flameboy Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 Its true it is property of Sony, but many gamers who were looking forward to this coming on the console that they own won't like Sony too much if it comes exclusive to PS3. And to be honest, you can pick up a Blu-ray player for "cheaper" than a PS3 price, i did. No different to say when Microsoft pick up numerous titles slated for production on other consoles both this gen and last... What's cheaper blu-ray got to do with it? naff all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helmsly Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 (edited) Six weeks before a game, that a lot of people we're looking forward to was about to come out, it becomes a timed exclusive to another console. its disappointing to actually see people defending this in some way. Edited May 9, 2009 by Helmsly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flameboy Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 Six weeks before a game, that a lot of people we're looking forward to was about to come out, it becomes a timed exclusive to another console. its disappointing to actually see people defending this in some way. I'm only defending it because people seem to have one attitude for one platform holder than they do for another... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ganepark32 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 But Flameboy this is different from Microsoft splashing out millions to secure a timed exclusive. This is a title that is complete and was ready to ship for all consoles in June and Sony have stepped in with weeks to go and have pushed it as an exclusive for their consoles, leaving the others in the cold for now. At least Microsoft go ahead and pull the timed exclusive stunt during development so people aren't left disappointed come release day like Sony have done here. Compared to Microsoft's splashing out, this is technically worse given the close proximity to release. I'd say I hope it doesn't work out well for Sony just for being arseholes but I actually want the game to do well on all consoles regardless of who's publishing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flameboy Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 But how do you not know they haven't been negotiations for a while? I think Sony clearly saw an opportunity and you can't blame them for taking it to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daft Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 Seeing as Sony don't really do this sort of thing any more, I really don't see why so many people are moaning. Microsoft pull this sort of crap all the time. Rock Band was the most annoying, we didn't even know when the hell that was coming out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choze Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 But Flameboy this is different from Microsoft splashing out millions to secure a timed exclusive. This is a title that is complete and was ready to ship for all consoles in June and Sony have stepped in with weeks to go and have pushed it as an exclusive for their consoles, leaving the others in the cold for now. At least Microsoft go ahead and pull the timed exclusive stunt during development so people aren't left disappointed come release day like Sony have done here. Compared to Microsoft's splashing out, this is technically worse given the close proximity to release. I'd say I hope it doesn't work out well for Sony just for being arseholes but I actually want the game to do well on all consoles regardless of who's publishing it. Its the best Sony can afford. Give them a break. MS will announce a ton more at e3 where Sony will focus on first party. Last time Sony did something like this we got Haze :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helmsly Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 Apparently November 30th is the release date for the 360 version now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daft Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 That's funny. Dead in between Halloween and Xmas. I just hope the game is actually good. The videos look pretty cool but we'll just have to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flameboy Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 Seeing as Sony don't really do this sort of thing any more, I really don't see why so many people are moaning. Microsoft pull this sort of crap all the time. Rock Band was the most annoying, we didn't even know when the hell that was coming out. Exactly, I compared this to RB2 before its no different. I think if Nintendo had done a similar move people on this forum would be saying what a shrewd and clever move it is but people's hatred for Sony means anything they do is awful... Personally I got over the stupid fanboy stuff when the Wii stopped giving the kind of games I wanted and now I'll be enjoying Ghostbusters in just over a month... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ganepark32 Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 I can understand people being in support of Sony over this when referencing Microsoft's cash waving but you can't compare the two. And I'm not condoning Microsoft as I feel that they really should stop flashing the cash for timed exclusives and just give everyone the option of what platform to get a title on at the same time. But this is completely different situation. This is a title stated for release in a mere few weeks across all platforms and suddenly, it's become a timed exclusive meaning those who were looking forward to it on the respective consoles they own may not get to play it until the end of the year. It's different from Microsoft saying that RB2 will be a timed exclusive because they stated that months before release. It's just shoddy. How can Atari still manage to release the title across all platforms in America yet Sony insist on 'trying' to boost their sales in one market by slapping the timed exclusive on it? I mean, surely Sony could just let the title be released on all platforms. It won't eat into their potential sales as those who want it on the PS3 or PS2 would still buy it over the other versions and they'd be getting money from the other versions anyway because they own the license. This is what gets me. It doesn't make sense in business terms. For a company which is floundering in the current economic crisis, surely it'd be better for them to release all games at once and get as much money as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwarf Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 Yeah but thing is what information do we really know? We don't and never really know the full story. Not on either side, it is annoying for it to be revealed a few weeks from release (not that I care because I think the game will end up being tosh) but the timing isn't Sony's fault - Atari fell flat so close to release so Sony did something about it. I guess businesses don't have morals or actual care for constumers. Some do but if they're a large business and they see cash then it won't stop them being nobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbob Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 I can understand people being in support of Sony over this when referencing Microsoft's cash waving but you can't compare the two. And I'm not condoning Microsoft as I feel that they really should stop flashing the cash for timed exclusives and just give everyone the option of what platform to get a title on at the same time. But this is completely different situation. This is a title stated for release in a mere few weeks across all platforms and suddenly, it's become a timed exclusive meaning those who were looking forward to it on the respective consoles they own may not get to play it until the end of the year. It's different from Microsoft saying that RB2 will be a timed exclusive because they stated that months before release. It's just shoddy. How can Atari still manage to release the title across all platforms in America yet Sony insist on 'trying' to boost their sales in one market by slapping the timed exclusive on it? I mean, surely Sony could just let the title be released on all platforms. It won't eat into their potential sales as those who want it on the PS3 or PS2 would still buy it over the other versions and they'd be getting money from the other versions anyway because they own the license. This is what gets me. It doesn't make sense in business terms. For a company which is floundering in the current economic crisis, surely it'd be better for them to release all games at once and get as much money as possible. Yes, it would be best for Sony to release it on all platforms instead of this "timed" exclusive period making everyone who pre-ordered it on the 360 and Wii wait even longer. Jeez, Sony could make so much more money on this by leaving the release dates the same as the PS3 version as they are publishing it. But no no, they must be the children here and say "We want it first, you have it when we are board of it.". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MATtheHAT Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 I remember pre-ordering Rock Band 2 for the PS3, January 31st was the release date. It had been out on the 360 since November. It was out in America on both the PS3 and 360. January 31st came and......nothing. The game did not get released, why? Because M$ had paid the money for the timed release in Europe.......again. The point is, this was not known until right up to the release week. So the argument it being too close to release for timed exclusive is bollocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwarf Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 Yes, it would be best for Sony to release it on all platforms instead of this "timed" exclusive period making everyone who pre-ordered it on the 360 and Wii wait even longer. Jeez, Sony could make so much more money on this by leaving the release dates the same as the PS3 version as they are publishing it. But no no, they must be the children here and say "We want it first, you have it when we are board of it.". I can't believe how sad your agument is... Yes I can understand you're miffed with the release date, but it is a good move from Sony's point of view - More sales and maybe even more consoles shipped because they get it first. You can stop being bitter now and just accept the wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flameboy Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 I remember pre-ordering Rock Band 2 for the PS3, January 31st was the release date. It had been out on the 360 since November. It was out in America on both the PS3 and 360. January 31st came and......nothing. The game did not get released, why? Because M$ had paid the money for the timed release in Europe.......again. The point is, this was not known until right up to the release week. So the argument it being too close to release for timed exclusive is bollocks. I thought this was the case but didn't want to say it in case I was wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Captain Falcon Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 You can look at it from any angle you want, but the point remains that if Sony didn't pay for the rights to publish the PS versions now, Atari wouldn't be able to release the others later on. If they hadn't, Atari would probably go under and Ghostbusters goes back to being in publisher limbo, at which point, Sony would probably have stepped in and maybe take the decision not to release on other consoles at all. Yes they'd be losing out on profits from cross platform sales, but if it was enough to help further drive PS3 sales, you know they would take it to try to secure future profits. In some ways, they are doing the rest a favour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helmsly Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 (edited) I remember reading an interview with the developers, and they said they had several offers from publishers when activision dropped the game last year, so if it wasn't Sony, it could of been another company. On another note, people here keep saying its a good move for Sony, well why should anyone care about that? Its not a good move for a gamer and actually hurts the sales of the game. As great as I think this game is looking, I don't think it's going to get people to rush out and buy a PS3 so what exactly does this time exclusive deal achieve? The 360 and Wii versions are not coming out a good 6 months later, and right in the middle of the Xmas rush of games, hich chances are will hurt sales of it. Edited May 10, 2009 by Helmsly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwarf Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 You're missing the actual point of us bringing it up though. I don't care that it's good for Sony either, but people have asked why Sony have done it - It's because they'll get more money overall. And when the game releases for the other consoles it'll probably be re-advertised for PS3. It won't get us to rush out, but the general public will walk by GAME stores etc and see it in a poster for PS3. There's quite a large base of GB fans so I think it'll do well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mundi Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 Timed exclusives are bullshit in any form and any way no matter who does it or who did it before. I don´t care if it´s smart for any company, it´s still the equivalent of flipping the finger to a large group of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choze Posted May 10, 2009 Share Posted May 10, 2009 Timed exclusives are bullshit in any form and any way no matter who does it or who did it before. I don´t care if it´s smart for any company, it´s still the equivalent of flipping the finger to a large group of people. I do agree but its going to happen. Money is no.1. at the end of the day. Ofcourse in many cases it ruins the long term prospects of some games. Having said that short term its attractive for some companies. Generally short term decision making is what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbob Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 October is now the release apparently for the 360 and Wii versions of the game. Well, now we have gone from 4 weeks wait to 4 months. Oh well, i'm sure i can find something else to pre-occupy me for that much time now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aimless Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) Perhaps this should stem the Sony hate in this thread a bit: Atari is now a US-only brand. Seems the game isn't so much a timed exclusive as a case of Sony stopping the versions on its platforms being delayed with all the rest. Those bastards! Edited May 14, 2009 by Aimless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbob Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Perhaps this should stem the Sony hate in this thread a bit: Atari is now a US-only brand. Seems the game isn't so much a timed exclusive as a case of Sony stopping the versions on its platforms being delayed with all the rest. Those bastards! Looks to me like that right now, except Game changed back the release of this to June 19th again. I wish they'd make their minds up to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ike Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 On a semi-related note: They are releasing a box set of the cartoon series! You can pre-order it over at play.com. Comes out 15th June! I hope Atari pulling out of Europe won't affect over game releases, One Piece: Unlimited Cruise is supposed to coming out next month, although I think that was being published by Bandai Namco anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts