[email protected]: "Geoff Keighley asked Jack Tretton about Agent. Here's what happened."
I just saw this :( The live stream is here: http://www.gametrailers.com...
Mm..looks like someone else had deeper pockets. I hope it stays exclusive though. I'd like to see whats possible when an open world game is built from the ground up on the PS3.
inFamous 1 & 2?
Srry, I should have rephrased that. I meant a GTA-like open world game.
game is taking for EVER wont be surprised if its not PS3 exclusive anymore
LA noire was built from the ground up on the ps3 then ported to 360, it looks stunning on both but i bought the ps3 version. But that is about the limit for this gens consoles. The PS3 version has popup and the character models minus the face are poor. the limits of this gen have finally started to show and now im not expecting too much from gta v graphically speaking
Smells multiplat to me. BTW doesnt this whole thing look strangely familiar to what happened with FF13 and now Versus 13..? I dont believe a single second Versus is still a PS3 exclusive. There must be a 360 version lurking somewhere. Probably timed exclusive.
@ SuperLupe You are absolutely right. When an "exclusive" takes this long to release from a 3rd party and not much publicity is going on about it, it's most likely due to the title going multiplat. Take a look at Kingdom Under Fire 2. Was to be an exclusive and a franchise that I love. We heard about it with little marketing, then it just died off and couldn't find anything on it. Another year goes by then suddenly it's announced as a multiplat and a bunch of new gameplay trailers are released with new game info. I think FF XIII Vs. will be multiplat as well as Agent. 3rd party studios are just making the change from exclusive to Multiplat. There is just more money in it for them and you need money if you want to maintain a business.
@Ultimate_Guy I guess, but I'm still skeptical about Versus XIII. I mean, it's been years and it's still exclusive, despite it's sister-project going multi. I get the feeling that if the game were going multi-plat(or atleast launching multi-plat), it would have been announced already. As for them not showing the game that much, well I think I remember Nomura saying that it may or may not make E3, but that we wouldn't see it any earlier than that.
Kinda strange, could of swore that R* owed Sony for allowing LA Noire to go multi since they funded a good amount of it. Who knows maybe they are going to get some exclusive GTA5 content instead which i'm sure they would rather have anyways.
Not exclusive anymore? Colour me not interested. -We are watching
Wtf? So Sony payed millions of dollars for nothing?
You know if it does happen and Agent goes Multi, R* will owe Sony a Game, lets see how this turn out, maybe some big franchise sequel timed exclusive or similar :D
I would rather Sony not pay huge amounts for third party exclusives, they can use it better in house. On the plus side I will be buying the one disc version of this game. ;)
Rockstar owes Sony an exclusive game, if Agent isn't exclusive, they will have to make something else exclusive for them. Maybe something even bigger than Agent...
Where does it say sony funded this project? Not being funny, i never read that anywhere...any links. And why does rockstar "owe" sony a game? The cost of Agent is probably so high that going multi is the only way to re-coup the cost of development and still make a profit. We already see that with LA Noir. Get used to this if this is true, 3rd parties cant handle the huge cost of game making to one system.
Screw all this. If Rockstar doesn't keep this exclusive then they should provide some funding for the production of The Getaway or give us our exclusive. Or just give Sony whatever they owe them, they'd be able to make their own exclusive.
Jack Tretton simply doesnt know, he probably last heard about Agent like us at E3 two years ago. ask R*
The reason R* owe Sony a game is they funded millions of $$ for LA Niore (20 million I believe) not sure if it was all straight up dev costs as I believe Sony gave them start-up money for the studio. In the end they'll prolly just get exclusive content for some R* games.
@roadrunnermaniacmayhem They owe Sony 3 exclusive games actually for Sony letting them out of the exclusive contract they had for GTA4.
No wonder Microsoft had nothing to show this year. It's because they are paying Rockstar to make Agent multiplat. I'm not interested in Agent anymore if it's multiplat. LA noire turned out to be a very average game.
That is very sad, dude..
How? I'm not spending money on a game that will no give me a new experience. After red dead and gta4 they have reached limit of multiplat openworld games. La noire was a step back.
I love how people on n4g know every aspect of the deal berween R* and Sony. We know that they signed a contract and that they owe Sony a game and why. We also know that "R* said Agent will be exclusive but then went and made it multiplat." And the analytical thinking here is astounding! I mean, it is so obvious that this means that "R* owes Sony a better and bigger game than Agent. You see, "They just need to make GTA V first." Genious!
You dont want to "ignore" 60+ mil user base(once its released).It was expected...
Im happy if true. I said it before and I'll say it again. One day there won't be any exclusive games unless the company owns the IP or owns the developers. Period. This is proof its coming true.
Well...I dunno why are people even making big fuss about it?I mean,yea,it was announced as exclusive but they probably have to make GTA V first,and with so much time in development for Agent those 20 mil wasn't close to enough...Plus,they showed NOTHING from Agent so its not such a big deal...
Why we make a big deal of it? It was announced as exclusive. What the hell is this? Today words doesnt seem to mean anything. Why should you agree to a contract and later say: Hey we get more money when its multi. Thats stupid you know that before, dont you?
Yeah I doubt this will be exclusive to PS3. With slumping sales, absence of consumer confidence, and excessive ps3 developement costs it would be crazy to keep it exclusive to ps3. They'll go multiconsole and recoupe the capital.
@R0me The cost of development changes things. Unless your a first party developer i don't think you can just go and ask for a extra 20 mil to develop a game, so they go to others to get more money. And your right words don't mean anything, but money does.
Yeah, thats right, but it would be smarter and more consumer-friendly if they wouldnt announce that game XY will be exclusive if it isnt 100% sure. I mean thats kinda fake. You announce at a big conference a great new exclusive IP to impress the community only to disappoint them later. You dont win fans with that and its not the first time this happens. They shouldnt do that kind of stuff thats all I am saying.
why shouldnt everyone be allowed to enjoy great rockstar games?
Everyone can if they buy the associated console for it. If I feel like eating a Big Mac burger, I don't goto a Burger King to order one, I go to the place that sells them.
@GodsHand So you're comparing a $300+ purchase of a game system...to something you can get on the Dollar Menu?
@GodsHand Did you even pay attention to analogies in English class? How is a burger like a game? I don't need anything but my mouth to eat that burger, unlike a game that needs a certain system. If anything, our mouth is a universal console that will eat/run any burger/game that is made by a burger-joint/developer. Learn analogies....
What if the mouth has no teeth?
BlackKnight you misinterpreted his wordin you see, he said BIG MAC, not a regular burger. Now tell me where can I get a big mac? What's the only fast food chain I can get 1 at? Now think of the game as that big mac and the fast food chain as the game console. EG Infamous 2 (BIG MAC) and the only thing we can get it on? Yes the PS3 (McDonalds) Now move along kiddie. ^-^
@CandyCaptain No I didn't. Burger = game Big mac = specific game (agent) Mcdonalds (like a dev) makes the big mac, but you don't need to buy anything else to "consume"/experience the game. Our mouth does it. Thats why a burger/game analogy does NOT work in terms of "compatibility". You don't BUY Mcdonalds like you do a PS3, the analogy fails hard.
i believe this happened with ff13 as well. microsoft paid square $$ to bring it to the 360 as well as offering to cover the complete cost of the court fee for breach of exclusivity . soo wouldnt be that surprised.. this is how microsoft works.. not only in the gaming space but even in the pc realm.. its good competition. but its still dirty tactics
I'm a huge ps3 fan, but i can sympathize w companies that make great games and make half the money, ie. Insomniac and naughty dog, and guerilla. I don't feel bad for rockstar. Someone lied or spoke to early about this making up corkage Noire. Granted, ill still play on ps3, but a rockstar exclusive would havebeen the nail in the coffin of 2011.
People may be looking too much into this. It could just be that Rockstar has not presented much info on the game to Sony. Its Rockstars game not Sony.
say its not a ps3 exclusive. here is the story. sony started la:noire but after more than 2 years od development and more than 20million invested inti the IP sony let it go and RS picked it up and sony went no we own the IP we are not just sure right now what to do with it RS went we give you another new IP as ps3 exclusive for LA:noire i know not to believe anything we read on the net but sony was the original publisher for la:n unless RS or sony announce its no longer ps3 exclusive it still is. also if it was goin MP don't you think MS would have had that on their stage. there is a agreement in place for sony to have this IP so unless there is another deal in works tis is a rumor also for those of you who don't know SONY HAS EXCLUSIVES RIGHT TO GTA4 for ps3 because of their pass success of gta on ps2. even it was limited time exclusive so when RS came to sony to let them out of agree agent was the game they offered in retunr now you believe what you may. if it goes MP more power to RS but unless they announce it first its still a rumor
Is Lego CITY STORIES for the Wii U. Come on, NOBODY SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT THIS? -End statement
R* owe Sony three games not ne and if Agent goes multi they possibly now owe them even more. My understanding is that a least one myst be for home console but don't be shocked at a couple of Vita games like the mooted Bully2 being a Vita exclusive.It's not a secret deal but I'd still be shocked if Agent goes multi unless it's shit. People seem to think all it takes to alter a contract is money but that's not the case and R* owe Sony big for the deal on GTA4 multi. R* owe SONY THREE games and will have to honour that or make it up BIG time and seeing how it came about and what they then made from GTA4 and follow up stories you'd think R* should be good with Sony. They also allowed Sony to announce it as a true exclusive-something I truly think should be illegal and leave both Sony and R* open to a class action lawsuit from anyone who bought a PS3on the streng of that announcement. Same with FF13 and ANY game where they move the goalposts. They should NEVER announce a game as exclusive(timed or true) without KNOWING it stays that way OR unless they SAY other platforms may be added. As it stands all it does is rip off gamers expecting a game optimised for their console caught purely because they made a spurious announcement. It's false advertising and should be stopped in gaming. Personally, I don't have a great deal of interest in either FF13 Vs or Agent(what's known to BE bothered about?)or think Sony have more right due to legacy with SE and R*than other console makers, no, but exclusives announced as such affect people buying consoles and it's not right to move the goalposts on them when a game made with BR capacity or 360's strengths solely in mind will ALWAYS perform better than a multi platform game that can use neither console's strengths and accommodate both sets of weaknesses. It's that simple. If you announce a game in public or on a big ad campaign on one platform as exclusive it has to stay there by law-otherwise it's plainly not right and timed exclusivity is a cancer only surpassed by retailer specific content. This generation stinks. Sony or MS taking advantage of a company/dev not yet knowing every plat is just lies to me and shows they don;'t care about us-as iof their awful pair of shows didn't already yesterday. D for Sony and E for MS.
has rockstar ever gone console exclusive?
It was announced as PS3 exclusive years ago but then again so was LA Noire...
Assassin's Creed and RE5 were also supposed to be PS3 exclusives. Anything can happen in this industry. Money talks.
No and there's no reason for them to. They don't want less money.
PS3 losing the exclusively of this R* game is a let down. Once again the systems being held back by 360. It happened with GTA4, LAN, and now Agents going to be held back with limitations.
Maybe you should switch to PC gaming if you don't want to be so limited. You could always try not being a fanboy, but that's just so difficult, right?
I would, but PC gaming is too expense. Plus there's only like three good games on PC IMO. Dude how am I a fanboy, are you telling me the 360 hasn't held some games back from there true potential?
Just a question here. Have any of you guys ever thaught that when a developper goes multi it might be MS or SONY that are hard to deal with and don't always keep their promises... I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't always the developper that is responsible for those situations.... But, let's keep in mind that companies (even in gaming developpement) exist to make money, not to loose any...
so one of these days they will have to give them AAA game exclusive and reading that article no where it said not ps3 exclusive from jack himself la:n was originally funded by sony gta 4 sony had exclusive rights to it because of the success on ps2 so for sony to give up on 2 AAA games one has to wonder they will get something back in return
Man this sux i hope it stays exclusive if not they better not water it down due to being multiplat.
Another 3 disc maximum data game
Rockstar haven't watered-down any of their previous multi-plats, why would they do it now? Especially considering that the PS3 is the lead platform for Agent.
Well they haven't watered down any of their games but they did remove cases in L.A. Noire and had to sell them as DLC. At first I didn't care because I thought the cases were just "extra", but if you've played them you'll know that those cases were suppose to be left in.
@ Fagol You dont think that maybe they were left out and made as DLC for ..hmmmm MORE MONEY "cha-ching". you know that's the new norm these days.
It's all a bit 'up in the air' aint it.
Was surprised to hear it myself and Tretton seemed like he just wanted to be honest there. Could be a good reason for why development and news on it has stalled for so long if it's true.
Xbox port would explain why this is taking so long. Need to wait and see, and personally i don't think it matters, R* is a big developer and they need to be multi plat to survive.
Erm. . .excuse me for asking but. . ."exclusivity for PS3". . .that wasn't actually said - the website just added that in.
Keighley asked "And is it still a PS3 exclusive?". So yeah, that's how you quote something that is in response to a question.
That's exactly what I thought. This needs to be verified cause [exclusivity for PS3] is in brackets. I mean, you wonder if Geoff even asked the exclusivity question. I'm sure the whole interview will be released soon. EDIT: @PhilipLarkin: Oh...well that question wasn't in the article.
lol. Xbox is calling
Hmm... Why didn't the website just post the actual dialog than just one side of it and attempt to give us context?
This was inevitable in all honesty.
may not be PS3 exclusive anymore pretty disappointing... =/
Not for people who will own the new Nintendo Cafe. Who says it has to be going to the 360?