Report: Developers are steering away from PS3

[TheChefO]

So they're skipping a year. I can think of a few reasons why. 1 is to get to grips with PS3. Another is because the inital installed base won't be that high. A third is that within that installed base, there's a lot of other titles competing. A mediocre game amongst a few better games is more likely to go overlooked, and if the user base is too small, those that do buy won't be numerous enough.

Yes but at launch they are competing less not more. Especially with the expected initial ps3 library.

If the game was close to being ready and set to sell to what most expect to be 2 million users why wouldn't they release it? Unless it really isn't that close but a previous post claimed it was playable...?

 

[Sojurn]

No doubt a lot of devs are still focusing on PS2 also. It's going to be the console with the largest install base for many many years yet. PS3 will probably get up to full steam in 2008 and as usual it will be taking preference again. Sony themesleves are launching God of War 2 in January 2007 on PS2, which a big title.

There's most probably going to be a sever shortage of PS3, It would be no surprise to anybody if the European launch gets delayed to spring 2007, as is customary for Sony.

2007 for the 'real' games sounds about right and is exactly what is happening with the 360, the real good games coming exactly a year after launch.

 

[Angelcurio]

Looks like WWE is not very about this:

WWE not happy with THQ

According to staff at WWE euroshop and at THQ, the WWE have been upset over the annoucement by THQ, for dropping this years addition of its ever so popular smackdown series for the PS3.

Staff at WWE euroshop have even stated that they,ve been told not to sell THQ's videogames until further notice.

THQ signed WWE to10 year contract to publish the WWE games on various platforms every year.

According to THQ reps, the WWE have a profound relationship with Sony corp, and have felt cheated by THQ over the annoucement.

Since the contract began, Sony have supported the WWE for 23 pay per views and 41 house shows and tours, and use to sell Sony products at its WWE store in times square.

Rumours did spread a while back that the WWE were looking to part with THQ and sign with a bigger company (EA probably), but THQ held there ground.

If this story of a rift does get bigger, i doubt THQ will have the WWE on its books.

Link: http://www.news4gamers.com/ps3/News-5815.aspx

 

[expletive]

What exactly is the WWE not happy about? Clearly THQ had a reason for not doing the game and depending on that reason WWE may have agreed. I'd like to see a quote from someone at WWE explaining why they're so upset.

 

[mckmas8808]

What exactly is the WWE not happy about? Clearly THQ had a reason for not doing the game and depending on that reason WWE may have agreed. I'd like to see a quote from someone at WWE explaining why they're so upset.

Expletive they are pissed because Sony has supported the WWE for 23 pay per views and 41 house shows and tours, and use to sell Sony products at its WWE store in times square.

It's pretty obvious. I wish they could have had a WWE game on the PS3 though.

 

[expletive]

Expletive they are pissed because Sony has supported the WWE for 23 pay per views and 41 house shows and tours, and use to sell Sony products at its WWE store in times square.

It's pretty obvious. I wish they could have had a WWE game on the PS3 though.

THQ isnt screwing Sony on purpose (i mean really, why the hell would they), if they felt they could put out a quality product in this timeframe and make money with this game, they would have.

THQ made a business decision this time around and the WWE has no right, that I can see, to tell THQ how to run their business. Having a business relationship with Sony is not a reason. WWE is running around like THQ is picking on their little brother or something. Like I said, if someone from the WWE could come out with a quote on why they think they should tell THQ how to run their business i'd be happy to reconsider my opinion.

 

[Farid]

Keep on topic, folks, please.

If you guys absolutely want to discuss the business relations between Sony and the WWE, or the nature of the contract THQ signed with WWE, just start a new thread.

 

[pc999]

What is WWE?

I wonder if devs are just leeting slip PS3 games just at launch avoiding higher costs due to incomplet tools, low market and good chances on others (namelly wii).

 

[rabidrabbit]

This is normal for a console launch, and for the one year after the launch, so what's the fuss??
Why is it that when it's about Sony and PS3, some people expect every game to be released in the first year, if it isn't, it's posted as "baaad news for Sony!".

 

[ManuVlad3.0]

Don't write off Sony

 

[mckmas8808]

Why is it that when it's about Sony and PS3, some people expect every game to be released in the first year, if it isn't, it's posted as "baaad news for Sony!".

Not even the first year even. We are talking about launch. People are forgetting that the PS3 is launching in November.

 

[Skrying]

Because of the extremely high cost of the console.

The cost alone of the PS3 makes it a unique situation. People are afraid its going to fall flat on its face, and even a minor title not coming out for it or it not getting support from a developer is big news. There's a lot riding on the PS3, and its cost makes it a very risky platform.

 

[mckmas8808]

Because of the extremely high cost of the console.

The cost alone of the PS3 makes it a unique situation. People are afraid its going to fall flat on its face, and even a minor title not coming out for it or it not getting support from a developer is big news. There's a lot riding on the PS3, and its cost makes it a very risky platform.

Hyperbole some? The cost between the 360 and PS3 are basically the same.

 

[Skrying]

Hyperbole some? The cost between the 360 and PS3 are basically the same.

You just made me choke with laughter.

At the very least there is a $100 difference and that nets you the top 360 vs the lowest PS3.

Get your head out of Sony's ass.

 

[mckmas8808]

You just made me choke with laughter.

At the very least there is a $100 difference and that nets you the top 360 vs the lowest PS3.

Get your head out of Sony's ass.

I was talking about the cost for devs.

 

[ROG27]

You just made me choke with laughter.

At the very least there is a $100 difference and that nets you the top 360 vs the lowest PS3.

Get your head out of Sony's ass.

$100 dollars doesn't even fill my car up with gas twice these days. I think the $100 price point difference is a moot point now. I can't believe in the days of $400 Ipods people are baffled by a highly functional state of the art game/video player that might actually be a media pc as well. You are basically getting a similarly functioning console (same features) + a bluray player for that extra $100 bucks. That's not too bad if you ask me. The press are really the ones that have been negatively spinning this. In my opinion, Sony probably couldn't offer the console at any lower price without serious financial reprecussions.

 

[Farid]

Guys, I said to keep on topic, not to resort to name calling and mudslinging.

 

[cthellis42]

Yeah, but... like... this is a console forum. What ELSE are people supposed to do?

 

[Skrying]

$100 dollars doesn't even fill my car up with gas twice these days. I think the $100 price point difference is a moot point now. I can't believe in the days of $400 Ipods people are baffled by a highly functional state of the art game/video player that might actually be a media pc as well. You are basically getting a similarly functioning console (same features) + a bluray player for that extra $100 bucks. That's not too bad if you ask me. The press are really the ones that have been negatively spinning this. In my opinion, Sony probably couldn't offer the console at any lower price without serious financial reprecussions.

I'm sorry your car costs to smuch to fill up, not my problem though. But your point hurts you. People's budgets are already streched thin due to such crazy pricing, the average wage is not going up with the price of inflation and the cost of gas. People do not have as much money to spend on entertainment devices.

I also dont care what pop culture buys into, iPods or whatever, they're certainly over priced.

You want proof that developers are afraid of the cost of the PS3? Because they're scaling back early launch and going with a wait and see philosophy. Now, I know for one you dont get a ton of games at launch, but when you're talking about scaling those back even further is when you should see the writing on the walls. That writing, at least to me, clearly says "To damn expensive." I believe this is also what some developers have come to see.

Also, I'm damn tired of seeing the Blu-ray drive as a justification for the PS3's price. Sony is the one that put it there, and if Blu ray does not win the HD format war then its useless. There's another aspect of the gambal that the PS3 is.

Price is a big issue. There would be no discussion at all that the PS3 would dominate like previous Sony consoles if it were not for the fact that the PS3 is no expensive.

 

[Almasy]

You just made me choke with laughter.

At the very least there is a $100 difference and that nets you the top 360 vs the lowest PS3.

Get your head out of Sony's ass.

And the lowest PS3 is equipped with more features than the top 360, so what´s really the point??