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."

[gaminoz]

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!!!

[Godem]

agreed, they want money. full stop.

[eagle21]

yeah, I said it....lol

[CaseyRyback_CPO]

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?

[XboxOZ360]

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 . .

[Parapraxis]

"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.

[Elven6]

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.

[gaminoz]

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...

[morganfell]

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_prime]

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

[caladbolg777]

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 Kaim]

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?

[RememberThe357]

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.

[Daver]

@Caseyryback

i agree with what you say

[Microsoft Xbox 360]

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.

[Sarcasm]

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 Land]

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

[GUNS N SWORDS]

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?

[Bnet343]

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 Muss]

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?

[xabmol]

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.

[morganfell]

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.

[thewhoopimen]

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.

[Seraphim]

@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...

[morganfell]

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_Shadow]

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.

[barom]

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.

[SuperM]

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.

[y0haN]

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

[CrazzyMan]

"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.

[Immortal Kaim]

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

[fishd]

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.

[Darkfocus]

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.

[GiantEnemyCrab]

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.

[Sillyace92]

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

[RememberThe357]

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.

[GiantEnemyCrab]

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.

[Cenobia]

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.

[Mogabu]

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.

[RememberThe357]

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...

[Mogabu]

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

[thewhoopimen]

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.

[ZuperAmazingCooKie]

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.

[fishd]

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*

[gaminoz]

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...

[Ju]

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.

[gaminoz]

@ Ju

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

[Ju]

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

[RememberThe357]

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...

[frayer]

Sony doesn't pay for exclusives- they make em

zing

[gaminoz]

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 360]

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

[gaminoz]

@ 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 360]

Sure and I own a Playstation 4.

[morganfell]

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.

[evilmonkey501]

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.

[GrooveMachine]

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

[XboxOZ360]

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 . ..

[Ju]

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.

[beardpapa]

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.

[XboxOZ360]

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.

[Ju]

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 why]

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.

[TheBlackSmoke]

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

[XboxOZ360]

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.

[So Easy I Can Do It]

.

[Spike47]

Sony is not perfect, and I don't blame them as a company for trying to turn profits or trying to gamble, but I love the great quality of their products and the free community(PSN), which even though it sounds weird, shows a generous side of Sony.

[XboxOZ360]

Oh the irony, now when MS does the very same thing,and helps Indie developers it's called outragious, buying exclusives and profiteering off game developers . . .

So what is exactly the difference between them - nothing.

Sure, these companies need to help the developers, as times are hard and they are suffering. But let's not call a spade a golden shovel when it's still just a spade after all.

I'm not supporting either, as both are as bad as each other. What the writer is pointing out is that when something is written about MS it gets slandered no end, yet Sony do the same thing, and worse, (see KK's comments) and they are just "nice guys trying to help"- -

[gaminoz]

"shows a generous side of Sony"

No offence, but lol. MS and Sony are for profit businesses; they don't do anything that they don't think is gong to help themselves out.

[You Already Know]

yeah, but Sony isn't petty with what they do...I have a new article coming that shows exactly how silly MS is because of a certain demo that they are having withheld from the PS3 because it would be available on the PS3 about 6 months before the 360 would have a demo available...

you'll see the article...

[Parapraxis]

Sony knows that in order to have a strong business they need to fortify certain things.

Yes, believe it or not Sony IS good with their devs. That's why so many remain loyal.
And why more and more small devs are picking PSN for their titles.
Sony realizes that building strong industry ties is critical.
10 years down the road when that small dev is making blockbuster titles thatnks to being able to initiall get published on PSN, they'll remember.

MS = short term plan and execustion. most money as quickly as possible.
Sony = long term plan and execution. greater wealth/growth in a long term due to having a larger more solid baseline.

[Why o why]

i hope you back your talk. Even though i have witnessed MORE underhand methods used by MS than Sony this gen I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if what your saying is true BUT i will need some evidence before I truly believe ya

Conversely I have also seen how Sony IS more accommodating to devs both internal and external and I believe their methods to be more dev friendly than MS's

[Phantom_T]

There basically putting a small advertising tax on companies that upload demo's and trailers with the bandwidth charge.
Then passing on money to pay for new up-and-coming developers to make new games,try new ideas's that may not have been given the chance due to it flopping and not making a profit.
Sony also makes royalty fee's from this.
I think bigger companies could sacrifice a few hundred grand to advertise there game when there going to be raking it in if it turns out to be a success.
How is this not a win for everybody?

[gaminoz]

I'm certainly not knocking the idea...it is just funny how it is 'marketed' and perceived as different.

[Ju]

That's a huge difference. Simply in the amount of money spent. I mean, I probably would be not so happy, if they would spend a couple of million on EA or UBI (or SE, for that matter). Come on, its clearly a different goal here. Sure, its marketing money for Sony, and a great strategy. It advocates talent rather then just subsidizing the big guys investments in the millions. I also think this concept will not work for established AAA titles, since the amount of money required to do this is extremely high. But it allows smaller teams to get a start. Sure, if that turns out to be a blockbuster, that's a win-win for both sides. MS could have done this since forever, but well, somebody else had the idea. Bad luck.

[rhood022]

What the author doesn't realize is the difference between buying exclusives and offering incentives is in the approach.

Where MS actively pursued exclusivity in it's deals (dolling out $50 million for DLC, for example), Sony is letting the devs come to them and giving them the option of matching their dev costs. As they've always done.

I don't know how anyone can't see the fundamental difference in these approaches.

[gaminoz]

You're right: one is obvious and the other one is more subtle. Either way the developer GETS MONEY in exchange for EXCLUSIVITY.

[Marceles]

Yeah Johnny, but they couldn't WAIT until Sony said something like this, just like the PSN bandwidth fee.

"OMG SONY IS JUST AS EVIL!" It's for small development companies to make little $10 PSN games exclusive AND guaranteed royalties. It's not GTA4 or Tekken or FF13 from well established companies, it's freakin Burn Zombie Burn.

[Blakzhuk]

Microsoft: "I'll give you $50m if you make exclusive DLC for me."
Rockstar: "Done deal!"

Sony: "I'll give you INCENTIVES if you make exclusive games for me."
Dev: "Done deal!"

I don't see the difference.

[Johnny Rotten]

I think people forget that Microsoft and Sony are both a business, this is all part of the business.

The dev makes the final say, if they choose this type of package then they must feel it was the best business move for them. They keep all rights to their game, they get extra funding's to improve the quality of the game therefore making a better name for their studio, and Sony get's a game out of the deal.

It's an option that's offered by one of the biggest game companies around. What small company wouldn't want extra funding? what company wouldn't want the recognition and their hard work showed off to the masses?

[gaminoz]

YES! Exactly!!!! Bubbles for you!

[XboxOZ360]

Yep, correct . . bubbles to you again. Most will split hairs over words, but in the end, companies need to make money, funny that . . and that means paying for things so that the competition can not benefit from it at some stage. It's why a company will tie up a hardware manafacturer to supply them the plasma screens for their brands, and not other brands, when they could be fitted to anything.

Again, buy exclusive rights over product, irrespective of what the product it, it's product - period.

[Thoreau]

getting on sony like this

[PotNoodle]

Someone is upset..

[Phantom_T]

Totally agree,both Microsoft and Sony are businesses,with the sole goal of making profit and being dominant in the market.
Microsoft seem's to lean toward the more "sign a blank cheque,hand it over" approach
Whilst Sony seems to be trying to actively encourage developers to use there hardware by helping them from the ground up,instead of just buying a contract and then taking the product.
I prefer Sony's method,it actually stimulates new idea's that developers may have been too scared to try due to it failing and just going into debt,which even a slight failure to a small new developing company could cause them to fail before they even take off.
In effect it's the same concept,long term profit and pushing showing the consumers to buy X over Y console.

[socomnick]

Sony would go the blank check approach too but they are broke. They have to resort to other methods of bribing developers.

[Cajun Chicken]

Yes, EXACTLY! Because Sony have more staff and studios to support because they haven't closed any yet, paychecks go where it actually matters for the company.

[Johnny Rotten]

A small developer doesn't have the funding that a bigger publisher has therefore the risk factor is bigger and quality may not be up to par to what they would like, and on a serious note one bad game can put the company under for good.

For the select few that would get into this program, they should be considering it a huge foot in the door for doing what they dreamed of... making it big and making a name for themselves in the gaming community.

Imagine if a major record label was to do this with indie rock bands... it would never happen, never in a million years.

[AZgamerB3yond]

Sony has long term strategy always in mind. And their games rock like no other. People need to stop being jealous and pull out their notepads and learn from sony. This guy rants on about Sony's blind followers while he's blogging on an XBOX fanboy site. Come on with it. 'Nuff said.

[Hockey11]

Here is the difference-

The developers go to Sony while Microsoft goes to the developers

The developers can choose if they want money with Sony, while MS puts money in front of the developers faces and says "well?"

[Cajun Chicken]

MS could choose to have more developers inhouse, but instead they closed a few years back and allowed some to buy out of their contracts with particular franchises, MS purely replace in-house developers by snapping up exclusives and DLC from multiplats. Sony has inhouse and relations in the bag.

MS started with a great team of inhouse developers back on the XBOX, but slowly dwindled and still contnue to lower the amount of developers even though the console is selling more and has a charged online service, so where is the money going?

[eagle21]

edit: So how many first party studios does MS own?

[Elven6]

Thousands of people work at Microsoft Game Studios, they have first party developers, just not as many studios as Sony.

[Elven6]

6 including a ad company, MGS itself is a game development studio in a sense that houses many development staff members.

Edit: Technically they still own the studios they shut down, so in reality they would own 11 game studios, 5 active studios, and 1 ad company.

[Andras84]

From and Xbox 360 fansite. Yeah ok. Just as belivable as a Microsoft bashing article from psu.com

[REALgamer]

Remember, this is from the site that awarded MGS4 Game of the Year last year, and reviewed Killzone 2 with a 9.2/10.

I don't think this article is bashing Sony, it's simply stating that as much as PR wants to reword it, Sony and Microsoft are both buying exclusivity. One hands them money during development, one hands them money after its published.

'Incentives' and 'Exclusivity contracts' are both the same thing: money to the developer to make sure the game doesn't appear on the competing platform.

[Zeus Lee]

I don't think it's that complicated,Microsoft simply show up outside a Developers studio and ask "Where do we park the Money truck?"

Disappointed that OXCGN would fall to the level of the hiphopgamershow to drive a point.Ah well,I guess I shouldn't have expected an Xbox dedicated site to provide logical and well-thought out articles.

[swiftshot93]

I'm not sure I understand. If sony is funding a project, they are essentially the publisher. Why would Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft publish a multiplatform game? Buying out an exclusive means to pay a publisher so that their game can end up on their platform as well as the former's exclusive platform (not saying that bad). There is a difference.

[cactuschef]

His point is Sony wants people to buy Playstation products, and not their opponents products. No sh!t. That's the whole point. Microsoft wants the same damn thing. Nintendo wants that also. MS pays money for exclusive items, and sony pays for exclusive items. This guy is whining too much.

[XboxOZ360]

I think you'll find he's speaking form a professional point of view and obviously has some financial background in marketing etc . ..So he'd know what he was talking about, much more than I would.

So what if you do not like what he has to say, he's entitled to it, just like anyone is. It's just when ppl start saying that one company is allowed to buy exclusive rights, and bag another when it does so . .

That's is called "blind faith" . . . and a "blinkered viewpoint"

[cactuschef]

Of course he is entitled to say what ever he wants, I never said he wasn't. Aren't I entitled to my opinion? I just think he is complaining a little to much about this. I don't even think you read the comment you are replying to.

My whole point is its business. Its about the money. All businesses do things like this. It isn't a big deal. Im not blindly following anything. As far as im concerned MS and Sony do business in about the same manner. C.R.E.A.M. you know what im saying?

I don't even know if you read my original comment. I think you are just replying cause I said it sounds like he is wining.

[Expy]

The article author fails. Sony isn't buying anything. If developers for PLAYSTATION NETWORK titles decide to stay exclusive to Playstation Network, Sony will give them their development costs.

It isn't even full blown exclusives here... it's PLAYSTATION NETWORK games.

[XboxOZ360]

Which is paying for "exclusivity" which part of that do you not understand . . . oh, all of it - sorry, my mistake.

[GVON]

Why is it a problem,no offense but almost every post you have in this section seem to paint it in a negative manner.

Sony are willing to help out small developers with cash to make games on their system,if they chose.
Then once that game is on psn they are free to do a squeal on any platform they chose.

I can't see anything wrong with that.They've done it since the psone days,then if they feel the talent is there to produce multiple games they buy the company or buy exclusive rights for a certain number of games.

Only a few days ago they signed a deal with Dylan Jobes new studio,essentially buying exclusivity.

MM with LBP and there nex 3 games

Mstorm development team evo-studios who did the WRX games for the ps2,had a 3-4 game deal,and were then added into the sony brand

Kz developers guerrilla were indi at the time,they essentially paid for kz to be exclusive.

ND who are behind uncharted

Psygnosis (now studio liverpool) who had wipeout on multiple systems until Sony got them in house,they even payed to get the f1 license for that company.

[Unicron]

Personally, I see this as a slightly different situation, in that I thought it was designed to help INDIE developers get noticed. I see a difference in helping make a game that would never get made due to lack of funding and giving a company like Capcom X amount of $ to put a title only on the Xbox.

But in the end, yes, it's just business, and what this is, it's basically the same thing MS is doing. Dev get money, console manufacturer get game. Some day gamers will learn that Sony, MS, and Nintendo don't care about anything other than your wallet. Give more credit to the games, and the devs themselves. You'll all be happier.

[XboxOZ360]

Exactly mate . . someone said why don't we stick to Xbox as we are a Xbox Community site.

Well yes, we are a "community site" but we are NOT an Xbox owned site, and to tell you the truth, getting any form of $$ asistance from MS is like dragging teeth from a chook . .impossible, same goes for Sony and Niffty. We get 110% more support, products and assistance from 3rd party developers and publishers than we do from MS.

They really care very little for the gamer in the end, be that Sony, MS, Niffty etc. It's all about their bottom line and what they can do to bolster that on a daily basis.

Gamers forget that SHAREHOLDERS run the gaming companies, NOT gamers.

[heyheyhey]

difference is...

MS throws money at already-rich pubs for timed exclusivity or DLC and whatnot

Sony is helping indie developers through their paces

so cry moar oxcgn

@Elven

urgh.. you don't get it do you?

did i ever say MS have never helped indie devs?... you know what, forget it

yes, i live under a rock

EDIT: ok fine, il explain it to your dumb ass

people cry foul when MS splash cash for exclusives and DLC for big, already well-funded games.. they have grounds to, it's a dirty trick

Sony on the other hand are just helping indie devs by offering a budget fund.. in return for exclusivity.. this is completely different from paying a huge company like R* for GTA4 DLC

this has nothing to do with MS's contributions to indie development..

you called me out on something i never implied, i guess your just special like that:)

[Elven6]

Have you lived under a rock for the past 5-10 years? Have you completely missed Microsoft contributions to developers both Indie and Professional?

[Immortal Kaim]

Ummmm XBL community games?

[Mogabu]

I mean look at everything MS has done for developers!

Microsoft closes Aces Game Studio
http://www.gamesindustry.bi...

Confirmed: Microsoft closing Ensemble
http://www.gamespot.com/new...

Microsoft Closes FASA Studio
http://www.gamasutra.com/ph...

Also from the Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
Former

* Bungie Studios: Became an independent studio in October 1, 2007.
* Carbonated Games: Developer of several classic and casual games for MSN Games and MSN/Windows Live Messenger. Dissolved in March 27, 2008.
* Digital Anvil: Freelancer. Dissolved in January 31, 2006.
* Hired Gun: Dissolved shortly after Halo 2 launch for PC.
* FASA Interactive: Mech series. The studio was closed on September 12, 2007.[12]

Not to mention, here's the difference. MS straight up BUYS developers full out. Bungie, Rare, these companies were bought out by MS. Not simply paid back their development fees. Seems the anti-Sony group is really grasping at straws as of late to cast Sony and the PS3 in a bad light, now trying to play the "MS is evil, huh? Well, Sony is too!!" card, only Sony doesn't buy up and shut down development houses. No two ways about it.

[Elven6]

Your comparing Microsoft's actions with professional developers to that of Sony's actions with Independent developers, you don't compare something like that unless you want to make a point. I guess your "special like that".

Mogabu: Yea and practically every time they shutdown a studio they do their best to give as many people jobs as possible in other MGS areas. Your comparing professional developers to "Joe Shmo's" development basement? You do realize all those studios Microsoft has bought were bought with the consent of their previous owners? And for the record, when they shut down a studio they have the appropriate backing to do it, they look at a variety of factors and see what the future for the studio would be. I don't necessarily agree with this business tactic but they don't just shut down studios to be the bad guy.

[xc7x]

based on this one thing,too funny. whatever.

[Dawn_Of_Ashes]

the guy who wrote that is a ms fanboy... "F-OFF"

[gaminoz]

I've run out of bubbles in the other thread, but the point I'm trying to make is not that what Sony is doing is wrong...it isn't!! It's a great idea!

It is the hypocritical factor of what they've said before, and what they are doing now. It's all the outrage at MS for doing similar things.

I think it is smart business that both MS and Sony do it.

Read this again: http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

Sony: "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."

BTW I love my PS3 and especially Uncharted: I can't wait for Uncharted 2 and Heavy Rain. I just don't like one company saying one thing and then pretending they aren't doing it. If it was MS I'd be the same way. I'm not a big fan of exclusive downloadables for example.

[realplu]

Sony = Providing funds to encourage and assist developers to create new IPs. Gamers win development developers win and Sony wins. If you are a small upstart developer, Sony will help you develop and publish your games but they are not strong arming anyone.

Microsoft = Looking at established IP's on other systems and paying for some form of exclusivity in order to compete in the video game market. This is nothing new for Microsoft in fact its a standard business practice for them. Then have no real interest in progressing the gaming industry as a whole. They just want your money.

[deshon09]

what we just read was from a xbox based website stop hating it was a great move sony

[Elven6]

The site is based inside a Xbox????

Sorry, you set yourself up for that one! :p

[ash_divine]

They JUST STARTED doing this. It'd be different if they were doing this secretly back when their PR said that they didn't buy exclusive.

Technically, they were telling the truth because AT THE TIME Sony said that they didn't buy exclusives, they really didn't.

Now they've changed their minds, which is fine. Because I can't think of any company around that didn't change their principles at some point in time.

besides, at least they were honest enough to reveal that they were doing this, because this could've easily been some under-the-table deal that no one would've ever known about.

[Adversary]

This idea by Sony is a good one as far as business goes. It will pay greater dividends to companies that produce greater products, and seems to me to be ideal for developers who want to remain independent, are producing untested genres and IPs, and may not have the economic muscle to push their products in hard copy formats. Call it whatever you want, but this fund can be a safe and steady stream of revenue for small companies if they produce a decent game. Imagine if the guys who made Tetris, Asteroids, or Snood were still getting 10% of every sale. They (or their companies) would probably be multi-millionaires by now. Now imagine that a small company makes another little game with the same addictive properties of those, and releases on PSN exclusively. And now imagine 10-20 years from now. The PSN will still be around, even if Sony doesn't even make Playstations any more, and will still have that game in archive for sale. And since that little company never sold the game, they're still entitled to their original royalty rates.

Safe money is usually the best way to go if you ask me. *shrug*

[cmacdonald]

Whoa that guy is angry...for some reason.

[T12AN]

When I first heard of Sony's new policy, I was excited for the opportunities that Indie developers now have, but I also thought that Sony was pretty much buying exclusives (which I'm not faulting Microsoft for, it is a business after all).

But as I thought about it, Sony isn't really buying exclusives. You see, Sony is willing to fund the development for indie gamers from the get go. Sony funds the development of the product, and the product should of course end up being exclusive to Sony. This is much like the relationship between Sony and Insomniac Games, and I don't think people view the R&C series as bought exclusives.

The difference with Microsoft is that they see a game that's already in development and pays the developer/publisher to only release on the 360.

Just my thought.

[cmacdonald]

I see it as Sony is willing to co-sign whatever loan a developer needs to get going. It is a assistance program for exclusive deal.

They are only guaranteeing royalties up to development costs. This would allow developers to get whatever loans they need to get going.

If the project makes money it doesn't cost Sony a thing.

[no-spin]

Shame on Sony for promoting more developers in producing games in their own, shame shame blah blah blah. SO WHAT?!?!

Wake up and smell the coffee, they are not visiting studios with fat checks. This is an Option developers have to produce games on their own.

Whatever Sony does is bad, doom, or just plain useless, yeah right

Fcking biased media can not get a real job and publish their crap on the web.

[Enzo]

"Cry Me A River"

Why turn a positive news to a bad one?

Who cares if PS3 fans are so excited about the new incentive? How bout you worry about something else rather than lurking at N4G getting mad at all the good news for PS3.

[Stryfeno2]

Oh, so now it's okay?...hahahhaaaaaa N4G never seems to amaze me.

Next will be Sony buying Exclusive DLC.

[GiantEnemyCrab]

Yup, it is funny isn't it? And not the least bit surprising on this site.

The truth will set you free.

[Snake Raiser]

Ya, a lot of hypocrites are here. But I kinda hoped Sony would start to do this. Thing is I guess nobody can complain now that both do it. Except wii fanboys. Overall message: We should all STFU about this.

[Scruffy_K]

So, Sony is throwing some money at small, indie developers so they can develop their game and in exchange it must be published on PSN? Hmm, I can't actually think of any examples of Microsoft doing this. They generally throw money at the big companies for DLC no? But, I guess I forgot how hard up for money Rockstar and Bethesda are, I mean they're practically non-functional

[Elven6]

C#, XNA, etc are all ways for even the bedroom program to make games and make money. The great thing about the IDE is almost anything running on a PC will run on a Xbox 360 with little modification. Microsoft has made tools readily available for people to legally develop games on their consoles, I don't think Sony has. Microsoft employees as well as hobbyist programmers also provide technical support for "bedroom programmers".

Both companies have systems in place to help the indie developer with his or her project, don't let your fanboyism blind you from that.

[Microsoft Xbox 360]

An Xbox site writing an article about Sony's businesses. It looks to me the 360 side not only ran out of games to talk about, but 360 news in general. Keep it up, the PS3 needs all the attention it can get.

[NegativeCreep427]

Since when the hell was plainspoken monetary compensation (as in when Microsoft approaches Rockstar and says "Hey, you know that hot DLC you're making for GTA IV? Yeah, if you make sure that never sees the light of day on the Playstation 3, this corporate check worth $50,000,000 is yours") the same as Sony announcing auxiliary-related perks to game developers in regards to potential and future online gaming projects???

Microsoft has always been candid in regards to third-party software and how it relates with their consoles. Microsoft takes the frank approach: "We like your game/dlc, we want it all for ourselves. Here is a briefcase full of cash. Make sure it never appears on anything without the 'Microsoft' logo on it.

Sony, on the other hand, is merely providing capital incentives to third-party developers who want a certain project to get out.
Sony takes this approach: "If you are a development studio who is currently facing very strict financial limits in regards to a particular project, come to us, and we will help you get that project out the gate and in front of consumers. We will not take or seize any publishing or property rights concerning your projects. The property and control over your project will remain entirely in your company's hands, we will simply aid you in finalizing and releasing your projects.

Look at the way Microsoft handled the deal between them and Epic regarding the Gears of War franchise. Microsoft finalized a contract that RESTRICTED the initial entry's from appearing on the Playstation 3 (and if it was even possible, on the Wii).

Now, if all the Phucking STUPID!!!, delusional Anti-Sony flaimbaiters have gone away now to go wash their ears out and take their ear medicine, who the F*ck here with a normal, logical adult mind(assuming N4G isn't already overtaken by a bunch of stupid F'n kids who would start a flame war over which ice cream flavor tasted the best), considers Sony's move to be Hypocritical in any way????????????

Honestly! No Fandom Allowed!

@ Patchstation

That's the best you got, little b*tch? Little Xbot a$$-rider...Is that the BEST you got???

Go back to Chuck E. Cheese and let that stranger in Chucky's suit fondle your swimsuit area. This is a challenge made for Men! Men who still don't sh*t themselves everytime they see Child's Play on cable.

[Stryfeno2]

STFU

[Snake Raiser]

you copied that from I think Canadianguy.

[Omega Archetype]

It isn't buying exclusives. Sony's just saying if they want help that it's available for exclusivity.

They are not outright buying games for their service. Incentive is the perfect word for what they're doing. It's not as if the developer has no choice in the matter. They can decline the offer and have it multiplatform.

I think it's a great idea and will provide PSN with an even more solid collection of downloadable games.

[The gaming GOD]

Most people can't handle that here at n4g.

[pansenbaer]

I was just gonna say...when is charging developers a fee and then saying, 'We'll help with that fee if you don't put your game anywhere else'...the same as...'Take our money and you can't put your game anywhere else'...

[drubils]

Who Cares- As long as the games keep coming out on each platform. None of you know the actual truthes. Its all speculation. Unless you sitting on these companies board none of you know the real truth. Just play the games and enjoy them. MS and Sony are businesses. Businesses exist to make money. They exist to maximize their profits for their investors. Check you basic economic books. Unless you have stock in one of these is the only way your an investor. Play the games- quit pretending your an investor.

[Ps_alm3k]

mines would be spending millions on a dlc....
LoL...... Sony haters, please stop and think.
This is business, and its a damm good business deal!!!! for developers.
They let Dev; buy low cost kits, earn and save some money, make name for themselves, what better deal
can be offer to get your game out there. The way I see it, is that sony is going to be making a lot of games
and someone is jealous that the dev are jumping on this gun!!!!

[smokey_vols]

While Sony aren't buying disc releases or exclusive DLC like Microsoft do, they are buying exclusive PSN games. This is a real help to the small devs out there who don't have enough money to self-publish their games. So if someone has a great game, but don't have to funds to get it out there, Sony will fund them as long as it stays on their system. I can see why some would call it hypocritical because of things Sony has said in the past, but you have to do what you have to do to stay with the competition.

[Etseix]

dude obviusly if u were somthing from SONY, tell me, u would let them go easy and do the game for the xbox when u are the one whos paying all the things for them? HELL NO!
i know this can sound like hipocrecy but, hey, see the good side, they are helping small devs, i want to eb a dev and i dont think i can start with the money i have, then SONY can help me there, thats the best thing that jus thappened to the devs out there!

[smokey_vols]

When did I ever say it was a bad thing? You act like I was slamming the idea, I wasn't lol...

[Etseix]

sry my bad, still i agree with u ;) (the only agree u have right now lol)

[smokey_vols]

Ohh, I don't care about those lol. I rarely even post so agree, disagree I dont care lol.

[Etseix]

like i said in the last comment related to something like this,
if u have an IDEA and dont have MONEY to do a game, then u can ask SONY obviusly theyll help u but THE GAME WILL BE EXCLUSIVE, u think u will want to make a game later for XL? NO U WOULDNT, because u know how to work with SONY,
its like saying *ill help u now, u help me later ;)*
lol this sounds more like *sony making friends instead of bussineess partners* lol

[BGDad]

....

Seriously thought ive said in the past I dont like the whole exclusive thing and as a ps3 fanboy I am torn between bashing the 360 and going by my word....

.. Decisions Decisions...

Im gonna have to say... Buying exclusives suck no matter how you put it... At this point though im not sure Sony or Microsoft have choices, games take a lot to make. Might become the norm. At least I have both consoles for those who dont that sucks.

No what else sucks 59.99 a frigin game.. We need to get that price lower.

[Makidian]

Microsoft at GDC is so lame that a bot site has to call them hypocrites for trying to get fresh, original and creative content on the PSN, lol, idiots

[Mogabu]

Just epitomizes what I don't like about certain gamers. Just angst and swinging at the fences over what? Nothing at all, especially nothing like what they are trying to paint. Chill out. Sony is financially encouraging developers by helping them recoup their fees, not buying dev houses straight out. Get a grip.

[NinjaOmega]

Sony is a saint they never do anything wrong,Ms buys everything they can and monopoly the gaming industry and there games always go to the PC,I wish MS went away they suck so bad, the 360 gimps multiplat's and the xbox 360 system Design looks like a poor man's version of the Wii,F*CK 360

[xabmol]

Never see the difference between paying 1-2nd party devs to make a game specifically for their system, and going out buying 3rd party games.

Sony pays people to make a game for their system, yes. (Duh)

M$(notice the "$") pays people to not release them. You think that all that DLC was made just for the 360? You think Rockstar would not have made some DLC without M$? You think the only reason Fallout has DLC is because of M$?! M$ is the reason the PS3 doesn't have the DLC, thats what M$ payed for. They bring nothing new, only take.

Sony is matching the dev cost for small indy games that may have never come out due to the cost of making them. Sony is not buying the rights or the game itself. The game and everything about it still belongs to the original devs. Sure they want it exclusive why would they pay for a 3rd party multiplat?

M$ on the other hand strait up buys the game, the IP all the rights, all of it. the devs say, "good bye" because now it belongs to M$.

/rant

[WildArmed]

yeah, and i expected a really Sony pro article from an 360 site.
/end sarcasm

[kumashii38]

helping small-budget developers is good thing.

[Silly gameAr]

Forth article I've read on this today with the negative spin. Even when Sony does something good, it's bad. I don't understand gamers today.

[PSGamingInc]

And lol, he is exactly right about N4g.com. This site is pathetic if you want anything even resembling credibility.

Unfortunately, the majority of n4g.com readers cannot read anything beyond a paragraph in length. Hell, the majority can only read the headline. Its a shame, because this guy really gets it right here.

I used to be part of the Sony Defense Force, and yes, I am embarrassed everyday by that, because there isn't anything even resembling rational thought coming from them. Hypocritical is only part of their problem. Their biggest problem is just flatout ignorance.

[GamerPS360]

blah blah blah :D

[thewhoopimen]

There is a CLEAR difference between buying exclusivity vs. providing incentive. In the former, you have MS paying UPFRONT money to retain exclusivity. In the Latter, you have Sony giving a free discount on development tools, publishing etc,. THAT IS A MAJOR DIFFERENCE.

This article is trying to claim what Sony and MS is doing is Apples to Apples. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Giving money and giving a discount are TWO VERY DIFFERENT THINGS.

[devilhunterx]

Which is better?

PSN game or DLC?

[bviperz]

If folks would stop being defensive/offensive and just get both consoles, NONE of this crap would even matter. Only buying the games would. I'm glad back in 06 I got both. If you have all the current platforms and still argue, then I feel sorry for you...

[GamerPS360]

which game did Sony buy ?? Just a question 'coz I really don't know. GDC was pretty much dull.

[paracardium]

Good for Sony..They're not just throwing money at companies ..it's a total option for anyone of the dev's out there and they still let them control it in anyway they want unlike MS.I see nothing wrong with MS doing it and who cares that's how the U.S companies does business with everything.

[JokesOnYou]

Reading most of the comments all I can say is "spin, baby spin"= theres is absolutely no difference in this "incentive" scenario vs "micro's evil bribes"= business deals to secure exclusive content, it doesn't bother me in the least bit because everybody outside of n4g knows this has been going on forever by both companies, hell if one company wasn't looking for these opportunities they would be foolish and furthermore I don't think exclusive psn games or xbl games for that matter will be significant in most gamers purchasing descisions, I love a old school releases, arcade titles etc or interesting new indie games as much as the next guy but really for my gaming tastes they are nothing more than a cool distraction for in between times of my core games.

JOY

[BIGBOSS08]

who cares? the difference is sony pays for worth while games and microsoft dont. its always DLC for them! some people want to actually turn their 360's on this year ya know microsoft?

[ThatDud3]

You are all nuts I must say. Company's have one purpose, making money.. Duh!