I think it's worth noting that a) Gears of War would not have been released in 2006 if it had been multiplat and then it'd have had much bigger competition in 2007, b) even if it'd have hit in 2006, it wouldn't be of that quality and PS3 userbase was tiny at the time anyway. If I were Epic and assuming they have no contract for GoW3 nor there is not any first refusal deal between them and MS, I would still go for MS to publish the game (and 360 exclusivity), because a)established fanbase, b) strong console association,c) very good advertising from MS for this franchise.
HOWEVER for their new IP I would definitely go with 3rd party publisher and multiplatform release, because they already have a well developed multiplatform engine that they are very efficient with (see UT3). Going multiplatform doubles your target userbase, so that makes sense to me.
And this is why I need not post anymore! My same thoughts
Gears exclusivity made a lot of sense in 2006. MS was funding the project which inturn was helping Epic get UE3 out the door, on the 360 at least. Next gen still wasn't in high gear so competition was thin (but still there, see R6:V) and Epic needed to get a title ASAP to validate UE3. Single platform development allowed more focus on limited resources and, the 360 being the largest install base at the time, also had the highest concentration of potential consumers (i.e. shooter fans). Going exclusive on, essentially at the time, the only next gen console garnered them a ton of press as well as MS pushing it as the Xbox 360 premier 2006 title. Huge marketing budgets as well as prime time E3 attention. On the PS3 front PS3 dev kits were late, development issues for UE3 were strained, the PS3 was more expensive, and the PS3 install base was small in 2006 and had an even smaller shooter fanbase.
There are times when exclusivity makes sense; other times not. FF is a good example of how market conditions affect such. I am pretty sure SE was aiming a couple years after the console launches to release their first FF. These games have HUGE budgets and instead of being a platform pusher they want to be a platform reaper. There needs to be a critical mass of consumers to justify the development expenses. This was the case, clearly, on the PS2 where being exclusive was a no brainer--even without Sony funding. The market is more fragmented now and the prospects of 1M-2M in total sales probably doesn't sit well with a title that has been in development for a number of years. Competition for gamer dollars is going to be high, so doubling the install base through multiplatform development is a viable option. If Sony were willing to pick up a substantial part of the FF13 tab as well as make it the centerpiece of Sony PS3 marketing then maybe this scenario would be different.
As for the new Epic IP multiplatform makes a lot of sense, UNLESS a publisher is going to help fund the title some and push it as a marque title on the platform. One need look no further than Rockstar's non-GTA or Bungie's non-Halo IPs to see that "killer app" success doesn't always translate outside of an IP. Epic has a history of good games that weren't quite "there" ("there" being where Gears is) so this new IP may not justify MS or Sony bankrolling the project. UT3 was a good game, but it didn't get Gears fans all hot and heavy to buy it in droves.
Sorry Shifty, I disagree with you. The SE situation is different; likewise Epic's titles are different. There are times when exclusivity makes a lot of sense (funding, marketing, consumer base and demographics, software adoption, etc) and other times it doesn't. I don't think anyone questions the fact the 360 has a larger install base than the PS3, more online consumers, and more shooter fans. Exclusivity at this point may make sense if it allows more focus to polish your product for a single platform. For an RPG the PS3 has a bigger Japanese install base but the 360 a bigger on WW as well as more RPGs in general. So unless SE was going to get the Epic treatment for FF13, being exclusive doesn't make as much sense. I think SE is looking at the 360 install base and software consumption rate and have bean counted it up to conclude that the extra sales will be larger than Sony funding.
If I was a developer I would look at it exactly like that:
What are our projected sales if we are exclusive? Calculate in any publisher support (funding, loans, marketing) => TotalA.
What are our projected sales if multiplatform? Calculate in advertising cost, cross platform development (time, money, quality) => TotalB.
If TotalA > TotalB, go exclusive.
If TotalB > TotalA, go multiplatform.
I think this is exactly what SE did with FF13, hence the long wait until the Xbox version announcement. Until recently I am sure it seemed likely that PS3 exclusivity would have been the best fiscal approach. The lack of PS3 ramp up to market leadership as well as continued pricing issues make alternatives appealing.
