Sony's Lost Exclusives: A Timeline

[Bond]

Having spent a lot of time this afternoon thinking about all the exclusives that PlayStation 3 has lost over the last tumultuous year, we here at Game|Life decided to catalog them in the runup to E3.

I'm not listing franchises that had been exclusive to Sony systems but now have Xbox versions, because that's not the point and because I don't want to be here all day. The exception to this rule is when a publisher was pursuing an exclusive, but Sony didn't sign on. As in the case of...

Grand Theft Auto IV -- Peter Moore shocked the world at E3 last May when he announced that GTAIV would appear day-and-date on Xbox 360 and PS3. Months later, Newsweek reported that Take Two had wanted to continue its long-standing practice of giving Sony a lengthy timed exclusivity on the game, but they didn't want it.

Newsweek says that former Sony Computer Entertainment president Ken Kutaragi's "radio silence" on the issue left Sony's American execs without the authority to make deals, and nothing happened. Same with...

Assassin's Creed -- Again, Newsweek revealed that Ubisoft had actually gone to Sony with an offer to make the game a PlayStation 3 exclusive. Although Sony did go through the trouble of asking Ubisoft to make it seem as if their multiplatform action game Assassin's Creed was indeed PS3 exclusive , it came out shortly after E3 that it would ship simultaneously on both platforms.

The brief flirtation with pretend exclusivity at E3 that year did get Assassin's Creed noticed, winning it several "PlayStation 3 Game of the Year" awards that it wouldn't have won otherwise. Very similar to what happened with...

Devil May Cry IV -- Another game that was said to be one of the biggest reasons to buy PlayStation 3, and easily the best PS3 title playable at Tokyo Game Show in 2006. A few months later, it was multiplatform, with a simultaneous release date.

Virtua Fighter 5 -- PlayStation 3 fans, count your blessings: at least you're enjoying Virtua Fighter 5 now, instead of later this year when Xbox 360 owners will get their version. Still, though, it's one more exclusive gone.

Beautiful Katamari -- Now, we're getting into the realm of games that PlayStation 3 might have lost entirely. Beautiful Katamari was originally announced for a multiplatform release, but according to Newsweek (helped along by Namco Bandai's curious reticence on the subject), the PS3 version has been junked and it's now Xbox 360-only.

Fatal Inertia -- Originally announced in 2005 as a PlayStation 3 launch title, Koei's racing game first was delayed into this year, then went multiplatform. This morning, it was announced that the PlayStation 3 version is "delayed indefinitely" due to issues with Unreal Engine 3. Where this leaves Koei's BladeStorm -- also announced as a PS3 title, also delayed, also made multiplatform -- is unclear. Koei says its status is not affected as it doesn't use UE3.

What's remarkable about many of these high-profile titles is that they are all from Japanese publishers, who historically have been resistant to the idea of multiplatform games in the first place. Market realities have had a profound effect, and very quickly, on their business practices. Sony is lucky that Xbox 360 was such a non-starter in Japan, because otherwise it would be ever more doubtful that game makers would bother putting together PS3 versions of their games at all.

What's Next? -- The two major remaining third-party exclusives for PlayStation 3 are Metal Gear Solid 4 and Final Fantasy XIII. Konami has certainly never been resistant to putting Metal Gear titles on different hardware; witness Twin Snakes on GameCube and Substance on Xbox. And Microsoft is likely gunning hard for the game. Also, Konami probably prefers making money to losing truckloads of it. All things considered, I'm pretty sure it's already a done deal, given the fact that we hear very credible rumors about it once a week or so.

So that really only leaves Final Fantasy XIII. We know that Square Enix is not blind to the changes in the market. Last Remnant, their latest RPG franchise, will be released simultaneously on both platforms.

Also, Final Fantasy XIII's release is a long, long way off. The EGM crew says that they will miss their stated goal of having a playable demo ready for E3. And Square Enix says the game won't hit until after March 2008.

So does that mean it'll end up on 360? Ehhhhh no. Maybe. Possibly. No. It could remain PlayStation 3 exclusive, although Square Enix would make way more money if it wasn't. But it's not one of those no-brainers like Metal Gear. We'll see where E3 takes us. Maybe the FFXIII logo will be tattooed on Peter Moore's chest.

Source: Wired (http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/07/sonys-lost-excl.html)

Peter Moore does have to get a new tattoo for E3 this year, and it very well could be of FXIII.

[Dyne]

Actually, the current rumour is that Beautiful Katamari is Wii-only now. I guess it was incorrectly rumoured that the PS3 version was out, which is partly (supposedly) true, but the 360 version might also be gone.

[Angrist]

Sony is probably paying Konami lotsa buncha money to keep MGS4 exclusive.

Edit: apparently they don't: http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=78883
"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 by saying, 'You can build a better game on our platform. If you focus your development on our platform, you will ultimately be more successful."

Dorks. :p

[Perfect Stu]

Personally, I don't see the big deal. They're not losing these games period (save Fatal Inertia and Katamari), just the exclusivity. Sure, that takes away some potential customers but as a gamer it's all good. I know a large percentage of people here want to see Sony fail, and fail hard, but to me it would only really be news if the games were cancelled for PS3. Third party exclusives are things of the past, Nintendo Microsoft and Sony will need to lean more on their first party developers.

[TheGame]

As times go on companies change. Just look at all the 3rd party exclusives Nintendo had in the NES/SNES ages. The speculation about future games is believeable only because it seems to be reasonable for this age in time, but if they want to make the best games they can make they'll probably stick with Ps3.

For FF and MGS.. well, Kojima said himself multiple times that the game MGS4 is going to be Ps3 exclusive, I'll take his word for it. He didn't rule out, however, the possibility of other MGS games going to 360.. its just MGS4 that he claimed to be Ps3 exclusive.

And for FF, besides the obvious FFXI, and the 10 year later ports of the older FF games... how many times has a FF game not been exclusive for one system at its initial release?

Not saying that them porting can't possibly be true, but in the end I'd believe something straight out of the horse's mouth over some websites that actually want these games to no longer be exclusive. The horse has spoken on MGS, FF hasn't been comfirmed yet.. and if its not at E3 probably no reason to lean on the rumors.

[Bean Kenzaki]

What about Ace Combat 6

[gekko]

It's better for the industry to release the games on multiple platforms where they will sell. I'd rather see the 360/PS3 getting the same games.

[TheGame]

Not sure how its better for the industry. Most developers who make games exclusively for a system are generally valued more than third party ones. Games that take full advantage of one specific system usually end up better.

I think it'd be worse for the industry if developers all focused on making money before making a quality game that works well with the system its made for. Companies that sell out usually end up dissapointing a lot.

-EDIT-

I'm not against them making a game for one system, then waiting a year or two to make it right for another system. But dropping things on 2/3 systems at once hardly ever works out.

[Angrist]

I think it depends more on the quality of the game than on its exclusivity. Some multi-platform games like Madden sell very well on multiple systems, while some exclusives like Metroid Prime 2: Echoes sell terribly.

[TheGame]

I think it depends more on the quality of the game than on its exclusivity. Some multi-platform games like Madden sell very well on multiple systems, while some exclusives like Metroid Prime 2: Echoes sell terribly.

But what ends up being a better game? Which game generally gets more praise, and which developers generally get more respect? If all developers just whored out their best games for sales, the game industry wouldn't have any good games anymore. Sequals every year to two years that are hardly an update over an older version...

Of course denying the developers money is selfish, but sometimes I like my games to be a work of art. :P

[Jonbo298]

The problem is that its making it harder and harder for people to see a true reason for a PS3. The 360 is getting most of the "huge" games alongside the PS3 and for probably a good majority, they see no reason to spend another $500-$600 on a console for one or 2 exclusives (unless its really worth it which is as said...becoming harder to do)

At some point I'll own a 360 again. PS3 is very very iffy. I just have no real reason to justify that much money on something the 360 provides most of anyways.

[TheGame]

The problem is that its making it harder and harder for people to see a true reason for a PS3. The 360 is getting most of the "huge" games alongside the PS3 and for probably a good majority, they see no reason to spend another $500-$600 on a console for one or 2 exclusives (unless its really worth it which is as said...becoming harder to do)

At some point I'll own a 360 again. PS3 is very very iffy. I just have no real reason to justify that much money on something the 360 provides most of anyways.

I see how you feel, but for me its the opposite. I'm having a hard time finding a true reaosn to want Xbox 360. It has a price advantage (which is killed in the fact that its a gamble if the hardware will work or not) and only one guaranteed good exclusive that I want. (Halo) $100-$200 difference is nothing for hardware, especially when the games are going for $60 a pop, that's 3-4 less games?

When Ps3 starts losing actual full blockbuster games to 360 (i.e. Nintendo losing FF series to Psx), then I might rethink.. but right now, based off of all the games in the forseeable future, I have the feeling that I'd simply enjoy Ps3 more.

Of course things can change with time, but that's just not enough to me. Just like all of Microsoft's E3 hype, in the end its all hype. "Maybe" 360 will get more of Ps3's current exclusives, but Ps3 WILL get what's planned for it for sure. Being a MGS whore, and a fan of RPGs in general.. I'm going to wait for facts instead of speculation.

[Perfect Stu]

The problem is that its making it harder and harder for people to see a true reason for a PS3. The 360 is getting most of the "huge" games alongside the PS3 and for probably a good majority, they see no reason to spend another $500-$600 on a console for one or 2 exclusives (unless its really worth it which is as said...becoming harder to do)

At some point I'll own a 360 again. PS3 is very very iffy. I just have no real reason to justify that much money on something the 360 provides most of anyways.

Believe it or not, Sony has game development studios worldwide that make some very good games. Also, PS3 serves as a Blu-Ray player. If you dont like MGS4, FFXIII, Sony first party and Blu Ray, then obviously the system isnt for you, period. If that's the case, you shouldnt buy it for $100 let alone $500

[bobcat]

Believe it or not, Sony has game development studios worldwide that make some very good games. Also, PS3 serves as a Blu-Ray player. If you dont like MGS4, FFXIII, Sony first party and Blu Ray, then obviously the system isnt for you, period. If that's the case, you shouldnt buy it for $100 let alone $500

That would be the perfect promo for people to buy a Ps3, except the last bit. If it was $100 I'd buy it for sure.

[gekko]

Not sure how its better for the industry. Most developers who make games exclusively for a system are generally valued more than third party ones. Games that take full advantage of one specific system usually end up better.

I think it'd be worse for the industry if developers all focused on making money before making a quality game that works well with the system its made for. Companies that sell out usually end up dissapointing a lot.

Boo hoo. I have no sympathy for the PS3 owner who doesn't get games optimized graphically for their system. For two generations in a row, Sony has made a system insanely difficult to develop for. If you only get 360-level graphics the entire generation and never see the power utilized, I could care less. Sony chose to do that, and if the industry doesn't all give in and start kissing their feet, I'll be happy.

You can make a quality game without optimizing it for one specific system. It might not look like Killzone 2 is at least promised to look, but by having the game sell millions on multiple consoles brings in money, which pays the employees, and gives them profits so they don't need to rush the next game. I'll take that over making the couple million potential buyers on PS3 happy that they have bragging rights on internet message boards.

[TheGame]

Boo hoo. I have no sympathy for the PS3 owner who doesn't get games optimized graphically for their system. For two generations in a row, Sony has made a system insanely difficult to develop for. If you only get 360-level graphics the entire generation and never see the power utilized, I could care less. Sony chose to do that, and if the industry doesn't all give in and start kissing their feet, I'll be happy.

You can make a quality game without optimizing it for one specific system.[b] It might not look like Killzone 2 is at least promised to look, but by having the game sell millions on multiple consoles brings in money, which pays the employees, and gives them profits [b]so they don't need to rush the next game. I'll take that over making the couple million potential buyers on PS3 happy that they have bragging rights on internet message boards.

Idunno, I think if they're going multi-platform for game releases, they're already in the state of mind of making as much money as they can as fast as possible. I can't think of many (if any) quality third party games that went multi platform from the gate, sold well, and DIDNT get a rushed sequal or two. Its almost like those things don't mix at all.. Every company that sold out to it lost a lot of respect too.

Of course they probably made more money and had declining game quality and originality.

I still don't see your point in how its better for the industry as a whole. I think you just want it more because its better for you as a 360 owner. *shrugs* In my opinion, I'd rather see SE or Konami give Sony the finger all together and develop exclusively for 360 over seeing them give into multi-platform releases like rockstar.

But then again, maybe this gives GTA a lot of room to improve when they release the next game in 2008.