They lose exclusives to others, then they make an excuse like this. Pathetic. Lance_C

What would you do if you knew you couldn't outbid MS for the exclusives?

That is a great statement and I admire him for saying so.. Microsoft is nothing more than another sad excuse for an american company. Microsoft throws 50 mill at rockstar just for an additioin for gta4, that is really, really sad. And i dont blame rockstar for turning it down, thats 50 million dollars!! But the consoles will continue to break and people that dont care or are just to blind to see that microsoft is bad for gaming will continue to purchase this flawed system.

[QUOTE="cakeorrdeath"]

SCEA president Jack Tretton says "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 lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform. We earn it."

Is this naive or admirable?

Link

peacebringer

But at the rate the PS3 is selling now it'll never make that ...what I mean is that this generation the companies need to think differently ...

Ignorance is bliss

[QUOTE="Lance_C"]They lose exclusives to others, then they make an excuse like this. Pathetic. secretsaiyan007

What would you do if you knew you couldn't outbid MS for the exclusives?

And how do you know they can not? Funny...Sony fanboys act like MS has unlimited money yet they have set limitations...Just like Sony does. Neither are allowed to over invest. But when one needs an excuse...its not hard to find one

But funny enough...Sony has more Assets then MS... So...about all that:oops:

SCEA president Jack Tretton says "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 lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform. We earn it."

Is this naive or admirable?

Link

cakeorrdeath

I think it's both. It's also pretty pointless for a company with such an unethical history to make a show of it. They're basically losing money to be hypocrits. Pretty pointless Sony, out of all the bad stuff you've done, you SHOULD buy exclusivity.

Gamers don't care if MS are using 'blackmail' to get exclusive games, all they care about are the games.

Terrible spin.

[QUOTE="cakeorrdeath"]

SCEA president Jack Tretton says "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 lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform. We earn it."

Is this naive or admirable?

Link

MADVLAD123

Companies are not about morals and ethics. They are about making money. Make your Shareholders happy: get your money. No matter what it takes, as long as they please the Shareholders they will make the money, and they will succeed.

Fixed ur post up a bit...but yea Sony cry me a river. I thought they payed to keep GTA on the PS2?

That is a great statement and I admire him for saying so.. Microsoft is nothing more than another sad excuse for an american company. Microsoft throws 50 mill at rockstar just for an additioin for gta4, that is really, really sad. And i dont blame rockstar for turning it down, thats 50 million dollars!! But the consoles will continue to break and people that dont care or are just to blind to see that microsoft is bad for gaming will continue to purchase this flawed system.

notoriousmatty

Sonys paid devs as well (read the thread)

MS is trying to fix their hardware issue (ever heard of the Playstation 2....Disc Read Error FTL)

its called BALLIN! SONY = POWER and they don't have to have exclusive games becasue sson games that go on every platform will be better for the ps3 anyway.

SCEA president Jack Tretton says "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 lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform. We earn it."

Is this naive or admirable?

Link

cakeorrdeath

its called BALLIN! SONY = POWER and they don't have to have exclusive games becasue sson games that go on every platform will be better for the ps3 anyway.

ocdog45

That's not a good reason!!! A console needs exclusives toshow thevariety of games you can't get on other consoles!!!

It's Sony's decision to make, but personally I think it's a bad one. I think that like a certain other company many years ago, Sony is putting too much faith into what worked in the past. For whatever reason, PS1 grabbed the lion's share during it's generation. A situation that caused and was helped by many 3rd party exclusives. PS2 got out there early and started building on that lead and the support from the previous gen. Developers had little reason to support the GC and X-box was late to the party and a complete unknown. This time, MS is not new to the game, Sony did not launch first, it's playing catch-up with its game library.

I've said it before, gamers buy a system for exclusives. Yes Sony still has some great games, but not nearly as many as it's had in the past.

This is a fine topic for a mod to make. It's based on a news article(although a bit old), and he has not inserted an excessive amount of his own opinion into it. This is the type of topic that SHOULD generate a lot of intelligent conversation. Just because fanboys choose to shout back and forth doesn't mean that the thread is bad.

"we don't buy exclusives, we lose exclusives"gamergeekgeek

:lol:

They don't buy exclusivity?!!! That's the most stupid thing i've heard, maybe they don't remember that after the Gamecube version of soulCalibur II had more success (Both commercial and critical) than the ps2 versionthat Sony went to sign an exclusive deal with Namco to ensure Soul Calibur III would be released exclusively for PlayStation 2. So don't tell me that you don't buy exclusivity you've always done it and you'll always do it.SuperMario_46

I agree. I think that Sony has only stopped buying exclusivity in the short-term because they have liquidity problems (i.e. cashflow). If Sony had the extra capital, they would certainly be allocating some of that towards exclusivity rights.

SCEA president Jack Tretton says "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 lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform. We earn it."

Is this naive or admirable?

Link

cakeorrdeath

I don't know, but it is true. Microsoft spent millions for exclusives and Sony not a dime, actually they made money by advertizing the games for the other companies lol! Wii has it's own exclusives: been there done that games, so meh.

Sony is pathetic. How much damage control can they really do seroiusly? I can't wait for the offical word on GT5 having no car damage. Yeah that should be laughable too :|

But its whatever. I could care less what those stupid PR guys say or do as long as the PS3 gets good games. But wait....it doesn't really have any good games and all of its good games I can get on 360.

Sony, get you **** together please. I mean seriously just get us good games.

The reason why I think Sony doesn't feel the need to buy exclusivity is because most titles are multyplat now anyway.

Another reason is because I think Sony has a lot of confidence in the future of its worldwide studios (first and second party games). Yes the Xbox360 might have a tad more exclusives coming for it, but I find Sony is covering a larger variety of games with it's first/second party titles than Microsoft is with or without their exclusives.

I also think Sony has more unique/interesting games coming out for the PS3 than Xbox360 does in the near future... Titles like LBP, Home and so on....

Sony will make sure some titles are exclusive though, because they've always been popular on their systems... (FF,MGS, and so on).

[QUOTE="peacebringer"][QUOTE="cakeorrdeath"]

SCEA president Jack Tretton says "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 lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform. We earn it."

Is this naive or admirable?

Link

jg4xchamp

I agree. Business is business. They did nothing wrong here.

I hate to say it but I don't see Sony moving forward now again. After all the bad comments here's yet another when I thought those days were behind them. Guess I was wrong.

Him saying this just sounds so childish IMO. They lost out on the exclusivity of GTA:IV content even if timed exclusive and he's whining like a baby. I mean if I was MS I would've bought Take two or looked into seriously. Maybe even do something along the lines of getting the GTA version on the 360 one year before the PS3 can or six months. Money makes money at the end of the day which is why the rich get richer and etc....

But this comment just sounds sad... doesn't sound like the comment from a company that destroyed the competition. Someone needs to do a seminar with all SCEA employees and presidents etc.... about how to handle things and not come off arrogant or snobish etc... And also they still haven't changed their ads which makes me think they've learned nothing at Sony for the PS3 and don't think anything is wrong at all besides the price maybe...

Well for Sony, why throw out money to a 3rd party developer when you have a bunch of 1 party developers making games that will probably end up being better than those third party games anyway.

Microsoft has very little first party so why not throw money at third parties.

Sony's 1st party as far as quality of games go is even greater than Nintendo's.

Sony's 1st party as far as quality of games go is even greater than Nintendo's.

CajunShooter

I actually agree with you. Maybe not AS far as Nintendo's, but VERY, very close.

Sony is smart at mixing exclusive third party titles/and using their first/second titles for variety in their gaming libraries.

SCEA president Jack Tretton says "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 lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform. We earn it."

Is this naive or admirable?

Link

cakeorrdeath

neither its the mark of a liar, sony purchased exclusivity in the ps1 and ps2 years. they just wanna act like they dont do it now so they seem better.

Its not microsofts fault sony made an overly glorified blu ray player.

SCEA president Jack Tretton says "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 lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform. We earn it."

Is this naive or admirable?

Link

cakeorrdeath

Interesting question. I think it's a little of BOTH. It certainly is admirable, and the way it SHOULD be, that peopel earn exclusives as opposed to "buy" them. I don't think any company that has to buy exclusives (essentially bribe) should be bragging about exclusives.

However, this is no longer the PS2 days when Sony had 100 million consoles on the market and developers could profit off of games. Now, developers have little to nothing to gain from being exclusive to the PS3...the market isn't there for them to sell enough games to make money.

However, on the flip side, with development costs going through the roof for the 360 and PS3, and yet no guarantee of getting even 1 more sale than in the past, developers have no choice but to go multiplat if they hope to see any profit.

Which is where the naive aspect comes in. It always has been and always will be true, that nobody buys a console based on multi-plats. They buy it for the exclusives and the muliplats are just icing on the proverbial cake. With developers more and more drawn to the benefit of muliplats, and development costs skyrocketing, the only way to make an exclusive game worthwhile for developers (at this point) is if it is either a cheap or quickly developed game (ie. Sega games are often made in only a few months) or if the console maker is willing to cover the potential losses the developer will see due to lack of sales for the exclusive.

So for now it is naive of Sony, but it was admirable in the PS1 and PS2 days. It will still be admirable if consoles this gen see as much sales as last gen, which may be doubtful. If they DO see those sales numbers and still have to BUY exclusives then I think that is pretty embarassing.

They never have.tegovoltio

Do you honestly believe that they never made any deal with any third-party developers for exclusivity ?

This could be one of the most stupid and crybaby things I've ever heard an exec say, and thats saying something.

How about instead of making excuses about 3rd party devs flocking to the 360 they actually do something productive to ensure games go to the system.

Seriously after the "$1200 comment" I thought Tretton was a joke, this comment does nothing to change my mind.

Thats funny because they bought square right out from nintendo with all their cost sharing and marketing funds.

SCEA president Jack Tretton says "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 lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform. We earn it."

Is this naive or admirable?

Link

cakeorrdeath

sony is really a sinking ship it seems

wii is a fad

xbox360 is the console that will break this gen....

tidus222

The March 1995 issue of Next Generation Magazine tell you exactly who Sony bought and what "deals" they made to get into the industry.

If someone can find that archive, that would be great. :)

there is that sony arrogance we know and love lol

[QUOTE="peacebringer"][QUOTE="Yellow_Rose"][QUOTE="peacebringer"] Casuals are to busy with the Wii, Theres alot OF SCEA and SCEJ games people would rather play than Xbox games, But no one wants to spen 599 for the console so there waiting for a price drop, but there not gonna buy a 360 so it can break.

you definetly get what you pay for with a Xbox 360.

NIN_013

So be a good boy and explain why the 360 is currently outselling the PS3.

Well my friend, if Sony announces a price drop do you know what Microsoft will do?

That's right - they will also price drop accordingly.

Even if Sony drops to the $399 mark, Microsoft will drop to the $299 mark or even lower. Microsoft has no problem not getting their numbers in the black (as we've seen over nearly the entire history with Xbox 1 and the 360) and they will do anything possible to make sure Sonyremains in their currentparalyzed condition. We've already seen MS throw boatloads of money to buy away exclusives from Sony, which makes me believe that they'd be willing to price drop $100-$150 if Sony makes such a move.

Mark my words - If Sony price drops, MS will move accordingly,which means a price drop for the 360 as well. Even though a price drop sounds like a swell idea for Sony (they really don't have any options) it will only mean a sustained or increased success for the 360. It will just move the 360 one step closer to the sweet spot of console pricing.

XBOX is already affordable people don't really care about it, PS3 is also a Blueray player and it has Sony Franchises, People want a PS3 so there waiting for a price drop, if people wanted a Xbox they would already own one. But they don't , if MS drops price with the PS3 it won't matter PS3 will still sell more units. the Xbox 360 core is 299 are people buying it up? no, for people who don't play online the 360 isn't worth it. and market research shows less than 60% of gamers play online anyways. MS console is only appealing to Shooter and online fans.
peacebringer

You never did answer my question.

Name the one and only $400 console to ever sell 10 million units in 13 months.

And which part of "over 80% of people buy their gaming consoles at $199 or less" have you missed in the past 5 generations?

XBOX is already affordable people don't really care about it, PS3 is also a Blueray player and it has Sony Franchises, People want a PS3 so there waiting for a price drop, if people wanted a Xbox they would already own one.
peacebringer

First off, the 360 IS NOT an affordable price. Every industry expert will tell you it's not. It's just more affordable than the PS3 is right now.

Second, contrary to opular belief, the vast majority of people still couldn't care less about Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, so that argument is moot.

[QUOTE="NIN_013"][QUOTE="peacebringer"][QUOTE="Yellow_Rose"][QUOTE="peacebringer"] Casuals are to busy with the Wii, Theres alot OF SCEA and SCEJ games people would rather play than Xbox games, But no one wants to spen 599 for the console so there waiting for a price drop, but there not gonna buy a 360 so it can break.

you definetly get what you pay for with a Xbox 360.

peacebringer

So be a good boy and explain why the 360 is currently outselling the PS3.

Well my friend, if Sony announces a price drop do you know what Microsoft will do?

That's right - they will also price drop accordingly.

Even if Sony drops to the $399 mark, Microsoft will drop to the $299 mark or even lower. Microsoft has no problem not getting their numbers in the black (as we've seen over nearly the entire history with Xbox 1 and the 360) and they will do anything possible to make sure Sonyremains in their currentparalyzed condition. We've already seen MS throw boatloads of money to buy away exclusives from Sony, which makes me believe that they'd be willing to price drop $100-$150 if Sony makes such a move.

Mark my words - If Sony price drops, MS will move accordingly,which means a price drop for the 360 as well. Even though a price drop sounds like a swell idea for Sony (they really don't have any options) it will only mean a sustained or increased success for the 360. It will just move the 360 one step closer to the sweet spot of console pricing.

too bad your wrong, alot of people are buying wii cuz its cheap, once sony drops the price so will microsoft, so I see nintendo and MS staying on top, and brand loyality dosen't mean jack, bub, cuz if it did, the nintendo name would have stayed at number one the last 12 years, so that pretty much stamps out your idea.

honestly, I don't think this exec gets it. devs are willing to do exclusivity deals because gaming in 2007 is so risky and so expensive, one poorly selling game can doom an independent developer. as such, this big corporations are in a position to give these developers the thing that they can appreciate the most:

security.

remember, these developers are people too. they have rent. families to feed. car notes to pay. education loans to pay back. credit card bills. exclusivity deals represent GUARANTEED money, whether the game flops sales expectations or not.

that's what this exec doesn't seem to get. it's a win-win for the company and the developer to sign exclusivity deals and the game reaches a fair amount of success.

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="peacebringer"][QUOTE="cakeorrdeath"]

SCEA president Jack Tretton says "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 lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform. We earn it."

Is this naive or admirable?

Link

kcpp2b

I agree. Business is business. They did nothing wrong here.

I hate to say it but I don't see Sony moving forward now again. After all the bad comments here's yet another when I thought those days were behind them. Guess I was wrong.

Him saying this just sounds so childish IMO. They lost out on the exclusivity of GTA:IV content even if timed exclusive and he's whining like a baby. I mean if I was MS I would've bought Take two or looked into seriously. Maybe even do something along the lines of getting the GTA version on the 360 one year before the PS3 can or six months. Money makes money at the end of the day which is why the rich get richer and etc....

But this comment just sounds sad... doesn't sound like the comment from a company that destroyed the competition. Someone needs to do a seminar with all SCEA employees and presidents etc.... about how to handle things and not come off arrogant or snobish etc... And also they still haven't changed their ads which makes me think they've learned nothing at Sony for the PS3 and don't think anything is wrong at all besides the price maybe...

Could you imagine if GTA4 was a timed exclusive for 6 months on the 360? All fanboys would be in an uproar (except sheep).