 21 . Some gamers are upset angry because EA is siding with MS thus leaving Sony standing out in the cold. Ubisoft has sided with Sony and folks are happy for that and xbox gamers aren't complaining as long as they get there game from Ubisoft.
JamieL  +   944d ago
Strong how can you accuse anyone of changing their tune. I think that goes with the same EXACT way you and the other PS3 fanatics do when it's negative MS rumors it's "you have to be online=100% true", "no used games= 100% true", "MS doomed Sony reigns supreme= 100% true". When it's positive it's all "let's wait and see about that".
So what you're basically saying is you HATE when people act like you. Right? You don’t do yourself any favors do you? A hypocritical hypocrite.
#2.1.4 (Edited 944d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(1) | Report
Septic  +   944d ago
More like, when it's positive news, Sony fanboys go out of their way to report an article.

Remember the whole fiasco a week or so ago?

You complete utter shameless hypocrites.
Catoplepas  +   945d ago
When were they off the table?

Sony's platforms receive several a year. As do Nintendo's.
Lionheart377  +   945d ago
Name the Sony ones?
Catoplepas  +   945d ago
Without listing Vita games, in 2013 ALONE:

Atelier Ayesha: The Alchemist of Dusk
Disgaea D2: A Brighter Darkness
Dragon’s Crown
Dust 514
Hyperdimension Neptunia Victory
Ni No Kuni: Wrath of the White Witch
Tales of Xillia
The Guided Fate Paradox
The Witch and the Hundred Knights
Time and Eternity
Final Fantasy X | X-2 HD
Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 Remix
Yakuza 5
JoJo's Bizarre Adventure All Star Battle

Let me guess. None of these count, right?
#3.1.1 (Edited 945d ago ) | Agree(26) | Disagree(5) | Report
Lionheart377  +   945d ago
Not going to say none of them count at all. I don't agree with counting PS2 HD remakes as there's likely an exclusivity deal in place from before, but yeah, these are third-party Sony games. Japanese dominance of PS3 allows for it. Very few leading U.S. publishers give them the exclusive treatment, though.
Hicken  +   944d ago
So you ask the question, with the unspoken implication that there are none.

Then when over a dozen are listed, you try and minimize their importance. Doesn't matter what country they're from. Doesn't matter whether they're HD remakes or not(dunno what deal would have been "in place before," or how that would disqualify a game; you had to come up with something, though, I guess).

You could as well say that very few(read: none) leading Japanese publishers(and you probably mean developers here) give Microsoft the exclusive treatment. The primary point, though is that Microsoft is the one lacking this type of third party support, though the article makes it seem like the Xbox is reviving that trend.

Clearly, however, Catoplepas' list shows that's not that case.
SDF Repellent  +   944d ago
All those games listed are great if you LIVE in JAPAN! But if you live in America or Europe, like most N4G members are, do you expect 99.9% of them to care about these games at ALL? I surely don't because most of them, if not all, are games that are made to fit the Japanese demographic and most of them have Jap text and dialog that most of us just can't follow. In that essence, I don't count these games as important exclusives at all. If you can read Japanese and like these kind of games, sure, but most of population in the west don't even know about them.
CEOSteveBallmer  +   944d ago
Its a shame when your avatar is a character from a "3rd party exclusive" game on Playstation. And yet theres a hint that you dont like sony.

@SDF Repellent, Some of those games are localized in north america and downloadable now on PSN like Nino kuni and atelier ayesha. It shows you don't own a PS3 console or no idea about it. You dont need to learn japanese because ahmmm they are already in english. Your trolling wont get you anywhere
#3.1.5 (Edited 944d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(1) | Report
Catoplepas  +   944d ago
@SDF Repellent

With a name like that, your opinion on anything Sony related is pretty much dirt.

Still, thanks for your entirely predictable response.
Supermax  +   945d ago
Microsoft has never launched a new console without a exclusive fps shooter there is nothing new here,I'm looking forward to this new ip.
Evil_Ryu  +   945d ago
n4g shutdown my kotaku article when did they change to this no anonymous sources rule?
WeAreLegion  +   944d ago
Random idiot from the internet > Kotaku
Evil_Ryu  +   944d ago
only if that random idiot is you
#5.1.1 (Edited 944d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(9) | Report
Jek_Porkins  +   945d ago
This is just a rumor, but if it's true it would make sense, Microsoft likes to make statements and Gears was theirs last gen, this could be the new one. As I said earlier though, if it's true. Things are getting very interesting though.....very.
JeffGUNZ  +   944d ago
Yeah, like you said it's just a rumor at this point, but it does make sense. These are the masterminds behind COD, which made COD4 what the franchise is now. MS has a close tie with the COD franchise, why wouldn't they do whatever they have to in order to grab up this game. This game has been in development for years, it's obvious they are taking their time with it. Can't wait for E3.
SDF Repellent  +   944d ago
remember, unlike Mass Effect, EA does not own Respawn or their new IP, they are just publishing partner so the game could go to any platform exclusively if Respawn chooses. Can't wait for this game.
Bigpappy  +   944d ago
You got that right. If true the game will be published by M$. That is why PS4 may never see a release. I don't know anything about this game really. But Respawn is made up of known great developers. If true, this is indeed big new. Trying to down play the potential for this game will just prove that person to be in denial.
porkChop  +   944d ago
Considering that the game is being published by EA, I don't see it being exclusive.

And the rumors came from Kotaku, yet another reason not to trust it.
JeffGUNZ  +   944d ago
You'd be surprised if MS throws a huge pile of money.
PCfanboy  +   944d ago
Bad news for Sony
People do not understand what this game is going to be.
MichaelLito79  +   944d ago
If anyone can pull it off is Microsoft. They always had great third party relationships and having an exclusive like this makes sense. Here is hoping the rumor is true.
SpitFireAce85  +   944d ago
Yeah they got extra $$$ to throw at third party devs....that's why you pay for live right.
JeffGUNZ  +   944d ago
Give me a break SPitfire. You think all those features listed/shown at the PS4 reveal featuring gaiki and cloud storage will be free? You are going to have to pay for that. PSN+ was just Sony testing the waters to see how their fanbase would react to a paid subscription. It's fine, as long as the content foots the bill.
supremacy  +   944d ago
Well i guess we have to wait and see what happens with Final fantasy versus 13/FF15.

Game i believe was rumored to be Playstation 4 exclusive, yet despite carrying a well known brand name it didn't spark an article like this. Must MS who is also rumored to be fallend behind in terms of games for its next gen system announce a 3rd party exclusive in order for headlines like this one surface?

Not to downplay the situation here, but...

Am i missing something here?
DFresh  +   944d ago
The Respawn Entertainment game is published by EA.
It's not going to be 100% exclusive.
Watch EA come out and say it'll be announced on PS4/Xbox 720/PC.
ichimaru  +   944d ago
Published not owned. Unlike Mass effect and other games OWNED by EA, as long as MS owns the rights to Respawn's IP it will likely take up a bed at the 720 estates
DFresh  +   944d ago
Publisher makes a decision on whether that game comes out on one platform or multiple platforms.
Not to mention publishers have had a lot of creative control, marketing and development budgets on the games they publish.
For EA to miss out on releasing a big game like Respawn Entertainment's (new IP) to come on multiple platforms to make more money would be a horrible business decision.
Knowing that EA is publishing the game it's going to be multiplatform.
Granted I'm not saying that this game won't be timed exclusive on Xbox 720 but 100% exclusive it's not gonna happen.
ichimaru  +   944d ago
"For EA to miss out on releasing a big game like Respawn Entertainment's (new IP) to come on multiple platforms to make more money"

I agree but it's happened before. Often
#12.1.2 (Edited 944d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report
MrBeatdown  +   944d ago
Your comment is way off the mark, because none of it even applies to this situation.

First of all, there isn't a chance in hell MS would own the rights to the IP. For one thing, EA wouldn't be publishing a game that Microsoft owns the rights to. MS would publish it themselves. And part of the deal with EA was that Respawn owns the IP. After Activision's screw job attempt, Respawn isn't ever going to give up IP ownership rights. There's no reason for you to bring up MS owning the rights, because the possibility of that is completely out of the question.

Secondly, EA is the publisher. It doesn't matter if EA doesn't own the IP. EA isn't going to sign a deal and allow them the necessary funding a start-up developer needs without having some degree of control over, at the very least, the first game in the series. Respawn isn't free to do as they please after signing a publishing deal and receiving funding from EA. EA has a say.

EA is a multiplatform publisher. West and Zampella knew that. If they signed an agreement with EA, it was definitely for a multiplatform title, because both parties wanted it. If Respawn wanted to be Xbox exclusive, they would have simply gone to Microsoft, who surely would have given them everything they wanted. Instead they went with a publisher that could provide only one thing Microsoft can't: Multiplatform publishing.

They are signed with EA, at least for the one game. That means anything Microsoft offers to make it 360/720 exclusive is as much EA's as it is Respawn's. If Respawn was so interested in Xbox exclusivity, and if Microsoft really was interested enough to throw enough money at the game to make sure PlayStation versions don't happen, Respawn certainly could have gotten a sweeter deal going right to Microsoft. They wouldn't have wasted their time making EA the third wheel, and cutting them in on a big piece of the pie.

As for your second comment, this has happened before, but rarely. Left 4 Dead is the only instance of a major EA-published game not being on every capable console. But EA even went out of their way to port The Orange Box to PS3. And you can probably chalk L4D's PS3 absence up to the failure of Orange Box on PS3. Just recently they ported a five year old Mass Effect game to PS3 just to charge $15 to the few people who still cared.

EA is a publisher that is almost exclusively multiplatform. Microsoft has shown a clear preference for timed exclusive DLC (GTA, COD, Skyrim, Fallout), and the occasional timed exclusive game (Bioshock), not permanent exclusivity for entire games. Respawn is comprised of a team that created and developed the best-selling series on both PS3 and 360.

The idea that all three are interested in deviating from what they do is a long shot at best. Especially when you consider that MS could jeopardize their relationship with Activision. I'm sure Activision wouldn't be too keen on the idea of Microsoft throwing millions at their biggest rival company, and a studio comprised of employees responsible for the biggest embarrassment in Activision's history, who happen to be developing what could be the next big rival to their biggest money maker.
#12.1.3 (Edited 944d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report
ichimaru  +   944d ago
ok. I can now see where I misinformed (ms does NOT own the rights) but a wall of text explanation is not necessary to get the meat of that argument across. As of now whether or not it will remain exclusive is to be seen. If you read the article it said the game has only seen development on the durango thus far, even developement on the 360 version(handled by a smaller handpicked team) has not began
#12.1.4 (Edited 944d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report
MrBeatdown  +   944d ago
Sorry, I didn't intend for it to be that long, but there's a lot to this. EA, Respawn, and Microsoft all have their histories, motivations, preferences, control of the IP, and money to make. There's a lot at play here, and I didn't think a few sentences were going to do it justice.

Plus, I was responding to your two comments on different (but related) topics, so it's on the long side because of that too.
Z501  +   944d ago
... and the most ignorant comment of the day goes to *opens envelope* SDF Repellent - "most of them, if not all, are games that are made to fit the Japanese demographic and most of them have Jap text and dialog that most of us just can't follow" Congrats bro!
ame22  +   944d ago
Probably a timed exclusive, but let's face it MS has nothing to put on the table quite like Sony does so they need their third party exclusives.
ichimaru  +   944d ago
kool, you're from the future. what games do they show on the 21st?
BitbyDeath  +   944d ago
Beginning of the gen both start at 0 so devs are probably more open to accepting bundles of cash in return for exclusivity.

This'll change later again as the numbers climb higher.

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

Narcissu 10th Anniversary Anthology Project Post-Kickstarter Analysis

20m ago - Marcus Estrada writes: "Sekai Project have made quite a name for themselves in the visual novel s... | PC

Let's Play Just Cause 3

20m ago - With Just Cause 3 launching this week, Cody and Jordan spent some time with the game. They discov... | PC

See what games are coming out in 2016

Now - Visit our release calendar to see what games are coming out in 2016. | Promoted post

Xenoblade Chronicles X Review - The Pinnacle of Open-World Landscape Creation | PlayerEssence

21m ago - It's finally here! One of the largest game-worlds to ever be created, and also part of a genre th... | Wii U

Xenoblade Chronicles X review – JRPG of the year | Metro

25m ago - In the face of Fallout 4 and The Witcher 3 could this Wii U exclusive really have the best open w... | Wii U

Custom Super Mario World SNES Is A Thing Of Beauty

25m ago - Custom-themed, limited edition consoles weren’t really a thing back in the day of the SNES and th... | Retro