Sony forcing game devs to add content?

[yeah_so_no]

I checked but didn't see a post on this.

I was reading one of the Japanese gaming blogs today, and one of them had a rather interesting article, taken from the blog of a former game dev.

Basically, the game dev was talking about how his company had decided to make a game for the 360, because it was cheaper and easier. They entered into a one-year exclusivity deal with Microsoft, and hey, off they go. Only, since it was a 360 game, the game just didn't sell, so they decided to port it to PS3 in order to try and recoup the costs.

That was when Sony says, "We will not approve a game that is the exact same as the 360 version. Add in additional content." Basically, in order to be able to make a PS3 version, new content had to be added. Or else.

Source, if you can read Japanese [http://blog.livedoor.jp/htmk73/archives/201209.html]. (If y'all really want, I can translate the whole bit from the game dev later; it's late here)

This would explain why games like Eternal Sonata, Tales of Vesperia, and Star Ocean 4 got or are getting so much new content for the PS3 versions. I can see why Sony is doing this--they lose out with exclusivity deals, and this is a way to get people to want that PS3 version or to wait for a PS3 version instead of getting a 360, but it seems kind of heavy-handed.

 

[Katana314]

I might see some business sense in that. They're trying to push their bluray platform and its advantages, plus giving people a reason to choose the PS3 over the 360. Joker in Batman, etc.

Of course, porting is the developer choice, so if it's too totalitarian, they can always flip Sony the bird and move on.

 

[Trivun]

That's a good business strategy from Sony, but surely it's not fair on the developer or the consumer? Sony are basically using unfair business practises and completely undermining the entire industry to try and push their platform. As a 360 gamer I find it totally unfair and wrong that Sony should be allowed to do this. No wonder some companies like Valve refuse to produce games for the PS3, if that's the sort of thing Sony are up to. Anyway, isn't that illegal? Surely it breaks some law on industry competition...

 

[KarumaK]

I like it personally.

Sony's all like, "What's that? Bitchbox didn't help pay for dinner? Weren't to interested in us awhile back were you? But we're feeling magnanimous today so, add in a shitload more stuff and we might allow you the privileged of porting to our console."

Sony is forgiving, if not forgetful.

 

[Baggie]

So they're potentially turning games away for other consoles because the devs aren't prepared finacially or otherwise to churn out new content?
Good job Sony, way to limit your game base further.

 

[yeah_so_no]

As a 360 gamer I find it totally unfair and wrong that Sony should be allowed to do this.

And as a PS3 gamer, I'm thrilled to be getting something to make up for having to wait a year to get a game--y'all got it first, but we're getting more. If the only reason a PS3 version wasn't available from the start was a timed exclusivity deal, I don't see why Sony shouldn't insist on something to make up for that that's in their benefit, and to make people want to buy a game that's already been out for a year.

 

[Suda51]

it's a smart move because it makes games on the ps3 seem more interesting.


Though on the other hand it may put off devs from making ps3 games.

 

[minoes]

Surely it breaks some law on industry competition...

No, because they are not telling developers to withhold content from de 360 version of the game, they are telling developers to add more stuff to an already finished game.

 

[TPiddy]

It's also a really dick move, like what Soul Caliber did where one system got Yoda, another got Darth Vader.... I also hate the "Gamestop exclusive" unlock codes and bullshit like that.

I understand that it's a business but I just wish they would stop trying to tell me where I should spend my money.

I am an XBox gamer, but that is purely due to the fact that XBox gets the games I want to play, in addition to the cross-platform games I want to play. It got Oblivion first, it got Bioshock first, it got Mass Effect, Dead Rising, Halo, Fable and Gears of War, and that is why I made my choice. I'm not going to get one version over another just because there's different content.

I'm not going to pay $400 for a PS3 just to play Heavy Rain and Fat Princess.

 

[Monocle Man]

Not too different from Microsoft's technique, no? "We get DLC the PS3 doesn't get (or just much later)."

 

[Deathsong17]

They already have all the content ready to be ported, some extra content won't hurt them. Besides, they don't say it has to be substantial.
EDIT

Not too different from Microsoft's technique, no? "We get DLC the PS3 doesn't get (or just much later)."

Exactly! GTA4 anyone? No one's screaming over Microsoft nabbing exclusive DLC for a game that's already multiplatform, but asking for something extra for a game that was only really ported for the PS3? Criminal! Also on a side not, you really sound like massive fanboy, Trivun.

 

[HentMas]

That's a good business strategy from Sony, but surely it's not fair on the developer or the consumer? Sony are basically using unfair business practises and completely undermining the entire industry to try and push their platform. As a 360 gamer I find it totally unfair and wrong that Sony should be allowed to do this. No wonder some companies like Valve refuse to produce games for the PS3, if that's the sort of thing Sony are up to. Anyway, isn't that illegal? Surely it breaks some law on industry competition...

boo hoo, fanboy ha.

(JK man dont get angry)

i have both consoles, and well i do think that besides Hideo Kojima, every other PS3 game is well bellow the content one can get into a blu-ray disc... the problem with Kojima is that he filled it with gibberish and dirty lymerics

sooooo, adding stuff to PS3 games seems only acurate given the cost of the disc

thats of course in my oppinion, and i dont think its "unfair business", its just "hey... i have all this content, and i only have halve the disc filled... with what could i fill it???"

also, it cant be illegal to demand a worthy product to the console you are selling.

 

[theultimateend]

That's a good business strategy from Sony, but surely it's not fair on the developer or the consumer? Sony are basically using unfair business practises and completely undermining the entire industry to try and push their platform. As a 360 gamer I find it totally unfair and wrong that Sony should be allowed to do this. No wonder some companies like Valve refuse to produce games for the PS3, if that's the sort of thing Sony are up to. Anyway, isn't that illegal? Surely it breaks some law on industry competition...

So you are mad at them for acting exactly like the 360 portion of Microsoft?

I'm...I'm very confused.

It's also a really dick move, like what Soul Caliber did where one system got Yoda, another got Darth Vader.... I also hate the "Gamestop exclusive" unlock codes and bullshit like that.

I understand that it's a business but I just wish they would stop trying to tell me where I should spend my money.

I am an XBox gamer, but that is purely due to the fact that XBox gets the games I want to play, in addition to the cross-platform games I want to play. It got Oblivion first, it got Bioshock first, it got Mass Effect, Dead Rising, Halo, Fable and Gears of War, and that is why I made my choice. I'm not going to get one version over another just because there's different content.

I'm not going to pay $400 for a PS3 just to play Heavy Rain and Fat Princess.

Weird. You just named a clutch of games that are more interesting on the PC. Except for Dead Rising which I 'think' is 360 only.

I like the 360 but overall you made an odd move. "I'm not going to spend 400 (it is 300 btw) dollars for a PS3 for two games but I will spend 300 for one game.". Going off your list of course. I imagine you have more than those.

I like the 360 but I tend to find mine is getting dusty. If the game comes out for it, ps3, and the PC I end up either getting the PS3 or PC version. Either way I'm looking at some (albeit on the PS3 likely trivial) improvement. On the PC I can mod the games which is fantastic and I can play online with people for free as opposed to paying for xbox live on the 360.

 

[Nmil-ek]

What do I care as a consumer great my console of choice gets better fuller games, I dont care about sonys buisness model or how dirty their dealings are its buisness and smart buisness at that. And lets not act like this is a one way alley M$ and Nintendo have been doing this shit for years aswell, namely buying out the competition for one.

 

[MrGFunk]

I can understand where they coming from. If devs are trying to sell SONY a year old game with no added extras for them to sell to their gamers, are they being a bit cheeky - basically trying to extend the life of their game.

I'm glad SONY are sticking up for me, I don't want it to be a precedent that games devs can just palm off outdated products on us. how about making a game from scratch on the PS3 to utilize it's and their potential.

 

[VanityGirl]

That kind of sucks to be a dev. (Good for me, since I don't have to design things for games.)
I don't really see the need to add more stuff in for a develope whose labor of love is already completed. It's kind of a bullheaded move on Sony's part, it will take long to ship because of the devs having to rewrite the programming to match the PS3's disk reader AND to make new stuff for it. As a gamer, I would just want the game ASAP without having to wait for extra content that may not even be worth it.
An example of stupid extra content: Playing as Joker in the Batman game... It was kind of pointless. I didn't play as the joker because i hardly ever did challenge modes.

But anywho, if I was the dev, I'd just be a smartass and put the main character in a different color costume.

 

[Maverick8187]

I'm nether terribly surprised or appalled by this, really. It seems that this ultimately comes off as a "Yes, it's time consuming, but it will net more profits for the both of us" situation. However...

But anywho, if I was the dev, I'd just be a smartass and put the main character in a different color costume.

I can see this happening.

 

[DazedAndConfused]

Looks like Sony are finally catching up in the medals tables for the Dick-Move Olympics. Shame they smegged up and had a GENUINE REASON for it...

 

[bad rider]

I like it personally.

Sony's all like, "What's that? Bitchbox didn't help pay for dinner? Weren't to interested in us awhile back were you? But we're feeling magnanimous today so, add in a shitload more stuff and we might allow you the privileged of porting to our console."

Sony is forgiving, if not forgetful.

Actually it's more, hey *****. You didn't have the money to come play the game so now work harder or don't bother coming back to us. Yeah, really kind company that one. :/