Top
500°

Sony Buys Exclusives: PR labels it "Incentives"…

OXCGN Writes:

"When is an apple not an apple? Well apparently when Sony PR calls it an orange!

Every once and a while I have the pleasure of imagining a world where PR speak isn't taken as gospel by the pathetic "I got a hard on for hardware" types and used in their incoherent, blindingly illogical diatribes about why their "hard on for hardware" is bigger than the other guys."

The story is too old to be commented.
gaminoz3127d ago

LOL...classic. Let's face it: All companies want is YOUR money and they will do whatever they can and call it something else to get it. MS 'buys' exclusives and Sony 'gives incentives' for content.

Wow what a surprise. But I bet many will say it isn't the same thing.

That's a great article in these times!!!

Godem3127d ago

agreed, they want money. full stop.

XboxOZ3603127d ago Show
CaseyRyback_CPO3126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

I think theres some kodu news..
Maybe some Alan Wake theories on what the controls will be?
How about what may or may not be at e3?
What new PC/360 multiplatform "Exclusives" are in the works..?
Links to discount pricing on hdd's and wifi, or batteries...?

Just sayin, if a site is focused around the 360, and hardly covers any actual 360 news.. whats the point of getting your audience confused into thinking its going to be slanted to one side or another. You know 2 things will happen when you see oxcgn.com.... A sensationalist title, and the author/owner arguing in the comment section with people.

What exactly does the 360 community have to talk about these days specific to the console anyway? I mean the biggest news on most sites is multiplatform gaming news. Unless you offer a repair service, not certain why its focused on the 360 still..? I think you will avoid a ton of guff in the future since it does appear that the only stories that will heat up on N4G are sony related ones.

Seriously though, I think i saw somewhere that NXE is getting a new static background for an avatar to pose in front of.

This was the same site saying RacePro was going to be good?

XboxOZ3603126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

Mate, I'm NOT having a go at you, just explaining why OXCGN does what it does:-

OXCGN supplies news about the gaming indusrty where it sees that it makes an impact on the industry, be it PC, PS3/SOny Wii/Nintendo. We'll do reviews and Impressions of PC, PS3 and Wii games as we are GAMERS, not biased fanbois.

It's why we have moved up the charts so well. We have many Sony fans coming to the site because of that, and many passing comments supporting our efforts to be that way.

Just because we chose to own 360's (many of us also own PC's and PS3' btw) does not mean we have to run a multiplatform site, or follow any one platform "exclusively"

If MS, Sony, Nintendo etc do something stupid, then we'll let gamers know . .

Parapraxis3126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

"XBOX news , reviews and VIEWS" sure thing XboxOZ360.
You are simply reporting it like it is, no bias at all.

Your entire article was overflowing with tears, it was in the overall tone.
You truly are sore about this move by Sony.

Elven63126d ago

Well it was pretty obvious when they said "platform exclusive" but of course fanboys tend to skip over such things. Theirs nothing wrong with it though, you make a game and Sony has your back, you get money to fund your next project which can be on any platform of your choosing. Microsoft does something similar with XNA, the tools are free for 3-4 months (at the moment), C# is super easy to use, get a "development pass" and you get to keep 70% of what you make where as XBLA developers only keep 50%. Its not a word for word copy but still both companies are encouraging more people to explore game development which is always a good thing.

Imagine what this will do to console lifespan in terms of the community model. Companies are still making games for Atari systems which is no easy task, today when companies are making it easier and more efficient for hobbiest developers imagine how much life a system will have.

gaminoz3126d ago

Besides....isn't it a comparison between Sony's new approach and MS's approach? Isn't that relevant to Xbox? I've seen plenty of Sony sites comment on the exclusivity deals MS makes...

3126d ago
morganfell3126d ago

This is the same OXCGN that was forced by Bioware to print a retraction. OXCGN's excuse? We were just printing what we read somewhere else.

But on the bigger note, Waaaaaaaaa! MS can spend 50 million on GTA IV DLC and that's okay?

Tough. Get used to it. Sony's moving in.

thats_just_prime3126d ago

so much for sony fanboys hold on to any hope of sony actual telling the truth about not paying for exclusives

caladbolg7773126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

Add oxcgn.com to the list of sites never to bother reading again. If I want unbiased news, I'll get it from an unbiased website and not from butthurt 360 fannies looking to take a few jabs, nor PS3 snobs with something to prove.

@Disagrees: Looks like some people like getting their news from biased sources. No bother. Different strokes for different blokes.

Immortal Kaim3126d ago

Irrespective of who wrote the article, atleast we can all agree that both Sony and MS pay (in their own way) for exclusive content. I don't know why it is perceived as being a negative thing? One less thing for the fanboys to fight over maybe?

RememberThe3573126d ago

I can't remember when or where I read it, however. The person retracting the statement said that it wasn't Sony's practice to buy exclusives, but that they wouldn't completely rule it out. He said that they were more focused on first-party development, at that point.

Besides, this was about PSN games not full retail titles. It seems to me that those are two different realms of production cost.

Daver3126d ago

@Caseyryback

i agree with what you say

Microsoft Xbox 3603126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

You guys can talk about all about this BS propaganda, in the end Sony is the winner with the most exclusives, which should be the only thing that matters anyway.

Sarcasm3126d ago

So Sony says "Incentive" and Microsoft "Buys"

Go ahead and pick on Sony's PR, disregarding the mass amount of stupid Microsoft PR talk for the past, oh I don't know, 3 years or so?

I cant wait to see next month's NPD reactions from Microsoft, so I know what's going on with the PS3 from it.

No FanS Land3126d ago

I don't think that next NPD flame party will show immediate changes, maybe in let's say may's NPD.

GUNS N SWORDS3126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

ok so when ms buys exclusives they get labeled as bad people (that's what the $ stands for when people type M$, right) but when sony does it it's ok right?

Bnet3433126d ago

Last night, I was saying the same thing. It's ok for Sony to do it, but when it's Microsoft all of a sudden they suck. No reasoning behind it, fanboys here just want to feel good about what Sony's every move is. The fanboys here are big hypocrites. If you're going to trash "Micro$oft" for buying left and right, you better trash Sony for bribery.

Jake the Muss3126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

Interesting article, XboxOZ360. However, I would like to point a couple of things out.

First, I would refrain from tarnishing all Sony fanboys with the same "idiot" brush; such is not helping your credibility. Many would consider themselves to be as educated and mature as those that write for your site, and are aware that you cover positive news for the PS3 community as well as the 360 (MGS4 etc.).

Having said that, CaseyRyback_CPO does have a point, even if he communicates it in a rather personal fashion. This article is written from someone who has a clear agenda, for the mandate of generating traffic. If you hide under the banner of "a unbiased community" site, then I would recommend you carefully select an opinion and provide arguments for and against it, as some of the comments in the Gamer Zone are fairly compelling. The title of "Sony Buys Exclusives!" is pure flamebait mate, and you know it.

Having said that, your comment that MS get slammed when they "buy" exclusives while Sony didn't is a fair comment. However, there IS a fundamental difference as to how Sony and MS conduct their business when pursuing exclusive agreements, and the individual ethics of each is in question, not the outcome.

Your article also mentioned that Sony paid for exclusive content for Mirrors Edge. Although I am aware that Sony had a "deal" for exclusive DLC, I have yet to read an article that stated Sony paid actual money for such. If there was, then I gladly retract my comment.

I frown on Sony's description of "providing incentives" - that is true PR spin, yes. But your article makes the implication that Sony is now exactly like MS - which it is not. Outcomes may be similar, but the process of achieving it is different. Phamtom_T, Unicron and Rhood022 all have some fair points worth reading.

Personally, I believe this may be quite encouraging for Indie developers in getting noticed and encourage more risk-taking for small players in the industry. No-one complains about exclusives (other than the other side), so it is the process of achieving said that people here question. At the end of the day, both are businesses; their directive is to provide value to their shareholders. Just something to ponder: who is worse, someone who offers a bribe, or someone who takes it up?

xabmol3126d ago

Some people just don't get it.

Lets put it this way.

Games + Sony = Games + Sony Games

Games + MS = Games

That about sums it up.

morganfell3126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

HAHAHAHAHAHA thats just prime. You can hold on tight to the thought that Sony changed their policy. Maybe that thought will comfort you on those long nights when you have nothing to play and are surfing the web drooling over Sony's offerings.

By your rules Sony isn't allowed to offer ANY incentives whatsoever to developers whereas Microsoft can spend spend spend. And what has their money really done to enhance things for the gamer? Who is pumping money into research, games, pushing the envelope, studios, technology? It sure isn't Micro-you-are-being-closed-nex t-soft.

Even if Sony appeared on the cover of GameInformer handing EA a check I could care less. If that is what is necessary so developers will focus on the most technologically advanced platform then I applaud them for their actions. The best experience can only be had on the most capable platform.

Let's see, what does that leave. So far the following attacks have been used and failed miserably:

No games
Too expensive
Killzone 2 is fake
Not supported
Home will never launch
Too difficult to develop for
Doesn't look as good
HD DVD is the future
Bluray won't win
Bluray is unnecessary
DVDs look just as good
Games are not limited by DVD9
Digital downloads are the future
No must have titles or system sellers
MGS4 is coming to the 360
Killzone 2 won't look that good
Too expensive
Too expensive (I know but they are desperate)
MGS4 is coming to the 360
360 is getting the Rage engine
PS3 is teh doomed
PSP is teh doomed
Sony is teh doomed
Gaming is teh doomed
Too expensive
Killzone 2 doesn't innovate
No Co-op in Killzone 2
The 360 is getting Crysis 3 engine (Couldn't learn, could they)
OnLive will kill Bluray
Sony is buying exclusives

If you are down to throwing that reason at the PS3 you might as well be poking a daisy in the end of a tank barrel. Just close your eyes and prepare yourself for the inevitable....

....or you can do the wise thing and join the PS3 army.

thewhoopimen3126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

Great points made Jake. I agree wholeheartedly. An unbiased article is one that provides both positive and negative points in a non-opinionated manner.

XboxOz360, what have you to say after being clearly shown your article is a one-sided opinion piece? I would like to further add this argument to the discussion:

-One of the points that I think is being missed here is that prior to this generation, Sony didn't have to resort to "incentivizing" potential studios in the way or manner that they have had to this console generation. Microsoft decided to play hardball with cash and I think it is only fair that Sony is "allowed" to compete without having to call them "hypocrites." Sony's isn't actively solicitating, unlike the majority of Microsofts' moves for exclusivity this gen.

A solicitation is 100% different from providing incentive. Microsoft is taking the initiative and literally soliciting for exclusivity. Sony is providing an incentive for new studios to allay their development costs, with PSN exclusivity being the 'catch'. The former involves giving UPFRONT money, the latter is a no-cost charge for development. I'm sorry xboxoz360 but you are wrong.

Seraphim3126d ago

@1. "Wow what a surprise. But I bet many will say it isn't the same thing."

actually it's not. Depending on the exact details of each situation.
But if Sony, or MS for that matter wants to say hey, we'll match your funding costs for a game if you keep it on our console that's totally different than going to the table and saying hey, we'll give you X million/s for exclusive content/games. It's one thing to basically say we'll pay your development fees if you keep your game exclusive to us and a totally different to pay an outright, overpriced figure for an exclusive...

morganfell3126d ago

The differences between Sony and MS could be explained with the car salesman metaphor.

There are two types of car salesmen. One is like Saturn salesmen. They sit in the office and say if you need us we are here. Everything you need to know is on the car window. That's Sony.

The other type of dealer doesn't just chase you out among the cars and up and down the aisles of the lot, they knock on your door at 2 o'clock in the morning and when you tell them you found another dealer then they try to ruin your credit. That's Microsoft.

JD_Shadow3126d ago

To those that are saying this "incentive" thing is the same thing, from http://www.psxextreme.com/p... :

This deal is called the "Pub Fund" and just to be clear, Sony is not purchasing exclusive rights for the games in question (a practice Microsoft doesn't seem to shy away from); IP rights and full control will remain in the hands of the development teams. This deal merely says, if you keep your game exclusive to the PSN - and therefore sacrifice any potential sales on the XBLA - we will match your development budget.

barom3126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

I guess the biggest difference is that MS is actively searching out the publishers and paying them. While Sony is more standing in their spot and asking if anyone wants the money. What's better and wutnot doesn't really matter. If we understand business, we all can see that PR people will defend the company no matter what. If they didn't, then they wouldn't be doing their job.

SuperM3126d ago

If you ask me what sony and MS are doing is not comparable. Sony is saying that if you make a game exclusive to the PSN they will cover the development cost. Basically this means that developers who otherwise wouldnt have had the funds to make a game can make one anyway, which means more games will be created. Now ofcourse Sony couldnt fund them if they developed for other platforms aswell. Then Sony would be paying microsofts bills.

MS on the other hand will take a game already in development (probably on several platforms) that looks good and then pay for them to drop development on the other platforms and make it exclusive. In this scenario the game would have been made regardless but now instead of releasing on several platforms its now exclusive to 360. In the other scenario Sony helps developers who otherwise might not be able to create the game.

So basically one of these methods creates new games, and the other one limits games that were already being made.

y0haN3126d ago

Technically they are not buying it, they are just not charging them the fee for it.

CrazzyMan3126d ago

"A really important thing to point out is that this is not first-party publishing, this is not Sony buying your product. You'll be the publisher, you'll own the IP and you'll control your product. This is assisting you to make your next step from developer to publisher."

That differs from buying games. Sony are just funding them.

+ Show (28) more repliesLast reply 3126d ago
Immortal Kaim3127d ago

Now that was a well written, insightful article. Hopefully it puts to rest the notion that Sony doesn't pay for exclusives.

fishd3127d ago

Give me a break,If they wanted to spend their money to buy exlusive games,they would have spent them on FFXIII,RE5,DMC4,Tekken6 etc etc,not some PSN games.

Darkfocus3126d ago

When MS wants exclusivity, they want full publishing rights as well as the IP (ie buy you out). This means that whoever goes through this deal gives up their intellectual property, ownership, and work. It means that MS has exclusivity on all properties for sequels if the game is a success. Unless it is a giant IP where they can only by timed exclusivity

Sony just wants the publishing exclusively on PSN. There is no taking of the IP, except an exclusion clause on xboxlive. If the game is a success and a sequel is made, the studio does NOT have to stick with PSN (as long as they choose not to have Sony help them with development cost again)

So for you stupid xbox fanboys who can't tell the difference, lets say you want to start your own game studio. do you want to give up your copyright and work? Yes, i see some head-nodding cuz some of you are just too deluded to admit it. No you really don't because you won't be able negotiate better %s on your royalties and you won't have control of how or who publishes for you.

That's the difference. As a studio, i would WANT to retain my rights and ability to choose who i go to, IF i am unsatisfied with my publisher. I would want what is mine to... well be mine.

GiantEnemyCrab3126d ago

Darkfocus: Yeah right, so I guess Insomniac owns all the IP's that it makes for Sony like Resistance and Ratchet??

No surprise this article is filled with spinning this into Sony doing right by the dev's and MS being the almighty evil.

You would be naive to think Sony hasn't been doing this all along. Not sure why everyone is acting like this is some new thing. Sony has and will continue to pay for exclusives just like MS.

Sillyace923126d ago

Umm, I'm pretty sure he was talking about the PlayStation Network games not retail games

RememberThe3573126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

I would agree with you if it wasn't for Sony losses some of it's biggest third-party exclusives.

This is for the PSN not for full retail games. We're talking about a couple of hundred thousand dollars, not 50 million. When I hear about Sony buying exclusive rights to third-party games then I will agree with you, but right now I just think MS and Sony have different business models.

I think if Sony had the money to buy exclusives they would. But consider how many first-party studios they have to keep open. I don't think they have the revenue to take money out of their first-party, put it into third-partys, and maintain the first-party they currently have. I could be wrong but from what I can remember Sony is kind of having problems making money at the moment.

@Crab(below): I see where your coming from, but I do see a difference. I'm not saying its better or worse. I'm not some one who cares if MS buys exclusives, I actually think it's good business.

I'm not saying its below Sony to buy exclusives, I'm saying I don't think they have the money. If Sony had a large profit margin I'm sure they would be buying exclusives as well, but it seems to me that they just have too much on they're plate right now to spend money on outside sources. At least not ten of millions of dollars.

GiantEnemyCrab3126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

There is no difference. You actually believe Sony is only doing this with PSN games??

I'm looking at it as an "IP", doesn't matter if it's retail or PSN and Sony will pay for an "IP" to be exclusive to their system.

@Beg: Take a game like Heavenly Sword. MS had a chance to release it but turned it away and Sony "picked it up" ("picked it up" = pay). Sony can pick and choose and perhaps they felt those titles weren't what they wanted to focus on and didn't fight for them being exclusive. Or Sony offered and MS offered more because they wanted them on the platform.

It's just guess work but the Heavenly Sword info is fact. Fact is, both companies do it and I find nothing wrong with it. It's business. The only problem I have is that people got on MS about it and many of those same people are now in this thread trying to spin this as something more "honorable" then how MS approaches it.

@2.7: Both processes end up with one system not having the game? And don't both involve an exchange of Intellectual Property exclusivity for money?

Couldn't I just as well say MS gives these established developers more money to create games for all systems? I don't think MS dictates what the receiver of their monies does with it. Even though I believe MS approaches new developers as well and does the same thing you describe. Look at Braid and look at Dishwasher Samuari. Hell, look at all the XNA developer tools and contests that MS is doing more than either Nintendo or Sony when it comes to helping new/aspiring developers.

How about Bioshock? Mirrors Edge exclusive PSN maps? Dead Rising 2? They could all be potential, but just like the people who blame MS they have zero proof to any business deals that happen and there could very well be other reasons. The only thing we know for sure is the Rockstar and MS money exchange and still nobody knows exactly what all that money went too.

No, Sony did save HS(thankfully). I was using that as more of an example of companies picking and choosing what they invest in and pass up.

Cenobia3126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

There is a difference between offering incentives to new developers so they choose to make games on your platform, and walking up to high profile devs with a garbage truck full of money.

One way promotes new developers, the other actively seeks to deprive consumers of a game or parts of a game unless they pay extra money for another console.

@Crab
What exclusives has Sony paid for recently? I might believe MGS4, but that has always been on the Playstation platform. They didn't steal it from anyone (not in the last 10 years anyway). I don't know of any multi-platform games that Sony has purchased...If Sony does bribe developers I think I'd be able to see it. Most of Sony's exclusives are 1st and 2nd party because MS buys out the rest. I haven't seen Sony steal anything from MS as of late. Maybe I'm just missing something though. Did MS have an exclusive that Sony paid for?

edit: But if MS turned HS away, then Sony saved it...unless you meant Sony bought it out from underneath MS.

edit: I see your point, but I feel like MS is just more dirty about it. It especially pisses me off to miss out on DLC because MS buys it. I feel like they do it to make Sony consumers angry, because I'm certainly not buying a 360 for extra content on multiplatform games. More real exclusives and I'd go for one, but buying parts just rubs me the wrong way and doesn't really enhance the lineup (imo).

I don't think I'd even mind so much if MS purchased entire games (as long as it was BEFORE it was announced/hyped), but that hasn't been the case. They go the wrong way about adding value to their consoles (again, imo), although I'm sure their profit charts disagree with me.

Mogabu3126d ago

Actually, yes, Insomniac does own the rights to Ratchet and Resistance. They were talking in an interview recently about how they in fact own everything and how nice it was working for Sony being able to make the games they want while retaining ownership. The interviewer then asked about the possibility of them making the Ratchet and Resistance games for other platforms and they said that was a possibility, but nothing they are entertaining right now.

RememberThe3573126d ago

Sony does own the IP's.

If you look at the back of the boxs you will see this:

"Ratchat and Clank is a registered trademark of Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. Developed by Insomniac Games"

"Resistance is a trademark of Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. Developed by Insomniac Games"

Sony owns those b*tches.

They're also on the list of Sony owned franchises and properties...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

Mogabu3126d ago

As it was talking about this very situation, but your point holds water very well.

thewhoopimen3126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

One of the points that I think is being missed here is that prior to this generation, Sony didn't have to resort to "incentivizing" potential studios. Microsoft decided to play hardball with cash and I think it is only fair that Sony is "allowed" to compete without having to call them hypocrites.

There IS a difference between incentive and solicit/bribing. Sony isn't soliciting, therefore, they can call it an incentive.

ZuperAmazingCooKie3126d ago

Gears is not even Microsoft owned. Heavy Rain probably will, just like Lair, Heavenly Sword, Ratchet, Resistance, etcetera.

Microsoft finds quick ways to get "exclusives" that will appear eventually on other platforms. They also find ways to get former exclusives on their platform. But the thing is, these are all quick fixes. Microsoft doesn't get involved, doesn't buy IP or devs, they don't grow the library that differentiates their platforms from the competition. The only thing they care about is 1uping the competition, which is sad.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 3126d ago
fishd3127d ago

They are giving a fantastic opportunity to indie devs,to those who can't afford making a game because of the financial risk,instead of spending their money to preventing a game that is suppos to be multiplat from being on competitor's platform,*cough*bioshock,and all those timed exclusive*cough*

gaminoz3127d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

Yes: out of the goodness of their blessed Sony hearts they are helping out the disabled developers (financially speaking) in these difficult times....by insisting on exclusivity in return.

Splitting hairs much? This is a clever business decision. Same as MS's to buy extra content, or Live games.

Read this for fun:

http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

Sony says: "We don't buy exclusivity. We don't fund development. We don't, for lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform."

Changed now...

Ju3126d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

What ? They clearly tell what they expect. Don't want it ? Don't take it. Simple. You (as a developer) own the IP and your game, no matter what. I mean, that's not bad at all. Basically you can work for free and keep the margin from the sales. Not sure if that'll work with big titles (to much money involved, I would speculate), but a great opportunity for the smaller devs.

And I mean, what's wrong to ask for something in return if you spend some money?

I mean, kind of ironic, that all of a sudden an xbox magazine jumps on that, while this has been common practice on "their" end since years now.

gaminoz3126d ago

@ Ju

That's the point: it IS the same as MS does.

Ju3126d ago

a) No, its not. See below. and b) where was the outcry when MS started to do that ?

RememberThe3573126d ago

Sony is offering a win-win proposition for them. They keep the game PSN exclusive and Sony will match the development costs.

The publisher owns the IP and still gets royalties. Sony gets an other exclusive title for the PSN.

How about reading what the actual deal is and not what some guy says about it...

http://www.n4g.com/events_g...

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3126d ago
frayer3127d ago

Sony doesn't pay for exclusives- they make em

zing

gaminoz3127d ago (Edited 3127d ago )

Oh they offer "incentives"....that 's not paying for exclusive content?

They may make them, but they are using PSN to go furthur....like MS is.

But I bet there are plenty of droids who will disagree.

I said in another thread that I don't think exclusive downloadable content should be considered the same as an exclusive game; but what if the whole game is on PSN or XBLA? I'm so over downloadable this and that. I like my disc: be it a game on PS3, Wii, or 360!

Microsoft Xbox 3603126d ago

Just face it gaminoz, you don't have to pretend to own a PS3.

gaminoz3126d ago

@ Microsoft

You're funny. I DO OWN a PS3, a Gamecube, a Wii, a PSP, a 360, and a DS.

I play more on my 360 than the others, and I wasn't a big fan of the Killzone 2 demo (yes..I admit it), but I DID love Uncharted, Resistance 1, MGS4. So go get stuffed.

Microsoft Xbox 3603126d ago

Sure and I own a Playstation 4.

morganfell3126d ago

I thought the title of this article should be:

"Sony does something Microsoft has been doing for a long time and OXCGN shows they are full of crybabies."

Seriously OXCGN, what a bunch of nancy sissy boys. Hike your diapers up and just go throw yourselves under an ice cream truck. That way you can die happy as Jingles the Clown kneels beside you. You bunch of whiny pansies you.

If you are smart you will at least jump off the building because the Sony army is marching on the capital and there isn't a damn thing you and your worthless excuse for a journalist staff can do about it. Maybe OXCGN and Kotaku can hold hands, set each other on fire and leap off the 40th floor. Then right as they impact the ground Brian Asscrack and his wife Crecente get plowed by a fast moving city bus.

evilmonkey5013126d ago

Did you guys JUST realize that the playstation has ALWAYS ended up with the best game lineup? This isn't news for the rest of us, just assurance that we are being taken care of. Thank you Sony.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3126d ago
GrooveMachine3127d ago

oh come on if they're funding your game of course its gonna need to be exclusive, its basically requiring indie devs to become first party groups if they want their game made

XboxOZ3603127d ago (Edited 3126d ago )

Well then how come when MS do it it's called "Buying Exclusives" and when Sony do it, it's simply called being generious and offering Incentives . . .

It is what it is, paying for exclusives, no matter what the game pr way of delivery. Even back in Phil Harrison's time sony did NOT listen to him when he pleeded with them to go online, or to pay for exclusive content. He was told bluntly the Sony doesn't "need" to do that, MS will get nowhere.

Even back as far as 1999/200 just before the Xbox launched Sony gave a statement saying that the Xbox platform will be gone within 12 months, as Sony rules the roost as far as gaming is concerned.

It's one of the primary reasons Phil Harrison left and formed the buy-in into Infogrames . . do some research and googling . ..

Ju3126d ago

That's not true. They do not buy the IP or anything. The devs own that still. Not sure what you can do with it if you can't sell it to somebody, but you can build a franchise out of it without loosing anything. Sony does not "buy" the title. Significant difference, IMO.

beardpapa3126d ago

When a company comes to you to look at the amazing product you're developing and they want it on their system, they'll give you incentives to produce for them. Incentives may be advertising, cheaper development tools, paying for publishing costs. In the end of the day, it's still your product to toy around with.

When a company comes and tells you they want to buy your product to release on their system, they're purchasing your IP. After that, you either work for that company or you focus on a new IP.

Like a person going on a date at a fancy restaurant as an incentive to hopefully getting a one night stand afterwards, vs a person paying money for the happy ending.

XboxOZ3603126d ago

Oh dear lordy:

By saying "buying exclusives" it means - buying the exclusive "rights" to publish the game in its entirity . .so that no other publisher can do so, or has any rights over it.

If it was OWNED by a publishing house, then that would be a First Party in-house game . . . Like say when Codies make a game AND publish it also. Rather than making it and having Atari publish it.

Just do a little background checking on what "buying exclusivity" means mate . . there's lots out there that can help you in that area understand it a little better.

Ju3126d ago

Not true. GeoW is a third party with an exclusive publishing deal with MS game studios. MS owns GeOW. There is now way, that Epic could go ahead and make their own GeOW and sell it to another platform. Same with R2 (second party). Sony owns the IP. Or KZ2 for that matter (well, that's a first party title). But that is entirely different. That's a PSN publishing deal which does not include the IP.

Why o why3126d ago

u know i love ur work man. I just feel that this whole thing was blown out of proportion by the hollow article a few days back. Sony were made to look like villains and the gullible lapped it up and started throwing rotten fruits. The truth has come out and its not quite as evil as some would have us believe.

Both MS and Sony are just using different methods to achieve their own goals respectively and yes their methods are ALMOST 1 in the same. I just dont think there would be such retaliation had the first article been truthful and not been full of baseless flame bait.

TheBlackSmoke3126d ago

Theres kind of a difference between sony funding indie devs in exchange for psn exclusivity to microsoft cherry picking AAA full retail titles and throwing millions just because they have to be like the PS3 so bad. If you cant see how totally different those concepts are please just quit writing about gaming. If sony bought exclusivity in the same way as microsoft theres no way they would of let FF13, RE5, DMC4 etc go mulitplatform, so dont even try to compare the two like they are the same.

How about you go back to writing about all the 360 games announced at gdc...oh wait.. nm

XboxOZ3603126d ago

We do our best at trying to present both sides of a story, no matter what . .if that means burning MS, we will, you should know that already. It's just that many fanboise read what they want to read, and forget about the bits inbetween.

MS and SOny are as bad as each other. We have no LOVE for MS per-se, we simply chose the 360 as a platform of choice due to whatever reasons.

As you may know, we (80%) of us have PS3's, Wii's and PC/Macs . . .As see ourselves as gamers first and foremost.

Not everyone will agree with everything written, that's the whole thing about the press in general. If you do, then you're labeled a sicafant and if you don't, you're labeled a fanboi . . either way one can not win.

We posted an article recently about how dumb MS were and yet Sony fans turned that around into us bohooing Soy - scratches head . . how can one do that - I'm confused.

Sometimes yo can never win, no matter what you print/publish.

If we stuck to just the basic about a few games, then it would be as boring as bat droppings - now wouldn't it hehehe.

If anyone wants to write an article for OXCGN, then there is always an opportunity to do so and submit it (see icon in top right hand side of site - we also take contributors submissions). But it seems many are way to willing to blame or flame, than to write and cop the abuse for their opinions, be they positive, or negative.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 3126d ago