Slashdot Mirror
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."
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 ato nt-buy-exclusivity-274862.php
http://kotaku.com/gaming/gag-order/scea-prez-we-d
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.
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.)
:)
:) Not Ma and Pa organizations "fighting the man."
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.
And just for the record: More games != better games. I would rather have 3 great titles than 30 mediocre ones.
It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
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
> 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"
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.