Top
70°

Jimquisition: Rise Of The Exclusivity Wars

The Rise of the Tomb Raider news confirmed one thing - this war over exclusivity is going to make the game industry an everso slightly worse thing. Yes, something else to do that, now.

Read Full Story >>
escapistmagazine.com
The story is too old to be commented.
lifeisgamesok1192d ago (Edited 1192d ago )

What I like about Microsoft right now is that they are building their in-house studios with Black Tusk, 343, Platform Next, LxP

And they are helping fund games like Tomb Raider so that it can be greater

If Sony had TR as an exclusive (timed, later on PC or not) then there would be no issue

DragonKnight1192d ago

Wow, someone is terribly mired in dat Xbox fanboyism.

Black Tusk is working on an unoriginal IP, as is 343, and I haven't even heard of the other two.

Tomb Raider isn't going to be greater due to MS funding. It was already being developed which means a budget was already set for it which means that everything that was going to be in the game was already planned for. It's likely that the money MS paid for this is going to go to marketing, not game improvements.

Yes it would. You haven't been paying attention. Everyone is railing against the very idea of 3rd party exclusivity of any content.

So here's a question your fellow Xbox fanboys can answer for you since you can't.

What benefit do you get getting to play a game you were already going to get, while it's locked away from millions of other people? Especially considering Sony's policy of requiring new content or some kind of improvement or difference between the versions? Sony demands that if third party titles go timed exclusive on the Xbox platform, that something is added to the PS version so as to make it worthwhile for PS fans to buy. So you're getting a game early while PS fans may have to wait but get something you won't until an inevitable re-release comes along.

Where's the benefit to you personally?

jimjam34421192d ago

you really lost me their at the end.

defiance1871192d ago

all i have to say to you is no mans sky.

DragonKnight1192d ago

@defiance187: I have 3 things to say to you. [email protected], No Man's Sky is a new IP, and it's coming to PC.

Anything else?

darthv721192d ago

So Sony requires some sort of improvement to be made to a game if released for their system after releasing elsewhere first?

i don't know if that is a good thing or a bad thing. And if a dev/pub opts not to follow that policy then they can't release their game on a sony platform. sounds like the old lockout clause that nintendo used to do back in the NES days.

"If you are making a game for us, you make it for us. If you make a game for someone else, dont even think about releasing it on our platform. We don't want sloppy seconds"

DragonKnight1192d ago (Edited 1192d ago )

@darth: You expect Sony to not demand that its userbase be compensated for decisions beyond their control?

The improvement doesn't even have to be anything major. It could be the basest of exclusive dlc content. So long as there is a distinction. Otherwise I would agree with any platform holder that says "I don't want sloppy seconds."

If the PS userbase wasn't good enough to put the game on the console in the first place, why should the company that made said decision receive any support from Sony or the PS fanbase? That'd be like confirming the status of second class consumers and is the wrong message.

darthv721192d ago

Dragon, it just paints a very different picture now. As you say, if sony "demands to be compensated" then that sounds to me like the dev/pub better do their best to make good on that demand or else.

Now had you said that sony (in a more laid back style) 'encourages' that devs throw in a little bit of something something for those who were waiting patiently then...yeah i can see that as something they would do but not required.

Im not to keen on the whole policies but the way you state it...that can be tough on the smaller teams if they dont have the budget to do so. sort of like MS and their release parity policy which too can be trying on smaller teams.

This whole 3rd party exclusive thing is getting way out of hand. it was out of hand before but now its 'way out' of hand.

If a game is from a 1st or 2nd party...its exclusive.

If a game is from a 3rd party that is being funded the development cost by a specific platform...it could be exclusive depending on the nature of the contractual obligations. EX: Bayoneta 2

If a game is 3rd party and under no contractual obligations then it should strive to reach release parity and make it the same game across the board.

DragonKnight1192d ago

I have no idea as to the depth or intricacies of Sony's policy, only that there's some kind of expectation that any games that arrive late on Sony's consoles get some kind of compensation for being late.

I also believe that it doesn't have to be some major change, just a change. Some kind of distinction that adds incentive for PS gamers to spend money on a game they weren't good enough to receive when it launched.

Perhaps demand wasn't the right word, I don't know.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1192d ago
ziggurcat1192d ago

@lifeisgames:

i don't know where you people are getting the idea that MS is funding the development of this game.

they're not. if anything, the money is to cover lost sales on the other platforms, and to help out with promotion, but as far as the actual game development goes, that's all SE/CD.

fonger081192d ago (Edited 1192d ago )

Every time I listen to this guy... all I keep thinking is, "I wonder if he's really close to passing out, he needs to remember to breathe a little bit more when talking."

I liken this move to a band-aid or stop-gap fix, much like a lot of recent re-masters. It a simple (expensive) PR move to speak to the undecided mass as, "hey look what we got!" But to most, it was a hollow move.

I also agree that I would much rather see more "organic" exclusives than those just bought out-right, even if timed. But as game developing budgets double and even triple, developers are going to be looking at the large publishers to help maximize profits and reduce losses. Look at from SquareEnix's side, they get extra money from Microsoft for a short period all the while knowing that they majority of their sales WILL come from the PS4 group eventually. These types of exclusive deals will become more and more common.

Chaostar1192d ago

Jim is spot on in this video and even calls out Kuchera and N4G lol.

Roccetarius1192d ago Show
colonel1791192d ago

One game that goes 'timed' exclusive, and now we get tons of articles about exclusivity and exclusive 'wars'. There are exclusive games every day. Sony has Deep Down and Bloodborne, Xbox has Sunset Overdrive and Titan Fall. The only reason this has attention is because it's Tomb Raider

Mikelarry1192d ago

i think TR was just the tipping point. i am glad people are taking a thorough look at this " exclusive" war BS especially third party exclusive its just stupid

ZombieGamerMan1192d ago

Well first off aside from Titanfall all those games are being funded by the console the game is exclusive to and in Sony's case co-developed. This however is a great big bull because not only is Tomb Raider a well known multiplatform series it is also a sequel to a game that was on PS3 & PS4 where the majority sales came from the PS version. So now people who are TR fans that own PS4's or even PC has to now wait a good while before they can get to play the sequel of the game they bought on the platform that it's sequel isn't exclusive to.

colonel1791192d ago

The exclusivity deal is a jerk move from Square Enix, not Microsoft. They obviously did it to prevent PS to have it, but Square Enix shouldn't have accept it. However, money talks and there is nothing in businesses that can't be bought.

ZombieGamerMan1192d ago

The blame goes both ways equally.

Spotie1192d ago

People have had a problem with it for a while. But there's always a limit, always that last straw. Tomb Raider just so happens to be the tipping point in this case.

And with good reason, as is frequently pointed out. Direct sequel to a multiplat. Being shut out from its biggest and most loyal fanbases. Deceptive original messaging that Microsoft was supposed to be done with. Spending money that could have been put to better use funding a true exclusive.

There's no shortage of legitimate reasons why this situation has garnered the sort of attention others have not. And I think it'll be detrimental to this game's success, in the long run.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1192d ago
Drasill1192d ago

This man hates Microsoft more than life itself.

Show all comments (21)