Respawn's Zampella Tweets Response To Titanfall Exclusivity

Respawn's Zampella Tweets Response To Titanfall Exclusivity

image

EA's the one you want to talk to, says Zampella.

If you've been following Titanfall, then you know that the giant mecha shoot-em-up is a Microsoft exclusive, for PC, Xbox 360 and Xbox One. No, that isn't a six-month-only deal; it's in perpetuity, which many have taken to mean is Microsoft's way of making sure rival Sony didn't get its mitts on what Microsoft sees as a flagship title. But it takes two to make a dream so real, the publisher and the developer, and Respawn Entertainment's Vince Zampella has taken to Twitter to point the finger at the villain of the piece: EA.

"Always exclusive at launch," Tweets Zampella, "great partner and focus is good for a startup. EA made a deal for the rest, we only found out recently. =(" Zampella also confirmed that the deal was only good for the first game, implying that future falling Titans, or whatever else Respawn chooses to make, might be found on Sony's console. Zampella went on to imply that, in his view, longevity of the Titanfall franchise was harmed by not having it on PS4.

As far as Zampella's concerned, Respawn's main focus right now is to make sure Titanfall is the very best it can be, and any distractions are being ignored. Titanfall's due March 2014, and you don't need me to tell you what platforms it's appearing on.

Source: Vince Zampella Twitter

Permalink

How many consoles does MS plan on having shipped by March? That versus the number of PS4s Sony has planned? Why on earth would you release it on the XBONE *only?

*referring to "of the next generation consoles." I know it's on 360 & PC

And that is why it will not be the game to kill COD.
Having half the market of the game you are trying to beat is like a one armed man boxing.

tdylan:
How many consoles does MS plan on having shipped by March? That versus the number of PS4s Sony has planned? Why on earth would you release it on the XBONE *only?

*referring to "of the next generation consoles." I know it's on 360 & PC

My guess is because Microsoft finally payed out the money to make it exclusive, if it was going to be from the start why would they have waited so long to make a definitive statement

I wasn't going to buy this game anyways but this is so dumb, exclusivity is just a stupid practice and I can't seeing this paying off for them.

Oh look Bungie making ANOTHER Microsoft vehicle. Really branching out this lot.
Ooops sorry.

DVS BSTrD:
Oh look Bungie making ANOTHER Microsoft vehicle. Really branching out this lot.

Err, Bungie is doing Destiny not Titanfall. This is Respawn Entertainment, aka the guys who left Infinity Ward due to shenanigans with Activision for EA.

Diablo1099:
And that is why it will not be the game to kill COD.
Having half the market of the game you are trying to beat is like a one armed man boxing.

Assuming that Titanfall is a hit it will make very little difference being on Playstation or not. It did Mass Effect no harm not being on PS3 until the second game (although ME1 did arrive on PS3, in 2012). More to the point, it did Call of Duty no harm either, the first two were PC only and then PC/360/Mac.

The first game in a series is rarely the one that crushes sales records (unless it's Half Life), it took Call of Duty eight games before it really took off for ridiculous sales with Modern Warfare 2. At the rate it's going it will be another four or five game before it's sales drop by notable amounts.

But, if Titanfall is ace, every Xbone has it and PC gamers go crazy for it too then by Titanfall 2 the amount of hype floating around will be absurd. It might not be CoD levels by the second game, but EA will be hoping for a lot of growth by the time it's on PS4 as well Xbone and PC.

Also, if all the rumours about Ghosts' graphics and Xbone's network issues are true then Ghosts could be the beginning of a decline for CoD, games often pay for the sins of their predecessor (see Crysis 3).

Ed130:

DVS BSTrD:
Oh look Bungie making ANOTHER Microsoft vehicle. Really branching out this lot.

Err, Bungie is doing Destiny not Titanfall. This is Respawn Entertainment, aka the guys who left Infinity Ward due to shenanigans with Activision for EA.

Aww shit. Well how long before EA puts a bullet in Respawn's head for underperformance? You think they'll get it before Bioware?

DVS BSTrD:

Ed130:

DVS BSTrD:
Oh look Bungie making ANOTHER Microsoft vehicle. Really branching out this lot.

Err, Bungie is doing Destiny not Titanfall. This is Respawn Entertainment, aka the guys who left Infinity Ward due to shenanigans with Activision for EA.

Aww shit. Well how long before EA puts a bullet in Respawn's head for underperformance? You think they'll get it before Bioware?

A better question would be which Bioware? Bioware Victory was renamed a few years ago and recently had its project (a new Command & Conquer) canned.

I think The Old Republic one will go first, by merger or simple shutting down.

Respawn is still in the honeymoon period, that and EA would want to keep them as a poke at Activision for a while longer.

DVS BSTrD:
Aww shit. Well how long before EA puts a bullet in Respawn's head for underperformance? You think they'll get it before Bioware?

Given the history, I think it's more likely Titanfall will be wildly successful, EA will try something stupid around Titanfall 3 or 4 and all the top staff will jump to another publisher, just like they did when they were making Medal of Duty... I mean Call of Honor.

fix-the-spade:
Assuming that Titanfall is a hit it will make very little difference being on Playstation or not. It did Mass Effect no harm not being on PS3 until the second game (although ME1 did arrive on PS3, in 2012).

The first game in a series is rarely the one that crushes sales records (unless it's Half Life), it took Call of Duty eight games before it really took off for ridiculous sales with Modern Warfare 2. At the rate it's going it will be another four or five game before it's sales drop by notable amounts.

But, if Titanfall is ace, every Xbone has it and PC gamers go crazy for it too then by Titanfall 2 the amount of hype floating around will be absurd. It might not be CoD levels by the second game, but EA will be hoping for a lot of growth by the time it's on PS4 as well Xbone and PC.

Also, if all the rumours about Ghosts' graphics and Xbone's network issues are true then Ghosts could be the beginning of a decline for CoD, games often pay for the sins of their predecessor (see Crysis 3).

Still, new IPs are born and die all the time in gaming, remember that whole mess about Dead Space needing to shift 5 Million copies to survive earlier in the year?

If this game doesn't break a crap ton of records, EA is going to cap it like it does for all the companies it takes over.
I know that you can't really break COD's records, but I'm not sure the Execs are going to see it that way.

Titanfall isn't a Console exclusive, it just isn't going to be on PS4. It will do quite well on the PC market where FPSs tend to thrive. I don't see it taking much of a hit because of this. It sucks, indeed because I was going to get a PS4, but having a gaming PC rig I'd most likely get it there anyway..

DVS BSTrD:

Ed130:

DVS BSTrD:
Oh look Bungie making ANOTHER Microsoft vehicle. Really branching out this lot.

Err, Bungie is doing Destiny not Titanfall. This is Respawn Entertainment, aka the guys who left Infinity Ward due to shenanigans with Activision for EA.

Aww shit. Well how long before EA puts a bullet in Respawn's head for underperformance? You think they'll get it before Bioware?

I think that the fact that Zampella is willing to be this frank in public about calling out EA for making what he feels is a bad decision, would actually imply that's he's feeling very confident that he'll be keeping his job after Titanfall ships.

Developers: Exclusivity is NEVER good for you. Why are you limiting your audience, especially if you are a startup? You want maximum exposure! Whatever you are getting from the publisher isn't worth it. I really have no clue why developers sign up for this kind of thing.

I have the same issue with Naughty Dog. I buy a lot of games. I would probably own virtually every one of their titles. But oops, I don't have a PS3. So I have bought none of them. Bad for me (I don't get to play good games). Bad for you (you make no money from me). What's the advantage again?

Diablo1099:
Still, new IPs are born and die all the time in gaming, remember that whole mess about Dead Space needing to shift 5 Million copies to survive earlier in the year?

That was EA completely misjudging the situation, Dead Space sold around 1.5million, Dead Space 2 around 2 million, quite where or what they pulled the 5 million figure from boggles the mind. It's not a problem they're likely to have with Titanfall.

RonHiler:
What's the advantage again?

Naughty Dog is wholly owned by Sony, the advantage is that you have to buy Sony to get their games. It doesn't work for you, but it clearly works for Sony.

NinjaDeathSlap:

DVS BSTrD:

Ed130:

Err, Bungie is doing Destiny not Titanfall. This is Respawn Entertainment, aka the guys who left Infinity Ward due to shenanigans with Activision for EA.

Aww shit. Well how long before EA puts a bullet in Respawn's head for underperformance? You think they'll get it before Bioware?

I think that the fact that Zampella is willing to be this frank in public about calling out EA for making what he feels is a bad decision, would actually imply that's he's feeling very confident that he'll be keeping his job after Titanfall ships.

I'm willing to bet his job was a lot more secure before he made this statement. Just wait until it doesn't make sale expectations. They've already abandoned single player, so Respawn is fucked as soon as the online dies down.

But remember, guys - EA totallyisn't being biased in any way towards Microsoft by giving them permanent exclusive rights to what they both believe is a system seller and having Fifa bundles ONLY on Xbone. (Which again, may very well be a system seller as far as Europe is concerned.

Nope, not seeing any bias at all. Move along, nothing to see here:

EA should become a verb for this. Or there should be some kind of term to specifically mean that EA did this crap again. Every time I think they can't surprise me, they do.

Good, maybe people can stop wholly blaming Microsoft for 'evilly' buying up exclusives - a business practice that has been present in gaming as long as there have been multiple gaming platform options. Not that I agree with exclusives in general, they hurt consumers _and_ developers and only really serve as an alternative way for platforms to compete instead of actually focusing on improving their hardware.

I'm genuinely unsure why EA have done this though. By most accounts the PS4 will 'win' the next console generation (for lack of a better word), surely it will cost them money in the long run backing the wrong console?

Battenberg:
Good, can people stop wholly blaming Microsoft for 'evilly' buying up exclusives - a business practice that has been present in gaming as long as there have been multiple gaming platform options? Not that I agree with exclusives in general, they hurt consumers _and_ developers and only really serve as an alternative way for platforms to compete instead of actually focusing on improving their hardware.

I'm genuinely unsure why EA have done this though. By most accounts the PS4 will 'win' the next console generation (for lack of a better word), surely it will cost them money in the long run backing the wrong console?

Don't know if anyone's upset at Microsoft for making good business decisions. But I'm fairly certain we're just confused and upset at EA for constantly shooting themselves in the trouser snake by way of harming the consumer at little to no benefit to themselves.

I would guess though, that the contract was drafted up before the XBO backlash. Probably when EA thought MS was going to establish that ridiculous preowned games killer. That would fall in line with their silly trend of punishing paying customers with audacious anti-consumer DRM. I'd like to say that the day they require blood and stool samples before we play their games each time that people wouldn't buy their games, but sure enough people would have the at-home probes and vaseline ready to go.

Lightknight:

Battenberg:
Good, can people stop wholly blaming Microsoft for 'evilly' buying up exclusives - a business practice that has been present in gaming as long as there have been multiple gaming platform options? Not that I agree with exclusives in general, they hurt consumers _and_ developers and only really serve as an alternative way for platforms to compete instead of actually focusing on improving their hardware.

I'm genuinely unsure why EA have done this though. By most accounts the PS4 will 'win' the next console generation (for lack of a better word), surely it will cost them money in the long run backing the wrong console?

Don't know if anyone's upset at Microsoft for making good business decisions. But I'm fairly certain we're just confused and upset at EA for constantly shooting themselves in the trouser snake by way of harming the consumer at little to no benefit to themselves.

I would guess though, that the contract was drafted up before the XBO backlash. Probably when EA thought MS was going to establish that ridiculous preowned games killer. That would fall in line with their silly trend of punishing paying customers with audacious anti-consumer DRM. I'd like to say that the day they require blood and stool samples before we play their games each time that people wouldn't buy their games, but sure enough people would have the at-home probes and vaseline ready to go.

The previous story on Titanfall on Escapist got a few people angry at Microsoft: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/129140-Titanfall-Will-Not-Be-Released-On-PlayStation-4

I guess that's the only explanation for EA's choices here, still seems pretty shortsighted though, even for EA.

On a side note if you don't watch The Jimquisition you definitely should.

I don't have an opinion on the game being exclusive, I wasn't planning to get it anyway. I do have a problem with developers, as soon as there is an unpopular decision announced, pointing at the publishers and saying "It's all their fault! Those are the bastards you want!" I ain't buying it.

The developer is just as culpable. Publishers don't just start giving money to devs, there is negotiation, there are discussions, and there are contracts. These contracts detail precisely what each party is expected and allowed to do. Respawn and Zampella chose to sign those contracts, knowing what was in them and knowing what they were permitting EA to get away with. By giving EA that power, they must accept a measure of responsibility, as they effectively said "We agree with whatever you decide to do with this power we grant you."

Stop pointing fingers, devs, you are just as at fault for crappy DRM, bad marketing decisions and poor PR as the publishers themselves.

Imagine a millionaire commissions a picture to be painted by up and coming artist. After much time the artist creates said painting and gives it the patron. Said millionaire decides to put the painting in his private gallery. He advertises the picture everywhere and then only invites his close friends inside his gallery. Can't begrudge the guy wanted to put the there it's his call. Sure fewer people might see it, but he has the right to do so. As I stated in the other "Exclusive" thread this game is not Xbox One only. PC and 360 are also getting a swing at it. From all the bad PR the Xbox One has gotten I think even MS and EA know it's not a sure thing. Another port is a wise business plan. And if it turns out that the X-1 does pull through more power (and profits) to them.

This whole announcement is just MS trolling Sony (fans as well). I mean we already heard it was an exclusive (only in the technical sense since it's on 3 systems not 1) why the sudden outrage? If you're only going to buy one next gen system, then yes you'll miss out on TF. But you can go the PC route. I say this since I don't think people would buy a 360 and pay for live just to try Titanfall. At least they would get more use out of a new (or upgraded) comp should other games come to PC later (or past games for that matter)

Battenberg:

Lightknight:

Battenberg:
Good, can people stop wholly blaming Microsoft for 'evilly' buying up exclusives - a business practice that has been present in gaming as long as there have been multiple gaming platform options? Not that I agree with exclusives in general, they hurt consumers _and_ developers and only really serve as an alternative way for platforms to compete instead of actually focusing on improving their hardware.

I'm genuinely unsure why EA have done this though. By most accounts the PS4 will 'win' the next console generation (for lack of a better word), surely it will cost them money in the long run backing the wrong console?

Don't know if anyone's upset at Microsoft for making good business decisions. But I'm fairly certain we're just confused and upset at EA for constantly shooting themselves in the trouser snake by way of harming the consumer at little to no benefit to themselves.

I would guess though, that the contract was drafted up before the XBO backlash. Probably when EA thought MS was going to establish that ridiculous preowned games killer. That would fall in line with their silly trend of punishing paying customers with audacious anti-consumer DRM. I'd like to say that the day they require blood and stool samples before we play their games each time that people wouldn't buy their games, but sure enough people would have the at-home probes and vaseline ready to go.

The previous story on Titanfall on Escapist got a few people angry at Microsoft: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/129140-Titanfall-Will-Not-Be-Released-On-PlayStation-4

I guess that's the only explanation for EA's choices here, still seems pretty shortsighted though, even for EA.

On a side note if you don't watch The Jimquisition you definitely should.

Pretty much this.

I didn't see this much rage when Naughty Dog released a game which only PS3 users will ever get to play. Is it only okay for Sony to do and not for Microsoft? And no, Naughty Dog developing games exclusively for Sony doesn't make it any different.

Though, I do dislike exclusives.

Iron Criterion:

I didn't see this much rage when Naughty Dog released a game which only PS3 users will ever get to play. Is it only okay for Sony to do and not for Microsoft? And no, Naughty Dog developing games exclusively for Sony doesn't make it any different.

Though, I do dislike exclusives.

ND are owned by Sony (and have never made games for any other platform), Microsoft don't own EA are supposed to be unbiased. I agree with your general argument but a company like Insomniac might make your point better (e.g. 'Resistance' being a PS3 launch title) although that said it seems Microsoft have grabbed them as well.

Battenberg:

Iron Criterion:

I didn't see this much rage when Naughty Dog released a game which only PS3 users will ever get to play. Is it only okay for Sony to do and not for Microsoft? And no, Naughty Dog developing games exclusively for Sony doesn't make it any different.

Though, I do dislike exclusives.

ND are owned by Sony (and have never made games for any other platform), Microsoft don't own EA are supposed to be unbiased. I agree with your general argument but a company like Insomniac might make your point better (e.g. 'Resistance' being a PS3 launch title) although that said it seems Microsoft have grabbed them as well.

You beat me to it.Sony has a surprisingly robust number of first party studios that put out great work. They also do some work to make them seem like third party when they're really first. Santa Monica (aka Sony Santa Monica) also collaborates with a wide range of smaller game companies to publish great work like Journey.

FYI, I do watch Jim's videos. Great stuff. He jumps the gun on a few topics he's passionate about here and there but he's absolutely one of my favorite people to watch.

Battenberg:

ND are owned by Sony (and have never made games for any other platform)

They made Rings of Power on the Megadrive, Keef the Thief on AppleIIGS and Way of the Warrior on 3DO.

Sony didn't open Naughty Dog, they acquired them in 2001. The only reason Crash Bandicoot was exclusive to the PS1 was because porting between systems was expensive and the PS1 utterly annihilated its competition in terms of sales to the point where you really didn't need to be multi-format to hit most of your audience.

ScrabbitRabbit:

Battenberg:

ND are owned by Sony (and have never made games for any other platform)

They made Rings of Power on the Megadrive, Keef the Thief on AppleIIGS and Way of the Warrior on 3DO.

Sony didn't open Naughty Dog, they acquired them in 2001. The only reason Crash Bandicoot was exclusive to the PS1 was because porting between systems was expensive and the PS1 utterly annihilated its competition in terms of sales to the point where you really didn't need to be multi-format to hit most of your audience.

They weren't Naughty Dog back then though were they? Either way I didn't say they opened ND, I said they owned them. Before that though it was Sony who took the gamble on ND and decided Crash would be their console mascot (so it would have to be exclusive), basically it was Sony('s Playstation) that really put them on the map as developers as they were relatively low level before then.

Battenberg:

ScrabbitRabbit:

Battenberg:

ND are owned by Sony (and have never made games for any other platform)

They made Rings of Power on the Megadrive, Keef the Thief on AppleIIGS and Way of the Warrior on 3DO.

Sony didn't open Naughty Dog, they acquired them in 2001. The only reason Crash Bandicoot was exclusive to the PS1 was because porting between systems was expensive and the PS1 utterly annihilated its competition in terms of sales to the point where you really didn't need to be multi-format to hit most of your audience.

They weren't Naughty Dog back then though were they? Either way I didn't say they opened ND, I said they owned them. Before that though it was Sony who took the gamble on ND and decided Crash would be their console mascot (so it would have to be exclusive), basically it was Sony('s Playstation) that really put them on the map as developers as they were relatively low level before then.

Yup, those games were all released under Naughty Dog. Crash was originally published by Universal. If the Saturn had been better competition, it's hard to say whether or not it would have been multi-format, but it wasn't so exclusivity was a natural choice.

I'm suspecting that MS threw a lot of money at EA at the last minute in order to secure a "Halo" type killer app for the XBone. They were desperate, and Titanfall seemed to be their only thing getting good press coming out of the reveals.

 

Reply to Thread

Your account does not have posting rights. If you feel this is in error, please contact an administrator. (ID# 59787)