Microsoft has Payed For RE5 timed Exclusivity.(Rumor)

[QUOTE="xscrapzx"][QUOTE="excelR83"][QUOTE="jethrovegas"]

[QUOTE="Cbok"]Yep MS are scum. They really think that they can plug up the hole of their sinking ship by throwing money at it? MS are comparable to oil companies. Pure Scum.excelR83

Ahh yes, those evil oil companies, the bane of kind, loving, and generous people all over the world. How dare those bastards charge money for their goods when they should be giving them away, and operating indefintely at a loss!

/sarcasm

Seriously people, what the hell is with all the anti-profit, anti-capitalist, bull **** in this thread? It's starting to piss me off a good bit, seeing tons of people here practically saying "that evil Microsoft, how dare they want to make money!"

WTH is wrong with this generation, man? When did so many ****ing people start acting like 'profit" is a dirty word?

It's past the point of making me sad; it makes me sick to my stomach.:|

Speaking of sick to my stomach...

It's the fact that profit is THE ONLY THING that makes me sick. Nothing wrong with making money. Buy for a penny, sell for two. What sickens me is the kind of greed we have in the world that allows 1% of people to control the vast majority of the money while most of the world still lives in inhumane conditions. I'm not some kind of drippy hippy but I'm tired of seeing society homogenized and roboticized year after year, and people like you facilitate it by buying into this "IT'S JUST BUSINESS LOL GOGO PROFIT" mentality.

If you can't see the difference between making a profit and completely ignoring all sense of what we as a society consider "values" and "morals" in exchange for a bigger house, an extra car, a new horizonless pool etc. then this discussion is dead in the water.

Don't even get me started on oil companies. I used to work for the biggest one out there (yep, that one).

Wow talk about going above and beyond what this original subject had to offer. So in your eyes businesses are not supposed to get ahead of the competition? They are supposed to throw what money they have out there to try to gain a competative edge? How do you think competition starts? I can't believe I'm seeing half the things you are typing right now. If it wasn't for that type of competition you wouldn't even have the gaming variety you have now, just get over it. I'm sure if this was the case about RE5 people who have the PS3 are going to get it or people who have the intent of doing so will get it when it is available as well.

ROFL

I can't believe I just read that.

You are contradicting yourself so hugely it's unbelievable. You are claiming you support competition, when all MS buying exclusives up and trying to eliminate the competition does is well uhh ELIMINATE COMPETITION. With no competition you have a monopoly. Wtf is so difficult to understand about this. Microsoft doesn't stop at #1. They have to be the only one. Why do you think they have been hit with antitrust suits? Those don't exactly happen every day.

Are you all right? First of all you should of stopped right when you said Monopoly because there can't be a Monoply in the gaming industry. It would be illegal, you need to look up todays definition of monopoly. Certain industries are allowed to have a monopoly in the case of MS with its OS because it is resonable to have one company make an OS instead of having 25 different companies out there doing it.

Secondly I don't approve of MS buying everything out just so they can have it on their system and they wouldn't be able to do that ANYWAY! Because that would be illegal. I don't see an issue with MS coughing up some dough to have a game be exclusive on their system for a couple of months to get the upper hand on another company, because anyone who games would know that they can still get that for the PS3 down the road. If Sony wanted to they can as well, so it is fair competition. You my friend really need to do your homework.

EDIT: Also putting money up for a time exclusive is not monopolizing the industry because if it were it wouldn't even be timed exclusive it wouldn't even come to Sony at all.

something M$ would definately try

doesn't affect me too much since i'll be getting it on 360 anyway, but bad for (and unfair to) PS3 owners

capcom shouldn't do this to a loyal fanbase .. sometimes it's better not to sell-out

[QUOTE="xscrapzx"]

No I do realize that they do this alot, I'm not a blind you know? Just because I have a gamertag doesn't mean that I'm blind to facts of reality. The bottom line is that MS is throwing some money out there to get an upper edge of the competition and what they are doing is not against the law. Monopolies are also legal as long as they stay within the laws that make it legal.

The problem if you have the money to make more money why wouldn't YOU do it? If you owned MS or Sony for that matter and you are trying to get more market share and more money are you not going to throw some money out there if it is going to help you? If you say you wouldn't you wouldn't make it in business. No matter how much you think it is wrong they aren't doing anything wrong. They are trying to get ahead and I see no issues with that. Is it fair to fans who love that series and now possibly will have to wait because they have a PS3 unfortunately no, but this has been happening for a long time.

naval

while it's not illegal but its certainly looks to be on the boundary of legal-non legal. anyways, it doesn't change the fact that MS have always followed unscruplous practices. they are throttling competiton which is good for progress by using the money power. so why should i like that.

also, here is a food for though : let's say tree cutting is not illegal , would you like a company destroys all the natural forests by cutting trees jus to make more money ?

First off you think they are ponying up all this money to keep this game specifically exclusive to them forever and that is not the case. Secondly the tree thing is a bad analogy because that concerns the natural habitat of the world a big difference from a hobby such a video games.

[QUOTE="heretrix"][QUOTE="excelR83"][QUOTE="heretrix"][QUOTE="Zhengi"]

There definitely are a lot of MS fanboys in this thread. How can you be happy that a game gets delayed for another console? Simple answer: Fanboyism.

As for the rumor, we'll see if it's true next month. Man, I wish E3 would get here already.

excelR83

Simple answer: JEALOUSY

360 owners should be happy.

. I've seen enough sour grapes from you to know I am right.

Dude, I can say this with 100000000 percent certainty you are full of it and I invite you to prove it. Put up or cap it.

Ugh it was in the MGS4 thread and that thing is 143 pages now. Some of the things you said in that thread curdled my milk, but without specific examples, I have nothing, and it's not worth sifting through that thread for.

Consider it capped. I apologize.

I recall our exchange and it was about they way you answered a post and if you were mad or not. It was a silly exchange, nothing more.

Ah, good old Microsoft. Their company ideals of "why develop or create something when you can pay someone else that has already done the legwork" is just inspiring to behold. The way they throw money around and slander their opponents is truly American, and makes me want to collect unemployment while I sit on my ass.

Has Microsoft or anyone under the employ of Microsoft ever actually had an original thought? This buying exclusives thing is really getting ridiculous.

Seriously though if this is true I will be too livid for words.

Microsoft: Step to the plate and get one of your multimillionaire-salaried employees to use his overeducated brain to develop an ORIGINAL IP. BRAWN > BRAIN, you go MS!

excelR83

Wow...little bitter! As an American I hope they do get it as a timed exclusive just to piss you off. How is that for stereotypes?

RM

"Do not take life too seriously....You will not get out alive!"

[QUOTE="excelR83"][QUOTE="xscrapzx"][QUOTE="excelR83"][QUOTE="jethrovegas"]

[QUOTE="Cbok"]Yep MS are scum. They really think that they can plug up the hole of their sinking ship by throwing money at it? MS are comparable to oil companies. Pure Scum.xscrapzx

Ahh yes, those evil oil companies, the bane of kind, loving, and generous people all over the world. How dare those bastards charge money for their goods when they should be giving them away, and operating indefintely at a loss!

/sarcasm

Seriously people, what the hell is with all the anti-profit, anti-capitalist, bull **** in this thread? It's starting to piss me off a good bit, seeing tons of people here practically saying "that evil Microsoft, how dare they want to make money!"

WTH is wrong with this generation, man? When did so many ****ing people start acting like 'profit" is a dirty word?

It's past the point of making me sad; it makes me sick to my stomach.:|

Speaking of sick to my stomach...

It's the fact that profit is THE ONLY THING that makes me sick. Nothing wrong with making money. Buy for a penny, sell for two. What sickens me is the kind of greed we have in the world that allows 1% of people to control the vast majority of the money while most of the world still lives in inhumane conditions. I'm not some kind of drippy hippy but I'm tired of seeing society homogenized and roboticized year after year, and people like you facilitate it by buying into this "IT'S JUST BUSINESS LOL GOGO PROFIT" mentality.

If you can't see the difference between making a profit and completely ignoring all sense of what we as a society consider "values" and "morals" in exchange for a bigger house, an extra car, a new horizonless pool etc. then this discussion is dead in the water.

Don't even get me started on oil companies. I used to work for the biggest one out there (yep, that one).

Wow talk about going above and beyond what this original subject had to offer. So in your eyes businesses are not supposed to get ahead of the competition? They are supposed to throw what money they have out there to try to gain a competative edge? How do you think competition starts? I can't believe I'm seeing half the things you are typing right now. If it wasn't for that type of competition you wouldn't even have the gaming variety you have now, just get over it. I'm sure if this was the case about RE5 people who have the PS3 are going to get it or people who have the intent of doing so will get it when it is available as well.

ROFL

I can't believe I just read that.

You are contradicting yourself so hugely it's unbelievable. You are claiming you support competition, when all MS buying exclusives up and trying to eliminate the competition does is well uhh ELIMINATE COMPETITION. With no competition you have a monopoly. Wtf is so difficult to understand about this. Microsoft doesn't stop at #1. They have to be the only one. Why do you think they have been hit with antitrust suits? Those don't exactly happen every day.

Are you all right? First of all you should of stopped right when you said Monopoly because there can't be a Monoply in the gaming industry. It would be illegal, you need to look up todays definition of monopoly. Certain industries are allowed to have a monopoly in the case of MS with its OS because it is resonable to have one company make an OS instead of having 25 different companies out there doing it.

Secondly I don't approve of MS buying everything out just so they can have it on their system and they wouldn't be able to do that ANYWAY! Because that would be illegal. I don't see an issue with MS coughing up some dough to have a game be exclusive on their system for a couple of months to get the upper hand on another company, because anyone who games would know that they can still get that for the PS3 down the road. If Sony wanted to they can as well, so it is fair competition. You my friend really need to do your homework

...

I didn't say there was a monopoly. I said that MS wants there to be one. By the way, owning 90% of the whole industry (OS, software, whatever it may be) is the same bloody thing as a monopoly. All it is doing is saying that ON PAPER, there is a chance for the little guy to make it and become the big guy. In reality, there are a million legal ways that they can stop that from happening. They stop just short of being a monopoly to appease some left-wingers but it all amounts to the same thing.

Obviously people can't tell the difference between operating at a profit and controlling the world (and yes, it HAS TO BE ONE OF THOSE EXTREMES!) so this discussion will continue to chase it's tail. But not with me.

Back to MGS4.

Scoring exclusive JRPG's and now in theory locking down Biohazard 5 as a timed exclusive,

It seems that MS is really trying to go to the hoop in Japan.

cosmostein77

something M$ would definately try

doesn't affect me too much since i'll be getting it on 360 anyway, but bad for (and unfair to) PS3 owners

capcom shouldn't do this to a loyal fanbase .. sometimes it's better not to sell-out

akif22

Well it does not seem like they care. They support the company that launches first the most...plus the moved RE to the gamecube despite parts 1,2, and 3 being on the PS. They moved Monster Hunter to the Wii...

I am sure if MS came to them with 10-20 million they would do it.

Speaking of sick to my stomach...

It's the fact that profit is THE ONLY THING that makes me sick. Nothing wrong with making money. Buy for a penny, sell for two. What sickens me is the kind of greed we have in the world that allows 1% of people to control the vast majority of the money while most of the world still lives in inhumane conditions. I'm not some kind of drippy hippy but I'm tired of seeing society homogenized and roboticized year after year, and people like you facilitate it by buying into this "IT'S JUST BUSINESS LOL GOGO PROFIT" mentality.

If you can't see the difference between making a profit and completely ignoring all sense of what we as a society consider "values" and "morals" in exchange for a bigger house, an extra car, a new horizonless pool etc. then this discussion is dead in the water.

Don't even get me started on oil companies. I used to work for the biggest one out there (yep, that one).

excelR83

Ok, now you're just reaching. We were talking about Microsoft using some of that neary $300 billion they have in market cap to do a timed-exclusive for RE5...benefitting the 360 fanbase & putting the kibosh on Sornery's BS3. That tiny shred of cash that Mr. Softy puts in for a timed-exclusive has nothing to do with the evils of the world. I mean, I can understand whining about having your candy taken away from the baby, but let's not go to extremes. Let's stick to the point of the discussion.

Also, I don't know why you guys keep talking about Fallout but perhaps you should make a new thread under PC Games. It has no place here.

micro soft and sony suck so bad they can't get their own game devs they always have try and buy pc game devs.....and guess the game still doenot turn out lol

That why pc will aways be king of the boat!!!!none of the big companies own pc!!!!!

if re was made none of the concles would come close too pc!!!!

Wow...this company really has an endless amount of money...man, so many games they have bought now. I was actually thinking Capcom was going to make RE5 exclusive for the PS3 in Japan since the 360 is dead there, but looks like I was wrong.Kahuna_1

Yep, it's a pretty sweet gig. They're trying hard to force the 360 into Japan with the brute force method. If they don't take it, it's more for us in America (Europe? don't know) at this point.

[QUOTE="Kahuna_1"]Wow...this company really has an endless amount of money...man, so many games they have bought now. I was actually thinking Capcom was going to make RE5 exclusive for the PS3 in Japan since the 360 is dead there, but looks like I was wrong.jknight5422

Yep, it's a pretty sweet gig. They're trying hard to force the 360 into Japan with the brute force method. If they don't take it, it's more for us in America (Europe? don't know) at this point.

[QUOTE="excelR83"]

Ah, good old Microsoft. Their company ideals of "why develop or create something when you can pay someone else that has already done the legwork" is just inspiring to behold. The way they throw money around and slander their opponents is truly American, and makes me want to collect unemployment while I sit on my ass.

Has Microsoft or anyone under the employ of Microsoft ever actually had an original thought? This buying exclusives thing is really getting ridiculous.

Seriously though if this is true I will be too livid for words.

Microsoft: Step to the plate and get one of your multimillionaire-salaried employees to use his overeducated brain to develop an ORIGINAL IP. BRAWN > BRAIN, you go MS!

russdmoore

Wow...little bitter! As an American I hope they do get it as a timed exclusive just to piss you off. How is that for stereotypes?

RM

"Do not take life too seriously....You will not get out alive!"

Haha it won't piss me off, it will disillusion me. I can't wait for it to happen to you.

Well, for starters, there's that kneejerk let's-start-a-fight reactionary bull**** that you just demonstrated which keeps people from questioning how things are and why. There's certainly that.

Sony is a big corporation. They are certainly shady and as I said, no angels. I'm not defending them.

Microsoft... come on. PLEASE try and explain to me how an MS Office bundle, which is just SOFTWARE, and was developed by basically just doing minor tweaks to the previous years programs, is worth $900. I would really like to know that. There is profit, and there is "well we are the only one making this product, what will people realistically pay for this? Just how badly can we milk these idiots before they revolt". It's capitalism at the expense of people, and I just can't bring myself to agree with that.

excelR83

So buy a Mac & Mac has an Office equivalent. Or you can use Open Office or Google Apps. Nobody is twisting your arm to pay for MS Office. Come on. The 360 doesn't cost $900 & neither do the games.

at the time the legislation for the gaming industry was not has advanced, tactics that would considered monopolistic today were accepted back then in the video game industry

for example:

Nintendo at the time forced an exclusivity contract to all companies that launched games on the NES the contract said that if they launch on the NES then they would have to wait (3 years i believe) before launching that same game on any other system, be it console, PC or otherwise (arcades were the exception)

st1ka

while i do remember playing same games on my pc which my friend was playing on his NES, but if that's true that is really bad (thank god for anti-monopolistic laws )

as for sony:

i dont have a link to prove what i say, all i can show you is how they killed sega by what in my opinion transpires of mass bribery here:

watch this

check it out at 3:04 "sony does anything it can to round up third party developers to support the playstation and is able to assigne 250 companies in japan alone"

the Playstation one was launched in japan in December 4 1994, Virtua fighter (the reason as to why third party developers started focusing on 3D as the documentary says) was was launched in November 1993

care to explain how does one company with no experience in gaming what-so-ever manages to convince 250 gaming companies to produce games for a market which was thougt to be over saturaded at the time? remember: there was sega, nintendo, 3DO, the Jaguar, Pippin, all of them were either already out or nearing heir launch dates and thats not even mentioning the handheld markets

st1ka

this is just guesswork. my guess would be the companies got tired of nintendo tactics like you mentioned above.

anyways my question was sony certainly doesn't seem to be using money to secure anything, but they are trying to make interesting games like LBP etc this time.

something M$ would definately try

doesn't affect me too much since i'll be getting it on 360 anyway, but bad for (and unfair to) PS3 owners

capcom shouldn't do this to a loyal fanbase .. sometimes it's better not to sell-out

akif22

How's it unfair?

I hate it when companies (Not just MS, Sony and Ninty have done it too) do things like this, it just screws over people who own the opposing console and have to wait months for their version to release. As an owner of both PS3 and 360, this doesn't benefit me in the slightest. I would much prefer it if MS used their money to develop entirely new games instead of bribing developers.Floppy_Jim

They're doing both, cuz. They probably have dumped cash for new games constantly but that doesn't product insta-game. They takes years to build.

I hate it when companies (Not just MS, Sony and Ninty have done it too) do things like this, it just screws over people who own the opposing console and have to wait months for their version to release. As an owner of both PS3 and 360, this doesn't benefit me in the slightest. I would much prefer it if MS used their money to develop entirely new games instead of bribing developers.Floppy_Jim

Some truth to that, MS could build 2 to 3 games with 50 million dollars. Sounds like they are just throwing cash in the wind.

[QUOTE="naval"][QUOTE="xscrapzx"]

No I do realize that they do this alot, I'm not a blind you know? Just because I have a gamertag doesn't mean that I'm blind to facts of reality. The bottom line is that MS is throwing some money out there to get an upper edge of the competition and what they are doing is not against the law. Monopolies are also legal as long as they stay within the laws that make it legal.

The problem if you have the money to make more money why wouldn't YOU do it? If you owned MS or Sony for that matter and you are trying to get more market share and more money are you not going to throw some money out there if it is going to help you? If you say you wouldn't you wouldn't make it in business. No matter how much you think it is wrong they aren't doing anything wrong. They are trying to get ahead and I see no issues with that. Is it fair to fans who love that series and now possibly will have to wait because they have a PS3 unfortunately no, but this has been happening for a long time.

xscrapzx

while it's not illegal but its certainly looks to be on the boundary of legal-non legal. anyways, it doesn't change the fact that MS have always followed unscruplous practices. they are throttling competiton which is good for progress by using the money power. so why should i like that.

also, here is a food for though : let's say tree cutting is not illegal , would you like a company destroys all the natural forests by cutting trees jus to make more money ?

First off you think they are ponying up all this money to keep this game specifically exclusive to them forever and that is not the case. Secondly the tree thing is a bad analogy because that concerns the natural habitat of the world a big difference from a hobby such a video games.

tree analogy is not bad, but its just that is much more extreme example of bad company practices and the fact that we should not accept any company practice just saying that they want to make money

i just presented an extreme example because, too see things properly i thing many times we do need to see the worst case scenarios ( in this case worse case scenario of a comapny's greed)

[QUOTE="st1ka"]

at the time the legislation for the gaming industry was not has advanced, tactics that would considered monopolistic today were accepted back then in the video game industry

for example:

Nintendo at the time forced an exclusivity contract to all companies that launched games on the NES the contract said that if they launch on the NES then they would have to wait (3 years i believe) before launching that same game on any other system, be it console, PC or otherwise (arcades were the exception)

naval

while i do remember playing same games on my pc which my friend was playing on his NES, but if that's true that is really bad (thank god for anti-monopolistic laws )

they were all ported later to the PC

[QUOTE="st1ka"]

as for sony:

i dont have a link to prove what i say, all i can show you is how they killed sega by what in my opinion transpires of mass bribery here:

watch this

check it out at 3:04 "sony does anything it can to round up third party developers to support the playstation and is able to assigne 250 companies in japan alone"

the Playstation one was launched in japan in December 4 1994, Virtua fighter (the reason as to why third party developers started focusing on 3D as the documentary says) was was launched in November 1993

care to explain how does one company with no experience in gaming what-so-ever manages to convince 250 gaming companies to produce games for a market which was thougt to be over saturaded at the time? remember: there was sega, nintendo, 3DO, the Jaguar, Pippin, all of them were either already out or nearing heir launch dates and thats not even mentioning the handheld markets

naval

this is just guesswork. my guess would be the companies got tired of nintendo tactics like you mentioned above.

anyways my question was sony certainly doesn't seem to be using money to secure anything, but they are trying to make interesting games like LBP etc this time.

if they got tired of nintendo then why not side with sega? Atari? Neo-geo? bandai? 3DO? they all launched consoles around this time, the playstation had no more chances of sucess in the beggining than these did, this was how sony helped kill of sega right from the start, with power of the allmighty dollar

it is no different then what MS is doing now, eventually Sony stopped these monopolistic moves because by then both of sony´s consoles were best sellers, not to mention they already have an established fanbase (and probably the fact that whatever bribe they trow microsoft will probably double it)

yes this is guess work, but these are also an awefull lot of coincidences specially if we consider the insane number of consoles launched at the time, the fact that nintendo and sega were lord and masters of the game industry, the fact that in one year sony conviced more then 250 companies in Japan alone .

EDIT: heck the sega saturn was already out with the home version of virtua fighter

One month of waiting isn't going to hurt a Cow like me. I'm used to it. MS is just pissing money away.caseypayne69

It is bascially just an attempt to win Japan. It is the same deal with Last Remnant. They are trying to get the RE fans to buy a 360 instead of the PS3 and this pretty much forces them since Sony does not throw money back.

1) Heh. First off, READ AGAIN, I said most. I didn't say 99% of people live in inhumane conditions. 1% of people (and Jesus Christ it's not even a real number) control the vast majority of money, power, and influence, while most of the world is lucky to have a decent sewage system. There are still a lot of us yuppy raised on TV suburbanites that are neither very rich nor very poor. However, most of the world (and yeah statistics will back me up) doesn't have the same standard of living that we do.

2) You are really going out of your way to make this a BLACK and WHITE issue. It isn't. You don't need to be a communist or an extreme capitalist. There is a grey area which most of us live in. As I said, so, so, so many goddamned times in this thread, there is nothing wrong with profit. It's when you throw your mother in front of a train for profit that we cease to become humans and I think if that's what our society is coming to, bring on armageddon before my kids have to suffer any of this bull****.

3) Capitalism is good because it rewards the hardest workers, the smartest people, but it also rewards the most conniving and devious. I just don't know why enough is never enough. Money makes people revert to their most basic animal survival instincts. It strips us of all this "civility" we pretend that our environment, through nurture has instilled in us. Money can change us into animals in the blink of an eye. That's what I find depressing.

4) I guarantee you're a big fan of capitalism because it has worked out in your favor, and I'd be willing to bet you've never been poor.

excelR83

1) Why do you think that most of the world lives in poverty? Here's a hint: It doesn't have jack **** to do with evil corporations. Think big government.

2) Ah, the old "but we're still human!" argument that crops up again and again. Your idea (whether you fully understand its orgins or not), stems from this concept that capitalism becomes a dirty buisness by its very nature. The assumption is that two companies that are in direct competition with one another will eventually resort to "dirty" tactics and begin scalping the "common man" aka, the willingness to "sell their own mother/kill their own mother" (old phrase; I like your little train bit though... even banalities get new paint now and then, it would seem). This argument is false primarily because two companies in a free market squeeze one another out based solely on buisness tactics and how well they can attract customers. Buisness only gets dirty when either a) the government gets involved or b) a man who doesn't truly believe in the tenets of capitalism comes to hold a position of power within a company.

3) Devious? Conniving? Ah yes, more of the buzz words (you forgot "ruthless" by the way; that tends to be a favorite) ascribed to those who actually try to run their business like, gee, I don't know, A BUISNESS, by taking advantage of whatever they legally can to gain a foothold in the market, whilst not stealing, or asking anyone else to give them something for nothing. You say money turns man into an animal, and I would agree that it certainly does... when that money is not earned. Man is what he is because he wants to achieve; those who are too lazy to achieve, those who hold a gun to the heads of the movers of the world are the true animals. A free man, a man who believes in capitalism, sees money only as a means to an end; a parasite sees it as a mystical ever renewable resource that he simply cannot tap into, rather than seeing it for what it really is: sweat, in paper form.

4) I, for one, don't extrapolate small amounts of data into judgements against massive economic systems that affect entire populations. Thanks for caring though.

For the people that is all for it, how would that be a good thing for us gamers ? 360 owners would gain nothing at all from it, they are using their money to slow down the competition rather than making their console better. There is a huge difference between paying for developing a new game that will be exclusive, and paying for developers to stop developing a game for the rival console.

It would be a smart move from M$ on a business point of view, very low but smart. However for us gamers there is nothing to gain whatsoever from this no matter what console you own.

bullspit...for christ sake DMC4 sold more on ps3 than it did on 360 why would capcom be so stupid?blazinpuertoroc

Here's another take on this:

You're in the Land of LAR and have a game system and you are trying to sell it to a fictitious anal-retentive country. They won't buy your console by putting it there and offering it even with a discount. They probably wouldn't buy the console even if it was free. So what do you do?

Well, one way is to go to that country's development establishment & pay them a large amount of cash to bring the game to your console. Now said country may change their minds about buying the Land of LAR console if they have that "I must have the game NOW" attitude.

Otherwise, what other tools are left to penetrate the impenetrable market of a foreign country?

Riddle me that.

if they got tired of nintendo then why not side with sega? Atari? Neo-geo? bandai? 3DO? they all launched consoles around this time, the playstation had no more chances of sucess in the beggining than these did, this was how sony helped kill of sega right from the start, with power of the allmighty dollar

it is no different then what MS is doing now, eventually Sony stopped these monopolistic moves because by then both of sony´s consoles were best sellers, not to mention they already have an established fanbase (and probably the fact that whatever bribe they trow microsoft will probably double it)

yes this is guess work, but these are also an awefull lot of coincidences specially if we consider the insane number of consoles launched at the time, the fact that nintendo and sega were lord and masters of the game industry, the fact that in one year sony conviced more then 250 companies in Japan alone .

EDIT: heck the sega saturn was already out with the home version of virtua fighter

st1ka

Well i could say sony promised them better features, support etc or probably they thought sony was a very good electronics company and could end nintendo's have handedness which other console companies have been unable to do. i could make lots of similiar guesses to point out the reasons why the supported sony. (a comparable analogy would be when firefox was launched it seems many people who were tired of IE supported that, as they felt that this is the browser to supplant IE, even though opera with many features like tabbed browsing etc were already there)

well i agree about previous gen that sony did not needed to use any effort but this time around it seems they are in serious need of exclusives and they haven't shown much inclination for secure some timed exclusives by paying money etc.

[QUOTE="st1ka"]

if they got tired of nintendo then why not side with sega? Atari? Neo-geo? bandai? 3DO? they all launched consoles around this time, the playstation had no more chances of sucess in the beggining than these did, this was how sony helped kill of sega right from the start, with power of the allmighty dollar

it is no different then what MS is doing now, eventually Sony stopped these monopolistic moves because by then both of sony´s consoles were best sellers, not to mention they already have an established fanbase (and probably the fact that whatever bribe they trow microsoft will probably double it)

yes this is guess work, but these are also an awefull lot of coincidences specially if we consider the insane number of consoles launched at the time, the fact that nintendo and sega were lord and masters of the game industry, the fact that in one year sony conviced more then 250 companies in Japan alone .

EDIT: heck the sega saturn was already out with the home version of virtua fighter

naval

Well i could say sony promised them better features, support etc or probably they thought sony was a very good electronics company and could end nintendo's have handedness which other console companies have been unable to do. i could make lots of similiar guesses to point out the reasons why the supported sony. (a comparable analogy would be when firefox was launched it seems many people who were tired of IE supported that, as they felt that this is the browser to supplant IE, even though opera with many features like tabbed browsing etc were already there)

well i agree about previous gen that sony did not needed to use any effort but this time around it seems they are in serious need of exclusives and they haven't shown much inclination for secure some timed exclusives by paying money etc.

in my opinion sony probably knows they cant compete with microsoft in the "bribery department" (but then again i wouldnt be surprised if Metal and FF 13 were developed with a lot of funding from sony)

one last thing, the sega saturn was hit in Japan it was their top next-gen system (it only changed when FF 7 was launched for the PS1.... 3 years later) just another fact that makes me wonder why did so many companys decided to switch in sony´s favour.... and why JUST sony?

[QUOTE="naval"][QUOTE="st1ka"]

if they got tired of nintendo then why not side with sega? Atari? Neo-geo? bandai? 3DO? they all launched consoles around this time, the playstation had no more chances of sucess in the beggining than these did, this was how sony helped kill of sega right from the start, with power of the allmighty dollar

it is no different then what MS is doing now, eventually Sony stopped these monopolistic moves because by then both of sony´s consoles were best sellers, not to mention they already have an established fanbase (and probably the fact that whatever bribe they trow microsoft will probably double it)

yes this is guess work, but these are also an awefull lot of coincidences specially if we consider the insane number of consoles launched at the time, the fact that nintendo and sega were lord and masters of the game industry, the fact that in one year sony conviced more then 250 companies in Japan alone .

EDIT: heck the sega saturn was already out with the home version of virtua fighter

st1ka

Well i could say sony promised them better features, support etc or probably they thought sony was a very good electronics company and could end nintendo's have handedness which other console companies have been unable to do. i could make lots of similiar guesses to point out the reasons why the supported sony. (a comparable analogy would be when firefox was launched it seems many people who were tired of IE supported that, as they felt that this is the browser to supplant IE, even though opera with many features like tabbed browsing etc were already there)

well i agree about previous gen that sony did not needed to use any effort but this time around it seems they are in serious need of exclusives and they haven't shown much inclination for secure some timed exclusives by paying money etc.

in my opinion sony probably knows they cant compete with microsoft in the "bribery department" (but then again i wouldnt be surprised if Metal and FF 13 were developed with a lot of funding from sony)

one last thing, the sega saturn was hit in Japan it was their top next-gen system (it only changed when FF 7 was launched for the PS1.... 3 years later) just another fact that makes me wonder why did so many companys decided to switch in sony´s favour.... and why JUST sony?

while MS definitely has more operating income than sony, but still sony has enough to secure few exclusives of their own, no need to actually compete

also, sony is most probably the most well known electronics company -so why not ?

[QUOTE="excelR83"][QUOTE="blackdreamhunk"]

I really hope this is true now you concole people will know how it feels when a big company like micro soft or sony takes a tittle away!!! just like they do to pc gamers !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

if this true it would make me real happy!!! what goes around comes around!!!!

BioShockOwnz

Wtf are you on about? I hope you don't mean Battlefield: Bad Company because it is probably the worst shooter to come out in years.

I doubt it. Capcom is too big of a company to play by childish rules like that. It could potentially damage the sales of millions of copies of RE 5. bstarter29

They threw $50m at RockStar for exclusive GTA4 content (which I feel will actually have very little effect on anything since GTA4 already feels like old news). If they throw $75m at Capcom I'm sure they could be persuaded to forget the PS3 for a few months.

Thing is, BioHazard in Japan is even bigger than Res Evil is in the rest of the world. It really doesn't make sense for them to screw their diehard Japanese fanbase, who has no interest in the Xbox360. I think in the long run it would sell a lot less and unless MS's offer is enough to cover the entire production cost I don't see it realistically happening.

That title belongs to the PS3 exclusive, HAZE.

Hour of Victory.

[QUOTE="excelR83"]

1) Heh. First off, READ AGAIN, I said most. I didn't say 99% of people live in inhumane conditions. 1% of people (and Jesus Christ it's not even a real number) control the vast majority of money, power, and influence, while most of the world is lucky to have a decent sewage system. There are still a lot of us yuppy raised on TV suburbanites that are neither very rich nor very poor. However, most of the world (and yeah statistics will back me up) doesn't have the same standard of living that we do.

2) You are really going out of your way to make this a BLACK and WHITE issue. It isn't. You don't need to be a communist or an extreme capitalist. There is a grey area which most of us live in. As I said, so, so, so many goddamned times in this thread, there is nothing wrong with profit. It's when you throw your mother in front of a train for profit that we cease to become humans and I think if that's what our society is coming to, bring on armageddon before my kids have to suffer any of this bull****.

3) Capitalism is good because it rewards the hardest workers, the smartest people, but it also rewards the most conniving and devious. I just don't know why enough is never enough. Money makes people revert to their most basic animal survival instincts. It strips us of all this "civility" we pretend that our environment, through nurture has instilled in us. Money can change us into animals in the blink of an eye. That's what I find depressing.

4) I guarantee you're a big fan of capitalism because it has worked out in your favor, and I'd be willing to bet you've never been poor.

jethrovegas

1) Why do you think that most of the world lives in poverty? Here's a hint: It doesn't have jack **** to do with evil corporations. Think big government.

2) Ah, the old "but we're still human!" argument that crops up again and again. Your idea (whether you fully understand its orgins or not), stems from this concept that capitalism becomes a dirty buisness by its very nature. The assumption is that two companies that are in direct competition with one another will eventually resort to "dirty" tactics and begin scalping the "common man" aka, the willingness to "sell their own mother/kill their own mother" (old phrase; I like your little train bit though... even banalities get new paint now and then, it would seem). This argument is false primarily because two companies in a free market squeeze one another out based solely on buisness tactics and how well they can attract customers. Buisness only gets dirty when either a) the government gets involved or b) a man who doesn't truly believe in the tenets of capitalism comes to hold a position of power within a company.

3) Devious? Conniving? Ah yes, more of the buzz words (you forgot "ruthless" by the way; that tends to be a favorite) ascribed to those who actually try to run their business like, gee, I don't know, A BUISNESS, by taking advantage of whatever they legally can to gain a foothold in the market, whilst not stealing, or asking anyone else to give them something for nothing. You say money turns man into an animal, and I would agree that it certainly does... when that money is not earned. Man is what he is because he wants to achieve; those who are too lazy to achieve, those who hold a gun to the heads of the movers of the world are the true animals. A free man, a man who believes in capitalism, sees money only as a means to an end; a parasite sees it as a mystical ever renewable resource that he simply cannot tap into, rather than seeing it for what it really is: sweat, in paper form.

4) I, for one, don't extrapolate small amounts of data into judgements against massive economic systems that affect entire populations. Thanks for caring though.

Ruh roh Raggy! Three-dollar words and a Wikipedia'd version of the history of capitalism as well as it's root causes and effects! If only I hadn't actually attended school I would be so impressed my pants might fall down. If I was a woman in a depression-era juke joint, I might even "swoon".

Banalities! I bet you even pronounced it right in your head (hint: it doesn't rhyme with anal!) Okay I am impressed.

We are not going to agree. I think it is depressing that man can revert to beast in the blink of an eye, particularly when money (or poontang) are involved. We will not see eye to eye on this.

I think capitalism is great. It's what America was founded on. Then again, I don't think the early American entrepreneurial types envisioned a world that is populated chiefly with Wal-Mart, Target, Starbucks, McDonalds, Keeping Up With the Kardashians, or Lindsay Lohan's "comeback" album. I think enough is enough.

I said homogenized before and I stand by it. I am overreacting (then again this is system wars), but every time MS throws money out and gets a result they are like the Yankees or Chelsea FC, proving that you can buy a team, buy people, buy a victory. Buy hollow achievements and reap the rewards. It is a blow for conformity, for homogenization, for our desensitization in general.

I don't think MS causes it or they are the only ones (WE are responsible for our well-being, in the end, and people being so damn weak and simple-minded is what depresses me), but I think they are a shining example.

Throwing fancy words around and languidly debating pseudo-philsophical and/or sociology issues was fun for a bit but now it's lost it's thrust and we are just talking to hear ourselves speak. Consider me done.

[QUOTE="excelR83"]

Well, for starters, there's that kneejerk let's-start-a-fight reactionary bull**** that you just demonstrated which keeps people from questioning how things are and why. There's certainly that.

Sony is a big corporation. They are certainly shady and as I said, no angels. I'm not defending them.

Microsoft... come on. PLEASE try and explain to me how an MS Office bundle, which is just SOFTWARE, and was developed by basically just doing minor tweaks to the previous years programs, is worth $900. I would really like to know that. There is profit, and there is "well we are the only one making this product, what will people realistically pay for this? Just how badly can we milk these idiots before they revolt". It's capitalism at the expense of people, and I just can't bring myself to agree with that.

jknight5422

So buy a Mac & Mac has an Office equivalent. Or you can use Open Office or Google Apps. Nobody is twisting your arm to pay for MS Office. Come on. The 360 doesn't cost $900 & neither do the games.

It's bigger than that. Everyone else owns _____ so you want something compatible with ______ something everyone knows how to use, etc. It's really too late for anyone to stop their software dominance because they had too big a foothold for too long. We became dependant and that's exactly how they wanted it.

It's easy to say "buy a car that uses _____ instead of gas then!" as if it's a solution, but if you have to drive out of state to fill it up it is no longer convenient and no longer a viable option. People will generally go the path of least resistance, and most people have enough to worry about without being enslaved by principles and convictions.

[QUOTE="stiltzsy"]M$ certainly can afford it. The real question is...is it worth it to M$? bstarter29

Of course it is. RE 5 is one of the few multiplats will most likely sell more on PS3.

why? :?

im getting the 360 version. the 360 currently has a larger NA userbase....and it has xbl. which will be handy if the rumors of some kind of online play are true

One month of waiting isn't going to hurt a Cow like me. I'm used to it. MS is just pissing money away.caseypayne69

you're aware its most likely going to be half a year or so, right?

[QUOTE="bstarter29"]

[QUOTE="stiltzsy"]M$ certainly can afford it. The real question is...is it worth it to M$? REforever101

Of course it is. RE 5 is one of the few multiplats will most likely sell more on PS3.

why? :?

im getting the 360 version. the 360 currently has a larger NA userbase....and it has xbl. which will be handy if the rumors of some kind of online play are true

One month of waiting isn't going to hurt a Cow like me. I'm used to it. MS is just pissing money away.caseypayne69

because you're right. what's 30 days? but 90 days? that's something. 180 days? that's something.

if they're paying for exclusivity expect between 90-180 days. nothing less will mean anything.

DAMAGE CONTROL HAS BEGUN! LOVE IT! COWS IN TEARS:cry:


liberty71441

Lol, a timed-exclusive for 1 month is not going to decide which system to get just cause of one game.

You know this is a rumour page. Have fun being milked since MS are going to get their revenue back from consumers.

[QUOTE="REforever101"][QUOTE="bstarter29"]

[QUOTE="stiltzsy"]M$ certainly can afford it. The real question is...is it worth it to M$? liberty71441

Of course it is. RE 5 is one of the few multiplats will most likely sell more on PS3.

why? :?

im getting the 360 version. the 360 currently has a larger NA userbase....and it has xbl. which will be handy if the rumors of some kind of online play are true

uh...both versions ended up the same...and the 360 gets dlc...

I hope not. If M$ can't get developers to come on board on there own then they need to change things in the company itself instead of trying to buy there way into game studios.jimm895

^what he said. If you have to pay people to get them to make a game for your console...you should probably restrategize...and where is that guy with the quotation from the Sony Exec, talking about how Sony earns exclusives and doesnt buy them, when u need him??

[QUOTE="jimm895"]I hope not. If M$ can't get developers to come on board on there own then they need to change things in the company itself instead of trying to buy there way into game studios.II_Seraphim_II

^what he said. If you have to pay people to get them to make a game for your console...you should probably restrategize...and where is that guy with the quotation from the Sony Exec, talking about how Sony earns exclusives and doesnt buy them, when u need him??

Guys the game was coming to 360 also :roll:

Sony paid for Unreal too so it's not just MS. I'm also sure Sony is paying to keep MS4 exclusive. 360 has earned a right due to the high attach rate and Devs have came on board. MS just sweeten the deal for a time exclusive, we all know how long it take to Dev for the PS3 anyways the 360 version was probly farther along.

Sony, get off your lazy ass and do something about this. Seriously. It's almost like they dont care.AAllxxjjnn

They cannot beat MS in a bidding contest. Their best bet is to hope Capcom rejects the offer and gets strong PS3 sales(which it would get).

i dont care, if MS can get it out by this year ill get it for 360, then prob get ps3 version later onMiss_Wacy

You must be pretty loaded with nothing better to spend your money on!!

[QUOTE="bstarter29"]

[QUOTE="stiltzsy"]M$ certainly can afford it. The real question is...is it worth it to M$? REforever101

Of course it is. RE 5 is one of the few multiplats will most likely sell more on PS3.

why? :?

im getting the 360 version. the 360 currently has a larger NA userbase....and it has xbl. which will be handy if the rumors of some kind of online play are true

Remember, RE is biggest in Japan. Also, M$ has never seen an RE title before, and every RE title except 0 has appeared on PS. The 360 version will probably outsell the PS3 version in NA, but worldwide I think will be a different story.

[QUOTE="REforever101"][QUOTE="bstarter29"]

[QUOTE="stiltzsy"]M$ certainly can afford it. The real question is...is it worth it to M$? bstarter29

Of course it is. RE 5 is one of the few multiplats will most likely sell more on PS3.

why? :?

im getting the 360 version. the 360 currently has a larger NA userbase....and it has xbl. which will be handy if the rumors of some kind of online play are true

Remember, RE is biggest in Japan. Also, M$ has never seen an RE title before, and every RE title except 0 has appeared on PS. The 360 version will probably outsell the PS3 version in NA, but worldwide I think will be a different story.

The same happened with DMC4- the 360 version performed better in NA but the PS3 version performed better worldwide. And by the time Resi 5 will come out, the gap between PS3 and 360 will be much, much smaller. Pretty much guarantees the PS3 version of Resi 5 will sell more than the 360 version.