| (Pages: 1, 2, 3) | |
That sucks for Sony, but no big loss for me. I don't have any Activision games on my PS3 right now anyways, and I don't know of any of theirs that I would want for my PS3. | |
Well, that'd be a killer blow to the system. | |
Who wants me to get them popcorn when Indigo Dingo shows up? More to the point I don't think Activision will drop support. They are just trying their power over the industry. Besides Sony might drop the price along with the new PS3 Slim. | |
I don't own any Activision games I couldn't easily live without, but they are a huge name in the gaming industry so this could be a huge blow to Sony. I personally have never once considered the PS3 too expensive, especially since I've spent a lot less money on it than my 360 or Wii yet use it so much more than either of the other two consoles. I do hope the best for Sony, and hope they're able to figure something out through this gen. | |
YAY! more crappy movie games coming to the 360,Wii,DS....list goes on. Activision are a one trick pony anyway Guitar hero, DJ hero, spining a banana round whilst drunk hero. It may be loss for Sony but I doubt Activision will do something like this. | |
Beat me to the punch. It's good to see that a big name like Activision is trying to show Sony the error of their ways. I'll need to keep up on my gaming news to see how this turns out. | |
You're forgetting CoD, which is a huge seller. | |
Remember, in a graphical arms race everybody loses cept' the guy on the sidelines laughing at the people in the arms race. | |
Sounds like corporate politics to me. I'd call they're bluff. screw um. And i agree with new troll, all things considered i don't think the ps3 is a huge wallet buster either. I mean shit i payed $700 for mine back in the day lol. And i own multiple systems as well. Even if activision is serious i don't see any of this happening anytime soon or even this year. I'm sure their are dozens of contracts for titles and liscenses up in the air, or works in progress. You can't just walk out. Alot can happen till then. Like i said, it's all just politics. | |
Well... I'm ashamed to have even played their games sometimes because they're such douche-bags. So... I don't really care. Most of their games aren't even that good. In the last few months they've done a lot of really mean things... | |
As long as I get Modern Warfare 2 before they stop support, I'll be able to die happy. | |
While it sounds like a pretty nasty thing when said publicly, I'm not entirely surprised. The PS3 does have a low attach rate and it costs significantly more to develop for. Unless you're dropping major blockbuster titles on it that carry minimal risk (ie. Modern Warfare 2) then it's not the most appealing platform to work with. | |
I couldn't care about any Activison game, but I know a lot of people that just love Cod so it would be pretty bad if they do pull support. But there are plenty of replacements for the games they make. Guitar Hero can be replaced by Rock Band and Cod can be replaced by Resistance or Operation Flashpoint 2. | |
Son of a bitch, I want my modern warfare 2! lets hope we get that at least and then they leave | |
Sony just can't seem to get the developer/publisher relationships right with this generation. | |
Wait what does activision make that I care about again, hold on let me check. *Searches through PS3, Wii, 360, DS, PSP, PS2 games.* Nothing, why do I care again? | |
Yep, especially when Sony has over 8-10 million less units out there. Activision must cap development for a system with such a low install base. /sarcasm end Seriously, I don't think Activision can truly afford to ignore almost 25% of the console market. Sounds to me like they want to predict demand something which is going to happen anyway this year and then pat themselves on the shoulder for having achieved it. Btw. development cost on PS3 is not much more than on the 360 if your staff is familiar with the architecture (which one should be able to presume after several years of availability now). What makes it expensive is to port an existing engine over without loosing too much performance. Looks like some serious "let's see how much market influence we got" move by Activision. | |
Said it there and I'll say it here. Bye bye, PS3. | |
While I doubt this will change Sony's ways, I sure hope it does. Ever since I've bought a new, shiny HD tv I'm looking at a PS3. And with a pricedrop, a PS3 would finally come in my range. Well in a few months that is. But I just can't fork over 400 euro's for a PS3, if it would be the same price as a 360 yea I might, but not like this. | |
Sure they can. Especially if it makes development 25% cheaper. ESPECIALLY when you consider that they have the PC market as well. What it comes down to is "Will we make more money releasing more games on PC and 360 or fewer games on PC 360 and PS3". If it came to the former, they'd drop support. | |
Activision is only saying this because they are dropping peripherals for Tony Hawk's Ride and DJ Hero that are probably going to be expensive. That's the only reason they want a price drop. Having to drop $400 plus an extra $150 to $200 for an Activision title with peripheral is a deal breaker for most people. Activisions business decisions lately haven't been all that stellar. After dropping Brutal Legends and Ghostbusters, then suing Tim Schafer and now demanding a PS3 price drop or they'll drop PS3 support doesn't give me confidence in their decision making ability. | |
The number of units out there is precisely why their attach rate is considered to be so poor. This will explain it a bit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attach_rate
Plenty of developers ignore that market sector due to the lack of profitability. Really, as long as Activision is pulling in the WoW dollar they can get away with saying a lot. Would they withdraw their flagship titles that they know they can move in bulk? Doubtful. It just means they'll start pulling smaller titles that don't have a guaranteed sellthrough.
I've got no reason to argue against that.
Familiar or not, it's a more time consuming architecture for us to work with and time is money, [b]especially[/ in this industry. Even the development kits cost an order of magnitude more than the kits for either the Wii, DS, or Xbox 360. Properly outfitting a sizable team for a PS3 title costs a small fortune for the kits alone. You're quite right that porting is also expensive, both ways. Moving from a PS3 architecture to anything else or vice-versa is a monster. That makes it easier to stay as an exclusive to the system, but the low attach rate makes that unfeasible. It's safer to release multiplatform or go exclusive for something else. What I'd be curious to know about is the royalty comparison between the three gaming leviathans. That's one set of numbers I've yet to come across.
Games are rarely developed ground-up for more than one system, and, in my experience, the porting process typically starts quite late in development. Nobody thinks much about it prior to that. By no means am I defending Activision here. I just like to play devil's advocate since I see things from a different vantage point. | |
But think about it, do you really expect development costs to shrink 25% by that? A lot of work that needs to be done is actually happening for both consoles (think about artists, modeler, scripts, etc.). The major difference between the platforms is the core engine and beta-testing. There were some slides available on the net that actually showed some developers how they can prepare a game engine from the start to switch between 360/PS3 version easily. Doesn't sound like 25% more cost to me, especially as things like shipment etc. tend to get cheaper at higher rates. EDIT: just saw your reply now RollForInitiative, I was looking for the slides mentioned while typing, but couldn't find the link anymore | |
Yet another reason why I am still happy I have never purchased a PS3 | |
Oh no! We'll lose great classics like.. Uhh.. Call of Duty WAW and COD 3. | |
The PS3 is the most difficult console to develop for. If you've got a game running on the PS3, porting over to the 360 and PC isn't that hard, but it's even easier to just start with the PC and 360 and not worry about the PS3. If the PS3 is your "lowest common denominator" platform, then it can hold up development for the other two platforms. For a game like Guitar Hero that isn't exactly pushing system limitations it's not a big deal, but for a game like CoD? Getting it to run on an extra platform means either A) Trimming things down to fit that platform's limitations or B) Spending a lot of time and money optimizing and tweaking the system to cram the full product in there. Not only that, but consider this: If you make the game available for PC/360, then part of the PS3's install base is redundant anyway. Some people have both a PS3 and a 360. Some PS3 owners have PCs (If Sony fanboys are to be believed, there isn't a single PS3 owner out there who doesn't have a full-blown gamer rig to make the 360's "console exclusives" irrelevant). Also, the publishers' shipping/printing operations are already at the point where economy of scale has yielded it's maximum benefit. | |
MOD EDIT: | |
Well, but that comes from a point of view that just looks at unit numbers as of now, ignoring the fact that the 360 has been around a bit longer (hence the /sarcasm). From that point of view, Activision must have concluded in the past that the 360 is not profitable, too, when the install base was around the number the PS3 is now.
Well, hard to argue that without knowing about some numbers on their side. On the other hand, Activision seemed to drop the ball on a couple occasions when then let Brütal Legend and others go, just to realize their error afterwards. Kind of leaves you wondering what they would consider a "smaller" title.
I'm afraid that it will get even harder as we don't know if and how they are cross-selling their products internally. Could be that Sony decided to go for an unprofitable PS3 anyway as long as Blu-Ray wins the format war. On the other hand, it seems to be profitable enough for Sony's 1st party studios which seem to be able to survive quite well despite focusing on the console with the lower install base.
I'd say that it depends heavily on the engine used. Of course, if they are doing something totally new, then it is usually unlikely to chase all platforms right from the start. But then again, these are usually titles that need more than just 2 years of development time. But then of course the next question must be "how much does a good development team cost?" and can they just as easily get one. Not to say that the devs at Activision are not good, but if I look around the IT industry in general, finding truly talented people is not only a problem in the gaming industry. And according the the "devil's advocate", I didn't see it as that as nobody really knows what goes on in the heads of those guys, leaving us to exchange theories. I just hope that Sony actually starts addressing these problems in terms of PR. Not just telling everyone that it is the best piece of hardware, but to really explain where they are and where they are heading. I am still baffled by the fact that Sony still has seperate PSN stores and teams, losing quite a lot of money just by restricting their customers to buy content based on their region and payment method. | |
I think one bloke up there figured out who the REAL CEO of Activision really is. | |
I'm still struggeling if he is referring to the topic or the country in my profile. | |
To be fair, I'd say that Brutal Legend was a smaller title when they dropped it. After EA picked them up it seems like it's profile increased by an order of magnitude. It looks to me like EA decided to take a risk and put some of their weight behind the game. I hope it pays off for them. | |
Fairly sure it's the topic. | |
I'll have some popcorn. Extra butter please! | |
Activision still worked with Infinity Ward on CoD4. | |
| (Pages: 1, 2, 3) | |
Extra Punctuation
MovieBob: Intermission
Experienced Points
First Person
Exploding Barrels
Miracle of Sound: Encore
Special Attack
Loading Time
Backchat
Drinking Games
Escape to the Movies
Escapecraft
Escapist News Wrap - Premium
Escapist Podcast
Feed Dump
GinxTV
Jimquisition
LoadingReadyRun
Mahalo
Meatbag and Co
Media Sandwich
Miracle of Sound
No Right Answer
Pro-Gamer Gauntlet
Reviews
Space Janitors
Tales from the Table
The Big Picture
The Escapist Presents
The Retro Show
Trailers
Unskippable
Zero Punctuation
Max Payne 3 Review
Company of Heroes 2
XCOM Enemy Unknown
Black Ops 2
Diablo 3 Review
TERA Review
Firefall Beta Preview
Starhawk Review
Critical Miss
Name Game
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article6531367.ece
""They have to cut the price, because if they don't, the attach rates [the number of games each console owner buys] are likely to slow. If we are being realistic, we might have to stop supporting Sony." Ask when and he says: "When we look at 2010 and 2011, we might want to consider if we support the console - and the PSP [portable] too." Sounds like Sir Howard Stringer, Sony's chief executive, is going to have to call Mr Kotick pretty fast."
Well damn. I doubt Activision will be pulling any of it's big name titles anytime soon, but there are a couple of implications here-
I can't imagine that he would come out publicly with this without having trying to coerced Sony privately first. If Sony was planning on announcing a price drop in the near future, I'd think they would tell him to avoid this- which casts doubt on rumors that a price drop is about to be announced.
Activision may make a few titles 360 exclusives just to let Sony know that they're serious. Not CoD or GH, but a lower profile title or two may be announced sans PS3 support soon.