Sony's Jack Tretton: 'We don't buy exclusivity'
by Ludwig Kietzmann 
{ Jul 3rd 2007 at 6:17PM }
Perhaps now would be a good time to start? In an interview published within the latest issue of PSM, Sony Computer Entertainment America president, Jack Tretton, responds to the magazine's observation that there are fewer exclusive titles bound for (and to) the PlayStation 3 than there possibly could be. Mr. Tretton explains that Sony's approach to the acquisition of exclusives is different than those of competitors, perhaps in the sense that it's far more noble and devoid of unspeakable acts of bribery. Or perhaps in the sense that there isn't much of an approach at all."Yeah, 'fewer exclusives' is a term, and I don't know what makes an exclusive," says Tretton. "We have a very different approach to exclusives than some of our competitors. We don't buy exclusivity. We don't fund development. We don't, for the lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform." That's correct, generating reasons for consumers to purchase and enjoy your console over others became a dubious, underhanded maneuver when you weren't looking. Since the publisher (of third-party titles such as Heavenly Sword and Lair) isn't willing to stoop that low, it would much rather "earn" exclusives. "We earn it by saying 'you can build a better game on our platform. If you focus your development on our platform, you will ultimately be more successful. We can try to partner up with you from a technological standpoint. We can try to partner up with you from a marketing standpoint. But just economically and technologically, this is the system that makes the most sense for you.'"
With money apparently not changing hands for that exclusive status, how do you suppose the system's comparatively small install base makes "the most sense" economically? No answer is obtained from Tretton, who then rightly notes that as a first-party, Sony has a very strong ability to provide plenty of exclusive titles. However, he warns that relying too much on first-party endeavors as Nintendo does might not make for a "healthy environment" and that conversely, Microsoft is "too dependent on the third-party community."
Grab a copy of this month's PSM to read the full interview.
[Via GamesRadar Forums]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
ComradeTrotskii @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:21PM
Ha ha. Sonys PR people crack me up.
TheGuy @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:24PM
Oh boy, this will start a flame war.
jsn @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:25PM
It would be funny if Sony was really just pulling our chains with their lies, excuses and PR blunders all along and they were doing it just so they could have the last laugh. I mean, it would be funny, right?
kingofwale @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:25PM
Sony: we don't buy exclusivity.... YET
I don't doubt that, SOny never needed to do that anyway. but they do not.
nick @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:27PM
Didn't Sony just partner with Quantic Dream for a new title that will be exlusive to the PS3?
Didn't Sony fund further development of Flow?
shirizaki @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:27PM
GTA. They bought that.
But MS has been buying more. They pulled dead rising to the 360. They bought Ace Combat 6 and a couple of others. They are scared of Sony and want to hold their lead over Sony.
But alot more games have come out for both systems like Assassins Creed, GTA4, and a few others.
But in terms of first party games, Sony has the upper hand. Resistance was a fun game and so was motorstorm. Not to mention GoW3. And the 3rd party exclusives like NGS that was just released, MGS4, Lair, and a couple others.
It took the 360 a little while to gather steam. I remember last summer the only online game people played was Halo 2. Now it's split between Forza 2, GoW, and Halo 2.
GJM @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:32PM
They don't buy exclusivity, just timed exclusivity. What a joke. Semantics FTW. Just give me something besides BluRays already! (Not that I'm not enjoying my BluRays)
BPM @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:36PM
Sony hasn't had the need, before, to buy exclusivity. The last two generations of consoles, they were the top dog. If developers wanted to make loads of money, they'd be foolish to not make a PlayStation version of their games. It's not to say a game that would only be on Saturn, N64, GameCube, Dreamcast, or Xbox would do bad, but by bringing the game to the PlayStation family, they would reach a much wider audience.
Microsoft had to. They had to beat Sony to the punch to the current generation, and they had to hit hard. And the only way to lure developers away from Sony is with cash, loads of it. Which they have to spend.
However, Sony cannot rest this generation. In all markets, they're in a distant second/third place, with the Wii outselling it like mad, and is quickly approaching 360's total sales.
The way things have panned out, Wii is the new PS2 (leading in all markets), PS3 is the new GCN (trailing in all markets, except Japan), and 360 is the new... Xbox (the middle child, except in Japan).
Sony needs to work harder to secure developers on the platform. $600 is not a mass market price, so people aren't snatching it up like they were with the last two PlayStations. However, more games, that are either better on PS3 than 360 or exclusive to PS3, will help convince more people to play beyond.
Big Boy @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:38PM
what happen to Sony? im losing more and more hope with them.
faith_lost @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:38PM
Sony does buy exclusivity, if the chatter that this year's E3 will unveil a new Epic property exclusively for the PLAYSTATION 3 is any true--purportedly Sony is throwing bucketloads of cash at Epic for this deal.
Digi Smalls @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:40PM
Pride and Dignity are not the same thing.
Pride is sin for a reason. it's an ugly human trait that has brought down countless empires.
.
HaloFans @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:42PM
Square-Enix anyone?
GodisaMyth @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:43PM
"GTA. They bought that."
If memory serves me correctly....all they did was sign an exclusive deal with Rockstar that would last until November 2004. They never paid money for it.
"Didn't Sony just partner with Quantic Dream for a new title that will be exlusive to the PS3?
Didn't Sony fund further development of Flow?"
They published Flow, and they are going to publish the Quantric Dream title.
Microsoft has been buying games for exclusivity from publishers.
Bring on E3!!!
Ian Von Porter @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:44PM
Its funny. With FF7, the game the that solidified the PS brand for the past 10+ years.. they didnt have to buy exclusivity. The PS platform was the only platform that enable Square to do what they wanted to do with the FF series.. N64 couldnt do it... so the franchise went to PS due to the technology advantage.
Same thing is happening with FF13, MGS4 (maybe), etc.
BluRay + Cell ftw!
(back to NGS)
Brad Lee @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:47PM
The more Microsoft can steal from PS3, the more likely the 360 will stay in the lead. Sony may not have needed to buy exclusivity, but nowadays methinks they need to rethink their strategies, otherwise MS is just going to nibble them away game by game.
I'm interested to see how the holidays tip the scales one way or the other or the other. Nintendo has a few big names coming up, 360 has the bad boy Halo 3, and Sony has... I'm not sure what, actually.
But even more interesting would be a possible price drop. If PS3's price dropped, I'm sure 360 would drop just to make sure they stay in the lead, then, would Wii drop too? Would Nintendo even need to at this point?
Spitkicker @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:48PM
Oh SONY you guys are a riot!!
"We earn it by saying 'you can build a better game on our platform. If you focus your development on our platform, you will ultimately be more successful. We can try to partner up with you from a technological standpoint. We can try to partner up with you from a marketing standpoint. But just economically and technologically, this is the system that makes the most sense for you.'"
WTF? LOL. Go grill me a steak Tretton.
By the way isn't this the same clown who said he would pay us if we can find PS3's in stock? News flash buddy, they are not selling.
Digi Smalls @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:51PM
Ian Van Porter, by your logic, Final Fantasy should've been on Gamecube or Xbox because of the "technology advantage".
it's called "install base" and PS3 doesn't have it.
.
Dave @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:51PM
"It took the 360 a little while to gather steam. I remember last summer the only online game people played was Halo 2. Now it's split between Forza 2, GoW, and Halo 2."
Actually, I think Shadowrun and Crackdown are ahead of Halo2 in online play. Either way, those are the games people prefer to play ONLINE. The number of excellent 360 games far outnumber the current PS3 count of two.
LR @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:54PM
Sony funds Level-5, which is developing an exclusive title for the PS3.
I don't see how Sony can say it doesn't buy exclusivity or fund development. They do. And they apparently lie about it.
Masked Magi @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:55PM
You know what Sony (playstaion department)? Fuck you.
Simple and to the point.
fragglefart @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:55PM
So full of shite, too funny.
LOL Sony.
Ian Von Porter @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:56PM
Hey DigiS... im not saying its a rule.. im just thats what happened.
N64 used cartridges, PS1 used CDs.. Square couldnt do FF7 on cartridges, so the exclusive went to PS1... technology advantage brings in the exclusive.
GJM @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:56PM
Digi Smalls,
Using "Ian Van Porter" and word "logic" in the same sentence defies it.
BPM @ Jul 3rd 2007 6:59PM
@GodisaMyth:
"If memory serves me correctly....all they did was sign an exclusive deal with Rockstar that would last until November 2004. They never paid money for it."
While it is possible, it doesn't seem very logical to enter an exclusivity contract with one console manufacturer, unless you'd be getting something in return for it. Because by preventing themselves from releasing GTA on PC and Xbox (even for just a certain amount of time), they limit who they can possibly sell the game to.
There is, of course, the advantage of ease of coding for making a game for just one system. However, that'd only be true if they meant to make GTA for PS2 and ONLY PS2 (which was not the case).
Digi Smalls @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:02PM
IVP, i hear you.
but later Final Fantasies could have gone to Gamecube and Xbox because of their technology advantages over PS2. but by that time, it didn't matter because the PS2 market was already too big. the same has already been said lots of times with the 360 over the PS3.
.
synce @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:03PM
Sony doesn't buy exclusivity because they don't have any money. If PS3 and Blu-ray fail, Sony fails. Can't afford to throw around $50M at every developer. And who cares how you get exclusives, anyway? If MS wants to, they can buy out every developer! People have to face the fact that MS will eventually be number 1 in the console market, just like the computer market.
Evan @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:12PM
Sony secures exclusivity by being publisher to developers like Insomniac, Naughty Dog, Game Republic, Ninja Theory, etc. (I think it's a shame because it locks some great developers into developing for Sony.)
The majority of PS3 exclusives are under the publishing thumb of Sony... 35 of the present and future exclusive PS3 games listed on Wikipedia are published by Sony. Konami has 8. A few others like Ubisoft, Tecmo, and Namco each have 1 or 2 PS3 exclusives, but overall, it's mostly Sony.
Sizer @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:13PM
Timed exclusivity is all that matters. It's that year while the game is available on your platform and not on the others that makes the difference.
If you discount timed exclusives there's no such thing as an exclusive game because they all end up in a virtual console or classics collection or emulator eventually anyhow.
Rubang B @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:18PM
Why did Tretton take a swipe at Nintendo there?
"Nintendo makes good games, which is bad, so we don't make good games, which is good. Microsoft pays big chunks of money for 3rd-party exclusives, which is bad, so we don't pay big chunks of money for 3rd-party exclusives, which is good. So basically, we don't have a great first-party or third-party line-up, but we have the most powerful system, so the potential is out there.! Our system is so powerful that it can thrive on movie tie-in shovelware! 599 U.S. dollars!"
I think Sony was just getting totally shitfaced and swimming through huge piles of money for 10 years, and they seriously have no idea why they were such a huge success and now they seriously have no idea why they are now such a huge failure. The movie Blank Check comes to mind.
cwolf267 @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:25PM
And I don't have a dead hooker in my car.
Oh wait...
Digi Smalls @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:25PM
hu·bris [hyoo-bris, hoo-]
–noun
excessive pride or self-confidence; arrogance.
[Origin: 1880–85; < Gk hýbris insolence]
.
Spitkicker @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:29PM
@cwolf267
Dude..now her pimp might go hungry. Why? Just tell me why?
fawazr @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:32PM
"We don't buy exclusivity [anymore]."
DWells55 @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:32PM
Isn't this the guy who said he'd pay $1,200 if you could find an in-stock PS3 at a time where they available at every single store around the country? It is? Then don't trust a word the man says.
RPGS @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:42PM
Von Porter last time I checked Sony gave square 120-125$ million dollars after they’re movie failure. Don’t care what it is called it is paying. Cell+ blu-ray for Inferior graphics and slow load times! Also giving lower licensing rates for a game is still paying for it to me! If they charge one company $10
Per disk and another $5 they are still paying! And yes they all do this. I don’t care what you call it, it is still paying!
djricekcn @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:43PM
You guys should re-read it and think at a different approach and not directly
Spitkicker @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:45PM
@djricekcn
Who should rethink it with a different approach..the people posting or SONY? Sorry, just can't tell what you mean.
Martez @ Jul 3rd 2007 7:46PM
"I think Sony was just getting totally shitfaced and swimming through huge piles of money for 10 years, and they seriously have no idea why they were such a huge success and now they seriously have no idea why they are now such a huge failure."
Ding-ding-ding!
Zeouterlimits @ Jul 3rd 2007 8:02PM
'We don't buy exclusivity'
And people aren't buying your console.
(Perceptively, of course)
Mr Khan @ Jul 3rd 2007 8:17PM
They really need to get rid of this guy, as the first step in an effort to revitalize their image
Triforceowner @ Jul 3rd 2007 8:22PM
"Yeah, 'fewer consoles sold' is a term, and I don't know what makes a console sell less. We have a very different approach to selling consoles than some of our competitors. We don't sell consoles. We don't think ahead. We don't, for the lack of a better term, get games that people will want to play on our platform and only ours."
My friend has this great gesture where he points at you and says in perfect timing, "You're screwed." I wish he was here today to point at Jackie-boy and say, "You're screwed."
alexy @ Jul 3rd 2007 8:46PM
@34.
I belive it is, Sony is such an arogant company....
I can't belive he even said
"We earn it by saying 'you can build a better game on our platform. If you focus your development on our platform, you will ultimately be more successful. We can try to partner up with you from a technological standpoint. We can try to partner up with you from a marketing standpoint. But just economically and technologically, this is the system that makes the most sense for you.'"
If they really wanted to back up developers with their progress...why make a cell that further complicates developing on their systems, and they are clealy not helping enough as games like Madden run better on 360.....
It complete bull in my eyes....
IMO As soon as M$ took an intrest in Console gaming Sony was doomed....
You don't Run companies with that attitude....someone should tell sony you don't
EARN games through fairness and honor....
You do it with MONEY...
M$ is a tyrant and thats why I like them, They won't stop till they are on top, M$ might not win this gen....but soon...Im SURE of it...M$ WILL dominate this market as it has in software...
If they are evil towards my benifit...then good...
Also remember that Sony has been in this market for years as M$ is still new, they're approce seems to be working fine, They still have a pretty small fanbase and developer support but that will all change in due time.....
Moosh @ Jul 3rd 2007 8:57PM
Maybe it's just me - but I think that Sony's Director of Marketing should be the LAST person who is plagued by "lack of a better term"-itis.
Tim @ Jul 3rd 2007 8:59PM
Tretton is probably accurate when he says they don't "buy" exclusivity in the form of a large lump payment made before the games release (ala Microsoft and the GTA payment).
I do decision support for an industry larger than gaming and I can say 99% of the time we don't 'buy' exclusivity by his definition either. Realize there's a % of each purchase which is split between the developer and the platform owner (Sony)...aka platform fee. That fee is variable and Sony likely has standard terms which state (as example) if the game is multiplatform the fee per game is $6, timed exclusive the fee is $3 during the exclusivity, and completely exculsive $1.50. On occasion, a game might be so compelling in the lineup (MGS4) Sony knows customers will buy their console just for that game. In that case, they may wave the fee entirely knowing they'll get a certain amount of increased sales on their box.
Eric @ Jul 6th 2007 9:41AM
"M$ is a tyrant and thats why I like them, They won't stop till they are on top, M$ might not win this gen....but soon...Im SURE of it...M$ WILL dominate this market as it has in software...
If they are evil towards my benifit...then good..."
I know there's no hope getting this through your fanboy opinion...BUT
1) I hope you realize someday competition in any industry is what's good for us all. If it wasn't for Sega and Sony we'd all be playing Metal Gear Mario & God of Mario Party. Evolution & innovation are driven through competition. I have both a PS3 & 360 and I'm glad these two are duking it out, because it means I get to play outstanding games on both sides.
2) I hope you also realize that while you're hoping for Sony's demise (again, why that's a good thing for anyone who enjoys good games I don't know), Nintendo and the Wii is whooping everyone's butt. It won't take long for the industry to realize where the money is and that's with the system which has the greatest install based and the cheapest development costs. And MS will never get the Wii's exclusives, as they are all 1st party. If MS wants to be a long term player and powerhouse in the industry, they need a stronger 1st party presence.
Dale @ Jul 3rd 2007 10:30PM
Jack Tretton really should stop talking. He still owes Penny Arcade $13,200, so he can't lose his job too soon:
http://kotaku.com/gaming/jack-tretton/jack-tretton-owes-penny-arcade-13200-235648.php
Jason @ Jul 3rd 2007 11:58PM
AMAZING! Keep it coming, Tretton... God I love his logic. Sony brings nothing worthwhile this generation... just about every multi-platform game looks or runs better on the 360.
"Hey, the PS3 is harder to develop for and has 1/3 the install base of Xbox. Don't you see how it makes sense to stay with us? ZOMG, so obvious!!1!"
Kham @ Jul 4th 2007 3:13AM
This coming from the guy that stated PS3s were hard to find when they were....well everywhere. Dont need Scooby Doo to sniff this one out as being bs.
GamerG @ Jul 4th 2007 4:56AM
Sony ""We earn it by saying 'you can build a better game on our platform. If you focus your development on our platform, you will ultimately be more successful. We can try to partner up with you from a technological standpoint. We can try to partner up with you from a marketing standpoint. But just economically and technologically, this is the system that makes the most sense for you.'"
MS "We have the biggest installer base, the easist machine to work on and oh here's a free pot of gold for your trouble as well, can I have your logo for a tattoo"
Hmmm wonder who i'd choose
BTW these does not bode well for Sony at E3 maybe he's trying to preempt an announcement.
Kazi @ Jul 4th 2007 6:31AM
It pisses me off to know that this bullshit is published in magazines that aren't counter acted by comments from the community. When you don't have someone there to tell everyone "This is complete bullshit" some people believe it.