@terrusaet @jeremy- Err, you are just repeating what i said in the first place.
I called it 'establishing brand integrity' for the next generation.
But what i explained, is this kind bullshit marketing strategy of depriving us for a game, for NO PROFIT, but just to build integrity for nextgen is annoying because i wanted to play the game on PC.
I understand that, and thats EXCACTLY the point i made. The fact that you just read a few lines then write a dissertation on exactly what i was saying is confusing.
You still fail to see the point... you are more interested in 'opinions' and being 'right' than exploring any aspect remotely involving intelligence.
Lets see if i can be more clear... so again, rather than ad hominem, we look at FACTS.
Take darksouls for instance, developed what we can reasonably characterize as 'near' the end of 'PS3 lifecycle'. And under 'exclusivity'.
Now, we see the emergence of a phenomena to the games industry, not really seen before, where there is a facebook group with 100k or more votes for a PC port.
Why? Why did these people not just all run and buy a PS3. Because (drum roll, as i've been saying in every post).... ITS NEAR THE END OF THE LIFECYCLE.
Gamers know how many potential games are left on the console, if they havnt got one now, and there havnt been THAT many exclusive games over the years, exclusivity (drum roll again)... IS NOT GOING TO WORK AT THIS PRESENT TIME.
Now, this is the part where these things called 'facts' really mess with your argument. because now Sony and the Dev agree with me too. They take the action of PORTING the game to PC (although poorly, and affecting gross sales).
Your statement of 'duh people dont buy windows because its not on ps3' is entirely a 'moot' point and irrelevant.
It was about EXCLUSIVITY, and whether you have to buy the PS3 to get the game experience. So lets look at it hey:
<< LINK REMOVED >>
Dozens of PC OR PS3 games, that you dont need to own the PS3 for to get the experience. Case and point :)
only its about whether the console has exclusivity. You never saw me demanding it be on Box, i would prefer last of us on the PC as i have a top spec box, (pretty sure i said that from the start anyway).
All i said, all i ever said, was that at this stage in the game, all the research, all the numbers show they should cross platform games UNTIL nextgen.
/end rant. Go ahead and try and prove me wrong but all i'm seeing are childlike 'told you so' or 'xbox sucks' responses.
@Total_mischief @jeremy- Actually there are plenty of examples of SOE making games to other platforms, as with microsoft owned content. Exclusivity serves the most important purpose during the 'early adopter', 'growth', and even 'market maturity' stages of consoles, where people are still buying them 'en mass'. At 'market decline', (ie, 2012-2013)... you will probably make more money selling to other platforms too.. Once nextgen hits, the cycle resets.
Go wikipedia.
Step 1) SOE makes planetside 2
Step 2) People buy Microsoft windows
Step 3) SOE makes a cool game and people buy it because its cool, regardless of the platform.
@traitor_651 There are about 25 comments, not one of which bothered to read my post (i made about 5 mins after the first and before the proceeding 25), where i clearly outlined that xbox do the same thing with DLC's, and i dont care about retarded xbox/ps fanboys (which half the idiots commenting are).
The fact that you see one sentence that seems slightly xbox oriented, and stand on your PS3 soapbox (without bothering to read the rest of my post, or the proceeding post), is actually just proving what a ridiculous 'fanboy' you are. I myself dont give a shit. I play PC.. and have done for 4 years, when nextgen arrives, LIKE I SAID, i will buy a console based on PERFORMANCE MERITS, not some retarded notion of fanboy'ism.
If you want to call that having my arse handed to me then sure, okay bro... cool story. Try reading a post in entirety before clicking reply though, just a pro tip bro.
I dont care whether its xbox OR ps3 doing it, i was just mentioning that 7 years into the lifecycle, exclusive titles have barely any effect on new console sales.. and its sad that it occurs. /END. Thats an undisputed fact, go read the console sales statistics.....
anyways....25 replies? Make it 50 kthx :)
EDIT... PS. if i happened to own a ps3, and to the most recent gears title, i would be saying the same thing about Xbox giving kickbacks for an exclusive xbox title. Do you really think it blew out Xbox sales when that most recent title came around? doubtful.
The problem was your comment section would automatically populate image and other content during copy + paste, so you would naturally pull a lot of data into the comments anyway unintentionally. While you are at it, you should fix that too. You need filtering on the copy and paste logic to remove HTML content, and just paste plain text + basic text formatting.
This game being PS3 only is the biggest travesty to gaming since Dark Souls. I understand they want to pull people toward ps3 but its too late in the game for that, do you really think I'm going to buy one now after 7 years?
Basically, playstation pays out the ass for exclusive rights so they can deprive everybody else of something and have slightly more 'brand integrity' going into the PS4vsX720 battle for the future.. its got nothing to do with sales of the current console... all they want to do is deprive everybody else.
All this leads me to do is actually DISLIKE Playstation more. I'm an xbox owner, but come the nextgen wars, i was originally planning to decide on each console based on merits / performance and work from there, possibly even own both. All playstation's anti-competitive behavior does is strip them from the running in my opinion.
While i'm on a rant, stop bidding over the f*cking DLC's too, just give them to everybody at the same time dipsh*ts. (looking at FC3).
EDIT*** One note, when nextgen hits, i know there will be a lot of exclusives, because it actually makes sense then, its not 7 years into the console lifecycle, and people are going to choose to BUY a console based on the exclusive titles, I'm specifically talking about how illogical and really, just anti-competitive/rude it is for the console manufacturers to be doing it now, which only has the effect to deprive gamers.
@TheOnlyConan As you can see the original comment i was responding to was deleted, i was essentially explaining that consoles sell below cost to a comment about how expenisve they would be.. and you are right it was a bit of an estimate. I think the playstation model shows the point i was making about selling below cost. For instance see the wikipedia entry on PS3.
"The PlayStation 3's initial production cost is estimated by iSuppli to have been %<< LINK REMOVED >>805.85 for the 20 GB model and US$840.35 for the 60 GB model.%<< LINK REMOVED >> However, they were priced at US$499 and US$599 respectively, meaning that units may have been sold at an estimated loss of $306 or $241 depending on model, if the cost estimates were correct,"
My point about selling below cost (of the comment now deleted).. stands but you are right in correcting a figure i pulled out of the air from years ago.
@risako9 If it costs 1000, they sell it for 500 (see previous consoles, original xbox cost 800, sold for 400, original playstation cost 1000, sold for 500). The prices will come down further too. The speculation to date has been a cost of around 700-800 with a retail of 350.
is it any wonder that we have the same violent video games in australia but barely the rate of school shootings as the US per capita?
Oh thats right its because there arnt 1238021938123 guns in our country that you can buy anywhere, even at your local supermarket while getting groceries.
jeremy-'s comments