Speaking in an exclusive interview with GamesIndustry.biz, Atari CEO Bruno Bonnell has confirmed that the publisher has no plans to release any PS3 games before 2007.
Bonnell said Atari intends to support all three next-gen consoles "fairly equally", adding, "It's just that we're lacking information about the PS3 at this stage, because we have basically a rough release date and a high retail price point.
"As far as the Wii and the Xbox 360 go, we'll be there for this season; for PS3, we'll probably have to wait a little later in the year before we release some new titles." And, according to Bonnell, that means no Atari titles on PS3 until 2007.
Gary Green said: Namco Bandai heard the call of many fans asking for the PlayStation release of Tales of Graces which was originally released seemingly exclusively for the Wii back in 2009. If you’re acquainted with the Tales series then Graces f won’t be something entirely new to you, yet if you’re a newcomer then you’ll find a plethora of gameplay mechanics and nuances that distinguish this series from other JRPGs. While the game finds itself following the traditional archetype of JRPGs, such as a somewhat clichéd story, Graces has something to offer to both veterans and newcomers alike.
Charging for early access has started to become a regular practice in several AAA games, and the gaming community should not tolerate this.
Don’t uh… don’t pay for it then? 🤷♂️ It’s 3 days early, let people who can’t wait pony up to pay for early access. I’d hope people have more control over themselves if they don’t want to pay extra. I personally, do not see an issue with the option. If I’m hyped for a game and they give you early access, I’ll pay. If it’s something I can wait to play on “actual release” I won’t pay extra. It’s as simple as that.
Except your entirely mistaken if you think it's "early access"
Theyre just charging you extra to play it on release. So gullible.
"Theyre just charging you extra to play it on release. So gullible."
Not really.
In some cases, paying for early access will grant you access to play those games at the same time media outlets and reviewers are playing their copies.
Besides, it´s a single player game. It´s not like early access to MP competitive games like Battlefield which EA would grant a full week early access to those willing to pay; which gives a unfair advantage to those gamers and breaks the game´s balance.
are you playing it earlier than retail release?
If that’s the correct answer, how is it not early access?
It's not early access...it's playing on release...early access is when the game isn't finished and needs a little more time...you also get it months in advance.
Let's not get confused here..
You get access to the game before it goes live for people who purchased the standard version of the game... thus you are getting early access.
Nope...you get access to the game the day it goes live. Those who didn't pay extra are blocked from accessing it as a punishment for not paying full price
Microsoft has been doing premium edition early access for awhile(Forza and Starfield recently) ...so why is it an issue now when Ubisoft does it?
It can't be the gamepass excuse as Ubisoft has day one subscriptions as well.
I´ve paid for Starfield´s Premium Edition to get early access to the game, plus Shattered Space expansion.
I don´t regret my decision and I mighty pay for it again to get early access to Fable and TESVI.
as long as people are paying for it, it will be a thing unfortunately.
the fear of missing out is ... huge. especially online.
I don’t think it’s about missing out. Think of it like a movie you’re hyped for. You can see it early if you pay extra or just wait until Friday when it officially releases.
It’s nothing more than that.
Nope. You're not seeing it early. Everyone else is seeing it late.
When a product releases to the public...that's the release date. If they company then chooses to block access to the product unless you pay extra...that's not early access...that's day 1 access.
Huzaifah from eXputer: "Sleeping Dogs from the early 2010s is one of the best open-world games out there but in dire need of a resurgence."
You say "yet" as if it's even possible anymore. United Front Games is gone, along with anyone that made this game what it is
That’s what happens when games sell poorly. And I’ve seen people wonder why people cry when a game sells badly… this is your answer.
Majority of the time it's true but if a company/publisher is big (in terms of money), they can take a hit or 2. e.g. I am not worried about Rebirth sales as Square will make Remake 3 anyway but if FF 17 doesn't sell then Square might need to look for alternative. <-- my humble opinion
Oh okay, Activision owned True Crime, but when that didn’t sell as intended it was canceled. Six months later Square Enix bought the rights and changed the title to Sleeping Dogs.*
*As per Wikipedia
Sleeping Dogs was a sleeper hit back then. It was fantastic. It actually still is. Would love a sequel to this, or at least a revive of True Crime series.
that headline image was supposed to be
www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/04 /06/sony_ps3_3.jpg
sorry, it got mixed up...
haha but it's funny. And see here, it get's real sh*tty for the PS3
most of the top games arent coming out till 2007 anyway
And whats the best game that atari has? Driver? And i thought Driver got bought out by ubisoft anyway. Who cares about atari?
How is it sh*tty for sony when it well be only a couple of months that we will see a game from atari on the PS3.
How is it sh*tty for sony when it well be only a couple of months that we will see a game from atari on the PS3.