The end of 3rd party exclusives ?

[ERP]

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.

Only if they out way your projections on the platform you won't ship on.

In the end it all comes down to the accountants.

 

[jvd]

Look at gow . They say it takes an artist 3 weeks to do a model of a character . Now epic is big and gow is a system seller on the x360. So I can see why its exclusive to the xbox 360 . However unreal 2k6 is not . Why is this ? Well I'm going to go out on a limb and say they simply felt that they can make the game on two platforms and reuse the art work which is quickly becoming more expensive than other parts of the game .

I believe this will hold true for all developers . If artwork continues to grow in cost and time the easiest ways to recoup that cost are higher prices or multiplatform .

 

[AlNom]

However unreal 2k7 is not . Why is this ? Well I'm going to go out on a limb and say they simply felt that they can make the game on three platforms and reuse the art work which is quickly becoming more expensive than other parts of the game .

fixed

 

[3roxor]

Sure the costs will grow but you are forgetting something important some devs still have which is pride in the product they sell. Sure developers like EA will continue to go for the money (despite what they say themselves..) but expect to see the best games (on both consoles) to be exclusives just like this gen.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Sure the costs will grow but you are forgetting something important some devs still have which is pride in the product they sell.

Alas, its the publishers and their overloard accountants who dictate such things, and developer pride is put by the wayside with early releases and bugged products because the publishers demand the sale.

No matter what a dev wants to do, if they can't afford it, it won't happen.

 

[MechanizedDeath]

This idea was pushed at the start of the current gen. The DC got ports, and the GC stole some notable titles. But as the generation progressed, games became more exclusive. I think there's a natural ebb and flow with that as the console market changes throughout the gen. If a system reaches 70% marketshare again, you can guarantee a lot of exclusives again. It just makes sense IMO. PEACE.

 

[Tap In]

I agree that as the market levels out this gen that we will see more cross platform titles and less exclusives.

It's evident already that MS is playing this gen differently (launching first, gaining Japanese support) and that may allow them to level the playing field with regard to games.

I think we will have some flagship 1st party exclusives and a lot of systems being sold on machine preference rather than game choice (beyond the 1st party).

 

[Almasy]

I don´t think it´s the end for third party exclusives. Heck, if it were, it´d be pretty sad, what would be the point of having competing consoles then?

 

[PARANOiA]

I don´t think it´s the end for third party exclusives. Heck, if it were, it´d be pretty sad, what would be the point of having competing consoles then?

I don't see me only needing to buy one console as a problem Probably is a problem for Sony or MS since they need to spend a lot more to convince me I "need" their machine. It also means first party will be what dictates - interesting, since Nin are the ones who traditionally have dominated here.

 

[jvd]

first and second party titles will be the key .

I think this is the gen of the change. The gen after this upcoming one will really show its affects .

 

[Fox5]

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?

Because Mario's last name is brothers?

 

[Nameless]

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!

My understanding

• o 1st party : The console manufacturer is the developer and publisher
  
  o 2nd party : The console manufacturer is the publisher and not the developer
  
  o 3rd party : The console manufacturer is neither the publisher not the developer.

 

[rabidrabbit]

This and last gen already there have been very few big name third party exclusives.

From the top of my head I really can't think of anything for PSOne and PS2 than Tekkens.

For xbox and GCN.... Can't thik of any big name exclusives. Help anyone ?

Games that haven't sold so well are more likely exclusives because they didn't think them economically sensible to port.
Or because of machine power limitations.

So yes, if the next gen is even closer to each other powervise than previous gens, I can see devs porting more of their games to different platforms.

 

[PARANOiA]

For xbox and GCN.... Can't thik of any big name exclusives. Help anyone ?.

Ninja Gaiden was 3rd party I think. So was Orta and Jet Set Radio. My three fave games on Xbox

 

[AlNom]

*cough* Doom 3* cough*

 

[Teasy]

For xbox and GCN.... Can't thik of any big name exclusives. Help anyone ?.

Rogue Leader and Rebel Strike for GameCube.

 

[ShootMyMonkey]

Because Mario's last name is brothers?

I think Mario's last name is Segali or Segalli or something like that.

 

[typoEDR]

Because Mario's last name is brothers?

I think Mario's last name is Segali or Segalli or something like that.

Spiralling off-topic for a second, wasn't Mario's last name just Mario? So it would be Mario Mario and Luigi Mario (yes, I don't think Miyamoto shattered his mind to generate a last name).

Even this generation marked the end of third-party exclusives, for the most part. Games thought to be exclusive where pushed into the multi-platform format (Splinter Cell, Wreckless, Super Monkey Ball, Resident Evil 4)... It's that darned PS2, I tell ya!

With movie-like budgets, it wouldn't make sense to have exclusives unless the PS3 or XBox360 achieved PS2-esque market share.

 

[Fox5]

This and last gen already there have been very few big name third party exclusives.

From the top of my head I really can't think of anything for PSOne and PS2 than Tekkens.

For xbox and GCN.... Can't thik of any big name exclusives. Help anyone ?

Games that haven't sold so well are more likely exclusives because they didn't think them economically sensible to port.
Or because of machine power limitations.

So yes, if the next gen is even closer to each other powervise than previous gens, I can see devs porting more of their games to different platforms.

Xbox- DOA series, other than that it relied largely on ports from PS2, GC, and PC.
GCN had Resident Evil, Rogue Squadron...

 

[Almasy]

I don't see me only needing to buy one console as a problem Probably is a problem for Sony or MS since they need to spend a lot more to convince me I "need" their machine. It also means first party will be what dictates - interesting, since Nin are the ones who traditionally have dominated here.

Ms´s and Sony´s first party time are already pretty damn good. Problem is, with such a tiny ammount of exclusives (if indeed third party exclusives were to be banished from the face of the planet), what convincing arguement can one have to get a system from the other?

I was happy the way this gen worked out, PS2 got almost all of the amazing single player games, xbox was the console for american teenagers and GCN was home for the best party games.

Sadly, MS seems focused on being a replica of PS3 this time around.