A Catalog of Lost PS3 Exclusives

Game|Life has a breakdown of the numerous PlayStation 3 exclusives that might have been. The high cost of making games and Sony's slow start out of the game means that titles like Assassin's Creed and Devil May Cry IV, which may have been exclusive to a Sony console at one point, will now be leading a double life on Microsoft's Xbox 360. "Grand Theft Auto IV -- Peter Moore shocked the world at E3 last May when he announced that GTAIV would appear day-and-date on Xbox 360 and PS3. Months later, Newsweek reported that Take Two had wanted to continue its long-standing practice of giving Sony a lengthy timed exclusivity on the game, but they didn't want it. Newsweek says that former Sony Computer Entertainment president Ken Kutaragi's 'radio silence' on the issue left Sony's American execs without the authority to make deals, and nothing happened. Same with ... Assassin's Creed -- Again, Newsweek revealed that Ubisoft had actually gone to Sony with an offer to make the game a PlayStation 3 exclusive. Although Sony did go through the trouble of asking Ubisoft to make it seem as if their multiplatform action game Assassin's Creed was indeed PS3 exclusive , it came out shortly after E3 that it would ship simultaneously on both platforms."

Comments

Ouch

[Wicko]

If Sony were to lose MGS4 and FFXIII, that might be the proverbial nail in PS3's coffin. I think it would help considerably if Square Enix were to release a remake for FF7 and FF8. Especially since Sony decided to play nasty and show off FF7 as a tech demo, with no remake in sight.

Re:Ouch

[Anonymous Coward]

Although people might label me as a Sony fanboy, all I've ever followed are the games that I like, while trying to have as few consoles as possible. For a long time, Sony was the goto for my games of choice. But near the end of the PS2's era, serieses started to branch out to other systems (exclusively)... Around that time I was already beginning to lose interest in [new] video games, and that exclusivity to other consoles was the clincher.

I really hope that it will still be possible to get all the games I want without having to get every console... because I never will.

I'm more prone to wait and see what games end up on each system, and decide which ONE console to get later on, in order to maximize the number of games I can play.

Companies may think having exclusive games for each console is a good way to get gamers to buy them all... but it has the reverse effect on people like me.

Re:Ouch

[moderatorrater]

While it would still be a considerable amount of work, in my opinion an FF7 remake would be the best thing that could happen to the PS3. The world's already made, the mechanics and balancing already done, and they even recently made Advent Children. Where's the downside to a remake?

Re:Ouch

[MikeFM]

I'd buy a remake of FF8 for PS3 - which would require I buy a PS3. I want to buy a PS3 because I do think they are the best game console currently available - there just has yet to be any compelling title to give me an excuse to do it. Grant Theft Auto 4 might be a reason if the PS3 version is better enough than 360 versions to be worth it. (Past info about GTA4 made it seem that the 360's weak points were going to result in a lesser version of GTA4 for it.)

Sony needs to step up. They delivered a kick ass console and since then they've done exactly nothing with it. I need at least half a dozen awesome games that aren't just as good on other consoles before I'll drop $600 on a PS3. What good is buying a Porsche if you can't put gas in it?

Re:Ouch

[Wicko]

This is true. It sounds like Sony has been using the "we can do it, why can't you?" stance on assisting developers. As opposed to MS, who has usually been there to assist the big developers in their games for their OS and console.

Re:Ouch

[Wicko]

I'd imagine its because they want to release new content (ie FFXIII), but who's stopping them from contracting another company to do it? Like you said, everything is done. All they need is artwork, and that's just an improvement on pre-existing artwork.

Re:Ouch

[MikeFM]

It's just stupid for Sony to chase off their own developers. They have the best hardware. They have loyal fans, like myself, waiting to buy a PS3 when given a reason to. Are they going to lose the console war because they didn't feel like getting games produced for their console? Morons.

Sadly, I think I've bumped the PS3 from my next-to-buy list to a Wii (Worst console name ever and all.) because the Wii actually has games coming out for it that look interesting.

Re:Ouch

[Wicko]

I will stick with the tried and true PC. I am a big fan of FPS, so it's hard to satisfy me on a console. I own a PS2 for its jRPGs. The only attractive console for me currently is the 360, mainly due to gears of war, assassin's creed, and a handful of others. But that will wait til a price drop occurs. And AFTER I buy a new PC for crysis this summer :)

Re:Ouch

[MikeFM]

The only real reason, IMO, to bother w/ a console at all is the lack of effort needed for installing and running games. I get annoyed at PC gaming because there are always hoops to jump through to get a game installed and running. I have a powerful CPU and video card and IMO I shouldn't have to put up with the kind of BS many games put you through.

Also, it's more comfortable to sit on the couch and play than to sit at my desk. I do like mind-oriented games like Civ on the PC better though because a keyboard and monitor work better for that sort of thing. :)

Re:Ouch

[Platupous]

Care to list the RPGs you play on the PS2? Id like to check 'em out.

Re:Ouch

[Wicko]

I am a programmer, haha, I am used to sitting at a desk. I have a nice chair and i put my feet up on my subwoofer, and it is relaxing as hell lol. And hoops, yeah I know what you mean. But at the same time I understand, its ridiculous how many different possible set ups you can have. But there are some games that are just terribly buggy, I just don't bother playing them, like the battlefield series. Also, I think developers take advantage of the fact that its much easier to release buggy software and patch it later on a PC than a console. The 360 has made it easier (I don't know about the other consoles though), so even then consoles might lose that benefit as well.

Re:Ouch

[Wicko]

Hmm, okay. Besides the obvious FF games, I play: Xenosaga 1 2 and 3 Star Ocean 3 Wild Arms 4, Alter Code F (remake of the first PSX version) hah, come to think of it, I don't have very many. Some that my friends play: Disgaea Kingdom Hearts 1 and 2 (surprisingly enough these are very good) Breath of Fire DragonQuest There are a lot of good PSX ones as well, if you don't mind the graphics downgrade: Legend of Dragoon Wild Arms 1 and 2 (one of the first 3D rpgs, with respect to the battles) Lunar 1 and 2 FF Tactics Thousand Arms (this one is hilarious) Chrono Cross Star Ocean 2 thats all I can think of offhand.

Re:Ouch

[Wicko]

oops, sorry, i forgot to post as Plain Old Text:

Xenosaga 1 2 and 3
Star Ocean 3
Wild Arms 4, Alter Code F (remake of the first PSX version)

hah, come to think of it, I don't have very many.

Some that my friends play:
Disgaea
Kingdom Hearts 1 and 2 (surprisingly enough these are very good)
Breath of Fire
DragonQuest

There are a lot of good PSX ones as well, if you don't mind the graphics downgrade:
Legend of Dragoon
Wild Arms 1 and 2 (one of the first 3D rpgs, with respect to the battles)
Lunar 1 and 2
FF Tactics
Thousand Arms (this one is hilarious)
Chrono Cross
Star Ocean 2

thats all I can think of offhand.

Re:Ouch

[donaldm]

If you are willing to look around you can probably do a deal for a PS3 although the same could be said for the Xbox360 and Wii. I got my PS3 (Australian) for AU$499 (approx US$407 at the time) with the trade in of a 5 year old working PS2 plus 10 old (to me) games. So far I have only one PS3 game (Oblivion) but I have over 50 PS2 and over 20 PS1 games and I find since version 1.8 of the firmware video upscaling to 720p (my HDTV) and 1080p (a friend of mine) makes PS2 games look so much better that I have started to play them again. Since more good (IMHO) PS2 games are coming out I can wait a long time because they look so much better than playing them on a PS2. In addition you can also play DVD's upscaled via HDMI as well and the result is excellent and if you really want you can play Blu-ray movies as well :-)

Of course you can also make it into a media center/player and/or install Linux on it. Don't like the 60GB disk then swap it for a 160GB disk or even bigger. If you have a PSP (you can get some good deals here as well although get one with a minimum of 2GB memory card) you can do some interesting things with this as well. My son can play his movie and TV downloads via the PSP to the PS3 and the result is very good. Home brew for the PSP is really popular but if you get one make sure it has version 3.5 or less. You can even convert movie or TV downloads to a form suitable for the PS3 or serve from your media center.

I would definitely say that Sony has done something with the PS3 it is just that the people who don't have one don't know or don't want to know. To find out more go to some of the forums or blogs (caution some rabid fan-boys) but some of the rants/blogs are really good and informative. Don't just take my word do some research and if after that you feel the Xbox360 or Wii is better then go for it after all it is your money.

One final word definitely get a HDTV fist and the bigger the better although this depends on what you can afford. All the new consoles particularly the PS3 and Xbox360 look good on a HDTV.

Re:Ouch

[miro f]

If you care about these things, the Xbox version is meant to have exclusive downloadable episodic content (for a fee, of course).

In terms of content, at least, the Xbox 360 version is better. In terms of how the game actually plays, well, no one will know until it comes out, obviously.

Re:Ouch

[MikeFM]

It was my impression that the 360 version wasn't going to come with us much content ebcause it didn't offer a hdd by default whereas the PS3 has a hdd and more disc space. Maybe that's changed?

Re:Ouch

[famikon]

My understanding is that the ps3 version was 'crippled' or not created to its full potential due to the 360 drawbacks of DVD and potentially no HDD.

I think they should be able to make "HDD Required" 360 games. And even "HD-DVD Required" games. It'd piss a lot of people off but I'd buy a HD-DVD drive if there was a distinct benefit, game-wise.

Re:Ouch

[miro f]

both games will be identical content wise, with the exception of the 360 containing downloadable content

Re:Ouch

[twistedsymphony]

The whole complaint about the lack of a HDD holding back the game on the 360 was that ALL version of the game were going to be the same (360, PS3 and whatever else) so the technical limitations of any one platform would hold them ALL back.

MS then paid for exclusive episodic content for the 360 on top of the core game. In terms of content on the disc, level design, etc. it should be identical across all versions.

Re:Ouch

[MikeFM]

Sounds as if they decided to wuss out on the design. What a bummer. I was really looking forward to massive worlds to explore and terrorize. :)

Re:Ouch

[MikeFM]

So the 360 held the game back for ALL systems and then paid to get some extra goodies made available to 360 users so that the 360 appears to be the best system? That sucks.

That sounds like proof of why Microsoft shouldn't be allowed into the game industry. They already wrecked the PC industry with that kind of tactics. I don't really care if games are released for all available platforms but I'd hope that each variant could live up to their full potential. Otherwise you may as well just get the cheap and crappy console of each generation.

Re:Ouch

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, no. Most devs don't use the HD on the PS3 for speeding up streaming because 1) You can't effectively cache data to the HD while streaming from the BD-ROM. This requires a large pre-install step. 2) The drive fragments horribly over time so that read speeds from the HD are actually slower than the Blu-ray disc 3)The read speeds of the 60GB and 20GB version are very different 4)The user may have replaced the Sony drive with one that has sucky performance. For console develoers, you have to make sure your stuff works on all variations of a console. On the PS3, using the HD for streaming may actually hurt performance compared to not using it all so there is no point other than using it for save data. Pretty much every review of every cross platform game will have the 360 version loading faster and usually running at a smoother framerate. Even the Oblivion developers admitted (contrary to what Sony fanboys tried to perpetuate) that the slightly faster load times on the PS3 version were entirely due to eight extra months of development time. Even then, they could save the PS3 version from horrible aliasing, dumbed-down lighting, and lower res textures. The 360 isn't holding the PS3 back, Sony's bad OS and bad design are doing that just fine.
Look at Crackdown, seamless streaming a large open world, no HD needed. And games that do use the HD when present benefit nicely. Compare DOA4's three second load times to those of VF5. As is finally becoming clear to the Sony faithful, having hardware isn't enough- you have to have software (including the OS) that actually uses it correctly.

Re:Ouch

[twistedsymphony]

This is nothing new nearly every cross platform title last generation was held back by the PS2's technical limitations... Cross platform titles are limited by the weakest link on all consoles they're slated for release on. This isn't some "MS Tactic" this is business as usual the way it's worked since video gaming in the 80s.

As for the content, just because they commissioned the creation of exclusive content doesn't make them evil, it's content that wasn't going to exist in the first place and now it does. it's existence is inconsequential if you plan on playing the game as it was originally designed, and a great benefit if you're a fan of the series who want more out of the franchise.

It seems to me like you're seriously going out of your way to look for reasons to hate MS.

Re:Ouch

[MikeFM]

Reasons to hate Microsoft? I call it almost twenty years in the PC industry. I don't need to look very hard to find their mark of evil anymore. Not that Sony looks like it needs much help to cut it's own throat lately.

Still, if you can't see anything wrong with Microsoft's behavior here then you obviously haven't spent much time watching how they dig their claws in and destroy an industry. They'll slide a little bit at a time into a position of control and then abuse the hell out of everyone so long as they can make the bucks. Sure that's common practice in the game console industry but Microsoft is better at it and will eventually cause more damage.

Re:Ouch

[Platupous]

Thats a whole bunch of prospectin' I have to do now. . . Thanks for taking the time to throw that together.

Cross platform is good for everyone but fanboys

[grapeape]

Though "exclusives" do boost console sales for individual platforms for some consumers. But for the gamer who cannot afford or refuses to buy every console made for a given generation, having the majority of games on all platforms is a great thing. I have a Wii, a 360 and my trusty PS2 and several of the games listed would have been skipped if not for going cross platform. The market is growing and spreading out enough now that 3rd party platform exclusives will only become more and more rare. The exception may be the Wii just because of the controller but concidering most of the games aimed there are more casual titles I dont think its anything any hardcore gamers are going to worry about.

Re:Cross platform is good for everyone but fanboys

[nschubach]

I dont think its anything any hardcore gamers are going to worry about.

They should. The world can't handle another industry bought by Microsoft.

Re:Cross platform is good for everyone but fanboys

[Khaed]

Given that the other alternative is Sony (as Nintendo isn't fighting to be cutting edge), it's a case of rock/hard place. Right now, Sony irks me more than Microsoft, so there's a bit of schadenfreude on my part when Sony gets handed bad news. (Plus, all the Sony fanboys that pissed me off leading up to the PS3 launch.)

However, I own neither an X-Box 360 nor a PS3, so I really don't have a dog in this fight. If Microsoft and Sony want to wail on each other then that's fine by me.

Re:Cross platform is good for everyone but fanboys

[Sciros]

It's fine. Nintendo has a tight grip on the handheld market that MS hasn't a prayer of getting into. For now, the PS2 is selling well enough anyway, hahah ^_^

Re:Cross platform is good for everyone but fanboys

[grapeape]

Oh give me a break. Sony has the money to do the same and with many exclusives that have left had the comfort level of prior exclusives to keep many if they wanted. The problem with Sony is more ego than anything, they have been king of the conosole world for two generations and still believe they are indomitable. There is an interesting article at
http://kotaku.com/gaming/gag-order/scea-prez-we-do nt-buy-exclusivity-274862.php

about how Sony refuses to pay for exclusivity (though that wasnt the case when they were trying to kill Sega and Nintendo two generations ago, look at square), IMHO this will be their downfall. It's amusing that Sony bashes Nintendo's over-dependence on 1st party development yet they are well on their way to the same dependancy. When it comes to product wars you do what you have to do to win, if MS gets the leg up on Sony only Sony will be the blame.

Re:Cross platform is good for everyone but fanboys

[jythie]

Almost.

You forget that making a game cross platform also increases development time while cutting features since they have to write and test on multiple hardware platforms then optimize for the lowest common denominator.

For instance, if the PS3 is good at X but bad at Y, and the xbox 360 is good at Y but bad at X, then the engine developers generally will develop something that avoids both X and Y.

Granted this can be mitigated (for instance, a title released for PS3/360 will probably have a better graphics set then a Wii but little else different) but this method comes at the cost of complexity, code space, and testing time.

So cross platform ends up hurting everyone a little, while single platform hurts everyone who doesn't have that console quite a bit but skips a lot of the mess for the people who DO have them.

Re:Cross platform is good for everyone but fanboys

[dj_tla]

I agree with you to great extent, however, I do want to make a note that developing for multiple consoles is a time-consuming endeavour that can result in some sacrifices to game quality. In the last generation, developing for GC, PS2 and XBox was not as difficult, as the specs of each machine were close enough that properly designed modular code wouldn't need to be changed, just added on to. Yet even then, you would be limited in each area (CPU, memory, graphics, etc.) by the lowest-performing system in the bunch, meaning you might not take advantage of each system's strong points.

Things have shifted towards rewarding exclusivity. PS3's cell architecture is certainly very powerful, but taking advantage of the cores takes specialized code. Certainly no game that runs on the PS3 or XBox 360 would run well on the Wii without significant changes, regardless of the control scheme. Perhaps it's time that consoles start differentiating even more; I have no doubt that great, innovative games will come out for the Wii that take advantage of its differences. Games will come out for the PS3 that look and feel amazing because they take advantage of its power. Already we see games on the XBox 360 that use XBox Live so successfully that playing it on another system is unsatisfying. Yes, it means gamers have to spend more for systems. But with any luck, we will be rewarded with more interesting games. *crosses fingers*

Re:Cross platform is good for everyone but fanboys

[YU Nicks NE Way]

Oh, look. It's the Sony astroturf troll!

Good to see you again, guy. You do realize that commercial slander is a crime, right?

Re:Cross platform is good for everyone but fanboys

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Given that the other alternative is Sony (as Nintendo isn't fighting to be cutting edge)

I think Nintendo's point is that cutting edge for it's own sake is beside the point of gaming. And I respect them for that, they do seem to have some pretty fun games, the other two platforms seem to be be cutting edge for its own sake. I suppose one might also legitimately say that Nintendo is cutting edge marching to the beat of its own drummer.

Re:Cross platform is good for everyone but fanboys

[Khaed]

I wasn't denigrating Nintendo there; I have a Wii, because of the three systems, it seemed to offer the most of what I wanted. I liked a lot of Nintendo's older games, so the virtual console is nice (yes, there's emulation -- but the VC games look better, to me, than my emulated games. I'm not sure why, though). The Gamecube backwards compatibility is also nice, as I liked a few games there -- Metroid, Mario Kart: DD.

But it's nowhere near graphically capable of taking on, say, the 360, and Nintendo has never pretended otherwise.

I think one of Sony's problems is what you said: Cutting edge just for the sake of it. They're so cutting edge the price is out of many people's range (and I think the sales compared to the much-lesser-powered Wii show this). $600 is a lot of money for a toy, especially if the majority of your target audience are teenagers or college students. They lost something between the PS2 and PS3, and I'm not sure what it was -- but now they're losing exclusives because of it.

Re:Cross platform is good for everyone but fanboys

[LKM]

I'd tend to Sony simply because they're incompetent. If Microsoft gains control of the console market, they're not going to fuck around and screw it up next gen. They're going to make damn sure they stay in control, and they're going to do whatever it takes, see Windows. Sony, on the other hand, is too disorganized internally.

If one of them is to win, I want it to be Sony. Not because they're more moral, but because they're more incompetent.

Re:Cross platform is good for everyone but fanboys

[DrXym]

I think next gen consoles are easily comparable platforms, just as PS2 / XBox and GC were before. And by next gen I mean XBox 360 and PS3, not Wii which I'll comment on afterwards. Sure there are differences between the 360 & PS3 but there is also a great deal of similarity - the amount of memory, CPU speed, the supported resolutions, the controllers, the network connectivity and so forth. It means all graphic assets, sounds, and a great deal of the game code is going to be identical for either platform. You can also toss in the PC as another platform that can share code & assets with the 360 & PS3. I hear people sometimes say next gen is more expensive to develop than last gen, but it must be remembered that the more platforms you can support from the same code, the cheaper things become. I think most games companies will be keen to support 360, PS3 and PC since they can share assets and probably 90% of the code too.

The Cell is different from the 3-core 360 but most cross-platform games (and indeed single platform games) do not hit the bare metal anyway. The likes of EA / Ubisoft / Activision have in-house teams that write tools and libraries that hide most of the platform specifics so for the most part the game code will be platform agnostic. There are also plenty of 3rd party middleware libs such as Havok, Physx, Renderware, Unreal etc. that also hide the details. Even when the code does have to hit the metal, proper abstraction can insulate most of the code from the specifics. We're almost at the point where PS3 / 360 cross-platform titles are virtually identical. The PS3 may still be slightly behind but that can be chalked up to the immaturity of the middleware which will obviously get better.

I think there is scope for consoles to split off in ways that exploit their strengths. For example the Cell is basically a number shovel. It can act almost like a preprocessor for the GPU, doing texturing, wave effects, clipping, scene culling etc. allowing the PS3 to render enormous maps with enormous numbers of environmental effects. The 360 has 3 general purpose cores which means it is easier to get sophisticated AI out of it as well as better and more mature network play.

I think the odd man out is clearly the Wii. It doesn't have the memory, CPU, resolution or anything else remotely approaching either the 360 or PS3. It is clearly impossible for games to share much at all between Wii and other new consoles. Even Miyamoto called it a Gamecube 1.5. This is why it is getting an unusually large number of PS2 ports. In time it may break away from the PS2 but the number of exclusives (or franchise spin-offs) will be more reflective of limitations than any strength.

Damn it...

[nschubach]

Damn it, I forgot my Sony bashing hat...

Re:Damn it...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's ok, just make a OMG DNF Nat Portgrits on Ponies joke and all will be well!!!

We're still looking at some great exclusive games.

[tarun713]

I disagree that MGS4 and FFXIII will be the only 'big' exclusives on the PS3.

God of War 3, Kingdom Hearts, White Knight Story - these are just a few of the exclusive games that will still only appear on the Playstation 3.

A price drop could balance the scales - but there are still exclusives on both sides that could pull a lot of weight.

Re:We're still looking at some great exclusive gam

[deathtopaulw]

also remember the next big title from the ICO team people (making it inevitable that I'll buy a PS3)

Re:We're still looking at some great exclusive gam

[metroid composite]

God of War 3: hasn't been announced (in fact the next two god of war games are for the PSP and mobile). Sony owns the God of War franchise, though, so it'll probably happen eventually I'll grant you.

Kingdom Hearts: Last I checked there hasn't been a PS3 version announced. A quick google search turned up "Kingdom Hearts not necessarily on PS3". Kingdom Hearts being one of the less photorealistic of Square's franchises actually seems to be an obvious switch to the Wii (much like Dragon Quest makes sense on the DS due to its cartoony style).

White Knight Story: Absolutely. Don't delude yourself into thinking that it's a high-profile game (I doubt it'll surpass the sales of, say, Valkyrie Profile: Silmeria, which is under 1 million worldwide) but it's certainly a PS3 game I'm hyped about.

AC6

[Anonymous Coward]

Not as big of a deal as some of those listed, but Ace Combat 6 should be a runner-up.

Yawn More Zonk FUD

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see, after six years in the console market and 7-8 billion dollars wasted on the Xbox fiasco, Microsoft has managed to:

* Get a half year old port of Virtual Fighter
* A flight sim - no one plays these on pcs anymore let alone consoles
* A gimped to 360 level graphics version of DMC - Sony has God of War, Heavenly Sword, Ninja Gaiden, and DMC all on one platform
* A gimped to 360 level graphics version of GTA

Golf clap Microsoft!

The 360 is selling at a worse rate than the first Xbox marketplace failure. Essentially selling to the very same pc gamer/Microsoft fan demographic in the US.

With the 360 having a 30-40 percent failure rate, the smaller than last gen storage medium(7gigs 360 vs 8gigs Xbox), a shitty online service(50 dollars a year for no dedicated servers or online world like Home), completely botched backwards compatibility, Microsoft isn't going even make it to their previous installed base numbers before they pull the plug on the whole 360 disaster.

Poor liddle Zonk, his pathetic attempts at FUD aren't going to save the 360 anymore than endless iPhone hype stories are going to get anyone but hardcore Apple fanboys go out and buy an underfeatured, overpriced phone.

Sony has built up their first party exclusives to a point where they are now this gen larger and more powerful than both Nintendo and Microsoft's own first party efforts combined.

God of War
Heavenly Sword
Little Big Planet
Warhawk
Gran Turismo
Final Fantasy
Killzone
Motorstorm
Resistance
Ratchet and Clank
Uncharted
Metal Gear Solid
White Knight Story
Tekken
Team Ico
SOCOM

And that is just stuff we know of for the next six to twelve months.

vs garbage like Halo 3 with shitty last gen graphics and pathetic 16 player P2P laggy networking or Forza 2's crappier than last gen graphics(WTF with the white speckles???)

Re:Yawn More Zonk FUD

[moderatorrater]

Is it just me, or is this that same Sony employee who's been posting on every Sony-related story for that past few months?

Re:Yawn More Zonk FUD

[VGPowerlord]

Sony has built up their first party exclusives to a point where they are now this gen larger and more powerful than both Nintendo and Microsoft's own first party efforts combined.

I don't recall Final Fantasy as being a first party. Square-Enix has gone on record as choosing to spread out their titles this generation.

I also wouldn't count Nintendo's first party line-up out yet, or Wii exclusives for that matter. Nintendo has always had a strong first/second party showing.

Re:Yawn More Zonk FUD

[Anonymous Coward]

I doubt he's actually a Sony employee but it is the same person posting repeatedly.

Re:Yawn More Zonk FUD

[xtinct]

i do find it interesting slashdot reports this story, as opposed to the reported ridiculous failure rate for the 360...

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=7892
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3160603

as a somewhat long-time slashdotter, i'm disappointed this hasn't shown up here for further discussion...

personal anecdote: there are two people i know of with an xbox 360; one is on his fourth and the other's network adapter doesn't work...

Re:Yawn More Zonk FUD

[Anonymous Coward]

I know 11 people irl with 360s, only one of ours has failed, they're all at least 6months old (bar one who we only got to get his last week), 2 of them were bought a few weeks after release. The failed one did do the red lights of death failure, it was bought in April '06.

I think the failure rate is higher than one would hope, but 33% is pushing it, in that case we'd expect that more than just one of ours would've failed. I also know plenty of people online with them and again, 33% seems unlikely, 10% seems the absolute max, but realistically I'd say 5% does seem about right when you look at the amount of people who have complained about it, compared to the amount that have 360s and bear in mind people aren't going to complain about not having a problem - sure even 5% is too high imo, but 33% is sheer sensationalism. Still, any amount of sensationalism to get your story noticed and your site hits up I suppose, that's something both sides are horribly guilty of.

The PS3 has a noticeable failure rate too, the difference is that nowhere near as many units have shifted so the noise isn't so large, when the 360 is doing rather well right now, the failure rate noise is just the easiest thing to pick up on and perpetuate the myth that said failure rate is much higher than it actually is in reality when trying to find a controversal story surrounding the 360.

Re:Yawn More Zonk FUD

[senatorpjt]

Hopefully, he'd notice that every post he makes gets modded as flamebait, and take a different tack.

Ken strikes again

[alvinrod]

"Newsweek reported that Take Two had wanted to continue its long-standing practice of giving Sony a lengthy timed exclusivity on the game, but they didn't want it. Newsweek says that former Sony Computer Entertainment president Ken Kutaragi's 'radio silence' on the issue left Sony's American execs without the authority to make deals, and nothing happened. Same with ... Assassin's Creed"

A lot of people have attributed some of the generally accepted poor decisions in the PS3's design to be Ken Kutaragi's doing, but I wasn't aware that he had anything to do with this. How can you not look at a game such as Grand Theft Auto IV and realize that it will be a major mover on consoles in the North American region. The sales numbers for the game during the PS2 generation were the best for any game on the console. Either he's incredibly stupid or was completly blinded by pride and assumed that consumers would flock to the new console regardless of whether or cost two dollars or two thousand and regardless of whether or not there were any good games on the platform.

I would have encouraged Take Two not only to release on the PS3 first, but to make the game big enough that it would need to span at least two DVD's, just to rub it in the face of anyone who said you didn't need Blu-Ray. Do you know how pissed off I would be if I had to switch DVDs ever time I drove to a certain part of the map? It doesn't matter if any exclusive they have eventually trickles out onto the Xbox 360, they just need something to create some buzz about and a set of good games that were designed for the PS3 first instead of lazily ported over after the fact.

What the hell was Ken thinking (or not thinking more likely) when all of this was going down?

Re:Ken strikes again

[I'll Provide The War]

Look at the top selling PS2 games in the US:
1. GTA:VC
2. GTA:SA
4: GTA 3

Can the fact that these titles sell so poorly in Japan really cause Japanese execs to ignore their importance? Talk about myopic.

http://vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php?name=&console= PS2&publisher=&sort=America

Either he's incredibly stupid or was completly blinded by pride and assumed that consumers would flock to the new console regardless of whether or cost two dollars or two thousand and regardless of whether or not there were any good games on the platform. Just look at his public statements:

> PS3 is "for consumers to think to themselves 'I will work more hours to buy one'. We want people to feel that they want it, irrespective of anything else."

And statements from other Sony execs:

> "We have built up a certain brand equity over time since the launch of PlayStation in 1995 and PS2 in 2000 that the first five million are going to buy it, whatever it is, even [if] it didn't have games"

Re:Ken strikes again

[Anonymous Coward]

"The sales numbers for [GTA] during the PS2 generation were the best for any game on the console."

This is just wrong. Dragon Quest VIII was the best selling game on the PS2. Much like Dragon Quest VII was the best selling game on the PS1.

Re:Ken strikes again

[Anonymous Coward]

"We have built up a certain brand equity over time since the launch of PlayStation in 1995 and PS2 in 2000 that the first five million are going to buy it, whatever it is, even [if] it didn't have games"

Yeah, that's an idiotically arrogant thing to say. However, it's also not far from the truth. They've sold quite a lot of PS3s - over 3 million - with hardly any games (almost no exclusives) and a very high price. Would an "off-brand" console have done that? I don't think so.

Re:We're still looking at some great exclusive gam

[Anonymous Coward]

God of War 3
Killzone
White Knight Story
Uncharted
Lair
Motorstorm
Resistance
Little Big Planet
SOCOM
Team ICO's new games
Metal Gear Solid
Final Fantasy XIII games
Warhawk
Ratchet and Clank

And that is just a quick list of the big ones off the top of my head. But I do love the absolutely bonkers attempts at fanboys trying to get people to believe the PS3 is 'down to' X numbers of exclusive games.

PS3 Going Strong

[Dr Kool, PhD]

What's with all the anti-PS3 FUD?? A great PS3 exclusive just came out today with Ninja Gaiden Sigma. Right around the corner is Hot Shots Golf, Heavenly Sword, MGS, Gran Turismo, and dozens of other great exclusives.

Why do Slashdot editors hate the PS3?

Re:PS3 Going Strong

[Anonymous Coward]

> Why do Slashdot editors hate the PS3?

The same reason they hype the iPhone:

They're paid to.

Slashdot use to be a legitimate tech discussion site years ago. At worst there was the John Katz crap. Now Slashdot has turned into a for hire marketing blog for companies like Apple and Microsoft.

Re:PS3 Going Strong

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. Besides Assassins Creed and GTA were never announced Ps3 exclusives. Only of the very few Ps3 exclusives lost I can remember is DMC4, which capcom remarked 'could only be done on Cell' yet they announced a port.

Same think with Kojima, who has stressed dozens of times, MGS4 would require all the space in a BD50 disc and would be impossible in 360 or Wii.

Re:PS3 Going Strong

[Anonymous Coward]

"A great PS3 exclusive just came out today with Ninja Gaiden Sigma"

It's only exclusive because most people played it years ago when it came out on the original XBox.

Re:PS3 Going Strong

[Anonymous Coward]

"Only of the very few Ps3 exclusives lost I can remember is DMC4, which capcom remarked 'could only be done on Cell' yet they announced a port."

Going back to when DMC4 was first announced it was a real custom next gen engine for the PS3 but when they realized that Sony wasn't going to pay them big bucks just for the exclusive so they switched to the crappy Lost Planet engine. This explains why the old amazing shots went away and now we are seeing the weak Lost Planet style graphics in the game footage. Look blur! Whoopie!

Sony has for fighting games this gen:

1) God of War 3
2) Heavenly Sword
3) Ninja Gaide Sigma/2
4) Devil May Cry

And there will most likely be more Sony first party exclusives. Sorry Capcom, you aren't worth the money. Put out your crappy 360 graphics version of DMC4, Sony doesn't need you this gen.

Re:PS3 Going Strong

[Trojan35]

Because Sony has once again overpromised on a console that frankly under-delivers. Compare that list of PS3 games (HS, MGS, GT) versus what MS has coming out on the cheaper platform with more games available (BioShock, Halo 3, Mass Effect, Two Worlds, Too Human, Blue Dragon).

We can debate which is better, but MS is obviously on the same playing field at a cheaper price. This means we don't have to put up with Sony's BS, FUD, and market bullying for a 3rd generation in a row. Honestly, the Sony bullying of developers during the PSone and PS2 days was despicable. I say, stick it to Sony.

Re:PS3 Going Strong

[Doctor_Jest]

What did they overpromise? I don't think it under-delivers at all. (And yes, I have both the 360 and the PS3) What you're comparing to is 360's 2nd year with Ps3's first year. Look at the first year of the 360... lackluster titles, QC issues (that haven't gone away)... I think Resistance and Motorstorm are solid titles (YMMV)... and no, I'm not in denial and trying to justify my purchase... I look forward to Heavenly Sword, and Lair... I'm one of the few people who couldn't care less about Halo 3.... and no, it's not because I hate Microsoft... it's because it's yet another FPS... (like Resistance... but Resistance has a story... I am guessing Halo 3 will be all about multiplayer... Halo 2 was sorta devoid of story as well... focus shifted to multiplayer. That's fine... just not my cup of tea.)

Consider this... this is the same boat the PS2 was in during its launch... people complained it was hard to program for, that it under-delivered (it actually did... didn't make the hype)... turned out to be the best-selling console (and still selling) of that generation. So, counting them out... "sticking it to them" for whatever reason is entirely too fanboyish... even for Slashdot. What did Sony do to you personally? Kill your dog? Rape your mom?

MS can't keep consoles running, won't admit they have a flaw, and has a failure rate that makes the PsOne's problems seem tiny... yet no one is giving them shit about it... well, besides the people who have to return their console a 2nd or 3rd time for the "red rings of death".

Am I saying that for Fanboy points? No. Just for some perspective. Sony's not all bad, and MS is not all good. They both have their strengths... and having them both competing for your entertainment dollar makes for a better experience... add the Wii as a wildcard and we all win. :)

Stomp and run Sony out of town with pitchforks and torches serves only to divide... We are talking about faceless corporations here. :) Not Ma and Pa organizations "fighting the man."

And just for the record: More games != better games. I would rather have 3 great titles than 30 mediocre ones.

Re:PS3 Going Strong

[Anonymous Coward]

Out of those you mentioned, only Mass Effect and Blue Dragon are exclusives.

Re:PS3 Going Strong

[Anonymous Coward]

And Mass Effect looks like shit. Ignoring the usual stupid UE3 engine marketing bullshots of course...

Re:PS3 Going Strong

[Anonymous Coward]

You really should try a period every now and then, instead of just ellipses.

Re:PS3 Going Strong

[ucblockhead]

Yeah, thank God!

With Microsoft in control, we can be sure there will be no BS, FUD and market bullying.

Re:PS3 Going Strong

[Anonymous Coward]

what, all 11 people who had an Xbox?

Re:PS3 Going Strong

[LKM]

Ninja Gaiden Sigma? A port from an Xbox game? I think you just made a point, but not the one you wanted to make.

Re:PS3 Going Strong

[Doctor_Jest]

Nah.... I... don't... really... feel... like... it...

thanks... for... your... input... though....

Nevermind that didnt last long...

[grapeape]

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid= 26340

Seems paying for exclusivity is ok but only if you call it "collaboration"

trends

[d3l33t]

I believe that in a few years to come, Sony's product will be superior in hardware, making it extremely difficult for developers to produce 'up to date' graphics on other systems. From a developers point of view, knowing that every console has a 60 gig hard drive at your disposal, makes it hard to turn away. You will slowly notice a gap in functionality with the systems and the one that's more versatile shall conquer.

"It is not enough to succeed. Others must fail." -Gore Vidal

Re:trends

[Megane]

I believe that in a few years to come, Sony's product will be superior in hardware

That doesn't make sense. Either the hardware is superior now or it isn't. The whole point of console systems is that the hardware platform is going to remain stable for 4-6 years.

It may take a while to use it to the fullest... but only if enough people buy PS3s to justify the extra work of pushing the hardware beyond just filling a Blu-Ray disc with more FMV cutscene crap.

Re:trends

[Actually, I do RTFA]

I believe that in a few years to come, Sony's product will be superior in hardware, making it extremely difficult for developers to produce 'up to date' graphics on other systems. From a developers point of view, knowing that every console has a 60 gig hard drive at your disposal, makes it hard to turn away. You will slowly notice a gap in functionality with the systems and the one that's more versatile shall conquer.

If true, it just means Sony's PS3 will remain an expensive 360 alternative. No one is going to write two engines, so there is an incredible 1st mover advantage. Because, by making the 360 crowd impossible to ignore, MS has guaranteed that all games will be written to work on both, which means taking no advantage of the 5 cores (yes there are 7 (the 8th was cut for cost reasons), but two are reserved), because it needs to run on teh three core 360 as well. Which is why I'm glad I banked on a 360 and a Wii

Re:trends

[LKM]

Yeah. The "we will win in 3 years" argument never worked in console gaming. And the PS3 just isn't a much better system than the 360. Even the Genesis/SNES were more different.

Re:We're still looking at some great exclusive gam

[Anonymous Coward]

MGS4 and FFXIII and the only big _third party_ exclusives. Kingdom Hearts hasn't been announced - I wouldn't be surprised to see it on the Wii.

Re:Sony's best exclusives are their own

[Cheapy]

Ensemble Studios and Big Huge. For some reason they are always forgotten when a discussion of MS's games comes up.

As i see it...

[Anonymous Coward]

There will be a lot of multi platform games but more for 360.... ps3 will be more exclusive, just like original xbox was! it hadn't got as many titles as ps2 but did pretty well too. It had a more powerful hardware and so on but even that, they didnt win past gen.

PS2 lives on, so will the 3

[scolen2]

So this all sounds just like the early years of the PS2. OMG it costs too much, and OMG there are no games. OMG, the xbox looks better. Ya, but look at it now. I'm still playing the games on my PS2 more then the 360 right now, and so what if the 360 has a lead now. It makes sence. Its eazier to program for and its market is already set up. when it comes time for the next gen games like GTAV, and others. They will be on the PS3 first and they will look better then the 360 and in 5 years from now I will still have my PS3 and it will be awesome not that all the teams figured out how to program for it while all the 360 games look just the same as they do now. Say all you guys want about coffins, you are just sheep of the marketing machine. Look at history, it will repeat it's self. Oh ya, and BD won. You just dont know it yet.

Re:PS2 lives on, so will the 3

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm, PS2 had the largest game catelog of its generation the very second it came out; all PS1 games worked on PS2. Plus it took some time before games really started to take full advantage of the new hardware so for a while you couldn't really tell that much of a difference between PS1 and PS2 games anyway.

Last generation, PS2 was the weakest of all 3 consoles hardware wise. But it was the strongest performer in sales because of its game library. It surged ahead of everyone primarily because of its exclusives.

Xbox was FAR FAR FAR superior to the PS2 in virtually every way except library. It got slaughtered in sales.

Game libraries sell a console. What's in the library and how many. That means in order to have an advantage you have to have good exclusives. XBox 360 has those right now. PS3 doesn't so far. If Microsoft is smart, they'll try to buy out a few more exclusives and really seal the deal.

Something that is dead can't live on

[Fross]

The PS2 lives on, ie still gets new games, still has an active community, simply because there are millions upon millions of them out there, over 65 million according to vgchartz.com. Developers release new games when they feel they can see a large number of them. God of War 2 on the PS2 is a great example.

The PS3 is already flagging behind the Xbox 360 quite a way - not only has it sold only 1/3 of the Xbox 360's volume to date, it's also selling fewer week by week. Losing exclusives means there is less incentive to get the PS3, and will continue to have a smaller market share. GTA V coming to PS3 exclusive? Why would they do that, when IV is coming out for both? They're obviously moving away from PS-only.

I'm sure the PS3's games will be more impressive given time. However, given the graphics on the 360 / PS3 seem about the same now on new releases, I'm sure the 360's games will improve equally, and there will continue to be little difference, if any. The only way Sony could differentiate their console is to have exclusive games, that are better than anything the competition has. It's what the PS2 had, and even the Xbox did (such as with Halo). The only way they'll get third-party exclusives is if they have a large userbase they can use to leverage that, otherwise they will have to be developed in-house (or brought in-house, as Microsoft did with Bungie)

(I'm no 360 fanboy. I only have a Wii, and think that's the only fun console out of the 3 at the moment ;) )

Re:Something that is dead can't live on

[miro f]

actually you'll find VGChartz says PS2 has around 118 million PS2 owners. You're probably using the figures from the "Hardware Comparison" chart which doesn't contain Europe figures.

Anyway, when most people say "the PS3 is in exactly the same situation the PS2 was in" they fail to mention some pretty important differences:

The PS2 was released a year and a half earlier than its other main competitors (Not including the Dreamcast) and flew out of the gates, selling in Japan faster than Sony could produce (at a rate higher than the Wii) and subsequently at the US and European launches went on and did even better.

The PS3 released a year after one major competitor and at the same time as another, and after a quick start sales fell to record lows and stayed there for six months to make the PS3 launch faster than only the failed consoles. (doesn't even beat the PS2 Japan launch)

Sony is smart to lose some exclusives

[DrXym]

Sony would have loved to hang on to GTA but when you consider that Microsoft paid them 50 million dollars just for some downloadable content, is it any surprise that they did not? Imagine how much Take Two must have been demanding from Sony for exclusive rights. It wouldn't surprise me if they were asking 50-100 million at least.

That is a lot of money, enough in fact for Sony to fund 5-10 1st party titles or maybe 30 PSN store titles. No wonder Sony told TTWO where to stick it.

Other than that, most of the other exclusives really don't mean much for system sales. Devil May Cry might be a great game but I doubt it sold many consoles. And if it would have cost 10 million to keep it exclusive, perhaps the decision was that the money is better spent elsewhere.

Sure that means losing exclusives, but it also means that the money goes to making new exclusives. People talk of Sony losing exclusives when they have something like 15-20 games in the works at present, many of which are new exclusives. Think Resistance, Motorstorm, Lair, Uncharted, Heavenly Sword etc.

At the end of the day, it's not like you can't play GTA or Assasins Creed or Devil May Cry. They're still all there so I really don't see the fuss. If someone asked me if I'd rather your game had 5 great exclusive sequels, or 5 great cross-platform sequels and 10 brand new exclusives (some of which are also great), I know what option I'd choose.

Re:Sony is smart to lose some exclusives

[Refelian]

Smart? The GTA series (4 games) sold 37 million on the ps2. The top 4 of the best selling ps2 games consists of 3 GTA games. I would say that losing the early lead Sony had with the ps2 could be quite devastating to the ps3.

You would think that with the kind of numbers GTA manages Sony would be more than willing to pay that 50-100 million.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_ video_games#PlayStation_2

Re:Sony is smart to lose some exclusives

[DrXym]

Smart? The GTA series (4 games) sold 37 million on the ps2. The top 4 of the best selling ps2 games consists of 3 GTA games. I would say that losing the early lead Sony had with the ps2 could be quite devastating to the ps3.

Yes smart. GTA IV is still coming to the PS3 so what's the problem? As I said if they can fund 5-10 games for what GTA would have cost to keep exclusive. I'd rather see Sony bulk up with new exclusives rather than pay through the nose to hang onto existing ones.

And I say that as someone who has owned pretty much every GTA title at one title at one time or another. I'm looking forward to GTA IV, but I really don't care that it's coming to the 360 too. Good for them. I just hope the PS3 version isn't hobbled by the DVD-9 capacity of the 360.

Even the much vaunted exclusive content for the 360 isn't happening until some time next year and might end up being a "timed exclusive" or similar. The PS3 is rumoured to be exclusive content which may or may not be the same content just 6 months later. I hope Sony didn't pay to get it and don't see why they should if Take Two rake it in from people downloading the content from the PSN store.

Re:Sony is smart to lose some exclusives

[ivan256]

None of the GTA games were Playstation exclusive.

GTA4 is still going to be on the PS3. $50 million for some downloadable content is just as stupid as paying $350 million for Rare (lauded as the deathblow for Nintendo at the time). But if Microsoft wants to blow more of their cash, I'm all for it. It's $50 million less they have available to use patent trolling.

Re:Sony is smart to lose some exclusives

[triffid_98]

Don't forget the last valuable exclusive Microsoft bought from Rockstar Games, 'table tennis'. Once upon a time Rare was probably worth $350mil (such as when the Goldeneye development team still worked there), but that was what, 1998?

$50 million for some downloadable content is just as stupid as paying $350 million for Rare (lauded as the deathblow for Nintendo at the time). But if Microsoft wants to blow more of their cash, I'm all for it.

Holy @#%ing @^it!?

[AbRASiON]

I had no idea Kutaragi was arrogant enough to actually turn GTA4 as an exclusive.
That is, without doubt one of the most stupid things I've ever ever heard - hot jesus that's stupid!

I hate to admit I'm a rabid fanboy for something, but I would without doubt drop the full 1.1k$ it would cost me (AUD) to purchase a PS3 and GTA4 if it was exclusive - no hesitation.

No other game do I rate that highly - that man is nuts - bye bye Ken, glad to see you go.

Not really

[LKM]

Exclusives are good for a platform's health. I bought a PS3 and a Wii, and I'm not going to buy a 360. Currently, there are pretty much no games available for the PS3, and many of those that are are also available (often in superior versions) on the 360. Obviously, the PS3 isn't selling well, so games aren't showing up.

A few A-list exclusives could changes that. They could give people an incentive to buy a PS3, which would publishers give an incentive to put more effort into their PS3 ports, and create more original PS3 titles. I'm not a Sony or Playstation fanboy. I've never owned a PS1 or a PS2, and I try to avoid Sony's stuff whenever possible. But from my perspective, as an owner of a PS3, I want more PS3 exclusives.

Let's not forget...

[Mark Gillespie]

That Microsoft PAID for GTA IV, $50,000,000 infact..

Anyone want yo count the new Exclusives on PS3, to replace the lost old ones? I think they may very well outnumber the lost ones..