The end of 3rd party exclusives ?

[jvd]

I've been thinking alot lately and it seems like my thoughts are starting to become a reality .

This is my thinking . Game development is increasing in cost and is taking more and more time to make games . I believe this is going to cause the end of 3rd party exclusives . We can already see this with alot of big and small developers and I believe as this next gen comes and goes its going to happen more and more often .


What do you guys think ?

 

[pc999]

I doubt about the end, but it seems it will be a lot less this time.

 

[Farid]

Most games are already multiplatform titles, as far as Western publishers/producers are concerned. Japanese publishers will slowly but surely have to do the same.
Having an SKU for each platforms is a good things for brand recognition and shelf placement.

Nonetheless, temporary and real exclusives will always exist as long as we have different hardware manufacturere proposing machines using different hardware.

 

[London Geezer]

I think jvd is not toalking about exclusives in general, but specifically about 3rd party studios stopping making exclusives, or turn 1st or 2nd party otherwise.

I have to say i don't disagree, though we'll have to wait and see.

 

[hey69]

i believe multiplatform will become more and more. especialy if marketshare will slip in favour of microsoft. when you have a 40-40-20% market share i think multiplatform will be more standart then in an other way

but exclusivs will always exist until the 1 Console to rule them all appears (1 open closed box ala 3do with 99% marketshare) but that will never happen i believe

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It depends on middleware and user base. Writing for PS2 and XB had different challenges, and if you couldn't afford to convert to the other, as long as the market ws big enough doing the conversion wouldn't make sense.

Anything using UE3 for example will likely be cross-platform. But if one outsells the other 3:1, and it's tools (say XNA or SNsytems) aren't cross-platform, a dev using the tookit for the platform with the larger market won't readily be able to port it, and so it'll likely be exclusive.

Depends on sales I think. There'll be less 3rd party exclusives for sure, especially early on when neither platform has a substantial base (if I was a dev I'd be aiming for my fist next-gen release after maybe 18-24 months...I want some people to sell to!) but I think there'll still be some 3rd party exclusives.

BTW : Does Factor 5 count as 3rd or 2nd party? IIRC they're exclusive from they're own choice.

 

[Farid]

BTW : Does Factor 5 count as 3rd or 2nd party? IIRC they're exclusive from they're own choice.

2nd Party, SCEA is producing their title.

 

[jvd]

BTW : Does Factor 5 count as 3rd or 2nd party? IIRC they're exclusive from they're own choice.

2nd Party, SCEA is producing their title.

But they can make another title that nintendo produces or ms produces . So they aren't 2nd party .


2nd party is like rare . Its its own studio but owned by the consoles company or a controlling intrest in which there is no off chance that the company can make a tittle for another platform .

 

[Farid]

[2nd party is like rare . Its its own studio but owned by the consoles company or a controlling intrest in which there is no off chance that the company can make a tittle for another platform .

If the studio is owned by the Console manufacturer it's then a 1st Party studio.

2nd Party is a studio working on an IP that belongs to the console manufacturer. When AV worked on F-Zero GX, one could consider them as a 2nd party studio.

The thing to remember is that 2nd party is not a definitive state. For instance Bizzare Creations works as a 2nd Party with MS for PGR, but can also work on other project as a third party (i.e Treasure Planet (PS2) for Diney Interactive).

 

[jvd]

Hmm I believe nintendo owned rare yet they were considered a 2nd party

 

[Farid]

Hmm I believe nintendo owned rare yet they were considered a 2nd party

Nintendo owned half (~49%, IIRC) of Rareware, the other half was owned by the Stamper brothers.

 

[jvd]

ah okay

 

[London Geezer]

Hmm I believe nintendo owned rare yet they were considered a 2nd party

Nintendo owned half (~49%, IIRC) of Rareware, the other half was owned by the Stamper brothers.

Are they the Mario Bro's cousins?

 

[Sonic]

Yes. 2nd party devs are basically an outside developer that is contracted, sort of, to make a game from the main company's IP. Not a bad thing to do as most of the time a company like MS will front money for the project for a game like PGR.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

So...

• o 1st party : Software developer owned by console company, producing console exclusives
  
  o 2nd party : Outside company contracted to work on an exclusive title, perhaps with a long term contract, but with the possibility to develop titles for other platforms at a later date or concurrently
  
  o 3rd party : Unaffiliated developer who can write for any platform.

In which case is there no such thing as a 2nd party developer, only 2nd party titles? I've always been confused as to what '2nd party' was!

 

[-tkf-]

Good point.

But wouldn't it imply that the main cost would be in the content creation and not the actual engine/software development?

 

[Farid]

In which case is there no such thing as a 2nd party developer, only 2nd party titles?

You can consider things like this, yeah.
Althought there's a few developers that can be called 2nd Party since they work exclusively with only one manufacturer (Camelot Soft., Insomniac, Evolution Studios...).

 

[Nite_Hawk]

I think a lot of it depends on what advantages there are for the devs. If a developer can target a specific platform and it means that their title is significantly more attractive than another companies multiplatform title that is similar, they may be better off targeting the single platform (especially if it has majority marketshare).

On the other hand, if there is a very split marketshare and porting between platfroms is cheap (and doesn't incure a significant penalty), then going multiplatform may be a better option.

It's really all about costs and benefits. There are too many unknown variables right now to really know.

Nite_Hawk

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I think there are enough known variables to make some guesses. eg. We know developing multithread code that effectively uses the platforms' strengths is costly, and we know middleware solutions are cross platform. Therefore we can expect more cross-platform than current gen. I think that's a given. You're right about platform specific due to engine strengths though, something I hadn't considered. Anyone who can produce a footy sim better on a given platform than FIFA or PES, if they're exceptionally good at harnessing specific hardware, might well launch an exclusive. I would imagine that's only a small number of devs at best though.

 

[wco81]

Well if development costs increase, there's more interest in leveraging the property across as many platforms as possible.

But, if a console maker gives you cash or more favorable licensing terms or advertising help, you would think those kinds of economic inducements will still be too hard to turn down.