All Channels
Popular
430°

Sony Dislikes Console Exclusive Titles

Sony as you know has a strong line up of Playstation 3 exclusive series such as Killzone, LittleBigPlanet and Infamous, recently they have now been critizing platform exclusiveness and has “warned” that it limits the games’ marketing potential.

LORD-PHOENIX5571d ago

third party exclusives...change the title

sinncross5571d ago

Actually to put their comments into perspective... they basically don't want to shell out lots of money for an exclusive when they could

1) Spend less money to secure exclusive DLC (Baman, RDR, AC:BH)
2) Use their money for their own first party studios.

It has the added benefit for 3rd party devs as their games are still multiplatform, but some extra content for 1 version won't be a problem.

tehpees35571d ago

Thats smart. It means they can focus on their own titles whereas M$ is running short.

Third party titles will come to PS3 anyway lol

malandra5571d ago

maybe this is meant as a response to the Resident Evil 6 timed exclusivity rumours

gaffyh5571d ago

Such a stupid article. They meant that it is better for 3rd party developers, because they don't want to force a company to make a game exclusive in that sense, because it limits their market. But at the same time, it means they can pay for exclusive content, which keeps both the developers and Sony happy.

sikbeta5570d ago

"Sony Dislikes [Third Party] Console Exclusive Titles"

Fixed :P and it's no like Sony "dislike" Third Party Exclusives, just use the money for First Party Games...

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 5570d ago
MrBeatdown5571d ago

Is it really that hard for the reader to figure out on their own?

vsr5570d ago

But 3rd party likes Sony,

Yakuza / Agent / FF versus 13 / MGS 4

And SO MANY PS1 PS2 Games !!!! ....... etc

blumatt5571d ago

Exactly what I was gonna say. They were referring to third party exclusives. Of course, that's a bit ironic too since the PS3 has a few of those coming too. haha

SnakeMustDie5571d ago (Edited 5571d ago )

Sony hates MGS4?

Anyway, I prefer exclusive games over exclusive DLC because having the latter will alienate the other console's fanbase.

Tommykrem5571d ago

They didn't pay for MGS4 so no. Also, the title can be a bit misleading.

Kon5571d ago

Well, just make every exclusive game multiplat and we're done.

nycrekid5571d ago

Just buy a Ps3 and your are done. Much easier than developing 15 games a year on two different platforms.

Kon5571d ago

I was kidding, i know that making multiplat games is harder than exclusive ones.

Zinc5571d ago (Edited 5571d ago )

Actually, just put a $120.00 graphics card in your desktop PC and you're golden. No limits, no excuses, maximum fun and maximum profit for developers because they are not subsidizing the hardware via licensing from the big 3.

badz1495571d ago

err...that doesn't solve the problem that you still need a PS3 to play PS3 exclusives! they don't come to PC EVER! some 360 exclusives too. so, what's your point?

Zinc5571d ago (Edited 5571d ago )

Well badz149, my point is that if we didn't have consoles, this subject wouldn't even exist. However, others would probably come to take their place... like OS wars and so on.

Picture it badz149... No special licensing... lowered costs per game... costs of computer equipment very affordabled... more games being made for an open platform...

More choice.

More freedom.

More fun.

More money being made for developers.

Developers don't have to rely on publishers as much as they do.

A video game renaissance is born.

A dream? Perhaps... but, a beautiful one.

DaTruth5571d ago (Edited 5571d ago )

As long as Sony keeps making games like they have been, I could really care less if they make a console!

I don't play consoles, I play games! I could get a better PC and just upgrade every five years like usual!

Somehow, I know it will hurt the market though, so the status quo should continue!

badz1495571d ago

I get your vision and it's good that you're accepting it as a dream. but let's look at it from another perspective

"More choice." - with only PC as the only platform? that's LESS choice than what we currently have! now, people who are comfortable with kb+m can game on PC, those who want it simple and stick with controllers can game on consoles and those who just game casually can stick to the DS or phones. everybody wins! granted that there'll be platform exclusive games, but that's not up to us gamers to decide but to follow the platform with games we want.

"More freedom." - not exactly. there's no freedom if you're being limited to just 1 platform IMO!

"More fun." - this is highly opinion. based on what you enjoy the most and everybody has different taste, FUN is not something that can be generalized.

"More money being made for developers." - no guarantee for this as if PC is the only platform available, competition will be fierce as well and things will never be the same.

"Developers don't have to rely on publishers as much as they do." - maybe it's hard to digest this fact but many studios available currently are 'alive' because of the publishers having their back and some even diminished not because of publishers axing them out, it's just because of their own incompetency.

"A video game renaissance is born." - I don't know about that as renaissance was launched because of the restrictions put on people during that time but now, the gaming market is as crowded as ever. I don't think any renaissance is needed but maybe we could do with some new fresh ideas.

long comment, sorry but just want to share my view

Zinc5571d ago (Edited 5571d ago )

Badz149 - It's cool man, I don't mind a long comment, I make plenty myself. I understand where you are coming from and enjoyed your comment.

I want to add that a computer is an all-in-one solution. If you want to game using other input methods and control schemes, there is no limit to what you can do with a computer. It accepts pretty much everything. But, a closed system with forever be static and that is the curse of all closed platforms that have strict control placed on them.

I think there is a viable reason to have handhelds and don't think of it as an all or nothing proposition. I think both can exist, because you can't take a desktop with you on a road trip or the train. However, who knows what the future might hold?

Developers rely on publishers, like coke heads rely on their dealers... that is all I will say about that.

Having one stationary platform like the computer, would open up so much more innovation and opportunity for not just the developers, but the end consumer.

I think the state of the industry has created an upwelling of indie development and that is largely fostered by the pc gaming community. That is a true renaissance created by the weight of the system in place, that same system that trends toward stifling innovation in favor of tried and true formula.

Remember... all things start with a dream. Reality has to begin somewhere.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 5571d ago
Aarix5570d ago

19 Disagrees? God damn cant you fanboys take a joke?

Raven_Nomad5571d ago

3rd party Exclusives are pretty close to being at an end anyway.
Most people by now can own all three consoles pretty cheaply and exclusive means jack squat to you like it does me anyway.

Show all comments (49)
80°

(For Southeast Asia) New Price Changes for PS5, PS5 Pro, and PlayStation Portal remote player

For Southeast Asia, new price changes.

Prices effective starting May 1st, 2026.

Read Full Story >>
blog.playstation.com
28d ago Replies(1)
BeHunted28d ago

Looks like PlayStation took a hit with Marathon and is now quietly adjusting prices worldwide to recover the losses

andy8528d ago

Lets be honest raising prices doesn't do that when no one's buying it. I imagine the profit it greater selling 10 times more at a lower price

Pergele27d ago

Whatever you say buddy, let's all wear the tinfoil hats.

IceKoldKilla27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

LMFAO Your comment alone says a lot more about you than anything else. When has one game not selling 10 million copies made a company raise the prices of their console? Then Xbox would be costing $5000 by now lol. You remind of the crazy drug addicts on the street rambling on about conspiracies. xD You sure you don't need a hug, buddy?

ChunkyMonk27d ago

One game that Sony payed $200 million for. lol
Also, you sure were quick to get triggered. Maybe your the one who needs a hug?

Eonjay27d ago

If nothing else, we should be united against the real issue here. AI and unnecessary tariffs that are effecting all gamers.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 27d ago
Athlon10128d ago (Edited 28d ago )

The price increases are due to the RAM demand associated with AI and the US-Iran war. You can look to any business news website and local news to see that. Heck, even the 2026 Asus Zenbook Duo I've been eyeing has faced delays and has had a price increase of $400; that laptop has two specs. Asus is doing a staggered release with per-orders for the lower spec now and shipping in May and pre-orders for the higher spec that I'm eyeing starting in June. Basically, all computer manufactures are affected. It'll most likely start affecting smart phones too if it hasn't already. I can't remember the last time any major console maker (Nintendo, Sony, Sega, etc) increased the price of their console mid cycle outside of Microsoft just to make more profit.

S2Killinit27d ago

Its not the war. Its the RAM issue.

jznrpg27d ago

War is causing gas prices to rise. Transport of everything requires gas so the prices of those items go up as well. So it does have an impact

Athlon10127d ago (Edited 27d ago )

The blockage of the Straight of Hormuz due to the US-Iran war has affected raw components used in semi-conductor manufacturing such as bromine, aluminum, and helium. Iran had attacked the liquified natural gas (LNG) plant in Qatar which is a large producer (1/3 globally) of helium which is used in semiconductor etching. So it's the both the war and the RAM crises.

badz14927d ago

Oh no...should I get the Pro now before the price increase?

80°

Former Xbox Exec Says Developers Didn't Want a Sony Monopoly

Former Xbox executive Ed Fries comments on the early days of Xbox, the opinion of Japanese game companies, and more.

Read Full Story >>
insider-gaming.com
41d ago Replies(2)
Reaper22_41d ago

I dont think that'll ever happen. But i must say back in the day, they were definitely trying because they were more cash rich than their competitors.

CosmicTurtle40d ago

I think MS were and still are the richer company. They tried to acquire Sega back in the day (and considered doing so again more recently), they obviously bought exclusivity to Halo which was originally shown as a Mac title. I don’t think as a company MS can claim the moral high ground here. It’s a wilful lack of self awareness.

Of course Sony would try exactly the same if they had the resources, but when the PS2 dominated the industry was in a much healthier place with an abundance of great third parties.

This has been a depressing generation as far as first party decisions are concerned. The fact we are debating business plans rather than which game is better is a sad reflection of the state of things.

Darkseeker41d ago (Edited 41d ago )

There was Nintendo as well, Sony wouldn't have had a monopoly. In fact, the world would be better today if Xbox never existed in the first place. They pretty much brought all bad practices we have today. We might have gotten all of it either way, but not this early. In term of franchises, I don't think there is anything Microsoft released that would actually be missed if it didn't exist. Even Halo the world wouldn't notice if Halo didn't exist.

S2Killinit40d ago

MS was definitely a bad influence on gaming.

raWfodog41d ago

I think almost everyone will agree that a monopoly is not good for the industry. But that being said, the competition needs to be smart and strategic with their business. Simply buying up publishers and traditional third-party studios just to keep them out of the other companies reach is not a sustainable practice. That goes for all parties so don't think I'm just referring to Xbox.

I'm no business guru by any stretch of the imagination but I firmly believe that the best way to drive consumers to your software and hardware is to invest smart in your first-party studios. Give them full support and guidance in making unique, fun games that are only available to play in your ecosystem and the gamers will come.

Reaper22_41d ago (Edited 41d ago )

But first party studios aren't enough. They only make up a small portion of the industry. Without 3rd party there would be no industry for Microsoft or sony.Developing games take time and money and sometimes you gotta make moves to stay competitive.

raWfodog41d ago

Nah, I never said first-party was enough. I said it’s the ‘best way’ to drive gamers to your platform. 3rd-party is a free-for-all and there’s no guarantee that gamers will use your hardware to play the game. If you want to push your own software and/or hardware you need first-party, or at least exclusive deals with third-party studios.

SimpleDad41d ago

They Shure did a great job... 25 years later Xbox is dead.

Reaper22_41d ago

Then why be so emotional and continue to talk about it. Xbox will never die be ause it stays in so many people's head.

lodossrage41d ago

How can you even see him being "emotional" in that comment?

If anything, you're the emotional one, constantly trying to go at anyone that says anything against Microsoft. So when you call him emotional, it comes off as deflection

Elda40d ago

I own an XBSX & I can say it's becoming irrelevant out of the 3 current consoles.

41d ago Replies(2)
Show all comments (34)
40°

Sony Shows Off 20 Minutes of Crimson Desert on a Base PS5

Sony uploaded gameplay footage of Crimson Desert on a base PS5 running in what appears to be Quality Mode at a stable 30fps at 4K.

Read Full Story >>
powerupgaming.co.uk
BlazedKong67d ago

looks god awful on the base systems