Sony has always been in a position of strength and influence in the gaming industry. In terms of game sales, no multiplatform would ever sell more on Xbox than Playstation. This is fact--- so why has Sony spent millions(if not billions)on exclusivity deals when they have always been in the position of strength. This applies to marketing deals and money hatting as well. That was/is money that they could reinvest internally. Let's just say that there was a deal for Black Myth: Wukong. How does that really help Sony in the long-term? That game was always going to sell more on Playstation. Same with Final Fantasy. They should be using those funds on their own studios. Seeing these layoffs, dev closures, and lowered 1st party AAA game output while still blowing money on exclusivity deals doesn't make any sense. They are fighting a battle against Xbox that they (Sony) won a long time ago. Xbox has never been a real threat to Sony.
Does Sony (Playstation) waste money when they don't have to?
- Thread starter FMX
- Start date
nial
Member
There are resources already allocated for each division, not using that money on paying timed exclusivity deals like Final Fantasy will just result on it being used on different expenses at their partner relations branch.
PlayStation Studios already has a fuck ton of resources used for a lot of different stuff. I don't think people realize that the likes of Stellar Blade and Rise of the Ronin were funded with PlayStation Studios money.
Also, I don't think you should worry about what a corporation spends its money on.
PlayStation Studios already has a fuck ton of resources used for a lot of different stuff. I don't think people realize that the likes of Stellar Blade and Rise of the Ronin were funded with PlayStation Studios money.
Also, I don't think you should worry about what a corporation spends its money on.
Marketing and Game Development are two seperate departments with their own budgets. Marketing isn't going to shut down or funnel money from their division if a game's budget ballons outside of the number given to them. The expectation is going to be on the studio to recoup that cost. For indie studios yeah sure, that's a reality but this is a mega corporation.
Last edited:
PlayStaytion
Member
That's the spirit of artists.
Punished Miku
Gaslighter Pro: 16.7 Fireflops
I think they spent very little on exclusivity deals honestly. They are usually blocking out a lesser competitor that doesn't command the same level of sales or install base. They can guarantee a large bulk of the audience, and money on top, and marketing and it used to be that the publisher lost very little so it kept happening. The dominant player just remained dominant. PC is upending this for 3rd parties, and Switch to a lesser extent. They also would use exclusivity deals to destroy markets from ever emerging on other systems. Fighting games, JRPGs, Chinese made games. They pick what they want to destroy on other systems and pay for it. Even if they are dominant they want to destroy any expectation that you can find these on other systems and over time people just expect it.
Last edited:
hououinkyouma00
Member
People complain when the winner doesn't try. People complain when the winner tries. Who would have thought?
Magic Carpet
Gold Member
Waste MY money maybe.
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
Black Myth deal has been debunked over and over. Get over it. Ha!
AmuroChan
Member
Budgets in large companies and corporations are complex and not necessarily easily understood by outsiders. Each division/cost center/project is budgeted a certain amount each year. Money do not just seamlessly flow between divisions depending on need. For example, if by beginning of Q4 my division seems to have a surplus, my director will find a way to spend it all. Basically it's use it or lose it. You never want to end the year without spending everything because it means you may get a smaller budget next year. Conversely, if my division is in need of additional budget, I can't just go to another division with a surplus and ask if they would share their resources. They would tell me to F off, even though we work for the same company.
Sooner
Member
Xbox was never a threat? Of course it was. Xbox had every opportunity to be one the dominant system a couple years into the PS360 generation.
They fumbled constantly after that. But Sony releasing games like Uncharted, InFamous, The Last of Us as well as third-party exclusive were also a big part of reclaiming their stronghold over Xbox and they never lost it again, until Xbox slowly died out, despite spending tens of billions of daddy Microsoft's funds.
They fumbled constantly after that. But Sony releasing games like Uncharted, InFamous, The Last of Us as well as third-party exclusive were also a big part of reclaiming their stronghold over Xbox and they never lost it again, until Xbox slowly died out, despite spending tens of billions of daddy Microsoft's funds.
Ar¢tos
Member
The irony that buying Activision was the downfall of Xbox is hilarious.
FrankWza
Member
If anything related to that deal is its Jimbo blocking CoD from going exclusive.
Last edited:
Felessan
Member
If you have 10 studios you can make 10 games and not 20.
If you have money - you can make 10 games and buy another 10.
And scaling internal development is harder and riskier than one-off paying money for product. Also buying others product you have a choice to buy if you like or not to buy if you don't. For internal studio you have to provide funding. Or close studio and lose all investment.
Guardian Monkey
Member
That's how they got where they did. They have been moneyhatting exclusives since the ps1, they used it to get off the ground against Sega and Nintendo. Its worked ever since. For a fraction of the cost of a studio you get an exclusive that bolsters you brand with much less financial risk. Yeah you lose potential at the top side if the game explodes, but you still have managed your risk allowing to fund other games to grow your brand. Why not?