Gamespot rumor: Big third-party Xbox One exclusive at E3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Schweinehund said:
Assets were leaked not too long ago. L4D1/2 were exclusive to xbox 360 in the console space, doesn't seem like it would be a big surprise.
Click to expand...

Sure, but their exclusivity seemed to have more to do with...

Gabe's stance on PS3 was that it was absolute garbage and they should trash it/start over. Then he released steam for ps3 (which wasn't really much). I don't think they're hardliners at all.
Click to expand...

I don't think they're hardliners either, but I also don't think they're interested in MS's money.
 
LukasTaves said:
Which is moneyhatting. Just sugar coated in fanboy drivel so it's okay for Sony does but a blasphemy when anyone else does it.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Sony second-party exclusives are titles that are published (i.e. funded) by Sony themselves. They paid for the development of the game.
 
frizby said:
You have to draw the line somewhere. I would say that if MS didn't publish it, it's a money-hat.

If it served their interest to paint Respawn as some kind of underdog studio (LOL) after the fact, that's good PR and is fine by me.
Click to expand...
It seems like the project would have been cancelled if it wasn't for MS funding. Moneyhat implies that the only reason for exclusivity is money and greed. Don't see how that's the case here.
 
TomShoe said:
What are you talking about? Sony second-party exclusives are titles that are published (i.e. funded) by Sony themselves. They paid for the development of the game.
Click to expand...

i dont see much difference between funding a game before development rather than buying the rights during development ... the latter sounds wiser from a business perspective because you can evaluate how the game had came together. The alternative requires a leap of faith which sometime works out but often times does not.
 
Kinyou said:
It seems like the project would have been cancelled if it wasn't for MS funding. Moneyhat implies that the only reason for exclusivity is money and greed. Don't see how that's the case here.
Click to expand...

It's a gray one to be sure, and MS did clearly fund some of the development.

I guess it depends on how much stock you put in a game from "Infinity Ward" being almost cancelled. Suffice it to say that I'm skeptical.
 
rrc1594 said:
Still don't get it, most if not all lunch titles where published or owned by MS
Click to expand...

shandy706 said:
Looks at launch lineup.


Errr...I'm not seeing it. I see games helped along by and published by MS (basically 2nd party) and 1st Party stuffs.
Click to expand...

Even if Microsoft published them it doesn't make it 2nd or 1st party. You think Mass Effect 1 is a first party MS game?! lol!

Ryse, Dead Rising 3, Plants vs Zombies Garden Warfare (timed), TITANFALL. Among their top selling games and all third party exclusives.
 
I'm sure that gamespot rumour is pure click bait...

sure it might imply their could be a big 3rd party exclusive, but it specifically only mentions a reveal, also implying their is no spoon.... erm sorry i mean 3rd party exclusive...
 
I don't think Microsoft is willing to pay the ridiculous amount of money it would take to make a megaton exclusive. Mass Effect, Resident Evil, Fallout, Call of Duty, etc. are the only kinds of announcements that would cause mass hysteria, but the amount of money it would take to make it happen at this point is absurd.

I fully expect this to be a new IP or smaller developer.
 
Vyse The Legend said:
I don't think Microsoft is willing to pay the ridiculous amount of money it would take to make a megaton exclusive. Mass Effect, Resident Evil, Fallout, Call of Duty, etc. are the only kinds of announcements that would cause mass hysteria, but the amount of money it would take to make it happen at this point is absurd.

I fully expect this to be a new IP or smaller developer.
Click to expand...
Would resident evil cause mass hysteria?
 
kekke said:
Yes it was, amongst other things. People just choose to ignore that fact since it won't fit their agenda.
Click to expand...

I have to finish reading the story on that. At what point did they step in and why? I left off where they were including next gen platforms, but Sony didn't want to tip it's hand and give them the PS4's specs. Honestly I don't know why they needed to know PS4's specs to begin with when they could've just used the X1 specs as a guide?

Would resident evil cause mass hysteria?
Click to expand...

Only if it looked like a return to the series roots and not the action game it's turned into.
 
I have both consoles so 3rd party exclusives don't bother me. I actually like it because in my experience exclusive titles in any form tend to have higher quality than multiplats.
 
King Beyond the wall said:
Wasn't the exclusive to Xbox thing forever something that happened shortly before launch behind respawns back?
Click to expand...

It was always going to be exclusive to Xbox One and PC because of lack of resources. Microsoft's initial funding locked it down for 13 months, minimum. Microsoft then penned a further funding deal with EA to lock it down for the title's lifetime.
 
“Asada-san took to 5pb’s blog to explain something interesting. At least one of the titles that will be announced at E3 is being developed in cooperation with an external company and won’t be either a visual novel or a shoot ‘em up”

“First of all Asada-mentioned the fact that he was familiar with Xbox from his previous works, and he was involved in the development of the Xbox One from the early stages, so the decision was taken as soon as he moved from Cave to Mages.”
Click to expand...
http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/05...vel-or-shoot-em-up-platform-choice-explained/
 
Melchiah said:
Why would you love that ME4 was locked away from the PS4 users? It doesn't benefit the XB1 gamers in any way.
Click to expand...

Let me clarify. Even though we know that ME4 is coming, I would love for some concrete details about the game to be released. It wouldn't effect me in the least if the game turns out to be multi platform.
 
iMax said:
Nope, it was always going to be exclusive to Xbox One and PC because of lack of resources. Microsoft's initial funding locked it down for 13 months, minimum. Microsoft then penned a further funding deal with EA to lock it down for the title's lifetime.
Click to expand...

which (at the time) didn't go down well with Respawn...
 
Tsundere said:
Even if Microsoft published them it doesn't make it 2nd or 1st party. You think Mass Effect 1 is a first party MS game?! lol!

Ryse, Dead Rising 3, Plants vs Zombies Garden Warfare (timed), TITANFALL. Among their top selling games and all third party exclusives.
Click to expand...

Actually if company publishes the game it's First party, does not matter who owns the IP
 
iMax said:
Nope, it was always going to be exclusive to Xbox One and PC because of lack of resources. Microsoft's initial funding locked it down for 13 months, minimum. Microsoft then penned a further funding deal with EA to lock it down for the title's lifetime.
Click to expand...

Wat? How was it minimum? It was a set 13 months and was made to be a full exclusive around E3 by MS.

"The way Respawn saw it, the developer had never agreed to full exclusivity for Titanfall on Xbox platforms, only an exclusive window of up to 13 months. Zampella maintains that the team only found out that EA had turned an exclusive window deal into permanent exclusivity in the summer of 2013, weeks after the game's spectacular showing at E3. The deal was a complicated one as Respawn wasn't dealing directly with Xbox. Instead, terms were negotiated through EA, which signed a larger, overarching partnership deal with Microsoft for the Xbox One. In order to make the economics work and keep Titanfall alive, EA needed a first-party publisher to invest. Xbox was willing to step up and save the project, which turned out to be a wise bet. Xbox now has one of the biggest games of the year as an exclusive to it's platforms, although it lays no claim to any sequels."
Click to expand...
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=108419913&postcount=75
 
iMax said:
Nope, it was always going to be exclusive to Xbox One and PC because of lack of resources. Microsoft's initial funding locked it down for 13 months, minimum. Microsoft then penned a further funding deal with EA to lock it down for the title's lifetime.
Click to expand...

You said nope and then agreed with him, that the lock down forever happened shortly before release.
 
CoG said:
The difference between the 360 and PS3 was there came a point where all MS became was a check writing and Halo factory. Paying for exclusive third-party titles and exclusive DLC became the norm. Sony chose to invest in new IP. When the smoke cleared Sony had a pretty good catalog of first party titles while MS was busy cranking out Halo/Forza/Fable sequels and writing checks. One strategy yielded The Last of Us, the other got us limited DLC for Call of Duty.
Click to expand...

Sure, MS did rely on Halo, Forza, Fable and lets not forget Gears, but they also invest in plenty of Kinect games, including new IPs (as well as State of Decay for XBLA which was a great new series for them), I won't convince you the Kinect stuff is good games but investment is investment and considering how Kinect sold it would seem like it was a smart financial move while they were getting games ready for XB1.
MS got the 360 out first and it was easier to develop for and third parties wanted in which left Sony with a big hole in their line-up as big exclusive series like FF, DMC and GTA went day one on Xbox and they retained MGS4 but lost out on the collection and GZ/TPP going forwards.

MS probably did help sway them, its rumoured they paid mega bucks to get SE out of their FF13 exclusivity agreement I think? But it still happened and left quite a gap in Sony's line-up. Lets not forget the acquisitions Sony made just before or during their 3rd generation (which is what MS is at now) which I think was obviously done to bolster their WWS and help make up for the exclusives they lost:

Guerrilla Games/989 Studios - 2005
Zipper Interactive - 2006
Evolution Studios/BigBig - 2007
Sucker Punch - 2011
Media Molecule - 2010

Sony did have a big first party line-up anyway but those additions made a huge different to them Sony have invested in new IP with their first party line-up. Also consider 3 of the studios above (2 shut down) will release major titles in the first year of the PS4.
MS have been bolstering their first party studios recently, similar to how Sony did, only without as yet buying any "AAA capable" developers recently.

This goes back to the age old argument of games aren't built in a day. TLOU was a result of years of work on a new IP! But Ryse was in development for 7 years and came out 5 month after TLOU and doesn't count as MS investment in new IP with Crytek? What about Sunset Overdrive which is out this year? I don't know when MS signed the deal, but clearly they are investing in new IP. Quantum Break too was give the green light in 2012?

Also, Sony get exclusive third party content. One strategy got you TLOU and other new games, but the other one got more Halo and established IPs but new Kinect games.
 
Half life 3!!! On a more serious note why even "leak" if your just going to say they are going to bring something really unexpected. Really there's gonna be a cool surprise? Well I never saw that comming.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

"Xbox PC" has started showing up in more third-party trailers
News 
39
968
Walliwallipaloo replied
switch 2 power excites third party studios
Rumor 
45
4K
GigaBowser replied
my analysis playing third party games on GC
Retro  2
94
2K
BlackTron replied
Will Sony become third party publisher?
2 3 4 5
232
5K
RCX replied
Do you think third party developers will ever go back
22
509
cobaltorange replied
Top Bottom