| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (90)

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:38PM RKN said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The 360 and PS3 already share a ton of multiplatform games. At least for me personally, the PS3 has more exclusives I'd want (Disgaea 3, MGS4, The Last Guardian, LBP are on the top of my head). At least these 1st party exclusives will probably never be lost to the competition unlike all the 3rd party content we see jumping ship all the time this gen.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:01PM sonicspike41 said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
The 360 has some nice first/third party exclusives, but a lot of them also had previous iterations appear on PCs. As a PC gamer you're probably only really missing out on games like Halo 3/Wars/ODST/Reach, Fable 2/3, and GoW2 off the top of my head.

So it seems only natural that you'd prefer the PS3 first party games since most of them remain console exclusives. Have any first party Sony games ever appeared on PC?
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:02PM KeenCommander said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
My objection to the PS3 is that in 95% of non-exclusive games, you're getting an inferior product compared to the 360. I would agree with you that their exclusives lineup is, at minimum, equal - but that's a killer, especially with the 360 being available at a lower price point...even if the Arcade is pretty much a useless version of it.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:08PM sonicspike41 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Keen

95%? I admit a lot of them end up questionably ported, but they aren't exactly inferior. At most you lose 5-7FPS under stress, textures that are a tiny bit blurrier (which in some cases has been fixed via patches), or you get maybe a tiny bit more screen tearing.

I remember seeing people rage about games like Assassin's Creed 1/2 and the PS3 port, but I own both and they look splendid on PS3.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:22PM TraceurRyuk Prepping for LBP2 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"its good but you can get bored of it within a few hours"

The fu*k? Then you aren't playing it right, I got the game on launch and I play it all the time. Try joining an LBP community like LBPCentral.

Also, 95%?! ...Lol, take out the 9 and then maybe your'e right.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:22PM philmcfail said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ BigN00b

That my good man, is called "opinions".
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:33PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Yea, they're his opinions, and he's voicing them. Simply because everyone doesn't agree that Little Big Planet is overly fun and has a highly sustainable fun value, you down-vote them? I can understand even if he was saying it was absolutely horrid and unplayable, but he even said it was fun - calm down, sensitive much?
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 9:05PM eat it said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think he got downvoted becasue he said, "the 1st party games are not as good as everyone says they are." had he started that sentence with "I think..." or "in my opinion" he might not have gotten downvoted.

because honestly, even if you don't like LBP, you have to admit, it is extremely ambitious and very well executed...on top of being the most innovative game we've seen this generation.

I got bored with Halo 3, but it's still a very very well made game that is as good as people say it is.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 9:06PM blueskyv201 said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I'm not a fanboy and I never cared for the 'console wars' but comments like KeenCommander's send me into a nerd-rage.
*takes a deep breath*
I'm alright . . .
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 9:38PM Yojimb0 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
KeenCommander does have a pretty good point though: the fact is that the PS3 is significantly, objectively more difficult to develop for than the 360, so it should be no surprise that multiplatform games don't look as good on the PS3. Add to that the smaller online community than the 360, and you can see why a lot of multiplatform games end up gimped on that platform.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 10:34PM elperron2 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
'Space' took the words right out of my mouth, I also played all of the Halo's, I find them extremely boring, just cause I find it boring doesn't mean its not a good game.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:39PM Dr Perry Ulysses Cox said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Oh man, I've got the Coke, who's bringing the popcorn?

*settles back to watch*
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:40PM s ls said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
people who say shit like that are just as dumb as the trolls
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:42PM Dr Perry Ulysses Cox said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Stop being so bitter, Solace. You wanna sit by me?
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:51PM mywhitenoise said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I don't know why Solace was downvoted. I totally agree with his/her statement.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:03PM mywhitenoise said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
/sigh

haven't heard that lame joke before.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:40PM Hyams said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Translation: "We've lost Final Fantasy Versus XIII."
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:41PM Hyams said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
lol, this is what they said just before FFXIII when multiplatform anyway. =P
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:42PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Translation: Mass Effect is never coming to PS3
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:43PM Ezio Auditore da Firenze said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Translation: Sony's Dyer emphasizes first-party PS3 strength over third-party exclusives
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:46PM Hyams said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
deaflty: He's talking about third party PS3 exclusive. If Mass Effect came to the PS3 it wouldn't be a PS3 exclusive, after all. It'd be multiplatform.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:15PM Hyams said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, I'm not really expecting it either. (And if it does come, it shan't be for another year at least.)
Reply

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 12:05AM BananaBoat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Translation "Yeah, we probably should have paid for exclusives". First party development is key, and it's obviously the driving force behind the Wii, and the PS3 to a lesser extent, but third party exclusives drive sales just as much or more, and Sony's development studio isn't nearly big enough to outgun Valve, Bioware, Bungie, and Epic combined (among a few others). It's not going to matter much going into the latter half of this generation and beyond, since the profit potential for multi-platform games is going to make exclusives unattractive to third parties, but Sony definitely missed the boat when it came to third party exclusives during this generation. I'm sure they feel that the gulf between 360 sales and PS3 sales of cross-platform titles is more of a worry though.

Having said that, I don't think anyone could deny that Sony puts out great first party titles. They just don't do it nearly fast enough (Gran Turismo 5 comes to mind), or on a consistent enough basis.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:42PM Sidebuster said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Sounds like the PS3 is going the Nintendo route. Hopefully they don't go fully first party and only a smidgen amount of third party devs. That is what kick the gamecube in the ass (even though the gamecube rocked).
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 8:59PM T Crespo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i think Sony is the only console maker kind of doing the right thing while the other two are on the total opposite ends of the spectrum. they have a few 3rd party exclusives, and a good amount of 1st party titles. You can't expect other people to support your product. with the Wii(and most of nintendo's past consoles), it seems Nintendo is the only one making quality games. then you have MS and it seems they rely on 3rd party devs and hardly ever put out many 1st party games.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:43PM BrianH said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
i really couldn't care less who makes my games, as long as they're good.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:25PM Extinction said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
You have the worst avatar ever
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 8:06PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
According to the Pokedex, I have a Legendary avatar.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:43PM mywhitenoise said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Mass Effect and Left for Dead are on PC...I wouldnt really call that "exclusive". But I really do prefer the variety Sony offers, their exclusives are (in my opinion) above and beyond the competition.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:45PM RKN said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
The PC is not typically counted in terms of exclusivity, that is used in terms of consoles. I remember when Bioshock had the "Only on 360" label. Future prints had the "Only on 360 and Windows" label. And then the PS3 got the game also. : D
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 8:06PM Ballistic H said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Then Trine is a PS3 exclusive because it's not coming to 360 anymore but's also on PC...

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/02/12/trine-on-360-likely-will-not-happen/
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 8:10PM Ballistic H said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Btw, Bioshock always had the "Only on Xbox 360 and Windows" tag until they completely took it out on the Platinum Hits cover. It never had "Only on Xbox 360" tag.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:45PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Final Fantasy 14 and Agent.


Could he have picked worse titles to use as a "good thing"?
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:49PM The Pirate said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Holy shit on a stick. Ive seen some f'ed up things in my time but this has to take the cake. Your saying Agent is a bad game and there arnt even any screenshots of it. You, sir, are a goddamn dick.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:50PM Dr Perry Ulysses Cox said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
deaftly insinuating that a video game may not be good is the most f*cked up thing you've ever seen? You, sir, have lived a sheltered life.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:53PM The Pirate said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
....I know :(
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:54PM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Damage control already deaftly! lol .. Make that money.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:48PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
They could have made it quick and to the point if they just said "We have God of War III. Suck it"

Can't argue with that.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:02PM Jack Tretton said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Not everyone wants to play a game like God of War.

Not everyone wants to play a game like Left 4 Dead.

Not everyone wants to play a game like Super Mario Galaxy.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:12PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, those are called Casual Gamers, and I don't care about them.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:50PM The Pirate said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Yeah i mean with all the great exclusives the 360 ha.....im sorry i cant keep it up, ha ha ha ha. (By the way im talking about EXCLUSIVES, if its on PC it isnt an exclusive).
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 6:55PM copa said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Mr. Dyer actually frames this in a very interesting way.

Sony "buys" exclusives by owning their own first and second-party studios, funding those studios, and developing the games.

Microsoft "buys" exclusives by throwing marketing and promotion dollars at third party studios in return for platform-exclusive releases.

Of course, you will still have some exclusives that boil down to developer's whims. Hideo Kojima prefers the PS3, while Gabe Newell prefers the XBox 360.

The advantage of Sony's approach is that they have better loyalty from their studios, who don't have the option of shopping around for competing offers.

The advantage of Microsoft's approach is that they get to pick and choose which products they want to target for exclusivity, and they don't have any financial obligations to underperforming studios.

The question of which approach is better is probably a fanboy debate, since it involves deciding which exclusives are better, and both consoles have a pretty impressive catalog of exclusives.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:10PM Acosta02 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I'm actually just leaving a comment to say how much I appreciate this comment. Not only do you use (mostly) neutral language, you keep a neutral position and make a good observation!* I like this comment!


*Now I'll get slammed by other people who think that the comment sucks and is unoriginal. *I* thought it was cool. :/
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:25PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
This is a fantastic comment!

Also, I wanted to add that an advantage of Sony's approach is almost the converse of what Mircosoft's advantage is. By being financially linked to their dev studios Sony is more motivated to pump in money for quality, upping their install base of first high-quality, first party exclusives.

Sony's approach also gives devs without established franchises more security that their titles will get published, and thus more incentive for the dev studios (such as Naughty Dog with Uncharted DF) to put all their eggs in one basket.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 9:11PM blueskyv201 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I was just playing MGS4 for the first time yesterday (I know) and all the little PS3 references made me laugh out loud.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 9:40PM Surfaced said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Accolades from me as well. I've posted comments similar to this one before. Those are the indisputable facts on this issue of exclusivity for this generation.
Reply

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 12:22AM spin cycle said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I just want to mention that Sony "bought" exclusivity from some devs this way in the PS2 gen. It was rather cheap for them since PS2 outsold its competitors 11:1 or so. If you gave a dev enough marketing help, they'd forgo making their game for other platforms, figuring with even a 9% increase in sales, they break even since that size increase covers the additional sales they would garner from the other platform(s).

This is how Sony "bought" exclusivity on games like GTA3. Other games, like Ratchet and Clank they got exclusivity by owning the IP, funding development and publishing it.

In this way I think Sony could have some perspective of the merits of the two different ways of doing it, since they've done both.

I think a very strong example of the differences could be born out by looking at the exclusivity of GTA3 versus Ratchet and Clank last generation. And the exclusivity of Halo versus Ghostbusters this generation. One clear problem with 2nd party exclusives is that as soon as there is another platform that makes sense to put the platform on (sales and technology-wise), the publisher of the game will want to port to it. And the more the other platform makes sense, the more money the publisher will demand to make up for lost sales on that platform or the less exclusivity time they will give you.

Given that Xbox 360 has only about a 2:1 lead on its competitor in the HD space and is behind in the overall space, it's probably not cost-effective to buy real exclusivity allegiance for MS this generation. And it's probably even LESS cost-effective for Sony since they are in last place. I think in this climate, 1st/2nd party (where Sony or MS owns the IP and publishes the game) exclusivity is probably the only cost-effective way in this generation.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:00PM Jack Tretton said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
It's about time Sony acknowledges they're not in the catbird seat like they were last generation when third-party developers fell over themselves to create PS2 exclusives. By the time the Xbox came out the PS2 had a stranglehold on sales numbers. Not developing a multiplat or not porting something to the Xbox or GameCube wasn't going to put the hurt on a developer's bottom line.

Sure, Sony can brag all it wants about its first-party exclusives because there are some damn fine games there, but like it was postulated in the post, do consumers care how an exclusive gets to their console of choice? Nah, just the fanboys.
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:07PM Pure Black World Tendency said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
You're not a very good Jack Tretton impersonator, are you? ;)
Reply

Posted: Feb 17th 2010 7:08PM Puertoricarious said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
word.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Remedy not done with Alan Wake

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 10:30AM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW