Sony Says Third Party Exclusivity Is Dead; Reality – They Killed It
- Scribbled on April 15th, 2009 by Jordan Lund
- Filed in Editorial Content, PlayStation Network, Sony PlayStation 3
Sony hardware PR man John Koller has come out and admitted that console exclusivity is dead – well, third party console exclusivity is dead at any rate. He correctly ascribes it to the high development costs of this generation. Third party developers simply can’t sustain the costs if they solely support one platform.
This is most likely why two-thirds of all Playstation 3 games – 213 of 317 titles so far – also appear on the Xbox 360.
Of course, this is a problem the 360 doesn’t seem to have. Those 213 multi-platform games are in a pool of 605 Xbox 360 and Xbox 360 Live Arcade games. This brings the total percentage of multiplatform titles down to just 35% of the Xbox 360 library.
So how does Microsoft get away with it when Sony cannot?
1) Lower development costs. Even if someone is daunted by developing a fully blown Xbox 360 Game, they can still develop content for Xbox Live Arcade fairly cheaply.
Which brings us to:
2) Xbox Live Arcade. Games can and are distributed through the Playstation Network, and some of them like Everyday Shooter and flOw have even found audiences, but as a service it hasn’t caught on to the same extent of Xbox Live Arcade.
Why? My personal theory is a lack of demo versions. The one game I’ve purchased, Wipeout HD, let me play it first. I can’t say the same for a lot of the other titles on the service. They might be good, they might not be, but I won’t buy a pig in a poke if you know what I mean.
It’s also pretty brilliant to put the option to buy right in the demo version. It stops users from getting out of the game, going to the dashboard, looking up the title on Live and then… wait, what were we doing again?
3) Microsoft actively seeks 3rd party development. Since 2007, Sony has made it clear that they aren’t interested in exclusive content, won’t pay for it and wont assist developers in creating it. So what’s a developer to do? Oh, look, there’s Microsoft waving money at them.
So yes, when Sony says that third party exclusivity is dead for them, that’s correct. What they omit is that they are the ones who actively killed it.
Click “Read more…” for an addendum.
[UPDATE: The author responded to the critics on N4G with the following addendum:
Now then, if you want to exclude all the games that came out in 2005 and 2006 (before the PS3 went on sale) that's pretty easy to do.
The number of multiplatform games drops to 196 / 317 on the PS3 or 61.82%.
The number of multiplatform games on the 360 drops to 196 / 467 or 41.97%.
In these calcs I was trying to be overly fair to the PS3 by including the 21 titles released in 2006 while at the same time removing all titles for the 360 from both 2005 and 2006 (Metacritic only gives the year so it's not possible to tell which 360 games overlapped the PS3 in 2006 and which did not.)
So even with this disparity in favor of the PS3 they're still behind on exclusives by 20%.
If you remove the 2006 PS3 titles as well so you're only comparing games released from 2007 to 2009 you get:
PS3 - 180 multiplatform out of 296 titles. 60.81%.
Xbox 360 - 180 multiplatform out of 467 titles. 38.54%.
So no matter which way you cut it, Sony's antagonistic attitude towards exclusive content has harmed their library depth.]
April 15th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
how was sony doing it last gen?
i remember i got an xbox 3 times last gen, and never owned it longer then a week before i got bored and sold it on craigslist, my ps2 on the other hand i had till it died, 4 years later.
playing all these great games that were only available on the ps2 helped sony,so why aren’t they doing it now?
they know it works.
April 15th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
Sony was doing it because the PS2 was a cheap DVD player at a time when DVD players were expensive. I know some friends who are 45 years old, never play games, but own a PS2 for playing DVDs.
If you recall, the PS2 launch titles were Godawful. Sony was clearly thinking about the PS2’s success as a DVD player when they shoved the Blu-Ray into the PS3.
After that, it was the sheer number of PS2’s that bankrolled Sony’s ability to ask Rockstar for limited time exclusivity with GTA3, for instance. Plus, the Dreamcast was a total bitch to develop for.
April 16th, 2009 at 12:29 am
[...] can tell E3 is approaching, as Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony continue to posture and make bold statements before the major event. Lately, Sony has confused a [...]
April 16th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
You guys think you’re being fair? Microsoft bribes all the 3rd parties to make levels, Sony refuses to follow suit and it’s Sony’s fault for ruining the industry? I really hope you get payola for writing this crap, because otherwise I really feel sorry for you. Do you really believe what you type?
April 16th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
What’s the point of this article?
April 16th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Your article fails to point out the most important reason why Microsoft seeks 3rd party support more than Sony does…
it’s because Microsoft’s first part games aren’t nearly as great(in terms of quality and quantity) as Sony’s first party games.
The 360’s best games are 3rd party (except a few rare gems like halo3) but Sony’s best games are first party (LittleBigPlanet, Resistance, Killzone2, God of War3, Motorostorm, Uncharted, Ratchet&Clank, Heavenly Sword, etc.)
Why would Sony spend $50 million to secure an exclusive (like MS did with GTA: L&D) when they can develop games internally?
And besides, most 3rd party games eventually find their way to the PS3 anyway (Bioshock, Ninja Gaiden, etc.)
April 16th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
You apparently don’t know what numerical analysis is. Aside from that, you are just plain wrong, as your points 1,2, and 3 above have nothing to do with numbers and are just opinion.
1. Dev costs are lower on XBox Live. What about developing PSN games? They are cheaper than full PS3 games just like Live games. Do you even know how much either cost?
2. Do you have numbers showing that Live games have caught on more than PSN games? And have you been on PSN lately? Nearly every PSN game has a demo version?
3. You made an incorrect statement. You said that Sony won’t pay for 3rd party exclusives, which is true, but when the hell have they ever not assisted in development? When the PS3 came out and devs were whining because they though it was to tough to develop on Sony threw all sorts of dev tools at them and if you follow GDC many of Sony keynotes are on optimizing PS3 development.
And then you throw afew number at the beginning and end of your article. And I just doubt those numbers due to your utter stupidity the rest of the article.
April 16th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
Well said, RuddigerPez.
April 16th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
This article is based on exclusivity numbers? Why are they so wrong then? Most 360 “exclusive” games are available on the PC – and as superior versions. Factor THAT in and we’ll see the REAL exclusivity numbers. I would also like to see a ratio of RETAIL exclusives. Most people dont give a crap about all the shareware garbage thats found on Live Arcade.
April 16th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Er, um, which is the dominant OS used for PC gaming?
Linux?
Mac?
April 16th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
XBox Live arcade = shovelware
April 16th, 2009 at 5:16 pm
Not really, no. Unless you consider Peggle, The Dishwasher, Castle Crashers, E4, Rez HD, Ikaruga, etc, “shovelware”.
April 16th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
@ RuddigerPez Says:
“You made an incorrect statement. You said that Sony won’t pay for 3rd party exclusives, which is true, but when the hell have they ever not assisted in development?”
Jack Tretton – 7/3/2007
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/07/03/sonys-jack-tretton-we-dont-buy-exclusivity/
“Yeah, ‘fewer exclusives’ is a term, and I don’t know what makes an exclusive,” says Tretton. “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 the lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform.”
See that big line in the middle? “WE DON’T FUND DEVELOPMENT”?
So, let’s play make believe for a moment. Pretend you’re a developer and you have two hardware platforms you could support. One hardware manufacturer says “Sorry, kid, you’re on your own. You make something we’ll be happy to show it.”
The other says “You know, we really want your content exclusively and we’ll even subsidize development costs.”
Which one would you work for?
April 16th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
Are Community Games, like TV Calibration, are counted as X360 exclusives in this article?
If not, the X360 exclusives are even higher!
April 16th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
No. XNA games aren’t counted. For one, those have no chance of being multiplatform.
April 16th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
I love some of these replies. Seems like the arrogant Sony fanboys are all up in arms because the PS3 is no longer like previous Playstations where it’s really a no brainer to own one if you are a gamer. The high price and lack of key exclusives is what’s going to keep hurting the Playstation brand from now on so many are obviously looking elsewhere now.
What I find funny is how narrow-minded some of you fanboys are too. Who cares if Microsoft funds DLC or goes after 3rd party exclusives? Same with who cares if Sony funds Killzone 2 or Little Big Planet. It’s games we play, we have no making in their decisions. We are not employees, so stop acting like it. I enjoy Killzone 2 and I enjoy GTA IV exclusive content.
Also why mention the PC when talking Xbox 360 exclusives? How does that help PS3 owners? When we see a game like Bioshock that’s also on the PC sell well over a million copies on the Xbox 360 and then we see Killzone 2 sell only a million copies what relevance are people trying to make? We wouldn’t be seeing PC games on consoles if there wasn’t a demand and we wouldn’t be seeing shooters like Killzone 2 on a console if there wasn’t a demand.
April 16th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Us fanboys, too? We’re not biased. If we are, explain this and this.
Don’t blame us for Sony’s constant verbal diarrhea. What do you expect us to do? Look the other way?
May 4th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
I find it hilarious that this Sony guy is slagging third-party exclusivity when it had been their bread and butter in the past. I mean, don’t get me wrong – I never liked the idea much and am glad to see it gone, but it makes me wonder why dude is saying this now.
Frankly, coupled with the arrogance on Sony’s part in creating a “not a games machine” that’s a bitch to develop for (negating a major advantage they had in the last generation) and the fact that it was only a matter of time that other console-makers (MS) got wise to the act of sponging from these same third parties…it was bound to happen sooner or later.
Never should’ve relied so much on third party exclusvity as a marketing plan in the first place – it’s not good business.