Microsoft Doesn't Want Sony's Sloppy Seconds

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Microsoft Doesn't Want Sony's Sloppy Seconds

image

Microsoft exec makes it clear that if another platform gets a game first, then Microsoft doesn't want it.

Ever notice how the game osmosis between Xbox Live and PlayStation Network seems to be a one way thing? It's a fair bet that any game that appears on the Xbox Live Marketplace will, eventually - after a great deal of hand wringing - make its way over to PSN, whereas if you're a 360 owner eyeing a PSN exclusive, you're out of luck. Apparently, that's a deliberate decision on Microsoft's part. Talking to Eurogamer, Xbox Europe boss Chris Lewis explained that Microsoft policy states that non-exclusive titles have to launch at exactly the same time, and with exactly the same content, as the versions for other platforms, if they don't, Microsoft can decide to simply not release them.

Microsoft's Content Submission and Release Policy states:

"Titles for Xbox 360 must ship at least simultaneously with other video game platform, and must have at least feature and content parity on-disc with the other video game platform versions in all regions where the title is available. If these conditions are not met, Microsoft reserves the right to not allow the content to be released on Xbox 360."

Yep, it extends to disc-based games too. Essentially, any title released for the 360 must have exactly the same on-disc content as it's PS3 or Wii counterpart. There are ways around the policy, of course. L.A Noire got away with offering launch exclusive content for PS3 owners by packaging it as DLC. Microsoft also seems to play fast and loose with its own rules depending on the size of the franchise in question. The 360 version of Mortal Kombat, for example, comes with absolutely no bonus content, while the PS3 version has surly egghead Kratos from God of War as an on-disc bonus character. For whatever reason, Microsoft chose to turn a blind eye to that one.

It all sounds a bit childish really, but Lewis argues the policy has a positive effect on the industry. "We just want what our consumers want from us," he said. "We want to be where they want us to be. We want the quality bar of what they experience from us to continue to go up. I think it has to happen. Everybody's got to do that. If we want to continue to command healthy average selling prices, which we all do, that which we offer our consumers has got to keep getting better. Despite the fact it can be irksome to have such strong competition all the time, it actually does keep us on our toes. It's great for everyone, and it makes for a very healthy race to higher and higher levels of quality of game experiences."

A representative from a publisher, who wishes to remain anonymous, lest he/she face Microsoft's biblical wrath, disagreed. Talking to Eurogamer, they said, "Microsoft is suggesting that anything but parity will result in them not carrying a title. They may think this is competitive, but it's not. They are killing any creative exposure of titles to make up for their own platform's shortcomings."

Source: Eurogamer

Permalink

I have come to a conclusion that Sony is bad with its customers, Microsoft are dicks to there's and Nintendo are Customer's Bitches. Well that my opinion. Its a shame that Xbox gamers don't get a chance to play Sony's games.

No matter how they phrase this, it sounds like petty childishness.

What an...interesting title you have there.

Anyway, staggered releases can be very good for a game. It's a shame that Microsoft doesn't realize that.

Wow, okay, screwing with your consumers to make a stupid point, sounds like ol' MS!

So that means Ratchet and Clank will never come to 360?

Fine with me Microsoft. I'll keep my PS3 nice and safe just so I can play the best 3rd person, funny, over the top, super fun, platformers ever made.
Yes that may seem like fanboyism but if you two won't play nice I'll just have to separate my consoles into opposite rooms! I think next firmware update for the Xbox will eject dirt out of the disc drive at the player if they mention Playstation games in the same room.

Doesn't MS reserve the right to block whatever content they want?

That aside, this seems like a poor policy for MS. While it may have pushed some developers to ensure that the XBox version wasn't delayed the overall effect is probably deleterious. Is it really a good idea to give your costumers a reason to buy a competitor's console?

Surely, if they want what their customers want, they will be accommodating to as many titles as possible? They are essentially giving Sony more exclusive titles, so people have more reason to pick the PS3 over the 360 in terms of games available (we'll skip over all the other endless backwards-and-forwards arguments about everything else).

Do Microsoft expect to be getting high fives for not allowing their customers to play certain titles because the other boys got to play them first?

That is one of the most childish things that I've ever heard out of a supposed corporation where adults work.
"If I can't get a toy at the same time as Timmy does, and in the same condition, then I don't want it! Hmph!"

The PopCap boss made a very good point. Simultaneous releases often make the game designed for the lowest common denominator. Meaning that it will have to set the bar lower so that it can launch on other platforms.

And Microsoft is encouraging it. I'm betting because they know that the Xbox 360's hardware is horribly outdated and that if someone releases an inferior product on the Xbox compared to other systems then it may tarnish the good name of the system.

TimeLord:
So that means Ratchet and Clank will never come to 360?

Fine with me Microsoft. I'll keep my PS3 nice and safe just so I can play the best 3rd person, funny, over the top, super fun, platformers ever made.
Yes that may seem like fanboyism but if you two won't play nice I'll just have to separate my consoles into opposite rooms!

Not unless both microsoft and ratchet and clanks developers want it. All this states is that microsoft reserves the right to not allow the content to be released on Xbox 360 if you dont release it on the 360 either first or at the same time as other platforms. So it pretty much means no way in hell will they ever allow something to come out on another platform but if it is an insanely popular game they just may allow it. Although I doubt they would take that from any game short of a call of duty title.

Just ask for Marcus Fenix in Mortal Kombat to make up for Kratos's appearance.

Also, it seems like a wise decision.

SgtFoley:

TimeLord:
So that means Ratchet and Clank will never come to 360?

Fine with me Microsoft. I'll keep my PS3 nice and safe just so I can play the best 3rd person, funny, over the top, super fun, platformers ever made.
Yes that may seem like fanboyism but if you two won't play nice I'll just have to separate my consoles into opposite rooms!

Not unless both microsoft and ratchet and clanks developers want it. All this states is that microsoft reserves the right to not allow the content to be released on Xbox 360 if you dont release it on the 360 either first or at the same time as other platforms. So it pretty much means no way in hell will they ever allow something to come out on another platform but if it is an insanely popular game they just may allow it. Although I doubt they would take that from any game short of a call of duty title.

Seems to me that Microsoft would just say; "Nope" just because there have been 7 R&C games exclusive to Sony so far. I'm pretty sure Insomniac doesn't care about putting R&C on the Xbox anyway. All of which I'm perfectly fine with.

Hmmmm, Microsoft not scrambling for every avaliable opportunity to wrangle more money? What kind of parrallel universe did I wander into?

Definitely sounds a bit childish

Sounds very childish, and a bit of a dick move, too. Fuck :/

I have an interesting Idea for selling large quantities of games to the public.

Sell the games on your platform...

There done.

Seriously the industry is going to hell with all these whiney money grubbing corporations throwing hissy fits and jerking us around.

Only tards are fanboys, I get my games on the platform that best suits the game or the best price. Right now I sway to the PC side, because I get mad games for cheap as it where.

I for one think it is just ridiculous what Ea did with Origin, because they didn't work it out with steam.

Xbox has no idea how to do dlc correctly especially since xbox live costs money and has no effect on pricing.

The wii sucks, don't prove me wrong just admit defeat.

And I never bought a ps3, because I am not interested in what it was putting out there, I have my ps2, good enough.

hopefully there is a major collapse in the industry and they have to rise from the ashes ,hopefully, not a bunch of dicks as they are now.

"Titles for Xbox 360 must ship at least simultaneously with other video game platform, and must have at least feature and content parity on-disc with the other video game platform versions in all regions where the title is available. If these conditions are not met, Microsoft reserves the right to not allow the content to be released on Xbox 360."

*Ahem*

"Don't cross the streams!"

Yeah. I'm just gonna let that sit there for a while.

maybe they're saying this cause the plan o release a console in the nexxt year or two to replace the 360 and say "what? oh that only applied to teh 360, not this new console. dont you people read?"

but whatever. anyhting the 360 wants to do to make itself look foolish, i'll fully endorse.

Do Microsoft not realize that this policy effectively gives Sony PSN exclusives?

Talk about cutting of your nose in spite of your face.

PS3: Best of both worlds.

At least in the general relevance of games.

Good thing about having every console: Things like this don't matter.

Jeez, why is everyone being such pricks?
Gamestop taking premiums out of new games. Sony releasing another overpriced and (sure to be) undersupported machine to the suckers. Every publisher is looking for a way to screw over consumers who buy used. Now MS is denying their own consumers games like they were denying them a working console for the first few years the 360 existed.

These idiots make me wonder why I even bother playing games anymore.

Terminate421:
...it seems like a wise decision.

....?

OT; This is one of the most childish things I've heard in awhile. Look on any comments section on an IGN review of a PS3 exclusive and you'll see quite a few f*cktar- I mean X-Box fanboys whining about how it's a shame the game isn't on their console of choice. As much as I hate them, Microsoft certainly shouldn't just ignore those demands to try to protect some false image of dignity.

TimeLord:
So that means Ratchet and Clank will never come to 360?

Considering Sony own the IP, I doubt it.

Grey Carter:
"We just want what our consumers want from us," he said. "We want to be where they want us to be."

Really. Sony fans tell Sony they want Mass Effect 2, they get them Mass Effect 2. Microsoft fans tell Microsoft they want Metal Gear Solid 4, they tell them to fuck off. I can see how thats delivering what your customerrs want.

Now, what he said is intresting and all, I wouldn't call it childish since we can be pretty damn sure that we aren't dealing with childish people here. But the comments here are really whiney. Seriously, I honestly don't see why people seem to take offense to this.

Don't like it, don't buy it; still works.

GonzoGamer:
Sony releasing another overpriced and (sure to be) undersupported machine to the suckers.

Sorry to double post and come across as a fanboy (I'm not), but the PS3 wasn't over-priced, that was part of the problem. Sony made a huge loss on the PS3 not because of lack of sales but because of cost of production cost versus cost of retail price. Also, the Vita's line-up looks alright (at least not as bad as the 3DS's).

PS; Why the hell are my captchas upside down Escapist?

So that's why they're so protective of their exclusives....

Terminate421:
Just ask for Marcus Fenix in Mortal Kombat to make up for Kratos's appearance.

Cliffy B asked them to do that. Neverealms actually said no, they didn't think the character was interesting enough.

How can this possibly be a good decision? It just means that the PS3 inevitably gets more games. It doesn't matter to me since I have both, but to all the 360's loyal fans this is just stupid. This is just reaffirming my choice to not buy the next Microsoft console, anyone with me?

So? there are no sony exclusives I actually want to play anyways...

SgtFoley:

TimeLord:
So that means Ratchet and Clank will never come to 360?

Fine with me Microsoft. I'll keep my PS3 nice and safe just so I can play the best 3rd person, funny, over the top, super fun, platformers ever made.
Yes that may seem like fanboyism but if you two won't play nice I'll just have to separate my consoles into opposite rooms!

Not unless both microsoft and ratchet and clanks developers want it. All this states is that microsoft reserves the right to not allow the content to be released on Xbox 360 if you dont release it on the 360 either first or at the same time as other platforms. So it pretty much means no way in hell will they ever allow something to come out on another platform but if it is an insanely popular game they just may allow it. Although I doubt they would take that from any game short of a call of duty title.

The Ratchet and Clank IP is owned by Sony so it's never gonna be on a Microsoft console anyway.
OT:Generally taking decisions on the base of emotions like pride is not the smartest thing to do in business cold logic works better, but what do I know...it's not like I have anything to do with a multimilion/billion dollar corporation.

Right, because they're balls-deep in their own first-party studios, and XBLA is renowned for being indie developer-friendly in the first place.

Fucking morons.

The-Epicly-Named-Man:

GonzoGamer:
Sony releasing another overpriced and (sure to be) undersupported machine to the suckers.

Sorry to double post and come across as a fanboy (I'm not), but the PS3 wasn't over-priced, that was part of the problem. Sony made a huge loss on the PS3 not because of lack of sales but because of cost of production cost versus cost of retail price. Also, the Vita's line-up looks alright (at least not as bad as the 3DS's).

PS; Why the hell are my captchas upside down Escapist?

You're right and that makes them even bigger morons.
The ps3 is actually a really well made piece of hardware and it's unfortunate that it's been sandbagged so badly that they may as well have made it cheaper. It would be a great console if they would just give it half decent support. As it stands, I feel like I have a really nice sports car that wont pop out of first. I tried to be optimistic about it, I really did, but now the only good thing I can think about it is "hey, at least it didn't burst into flames."
Of course the alternative was the 360 which is of course crappy hardware (so bad that for a long while, half of them were spontaneously combusting) that actually gets good support.

This is why I'm not even going to bother getting a console when the next gen rolls around, I'll sink that money into my desktop and at this point probably get more bang for my buck... and the PC really does do everything.

Even though this is kind of bad for the gamers, I still appreciate MS showing a little backbone.

Actually I like this policy and hope that Sony and Nintendo take it too. It is kinda bogus that some games get special content and features on some consoles and other don't and that practice has to stop. No matter what your console, you should have have the same sort of content for a third party game.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here