Top
260°

The war on third party exclusives has begun

"The Street Fighter V fiasco proves that no third party title is safe from the clutches of Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo."

" the ferocity of competition can also result in some negative changes and this practice of buying out key third party exclusives is evidence of this."

Gaz from GameOnDaily discusses events in light of the Street Fighter V exclusivity and how it sets a new and ugly precedent in the console arena.

Read Full Story >>
gameondaily.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Bennibop1017d ago

Its all about risk and I don't believe Capcom is in the position to take them.

SPAM-FRITTER-1231017d ago ShowReplies(3)
kingdip901017d ago (Edited 1017d ago )

A new precedent huh?

I remember the gaming community being excited for an apple mac game by the name of halo.

Sure microsoft bought the company that made the game but it ended in the same result: a multiplatform game becoming exclusive.

This practice has been around as long as the xbox

Septic1017d ago (Edited 1017d ago )

If you read the article you'd realise that this practice has been around since the PlayStation One.

MasterCornholio1017d ago

It didn't start on the PlayStation One though. It happened way before that. I remember that it happened with the Genesis and NES.

kingdip901017d ago

No I realize that this issue is older than xbox. The reason I mention xbox is that it's that side of the Isle that is in a tizzy about street fighter V.

Suggesting the practice has only just become a war since that particular exclusivity deal is absurd as is suggesting Sony or microsoft are destroying the industry by buying exclusoves

imt5581017d ago (Edited 1017d ago )

You wrote this article? Titanfall wouldn't be made without MS help, Bayonetta 2 wouldn't be made without Nintendo help. Same shit for Street Fighter V, man.

Look Capcom's financial status last year

http://i.imgur.com/6MQ3afh....

What Ono said before :

http://www.eurogamer.net/ou...

Do some research, man! Anyway, article is bad with no research how and when.

Death1017d ago

I remember this honor going to Nintendo with the SNES. Not too long after a version was released for the Genesis. I also remember Pacman being an Atari third party exclusive in the 80's. If memory serves me I played KC Munchkin on the OdyseeII until I owned the 2600. Third party exclusives have been part of the industry since it's inception.

darthv721017d ago

@imt558 "Titanfall wouldn't be made without MS help, Bayonetta 2 wouldn't be made without Nintendo help. Same shit for Street Fighter V, man."

You do know there is a difference between shopping around for help and being directly approached.....right?

titanfall and Bayonetta were being shopped around and turned down by sony and MS opted to help with Titanfall and nintendo helped with Bayo 2.

Capcom may not have had a budget for SFV but does that mean they were in the process of trying to make it? Not likely as they have been working on Deep Down. sure they could be working on multiple projects but they werent shopping for SFV investors.

Sony came to them not the other way around.

Dannyh1017d ago

sony did the same thing with half life 2 keeping it of dreamcast. it's part of the game

ShinMaster1016d ago

I remember when Peter Moore worked for Sega before selling Shenmue 2 to Microsoft in exchange for a job position with them, screwing every Dreamcast owner in the West and forcing them to buy an Xbox.
Not a very pretty situation.

And seriously, if you think this started with the PS1, then you're either very young or your bias is blinding you from the rest of the facts.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1016d ago
Alsybub1017d ago (Edited 1017d ago )

The primary example is on PSOne where Tomb Raider was multi platform but Sony paid to have the Tomb Raider franchise, from Tomb Raider 2 onward, as a PS exclusive until the early 2000s.

I'm sure it did exist before but that's the most blatant example that I can think of.

EDIT:

To the disagrees, and since people don't want to use Google to find out for themselves, this is from the Tomb Raider wikipedia entry:

"In September 1997, Sony Computer Entertainment America signed a deal with Eidos to make console releases for the Tomb Raider franchise exclusive to the PlayStation, preventing the Sega Saturn or the Nintendo 64 from having any Tomb Raider game released for it until 2000, a deal that would prove very beneficial to Sony both in terms of revenue dollars and also in further cementing the PlayStation's growing reputation as the go-to system for must-have exclusive titles.[10]"

So, I don't know what you're disagreeing with. I'm not being negative about Sony, it's just a fact.

As for games like Bayonetta 2 and Titanfall, that's a different situation because without the funding from the deals with MS and Nintendo they wouldn't have, necessarily, come to market. If that's the case with SFV then that's fair enough.

snarls2001017d ago

while true if i remember correctly the Sega Staurn version flopped compared to the PS1 version so them signing a deal with Sony made sense. plus nintendo did not even get the first Tomb Raider

Seafort1017d ago

@imt558

Yes it would. Microsoft just bought the exclusivity rights nothing more.

They didn't fund the game Respawn and EA did.

Microsoft isn't the publisher of Titanfall.

Alsybub1017d ago (Edited 1017d ago )

Really?

http://goo.gl/N1JBK1

It's true that Microsoft isn't the publisher but they did fund Titanfall.

Their deal for Tomb Raider is more questionable, because it holds back the release on other platforms and they didn't have any financial input on development.

shloobmm31017d ago

I'm pretty sure MS is publishing TR so yes they give financial input.

dirkdady1017d ago

@shloob what??

Square Enix owns crystal dynamics they would publish it not msft. This isn't a small dev that needs a publisher.

ScorpiusX1017d ago

Longer sony has done similar to N64, Sega and any one else around the PS1, PS2, Era so yes it has been around way before MS/Xbox .

ShinMaster1016d ago (Edited 1016d ago )

Same thing that Nintendo used to do before that.

fermcr1017d ago Show
+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1016d ago
RINGOELGRINGO1017d ago

If no clear winner emerges from all of this, a two-man sack race will be held on consecutive Sundays until a champion can be crowned.

Nitrowolf21017d ago

I would like to see a return of wacky races sundays

Roccetarius1017d ago

No, this should be settled with a match of playing Quake.

Moldiver1017d ago

"No, this should be settled with a match of playing Quake."

Yes. On PC. Its neutral ground.and it can be hosted by steam! lol

MasterCornholio1017d ago (Edited 1017d ago )

Well as a PS4 owner I have to prepare myself to lose beloved 3rd
Party franchises. Which means that if Microsoft buys franchises like Elder Scrolls, Fallout etc I'll just have to deal with it.

I really don't like this bidding war that started especially with Phil claiming that hell get revenge for Street Fighter 5.

I know he said ammends but it sounds like a quest for vengeance more than anything.

P.S Its just business but that doesnt mean that I have to like it.

Septic1017d ago

"I really don't like this bidding war that started especially with Phil claiming that hell get revenge for Street Fighter 5. "

He NEVER claimed that.

You're misconstruing his response. The person he replied to was saying all would be forgiven if we got a Conker or Banjo game.

Its a complete fiction that Phil started this trend. He didn't. Microsoft didn't. Please stop passing the buck to defend this practice on one front.

MasterCornholio1017d ago

"You're misconstruing his response. The person he replied to was saying all would be forgiven if we got a Conker or Banjo game."

That makes a lot more sense then. I guess those articles really twists what he says.

"Its a complete fiction that Phil started this trend. He didn't. Microsoft didn't. Please stop passing the buck to defend this practice on one front."

Now your just making things up. I never said that Phil started this trend which is what your implying to make me look like a moronic Sony fanboy.

I know that this practice always existed in the industry. I heard of cases like this happening on systems like the NES and the Genesis.

And as for defending it can't you see that I dont like it? If Microsoft buys off a 3rd party game that means that I won't be able to play said game on my system. If Sony did the same thing it wouldn't affect me but I understand how owners of the other system might feel though. I dont like this practice of buying exclusives unless the game wouldn't have been made without that funding. Like in the case of Bayonetta 2. At first I was mad but then I realized that without Nitnendos help that excellent game would never have been made.

LeCreuset1017d ago (Edited 1017d ago )

Speaking of misconstruing and the 3rd party exclusive trend, why do you keep trying to reach all the way back to Tomb Raider II, implying a money-hat from Sony kept the game off other consoles?

"The game is going to be PlayStation and PC only. Does cutting out the Saturn version allow you any additional flexibility?

"Smith: Basically, that's it in a nutshell. If we looked long and hard enough at it, we could have done another Saturn version, but I think we might have been compromising what we wanted to do on the PlayStation and PC. We've always said that the PlayStation is a good system to do what Tomb Raider does. That's not anything against the Saturn, it's just that the PlayStation does its job extremely well. There was no way we could gain improvement from the Saturn version because we couldn't make use of things like Mode 7 floors. We viewed it as a situation that we couldn't move it as far forward as we wanted to."

http://web.archive.org/web/... http://cubeit.com/ctimes/ne...

Not hard to get a console exclusive deal when the competition can't handle the game and is getting crushed in sales.

roland821017d ago (Edited 1017d ago )

You mean you wouldn't buy an Xbox if Microsoft bought the elder scrolls and fallout franchise? Those are games I couldn't live without

LordMaim1017d ago

That's what having a computer is for.

Christopher1017d ago

Gotta say, if Bethesda went all XBO only and announced a new Scrolls and Fallout game, it would be enough now for me to get an XBO (in addition to Tomb Raider and Sunset Overdrive). But, I wouldn't like the fact that the only reason I would get one isn't because of MS exclusives but because they forced it through third-party exclusives.

I really wish either we knew things to be timed exclusives up front or that we moved away from outright exclusive games and instead to timed exclusive content. Destiny players on XBO may not have access to one strike (two with DLC), but they have access to 99% of the rest of the game and will get the strikes next year. That's much better than not having access to the game at all without handing over another $400 on top of the cost of the game.

Moldiver1017d ago

"I really don't like this bidding war that started especially with Phil claiming that hell get revenge for Street Fighter 5. "

He NEVER claimed that.

@Septic. I agree.I also agree with the rest of your post. But I like the way he phrases it. makes it all sound so dramatic.lol.

He is weary from years of fighting the console war. Go easy on him, sir.

Septic1017d ago

"w your just making things up. I never said that Phil started this trend which is what your implying to make me look like a moronic Sony fanboy."

Actually my bad here. I misread what you wrote.

"I really don't like this bidding war that started especially with Phil claiming that hell get revenge for Street Fighter 5. "

My apologies for that.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1017d ago
the_dark_one1017d ago

"The war on third party exclusives has begun" - NO, its been around for a long time now.
"the street fighter fiasco" seriously? fiasco imply s that it failed or in gamers terms "it floped", yes it got alot of angry reception from xbox community but pc and ps community can still enjoy it, but it would hardly be a fiasco

GameLover561017d ago

No it didn't those where a couple of people upset over this deal unlike the Sony cried foul as Aaron Greenberg Announced Rise of Tomb Raider is exclusive only to the #XboxOne and Xbox360 Sony fans are still raging oh well money talk B.S walks

Ballsack1017d ago Show
marlinfan101017d ago (Edited 1017d ago )

@ballsack

I believe it is a lifetime exclusive to MS though, phil came out and said that to ease the pain and hate going around. TR is being published by MS, its HIGHLY unlikely it ever comes to ps4. It may be timed and go to pc after a year or two, but ps4 ? Very doubtful

christocolus1017d ago

The Sf5 and TR deals are just the beginning,anyone thinking otherwise is just setting himself up for dissapointments this gen, even nintendo will keep chasing 3rd party exclusives this gen.its an open field and whoever comes up with the best deal gets the game.

Also this just in from gamespot.

http://www.gamespot.com/art...

“A representative for Square Enix has told GameSpot
that Microsoft is providing support across the entire
development and publishing pipeline. The publisher has
not yet commented on whether this affects plans for a
PlayStation 4 version.
“Yes, Microsoft will be publishing Rise of the Tomb
Raider on Xbox," Square Enix's statement read.
"Microsoft has always seen huge potential in Tomb
Raider and they will get behind this game with more
support across development, marketing and retail than
ever before, which we believe will be a step in
continuing to build the Tomb Raider franchise as one of
the biggest in gaming.”

It seems more and more likely that this game will end up on just PC after the duration of its xbox exclusivity expires.

Show all comments (76)
The story is too old to be commented.