Next Xbox Development Woes Could Spell Trouble for the PS4

Push Square: "Microsoft is supposedly struggling. According to reports coming out of Kotaku overnight, the platform holder is as much as six months behind on producing content for its next generation console. The site’s sources claim that the company recently canned a number of internally developed titles for its impending machine because they weren't coming together as expected. However, the firm’s aiming to compensate for that by pulling out its cheque book, and is aggressively targeting third-party exclusives for its machine. That spells danger for the PlayStation 4."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
MariaHelFutura1847d ago

Sony owns enough solid developers. They'll be fine.

Muerte24941847d ago (Edited 1847d ago )

Microsoft has always been know to rope in a trilogy every gen. This did it with Bungie (Halo) Epic(Gear of War). So I'm not expecting anything different. But still Sony manage to completely outpace them in terms of exclusives.

So if Microsoft was to continue this same old tactic, then by all means let them. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Microsoft feel like their gaming on xbox infinity in the back seat.

This article is making the assumption that Microsoft will be able to acquire, GTA5 as a timed exclusive. Also they're assuming that Sony's exclusives won't sell.

1847d ago
Blackdeath_6631847d ago (Edited 1847d ago )

more than 90% of games on kinect are shovelware made purely to increase the numbers and add absolutely nothing to the gaming experience.
sorry but i refuse to acknowledge jumping on the spot in front of a camera as gaming. also the vast majority of kinect games are dancing and fitness games. the reason kinect games are discredited as you put it is because none cater to the core gamer.

Army_of_Darkness1847d ago (Edited 1847d ago )

If your including kinect games as "competitive exclusives" to ps3 games, which MUST mean you buy, play and enjoy them then i will agree with you and not discredit them. However, if you have done nothing i mentioned above, then well.. the kinect games aren't comparable exclusives to Sony's library as normal....
When we talk exclusives, you should know by now that we are talking about quality exclusives such as halo, gears, alan wake vs. God of war, uncharted, killzone and so on;-)

AngelicIceDiamond1847d ago

I read this article somewhere last night that MS was 6 months behind in its first party stable. If I remember correctly

"The Xbox 720 delay rumors, for both hardware and software, are especially troubling considering Nintendo's Wii U console. Nintendo blames the failure of the system to catch on squarely at the foot of software, or lack thereof. And it wasn't for lack of trying: Nintendo siphoned so many resources into developing the system that the software withered on the vine and suffered severe delays that, largely, still continue. The software lineup was theoretically robust, but practically nonexistent. The same thing happened to be PS3 in its very early days. And the same seems to be happening to Xbox 720."

The Wii U is struggling with its software and PS3 did as well when it first launched. This could happen with the 720 as well.

Septic1847d ago Show
Enemy1847d ago

3rd party exclusives? Here we go again with "exclusives" that will be on PS4 and PC months later with exclusive content.

It's not Microsoft's if they don't own it. Poor guys still haven't learned. Try again.

loulou1847d ago Show
Muerte24941847d ago

There isn't anyone putting Sony on a pedestal. People are simply pointing out that Sony edges out Microsoft in terms of exclusives. "Next Xbox Development Woes Could Spell Trouble for the PS4" is the title of the article. This piece was not meant to be a pro Sony piece.

revben1847d ago

For all the people who really think Sony has more exclusives that MSFT are dead wrong. MSFT has the second highest amount of exclusives followed by Sony.

But you will say "but Sony has the better games". No! MSFT has a 74 metascore while Sony has a 73. Plus MSFT's exclusives sells better than Sony's. No matter what way you twist it, you cannot change facts.

The only thing Sony has over MSFT is that they have more triple A exclusives. But in terms of innovation, nothing beats XBLA.

1847d ago
thechosenone1847d ago (Edited 1847d ago )

Makes perfect sense, MS is the one who's deficient on games yet Sony will be the one who will suffer as a result...perfect logic.

ALLWRONG1847d ago (Edited 1847d ago )

The 360 has more exclusives even without Kinect titles. In fact in just about every category the 360 has more.

Kinect vs Move

Deny all you want but facts are facts. There are search engines available if you need check.

Third party exclusives have helped the 360 a lot this gen so Sony should worry.

Muerte24941847d ago (Edited 1847d ago )

"Third party exclusives have helped the 360 a lot this gen so Sony should worry."

Even with all that help, Microsoft has still been outsold by Sony worldwide. While still remaining the most expensive out of the 3 consoles. Also PS3 has quality over quantity.

Uncharted 2 recieved game of the year 2009

Journey received game of the year 2012

God of war 3 received best graphics in 2009

Now Braid won Game of the year in 2008 @ AoIAS awards (Academy of Interactive Arts & Science)
But even he is now in Sony's camp.

So what exactly does Sony have to worry about?

3 months after PS3 hit 77 million, Microsoft hit 77.2 million.

These.........these are facts

WeedyOne1847d ago

To all the people saying MS has more exclusives id just like to say 1 thing...

Most of those "exclusive" games are on my pc!

pixelsword1847d ago

@ allwrong:

How about "good" exclusives, and leave it at that, huh? Please don't act like people don't own both or that that's a slap in the 360's face, or that someone can't merely go to wikipedia, but that's how it is.

sikbeta1847d ago

Respawn Exclusive Game seems to be just the beginning then...

MrBeatdown1847d ago


That response of yours is always good for a laugh. The funny thing is that you keep posting it, no matter how stupid of an argument it is.

Let's take a look at some of those fine exclusives you speak of, yanked right from Wikipedia...

It's so epic, we'll have to limit it to just A's and B's.

11eyes CrossOver (Console exclusive)
A-Train HX
Absolute: Blazing Infinity
Ace Combat 6: Fires of Liberation
Akai Katana Shin
America's Army: True Soldiers
Amped 3
Apocalypse: Desire Next
AquaZone: Life Simulator
Arcania: Gothic 4 (Console exclusive)
Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts
Battlestations: Midway (Console exclusive)
Battlestations: Pacific (Console exclusive)
Beautiful Katamari
Black College Football: The Xperience (Console exclusive)
Blue Dragon
Bomberman: Act Zero
Bullet Witch

You a big fan of Bomberman and Black College Football? Nah, you're probably more of an AquaZone and A-Train guy. Maybe Bulletwitch. I mean, who doesn't like Bulletwitch? And of course, who can forget the GOTY contender that is 11eyes CrossOver. Isn't that a Hideo Kojima game?

You keep living up to your name. At least the PlayStation fans you so desperately want to prove wrong don't need to resort to mentioning Lair, Haze, and games so obscure, you don't even know they exist.

Come back when you can produce a list that isn't inflated by shovelware, trash, and games so obscure, not one person reading this site has ever heard of them. There are search engines to help you out.

Knushwood Butt1846d ago

The only way I can see this being a negative for the PS4 is if some next gen multiplat titles are delayed due to these supposed XBOX development woes.

If that happens, it will impact the flow of games for the PS4.

Other than that, if true, this is only really going to spell trouble for MS.

Army_of_Darkness1846d ago

So if you never bought, played or enjoyed infamous or god of war on your ps3, how do you even know you would or wouldn't like them??
And as for kinect games, you didn't answer my question as to wether or not you buy, play and enjoy them??

DeadlyFire1846d ago

So Microsoft has reached out to EA for an exclusive game deal. When has EA ever released a single platform game? .....Never to my knowledge. They even took Bioware and stepped back and grabbed their old titles to port to a new platform. Respawn's game will come to PS4 as well. I myself am not worried one bit about PS4 overtaking X720.

You can't just buy in exclusive titles. That won't last forever. Activision clearly said no to Microsoft for Destiny. Now its landing on PS4 at the same time as it launches on other platforms.

abzdine1846d ago

while MS will be showing tech demos of games techs that will never come out (Milo and Natal anyone??), Sony is delivering proofs that their studios and partners will be kicking for years to come.

morganfell1846d ago

The only exclusive CONFIRMED material for a next gen console belongs to the PS4.

humbleopinion1846d ago (Edited 1846d ago )

I love it how people argue with ALLWRONG here, yet he simply asks everyone to look at the actual valid stats and facts. Some people moan how most of the stuff coming from MS is Kinect shovelware, while others complain that MS used to push out more games in the past but that trend changed in recent years.

So let's see how things stuck up on Metacritic publisher rankings - only in the last 3 years (post Kinect shovelware:
Microsoft 2nd. MC average of 73.0.
Sony 3rd. MC average of 72.3.
Microsoft 1st. MC average of 77.2.
Sony 3rd. MC average of 72.8
Microsoft 4th. MC average of 73.4
Sony 7th. MC average of 70.9

Buy hey, one may argue that we're counting here both Xbox 360, PS3, Vita and PC games. Let's see how games stuck up on console VS console

Xbox: 243 games. Avg 69.5. 7 great games. 8 good exclusives.
PS3: 204. Avg 70.3. 6 great games. 6 good exclusives.
Xbox: 261 games. Avg 68.9. 9 great games. 12 good exclusives.
PS3: 253. Avg 69.5. 12 great games. 13 good exclusives.
Xbox: 260 games. Avg 67.8. 9 great games. 13 good exclusives.
PS3: 231. Avg 70. 7 great games. 12 good exclusives.
Pretty tight competition, huh?

Overall good games (75% ranking and up) in 3 years:
Xbox 101 + 112 + 101 = 314
PS3: 101 + 96 + 83 = 280
Great Xbox games: 7+9+9=25
Great PS3 games: 6+12+7=25
Good Xbox exclusives: 8+12+13=33
Good PS3 exclusives: 6+13+12=31
(BTW, The exclusive list excludes "console exclusives" which are basically PC ports - such as The Witcher 2. Something which could have given the Xbox an extra edge for people who don't bother with PC gaming).

So overall, in the past 3 years (2010-2012) people had 314 good Xbox 360 games to play versus 280 good PS3 games to play. And in all metrics, the Xbox 360 is on par or surpassing the PS3: be it publisher rankings, number of good exclusives or number of good games: no matter how MC cuts the data - the Xbox 360 is still coming on top.

And as Muerte2494 puts it:
"These.........these are facts"

(and before someone here bashed MC: you can always come up with your own metrics instead and share the data with us. Until you do that though...)

MrBeatdown1845d ago (Edited 1845d ago )


If ALLWRONG wants to take issue with people discussing quality exclusives, he should present relevant numbers. Nobody wants to play crap, so why use a list that includes it?

Not only that, but he's using Microsoft's publishing Metacritic score, alongside a list of all exclusives. MS's average rating doesn't apply to third-party exclusives.

Also, nobody criticizes XBLA or PSN games. They're fine. Always have been. But they aren't a replacement for the big budget $60 games people want too. And ALLWRONG's "proof" ignores that fact.

The problem people have with Microsoft, is the lack of retail exclusives nowadays (something especially important to multiplatform owners), and when you look at those specific numbers, it's clear who is doing better.

I'm not even going to attempt to compile a list of every last third-party exclusive, so I'll just use first-party lists from Wikipedia from 2010 on, using Metacritic scores, excluding everything but $50 - $60 retail games, for PS3 and 360 only. I left out HD remasters, and retail releases of DLC games like Journey. I didn't pay close attention to "console exclusivity", but this includes Alan Wake (console exclusive), but not DC Universe, and I'm too lazy to adjust it one way or the other. Alan Wake was 360 only for a couple years anyway.


First, the games...
2010: MS - 9, Sony - 14
2011: MS - 6, Sony - 16
2012: MS - 9, Sony - 8
2013: MS - 1, Sony - 3
Total: MS - 25, Sony - 41

Average Metacritic scores...
2010: MS - 72, Sony - 69.2
2011: MS - 80.7, Sony - 71
2012: MS - 74.1, Sony - 73.6
2013: MS - 79, Sony - 81
2010-2013: MS - 75.1, Sony - 71.9

Sony wins on quantity. Microsoft wins on average quality.

But here's the kicker... When you have more games, as Sony does, players don't need to waste time on the crap. More games means more good and bad games. But gamers can focus on the good.

MS had 25 games total with an average of 75.1 on Metacritic.
Sony's top 25 games had an average of 81.9.

Sony's best 25 trumps Microsoft's 25 by a big margin of nearly 7%.

Even worse, on the MS side, only 9 of those 25 games can be played by without Kinect. Combined, those nine games have an average score of 83.6

On the Sony side, 22 of those top 25 games can be played without Move. Those 22 have a combined average of 82.4, just 1.2% shy of MS's average for their controller-based games. When it comes to controller based games, Sony flat-out obliterates Microsoft in quantity, offering more than double what MS offers, with only the slightest hit to quality.

If you look at just Sony's top 9 controller-based games, they average 87.4, compared to MS's average of all nine controller-based games, 83.6. Again, Sony wins by a notable margin of almost 4 points.

It's pretty clear, at least on the first party side, Microsoft is clearly lagging behind Sony, especially in controller-based games, which is exactly what people take issue with. It's a complaint, because it's a very real issue.

Throw third-party games in there, and I doubt the situation changes all that much. The notable ones are so few and far between, they aren't going to skew the results any one way or the other.

humbleopinion1845d ago (Edited 1845d ago )


You're making two biased assumptions here to manipulate the data towards your favorite:

1) For some reason, you decide to ignore third party publisher exclusive games for each platform in order to decide which console has a better selection of games.
The real kicker? This is EXACTLY what this article is about, and exactly the point AllWrong raised himself. Quote:
"Third party exclusives have helped the 360 a lot this gen so Sony should worry"
Maybe you still don't understand: nobody cares how who the publisher is as long as the game is good. Microsoft and Sony can choose to pay salaries to an internal studio to develop a game (Forza, Gran Turismo), hire an external developer (Gears of War, Heavy Rain) or sign a 3rd party exclusivity deal (Splinter Cell Conviction, Metal Gear Solid 4).
The only thing that matter for the user base is how good the game is: the fact the The Witcher 2 for example is published by a third party is irrelevant - the only think that relevant is what a superb RPG this game is, and that you can play it on one platform but not on the other.

2) You somehow make the assumption that people should distinguish between different kinds of games based on how they are distributed (kind of surprising knowing how Sony especially is blending the lines between the two with many PS3 games getting a multiple retail and download release as well as PSV release.
Minecraft for example is a 20$ XBLA game, but it probably provides more content than almost any retail Xbox 360 or PS3 game to date (and sold more than most of them). Why should it be ignored?
Trials Revolution is a Pseudo 2D game with an enormous amount of content not to mention editing and sharing - just like LBP. Is it somehow Microsoft's fault they decided to distribute it digitally and not charge 60$ for the retail package?
Journey won quite a few 2012 GOTY including at GDC and BAFTA IIRC. Should we ignore it simply because it's a digital download? It's still the best exclusive on the PS3 in 2012 by far.
Microsoft released over 40 XBLA games in 2012. Among these are Dust, Fez, Minecraft, Mark of the Ninja, American Nightmare, Trials Evolution and Spelunky: well received, deep hardcore experiences, surpassing many 60$ retail games with the experience they provide.
And you're saying now "let's ignore all of these, and instead focus on retail only", so we can talk about... what exactly? Book of Spells and Kinect Star Wars!?

If you want to skew the numbers towards Sony you can simply say it: "While I love my PSN games, I know that Sony only published less than 5 PSN games in 2012 while Microsoft published over 40, so I'll try to make a sad excuse to ignore them".

But the discussion here is about high quality games without discrimination: no matter the format, no matter the company logo. If it's a good game - it's worth our time and money. And the facts are that one console has more games than the other.

MrBeatdown1845d ago (Edited 1845d ago )


Biased, huh? I see you didn't take the time to do an unbiased equivalent. Probably because it doesn't change the outcome. Ignorance is bliss, right?

Microsoft and Sony are the biggest creators of quality exclusive games on their systems, by far, so what I covered is the vast majority of what's out there that's worth a damn. I even acknowledged I didn't cover third party games, but said I doubt it would change the outcome, because it's the truth. A truth you didn't seem to want to take the time to actually disprove.

For all your complaining about me leaving out third party games, you only managed to name a measly two retail games for 360, and even that's a stretch, considering they're on PC as well.

Witcher 2 and Splinter Cell. An 88 and 85. There's a reason you only named those. They're the only two worth a damn for the 2010-2013 period we covered.

See anything else noteworthy? I see a whole lot of trash.

How about the most recent batch of third party 360 exclusives...

Dragon Ball Z for Kinect. A 49.
Harry Potter for Kinect. 54.
Steel Battalion. 38.
Country Dance AllStars... so irrelevant, only OXM (surprise, surprise) rated it. A 65.
Sesame Street. A 79.
Rapala for Kinect... so irrelevant, nobody reviewed it.
Victorious: Time to Shine... so irrelevant, nobody reviewed it.
YooStar on MTV... A 49

That's a year and a half of ALL third-party exclusives during that time. I could throw the "console exclusive" Witcher 2 in. Think that will help? The average for all those, Witcher 2 included? 60.3.

Have I proven my point, or are you still deluding yourself into thinking third party exclusives would help? They'd drive the average score right into the dirt.

These are the games that ALLWRONG so brilliantly uses to win his little "but, but, but... the 360 HAZ MORE!!" argument.

Like I said, a pure quantity argument encompasses a big steaming pile of garbage. A pile of garbage guys like you and ALLWRONG are more than willing to roll around in if it gives you something to defend 360 with, no matter how pathetic of an argument it is.

I didn't cover the only TWO 2010-2013 360 third-party retail "console exclusives" worth a damn that you or I could come up with. I didn't include actual PS3 exclusives, Ni No Kuni (86), or Yakuza games (78 and 79) either. Because, just like I said, it's but a drop in the bucket, and not going to change the results in any meaningful way. My proven point stands... Everyone bringing up the lack of exclusives on 360, and from MS, is referring to a very real problem, and ALLWRONG's big list padded with garbage games doesn't change that.


MrBeatdown1845d ago (Edited 1845d ago )

Oh, and as for downloadable games, you act like I made a total "biased" assumption that the people ALLWRONG responded to weren't discussing them, even though the article only mentioned retail games, and nobody but the guy who brought up XBLA mentioned downloadable titles. You however, assumed they are included in what everyone here was referring to, article included, but nobody aside from the guy who brought up XBLA to shoot everyone down mentioned any. You made a bigger assumption than I did.

Either way, the fact of the matter is, it's ridiculous that you act like retail and downloadable can't be distinguished. There's a reason they aren't $60. You fall back on the argument that "games are games". Acting like people shouldn't complain about the lack of retail games because there are XBLA games is as absurd as suggesting they shouldn't be complaining about a lack of racing games because there's a ton of shooters to play. Mark my words, the vast majority of games shown at the Xbox reveal will be retail. There is a reason for that. You'll be lucky if you see one XBLA game there, just like every E3.

And I love your idiotic jab at me...

If you want to skew the numbers towards Sony you can simply say it: "While I love my PSN games, I know that Sony only published less than 5 PSN games in 2012 while Microsoft published over 40, so I'll try to make a sad excuse to ignore them".

You act like me specifying retail games is in response to (what you seem to think is) Sony's lackluster downloadable lineup. Ignorance at it's finest. For one thing, it's flat out hypocritical that you act like third-party is such a big deal when it comes to retail (even though I proved that wrong), then play up the fact that MS published 40 games, versus Sony's five on their online stores, and ignore third-party published downloadable games.

But the real funny part... MS requires a publisher. They'll even publish multiplatform games. Sony doesn't. Devs can self-publish. Sine Mora? Joe Danger? Spelunky? On PSN. Yeah... you reeeaaally got me. Sorry, but using a list of games, including multiplats, bloated on 360 because of Microsoft's publishing requirements, doesn't exactly make for the best troll attempt.

But let's not leave your "excuse to ignore them" theory just swirling in the bowl. Let's send it right down the hole. Let's look at 2013 downloadable games...

26 games released on XBLA.
36 released on PSN.

Yeah, clearly a lack of PSN games is my "excuse to ignore them". Brilliant.

*slow clap*

+ Show (25) more repliesLast reply 1845d ago
avengers19781847d ago

If MS is having problems... How is that trouble for PS4??? Right now Sony has already shown me enough to make PS4 a day one purchase for me with KZSF and infamous second son, both exclusive games, not timed exclusive, not exclusive content.

Blackdeath_6631847d ago

they do have exclusive content on watch dogs i am just glad sony isn't doing timed exclusives because that is just silly.

Jaqen_Hghar1847d ago

These and Watch Dogs will be a man's first 3 first party games. A man still has to see more of Knack but it is also a strong candidate for adoption. A man's PS3 library is over half exclusives and with the same great studios coming back for PS4 a man doesn't see that changing. He looks forward to new IP from Guerilla, SSM, ND, SP, Insomniac, and MM on PS4 as well as the potential return of old favorites like Jak, Sly, Ratchet, LBP, Uncharted, and GoW.

MysticStrummer1847d ago

@Blackdeath - Who says that Watch Dogs PS exclusive content content isn't timed? It most likely is.

I can sort of see the point of the article. If MS is behind on games and decides to buy devs to make up for it, it could certainly impact Sony. For me, the devs Sony already has are enough to keep me a PS guy but more fickle fans might see it differently. I guess the main question, besides how all those negative 720 rumors turn out, is whether what MS buys is timed or a real exclusive.

loulou1847d ago

jaqen hghar

is that how his name is spelt in the books?? i cant remember now as i am on the 5th book..

Blackdeath_6631847d ago

multiple ubisoft games had 60 min of exclusive content for the ps3 most notably the assassins creed games. the new one black flag also confirmed to have 60min of exclusive content (source: ) none of the previous examples of exclusive content on ubisoft games for the ps3 were timed so it doesn't take a genius to notice there is a pattern forming

DeadlyFire1846d ago

Funny part about Sony is that only 5 games have been showcased so far. PS3 nearly had 15-20 games at its E3 debut shown off. :)

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1846d ago
OlgerO1847d ago

Microsoft is paying developers big sums of money to keep their almost finished titles away from the PS4. Sony funds and makes entire new exclusives that would otherwise not exist.

Septic1847d ago

Please provide a link to prove your sweeping statement.

pixelsword1847d ago

@ septic:

For the first part, I think that's what this article is basically speculating.

As far as the other games not existing part, 8 days would be a candidate, I think:

8 days looks to be a replacement for GTA's exclusivity.

Silly gameAr1847d ago (Edited 1847d ago )


I think this current gen is proof enough of what OlgerO is saying. Just look at games like Skyrim, RE6, Tomb Raider, and COD for proof. I doubt they'll change their strategy up to much for the next gen. They'll most likely just buy more timed dlc or a game from a dev that's already almost complete.

AmkOwns1847d ago Show
fr0sty1847d ago

Microsoft is the one in trouble here, as that check book is only going to get them some exclusivity contracts that the third party publisher's team of lawyers will non-stop try to find a loophole in so they can sell it to another console as well. Look at Mass Effect, Ninja Gaiden Sigma (they just renamed the game to get around that contract), Bioshock, etc... All games MS paid good money to be exclusive that wound up on PS3. They even had to watch Bungie walk out on PS4's stage and reveal their next game before it was even mentioned on the new Xbox.

MS tried this approach before and it hasn't worked out well for them. The only reason they still sold well is that PS3 is a pain in the ass to program for, so in many cases the multiplat games looked or played better on Xbox. Next gen Microsoft will not enjoy that same advantage, so I don't see this ending well for them. They need to beef up their first party studios with developers who have released proven AAA titles.

_-EDMIX-_1846d ago (Edited 1846d ago )

though I agree with you that Microsoft should be building up there party studios, I disagree with the notion that these exclusives were lost through contracts loopholes. The Mass Effect IP was never owned at all at any point by Microsoft. Bioware owned that IP and then it was sold to EA at no point did Microsoft ever own or have any power over that IP. these are all facts that can be looked up. Microsoft merely published Mass Effect and even the publishing rights where sold to EA in May 2008.

Mass Effect was published by EA for PC in 2008. by May 2008 Microsoft had 0 ownership over anything Mass Effect. even with Ninja Gaiden Microsoft merely publishing the game they had no ownership over the series or even the IP. so there is no confusion at Microsoft over these games appearing on other systems in fact I think it's obviously implied that the point of this tactic is to make it seem as if there is no place other than a Microsoft System to own these games they're merely trying to get the initial sales of the game to sell units they could care less where the game goes 2 years from now

There point is to try to get people to buy 360's or 720s under the false understanding that is going to be the only place to find games like Bioshock Lost Planet Ninja Gaiden etc. I don't think Microsoft at all is under the impression that these games will stay on the system's 100 percent exclusively. it's why they just merely purchased publishing rights and not the intellectual property.

its why even despite the game appearing on a competitor's system month or a year later you still see Microsoft working with Osain publishers. It's because it was very intended plan to only have it on the system for 6 months to a year. but this plan is becoming quite stale at this point many people know when they hear the word exclusive it really means timed ( unless the developer and the ip are owned by first party publisher) so at this point if its true which is most likely is I'll just wait a year before I play respawns game. no one is falling for Microsoft BS what they should be doing is spending money building first party studios I always love how they try to create this false allusion of having something exclusively. at the end of the day does it really matter got it first? If Microsoft does nothing but spend money on timed games will just end up like what we got this generation at the end of the day everyones getting the same games but Microsoft gets less. I don't know what Microsoft is giving you their just taking it away from another system to give people false sense of justification for purchasing a new Microsoft System. I'll see what all the fuss is about six months to a year later lol

I'm sorry but MS is not MAKING EA's new game so....why should one feel like MS is GIVING them something they would not have had? a system for 1 years of a game being one one platfrom as suppose to just waiting that one year and getting it on another? I mean, this year is so packed full of games, I just don't care what ReSpawn makes or what timed games MS gets......I'm not getting a 720 FOR A TIMED 3RD PARTY GAME! If MS can show me something cool in there first party studios not Kinect or Illumiroom or any of that crap, if they can show me some new IP's....I'll be interested, but to buy a system for 2 new IP's, mind you by MS no less, is a tough sell. They have to truly WOW me and show me they are commented to the new IP.

Pherros1846d ago

"The only reason they still sold well is that PS3 is a pain in the ass to program for, so in many cases the multiplat games looked or played better on Xbox."

I agree fr0sty, things seem as if they will play out a lot differently for Xbox. Especially sense the PS4 will be much easier to develop for.

miDnIghtEr20C_SfF1847d ago ShowReplies(2)
Ju1847d ago

Yeah! Way to go in turning this into a PS4 issue when actually MS is 6 month behind. Not biased, heard it all I guess.../s

bryam19821847d ago ShowReplies(1)
Aceman181847d ago

personally i don't care if microsoft pays to get Respawn game exclusive, or timed exclusive. it will not persuade me to purchase the 720 or whatever its going to be called.

i'm not going to pay full price of $60 to half the game because i still refuse to pay to play online. plus microsoft's reliance on spending for 3rd party stuff instead of funding new ips doesnt give me much confidence that they take my hobby serious enough.

Kaneda1847d ago

Isn't that what they did last gen! Nothing new here...

OmegaSlayer1846d ago

NEXTBOX will mean trouble for Sony anyway, it won't made Sony life easy in any way.
The theatre of war is only the US anyway where people still didn't understood Sony's reliability both as hardware and software provider.

DonFreezer1846d ago ShowReplies(1)
+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 1845d ago
Convas1847d ago

"Microsoft is supposedly struggling"

And there ends my involvement with this story. May 21st is but 3 weeks away. I'll form my opinions there.

a_squirrel1847d ago

But it's almost definitely confirmed supposedly! Maybe.

Hicken1847d ago

The only problem is that there's no guarantee we'll find that out on the 21st, or even a little while later at E3.

To the article, I don't think it'll be any sort of trouble for Sony, as they've got a pretty good stable of third party exclusive partners, as well as ample in-house studios.

Godmars2901847d ago (Edited 1847d ago )

Actually the title's as misleading as the article itself is all over the place. It talks about MS 3rd party exclusives, but then goes on to site ME as an example despite it being multiplatform now.

Cueil1847d ago (Edited 1847d ago )

Mass Effect is as much a Microsoft exclusive as MGS series belongs to Sony... it'll always be associated with Microsoft who helped make the series the hit is was

trouble_bubble1847d ago


Not even close. MS had one exclusive mass effect game but even that came to ps3 eventually with an upgrade to performance. All 3 are on ps3 now, Ps3 even got the ME1 digital comic first. PC had everything day and date with xbox.

Meanwhile mgs1, mgs portable ops, mgs4 are all canon yet remain sony exclusives. Even mgs rising has exclusive ps3 dlc vr missions, while ac!d remains a psp exclusive. Raiden is playable in exclusive ps all stars battle royale, definitely not the same thing.

_-EDMIX-_1846d ago

....I laughed. Before Mass Effect was even released it was known that EA would be owning the series. Mass Effect was barely a timed exclusive by then. At least games like Bioshock had a year or so before anyone knew of a PS3 version, By Oct 2007 EVERYONE knew there would be a PC and PS3 version.

Umm..HELLO EA OWNS IT! LOL! I can't even understand how anyone can say Mass Effect is a "3rd party exclusive" it was never mean't by EA to remain on 360 exclusively so....I'm not sure why one would call it a "timed exclusive" or "3rd party exclusive" in that respect. no. Bioware made Mass Effect and owned the IP...not MS. Had Bioware had been with another publisher, Mass Effect would be just fine.

Just saying...Mass Effect 2 is the best in the series....not made or publisher under MS BY EA! LOL!

When this is all done and over with and Mass Effect next gen is shown, I don't think many gamers will even remember that Mass Effect 1 at some point was a 360 exclusive.

TheLyonKing1847d ago

Its a competetive market so it is woe for both bringing out consoles but great for consumers.

I am very interested to see sales between both games since they are being realeased at the same time.

Minato-Namikaze1847d ago

If this gen is anything to go by then MS will start to lag behind pretty soon.

hellvaguy1847d ago

Under that same logic of this gen, ms will jump off to a huge lead. Obviously u cant pick and choose tid bits to screwer your "facts" because this next gen has alot of positives going that last didnt.

Natso1847d ago


Umm, no. The 360 had a year long headstart on the PS3, with the PS3 catching up in sales.

You're not using "logic", you're using favoritism.

And wth is "screwer"? That's not even in the English language.

NYC_Gamer1847d ago

There is no reason why people should listen to rumors that from web sites that are known to pick up anything for hits

Dlacy13g1847d ago

@NYC_Gamer what I find a bit funny is supposedly the mods are hammering down on rumor articles from "anonymous" sources. They Actually failed the stories from Kotaku on this rumor yesterday and approve opinion pieces on the very same failed rumor source. Doesn't make sense to me.

Dont post the anonymous rumor on the site but you can have an opinion article on that rumor. <shakes head>

Knight_Crawler1847d ago

The mods on this site are the worst mods I have ever seen...sometimes I think they let articles like this slide becuase in reality flambait and rumor articles generate more hits.

I never understood why the mods banned HipHopGamer but keep site like this alive on N4G.

I hope a mod is reading this becuase you guys should be a shame of yourselfs.

MysticStrummer1847d ago

"sometimes I think they let articles like this slide becuase in reality flambait and rumor articles generate more hits."

You only think that sometimes? I think it's pretty obvious that N4G's bread and butter is flambait and fanboy reaction to it.

DragonKnight1847d ago

It is amazing how little people know about how the mod system actually works here. You'd be surprised at how few articles get failed by mods in comparison to the community, and even fewer are approved by the mods. Mods get 10 votes towards approval, which means an instant approval for any article they wish, take a look through the approvals and see how many they've actually approved.

Nate-Dog1847d ago

@Knight Crawler: The simple fact is we can't spot everything as we can't all be on at the one time. If people don't report articles then we won't see them all but a lot of people just complain about articles or other users and don't report them, so the chances are with the amount of traffic the site gets we won't see everything.

@DragonKnight: I can't speak for any other mods but the reason why I don't approve articles much now I'm a mod is because of the instant approval an article gets. If I approve an article that has 0 heat then chances are no-one will see it, so I let the community contributors decide if it's worthy to get to the front page or not.

jetlian1846d ago

wondering when will nate dogg take this duplicate, anonymous sources article down.

What does MS being behind on games have to do with sony or even 3rd party. Watch dogs is probably done so it has no bearing on 720

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1846d ago
Roper3161847d ago

hopefully a untrue rumor but is does sound like the typical MS way of doing things.