The problem is with every mention of Titanfall you hear someone say "I'm just waiting for the PS4 version". Doesn't matter if it's online, in a GameStop, a Best Buy, between 2 friends, coworkers, whatever. That's not a message MS wants floating around out there if you've put a giant bin of money into EA's bank account, if it's exclusive then just say it is and be done with it. All this coy non-answer just further cements people in the "I'll just wait it out" camp.
There was a PlayStation controller and presumably system visible on a developer's desk in one of Titanfall's videos. It's probably going to release on the PS4. I'm still going to buy it on the Xbox One, though. I want that game now, not later!
Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
There's no need for semblance of professionalism in the gaming advertisement space, especially with all the "extreme" marketing Xbox has had in years past
Just give EA a shit-ton of money, put out a fancy new trailer that ends with a stinger of a big green splash screen that says NEVER COMING TO PS4.
There's no need for semblance of professionalism in the gaming advertisement space, especially with all the "extreme" marketing Xbox has had in years past
Just give EA a shit-ton of money, put out a fancy new trailer that ends with a stinger of a big green splash screen that says NEVER COMING TO PS4.
That would be one of the funniest trolls ever.
I would laugh my ass off.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
What answer are you guys expecting them to say that's not already been said? /boggle.
Anyway, the Amazon description of the Day One box includes the following bullet point in the description:
* The product does not come with the converter.
What converter could they be talking about?
The converter, when used in conjunction with the Kinect and the power of the Cloud, scans and converts you into a digital signal so that you can experience gaming in true controller-free virtual reality.
Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
There's no need for semblance of professionalism in the gaming advertisement space, especially with all the "extreme" marketing Xbox has had in years past
Just give EA a shit-ton of money, put out a fancy new trailer that ends with a stinger of a big green splash screen that says NEVER COMING TO PS4.
They both already do this, with a big stinger of "ONLY ON XBOX 360" or "ONLY ON PS3".
There's no need for semblance of professionalism in the gaming advertisement space, especially with all the "extreme" marketing Xbox has had in years past
Just give EA a shit-ton of money, put out a fancy new trailer that ends with a stinger of a big green splash screen that says NEVER COMING TO PS4.
They both already do this, with a big stinger of "ONLY ON XBOX 360" or "ONLY ON PS3".
Your wording is better though.
The thing is, it needs to explicitly say not coming to the competition, because as we all know, the "only here" thing is meaningless
+1
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
What answer are you guys expecting them to say that's not already been said? /boggle.
Anyway, the Amazon description of the Day One box includes the following bullet point in the description:
* The product does not come with the converter.
What converter could they be talking about?
Headset.
Is there even a SKU for the headset converter yet? I guess they kept getting asked about it or something... hm.
No SKU yet; it is coming next year.
In the meantime, there will be a few headsets at launch to buy and a free (albeit inexpensive) one in each box.
The reason for the change makes sense, since the new headset port carried data way beyond just audio, can support accessories and can also do a high quality stereo audio feed from the console, SUPPOSEDLY meaning you can plug one of the new stereo headsets into it and listen to game audio through the controller with your TV muted and no cables running from your entertainment center to you.
Still, they should have had the legacy converter at launch for the people who have already paid hundreds for fancy xbox headphones that need a minijack on the controller.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
There's no need for semblance of professionalism in the gaming advertisement space, especially with all the "extreme" marketing Xbox has had in years past
Just give EA a shit-ton of money, put out a fancy new trailer that ends with a stinger of a big green splash screen that says NEVER COMING TO PS4.
They both already do this, with a big stinger of "ONLY ON XBOX 360" or "ONLY ON PS3".
Your wording is better though.
The thing is, it needs to explicitly say not coming to the competition, because as we all know, the "only here" thing is meaningless
Resident Evil 4 was originally to be an exclusive but it was said to not be shortly before it came out, iirc. Also Mass Effect 1:
Original release date - November 20, 2007
PS3 relase date - December 4, 2012
So, we're talking several years after the fact, which also makes this a poor example of the point you're trying to make.
“The Sony platform and the Xbox platform are both very important to us. If you look at the previous generation we did tactical deals with both Sony and Microsoft throughout the cycle. Titanfall is different, it’s an EA Partners game – everything else is platform agnostic.
“Sony has been executing exceptionally well on the next-gen transition. Their hardware’s hot, they’re clear and disciplined and consistent with their policies, they are showing some amazing things with indies, so overall I couldn’t be more pleased with how they’re executing. I hope both systems are successful – EA succeeds when more platforms are doing well.”
When asked if this means Sony itself may see some PS4-exclusives from EA, Gibeau replied, “It’s a long cycle, and certainly there’s potential with Sony exclusivity deals too.” He later stressed, “I can tell you now, our internal games, the games we make ourselves, will be multiplatform.”
I find this rather interesting; that EA is calling Respawn an "EA Partner" and not an EA internal studio, and that they do not have control over where and how Respawn chooses to publish their titles.
Maybe a little fuel in the "gonna remain exclusive" camp, since it seems to neuter EA's ability to control things.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
“The Sony platform and the Xbox platform are both very important to us. If you look at the previous generation we did tactical deals with both Sony and Microsoft throughout the cycle. Titanfall is different, it’s an EA Partners game – everything else is platform agnostic.
“Sony has been executing exceptionally well on the next-gen transition. Their hardware’s hot, they’re clear and disciplined and consistent with their policies, they are showing some amazing things with indies, so overall I couldn’t be more pleased with how they’re executing. I hope both systems are successful – EA succeeds when more platforms are doing well.”
When asked if this means Sony itself may see some PS4-exclusives from EA, Gibeau replied, “It’s a long cycle, and certainly there’s potential with Sony exclusivity deals too.” He later stressed, “I can tell you now, our internal games, the games we make ourselves, will be multiplatform.”
I find this rather interesting; that EA is calling Respawn an "EA Partner" and not an EA internal studio, and that they do not have control over where and how Respawn chooses to publish their titles.
Maybe a little fuel in the "gonna remain exclusive" camp, since it seems to neuter EA's ability to control things.
As I understand it Respawn owns the Titanfall IP, not EA. EA publishes their games but Respawn is an independant company.
Yeah, EA Partners leaves a lot of control in the developer's hands. For example, EA handled retail distribution of Valve games through the EA Partners program.
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
How does that even work though?
Does EA take a larger cut of per-unit sales in exchange for being able to use EA's advertising, distribution and product placement machinery?
Kind of like how Apple takes 30% of every sale on the App Store, but you are free to price things how you want and Apple doesn't keep you from porting your software to Android or elsewhere?
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Respawn has been pretty clear that Titanfall on the 360 will be a meaningfully different game than the One version, not a straight port. They have not, however, confirmed exactly what the differences will be.
I guess we'll see. I find the idea that it'll be significantly different kinda hard to believe though, as I don't think Respawn would let another company potentially ruin their brand new franchise. And I definitely think that'll be the version that will sell best (at least at first) and be the first impression most people get of that franchise.
in addition to graphical and resolution differences
The game also uses Microsoft's cloud computing for multiplayer servers, physics, and artificial intelligence. Offloading this non-player activity frees the local console for visual rendering tasks and better graphics, and the developers for game development (instead of backend maintenance). This arrangement also determines world events in the cloud instead of locally, so position and movement data is downloaded simultaneously by all player-clients.The studio's cloud server access is considered vital to the game's viability.
I don't get it. The 360 and PC versions use dedicated servers as well.
On a different subject, comparing Titanfall to Gears or Mass Effect is completely ridiculous. EA's the publisher, not Microsoft. If it's even remotely popular, a port is guaranteed. There's a reason why barely any third party games are exclusive and it's not because Microsoft/Sony don't want them to be, it's because it takes an insane amount of money to make up for all the potentially lost sales on the other platforms.
Which is why you see a lot of 3rd party exclusives at a console launch,and almost none as you get further into a generation.
If Microsoft cuts a 10-20 million dollar check to respawn, and makes the dedicated servers dirt cheap for them... that will offset what they hope to make off of PS4 owners when there are only a few million units in the wild.
Try doing that on a AAA title when there are 80 million consoles you are telling them not to sell to. Doesn't work as well.
Agreed, I'm just arguing against the idea that it will stay exclusive. I also think the idea that they'll skip porting the first game and make the sequel multiplatform is just as ridiculous. They're a small team, they're not going to be pumping out sequels that quickly. At absolute best there'll be a two year gap before the sequel comes out, so if the exclusivity is for one year then of course they're going to port the first one.
And who is to say the two years is completely unreasonable for franchise exclusivity? With all the good games on the PS4, I am honestly surprised at how much future playstation owners seem to keep saying to themselves "we are getting it soon anyways" - I see Microsoft having recognized the value of the title, and putting a gargantuan money hat on EA / Respawn to keep it shored off can pay off long term dividends even 5-7 years from now. Its stuff like that which can turn one console houses into multi console homes, and sway decision-making on which system to buy into first, as evidenced in this thread.
Same applies to your defensive stance on its exclusivity, doesn't it?
Online only games aren't my thing so honestly, I don't care about Titanfall. I only got involved in this argument because of the silly comparison to Mass Effect and Gears.
There's no need for semblance of professionalism in the gaming advertisement space, especially with all the "extreme" marketing Xbox has had in years past
Just give EA a shit-ton of money, put out a fancy new trailer that ends with a stinger of a big green splash screen that says NEVER COMING TO PS4.
They both already do this, with a big stinger of "ONLY ON XBOX 360" or "ONLY ON PS3".
Your wording is better though.
The thing is, it needs to explicitly say not coming to the competition, because as we all know, the "only here" thing is meaningless
Resident Evil 4 was originally to be an exclusive but it was said to not be shortly before it came out, iirc. Also Mass Effect 1:
Original release date - November 20, 2007
PS3 relase date - December 4, 2012
So, we're talking several years after the fact, which also makes this a poor example of the point you're trying to make.
EA Partner also tends to mean that EA does no promotion/marketing what so ever.
Which isn't a problem when one of the big players want's to show you off to everyone.
Does EA take a larger cut of per-unit sales in exchange for being able to use EA's advertising, distribution and product placement machinery?
Kind of like how Apple takes 30% of every sale on the App Store, but you are free to price things how you want and Apple doesn't keep you from porting your software to Android or elsewhere?
I think so. The developer gets EA marketing muscle and let's them handle the distribution and manufacturing and other boring but necessary stuff and EA get's a cut of the sales.
Does EA take a larger cut of per-unit sales in exchange for being able to use EA's advertising, distribution and product placement machinery?
Kind of like how Apple takes 30% of every sale on the App Store, but you are free to price things how you want and Apple doesn't keep you from porting your software to Android or elsewhere?
I have a feeling there is not a standardized contract. The list of deals that are included under it are pretty varied -- anywhere from Funcom copublishing The Secret World with EA to Crytek with all the Crysis games or id with Rage (who is now obviously owned by Bethesda). However, it sounds like the publishing deals are mostly related to leveraging EA's global distribution capabilities.
This article from back in 2010 has a lot of interesting insight into the EA Partners program, though. Since 2010 EA is very different from 2013 EA in terms of competitive positioning it's all pretty out of date, but I think it gives a good idea on the sort of deals that they've been able to pursue through the program.
Dehumanized on
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
EA Partner also tends to mean that EA does no promotion/marketing what so ever.
Which isn't a problem when one of the big players want's to show you off to everyone.
The EA Games Label is also home to the EA Partners group which works with external development studios to provide these partners with a variety of services including development support, publishing, marketing and distribution. Current EA Partner studios include Crytek, Respawn Entertainment and Insomniac Games.
honestly, I am more confused at this point. I guess this means Respawn is its own standalone company, but gets some help from EA in the form of dev support, publishing and selling the title... and EA gets a slice of the profits but is otherwise hands off?
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Yes, that is definitely correct. Any developer with an EA Partners deal is independent from EA beyond whatever co-publishing deal that they have negotiated. That obviously could represent publisher input on products developed for EA Partners, but it sounds like generally the deals have been hands off in that regard.
edit: And of course, I'd expect Respawn was VERY particular about conceding as little control as possible to EA, given the reason the studio formed in the first place.
Respawn probably got a sweet ass deal considering it was 'those dudes who made Modern Warfare and MW2'. Especially if you believe all the 'EA was trying to woo these guys away from Activision' talk that went around at the time.
XBL: That Stone Dude
0
David_TA fashion yes-man is no good to me.Copenhagen, DenmarkRegistered Userregular
Wasn't Rock Band an EA Partners title, where EA pretty much just handled distribution?
Wasn't Rock Band an EA Partners title, where EA pretty much just handled distribution?
Yeah. MTV Games was also a publisher in the more traditional sense (Harmonix absolutely needed their connections to get licensing deals from artists and record labels). EA dealt with the logistics of shipping all those fucking crates of plastic instruments around. Once MTV Games and EA both soured on the whole thing, Harmonix bought themselves back out from MTV Games (who did own them for a while), ended their partnership with EA Partners and then struck a publishing deal with Mad Catz that had the peripheral manufacturer both distributing Rock Band 3 and all of the plastic instruments.
There's no need for semblance of professionalism in the gaming advertisement space, especially with all the "extreme" marketing Xbox has had in years past
Just give EA a shit-ton of money, put out a fancy new trailer that ends with a stinger of a big green splash screen that says NEVER COMING TO PS4.
They both already do this, with a big stinger of "ONLY ON XBOX 360" or "ONLY ON PS3".
Your wording is better though.
The thing is, it needs to explicitly say not coming to the competition, because as we all know, the "only here" thing is meaningless
Resident Evil 4 was originally to be an exclusive but it was said to not be shortly before it came out, iirc. Also Mass Effect 1:
Original release date - November 20, 2007
PS3 relase date - December 4, 2012
So, we're talking several years after the fact, which also makes this a poor example of the point you're trying to make.
It is not a poor example - it is in fact a perfect example! Both of those games say "Only on" this platform, which is poor wording no matter how you say it, especially since Mass Effect 1 was on PC a couple months later and eventually came to the competitor's console. That it came five years later is irrelevant - those consoles are still in competition.
They need to work something out in a contract that says "Never on PS4 and we fucking mean it, breach this contract and pay out your assholes."
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
They need to work something out in a contract that says "Never on PS4 and we fucking mean it, breach this contract and pay out your assholes."
But why? The value of exclusivity wanes as the game gets older or replaced by sequels.
Mass Effect 1 did not move any PS3 sales when it ultimately came out. Every year after its launch, Titanfall will likely be less valuable as a mover of consoles, unless they somehow decide to stay exclusive to Microsoft throughout the console generation with future titles.
Some kind of sliding scale exclusivity makes more sense, honestly... "Every year you keep your game exclusive to us will reduce your buy-out from the contract" kind of a thing.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
There's no need for semblance of professionalism in the gaming advertisement space, especially with all the "extreme" marketing Xbox has had in years past
Just give EA a shit-ton of money, put out a fancy new trailer that ends with a stinger of a big green splash screen that says NEVER COMING TO PS4.
They both already do this, with a big stinger of "ONLY ON XBOX 360" or "ONLY ON PS3".
Your wording is better though.
The thing is, it needs to explicitly say not coming to the competition, because as we all know, the "only here" thing is meaningless
Resident Evil 4 was originally to be an exclusive but it was said to not be shortly before it came out, iirc. Also Mass Effect 1:
Original release date - November 20, 2007
PS3 relase date - December 4, 2012
So, we're talking several years after the fact, which also makes this a poor example of the point you're trying to make.
It is not a poor example - it is in fact a perfect example! Both of those games say "Only on" this platform, which is poor wording no matter how you say it, especially since Mass Effect 1 was on PC a couple months later and eventually came to the competitor's console. That it came five years later is irrelevant - those consoles are still in competition.
They need to work something out in a contract that says "Never on PS4 and we fucking mean it, breach this contract and pay out your assholes."
short of owning the studio and/or IP there's no way that you can 100% guarantee that the game wont be posted later. no developer would sign a contract that put such a limit on something they own. a timed exclusive is generally the best you can get, and if you can capitalize on that then its worth it.
do you really think MS is beat up over the fact that Mass Effect 1 eventually made it to the PS3? hell no! they made their money off that and were able to position it as a system seller. they got exactly what they wanted from the game. they may have been less pleased with ME2 and 3 getting released on the PS3 though but that's a separate issue.
as for the PC, it doesn't count. none of the console manufacturers see PC gaming as being in direct competition with their products*. yes there's some cross over, but generally PC gamers and console gamers are different crowds.
*this may change once Steamboxes start dropping, but until they start to reach the market its still unsure how that's going to go.
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
I am feeling much more confident in the xbox one after watching this video.
Sure, there are a couple framerate dips (for both consoles mind you), and I know that the XBO is running at 720p instead of 900p (with both using hardware scalers to reach 1080p) but I watched this at 1080p a few feet away from my 27" monitor and aside from brightness I do not see a difference at all.
Unoptimized launch titles LOL and all, but at least out of the gate, it really should (and always has) come down to what games you want to play, and who has the better exclusives for your tastes.
Dead Rising 3, Crimson Dragon and Killer Instinct are gonna be fun.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Dead Rising 3, Crimson Dragon and Killer Instinct are gonna be fun.
Wait, seriously? I would LOVE to be sold on Dead Rising 3. I was a HUGE fan of the first one, and enjoyed 2 a lot. But so far they have done zero to sell me, as a fan of the series, on 3. It looks like they sucked all the personality, color, quirkiness, and fun out of it and made a generic Zombie brawler. Has there been anything in the past couple months released about the game that I've missed or something? Because with the exception of a tacked on weapon scene at the end of the trailer, nothing really screamed Dead Rising to me about that game.
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
Dead Rising 3, Crimson Dragon and Killer Instinct are gonna be fun.
Wait, seriously? I would LOVE to be sold on Dead Rising 3. I was a HUGE fan of the first one, and enjoyed 2 a lot. But so far they have done zero to sell me, as a fan of the series, on 3. It looks like they sucked all the personality, color, quirkiness, and fun out of it and made a generic Zombie brawler. Has there been anything in the past couple months released about the game that I've missed or something? Because with the exception of a tacked on weapon scene at the end of the trailer, nothing really screamed Dead Rising to me about that game.
If you haven't looked since E3, I strongly suggest you look again. Silly outfits, ridiculous weapons you patch together from the stuff you pick up, maniacs, and a lot of new kinds of mayhem injected from vehicle related stuff.
They followed the path of advertising it like the walking dead at launch, and introducing more and more silly in announcements leading up to launch.
It's totally a Dead Rising title.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
Here, for a taste of some of the silly:
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
There's also a lady that's more adept than the male lead and who will probably die too. I forgot the character's name but it's in another of the longer vids from the "Welcome to the After Party" campaign.
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
Oh, and @Aoi - stick through this one... its worth it.
Okay, yeah. That's much more like what I was looking for in a Dead Rising The setting still feels a bit drained of life and monotone, but eh, it's just a small trailer. The mood definitely seems to be there though. This could certainly push me toward getting an XB1 sooner than later if the launch stuff all goes well.
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
Okay, yeah. That's much more like what I was looking for in a Dead Rising The setting still feels a bit drained of life and monotone, but eh, it's just a small trailer. The mood definitely seems to be there though. This could certainly push me toward getting an XB1 sooner than later if the launch stuff all goes well.
I think it is more matching the lighting / feel of a town like this, as opposed to a mall or a casino.
Because it is a much bigger playground, I am hoping there is a mall, casino or somewhere similarly garish and bright in this town that you can romp through, just for contrast.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Okay, yeah. That's much more like what I was looking for in a Dead Rising The setting still feels a bit drained of life and monotone, but eh, it's just a small trailer. The mood definitely seems to be there though. This could certainly push me toward getting an XB1 sooner than later if the launch stuff all goes well.
I think it is more matching the lighting / feel of a town like this, as opposed to a mall or a casino.
Because it is a much bigger playground, I am hoping there is a mall, casino or somewhere similarly garish and bright in this town that you can romp through, just for contrast.
I'm probably the only one who noticed, but running while shooting still looks like shit.
Okay, yeah. That's much more like what I was looking for in a Dead Rising The setting still feels a bit drained of life and monotone, but eh, it's just a small trailer. The mood definitely seems to be there though. This could certainly push me toward getting an XB1 sooner than later if the launch stuff all goes well.
I think it is more matching the lighting / feel of a town like this, as opposed to a mall or a casino.
Because it is a much bigger playground, I am hoping there is a mall, casino or somewhere similarly garish and bright in this town that you can romp through, just for contrast.
I'm probably the only one who noticed, but running while shooting still looks like shit.
Well tbf, if you're playing Dead Rising and not using melee weapons all the time... you may be doing it wrong. :P
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
Posts
There's no need for semblance of professionalism in the gaming advertisement space, especially with all the "extreme" marketing Xbox has had in years past
Just give EA a shit-ton of money, put out a fancy new trailer that ends with a stinger of a big green splash screen that says NEVER COMING TO PS4.
Anyway, the Amazon description of the Day One box includes the following bullet point in the description:
What converter could they be talking about?
That would be one of the funniest trolls ever.
I would laugh my ass off.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
The converter, when used in conjunction with the Kinect and the power of the Cloud, scans and converts you into a digital signal so that you can experience gaming in true controller-free virtual reality.
Headset.
They both already do this, with a big stinger of "ONLY ON XBOX 360" or "ONLY ON PS3".
Your wording is better though.
Is there even a SKU for the headset converter yet? I guess they kept getting asked about it or something... hm.
The thing is, it needs to explicitly say not coming to the competition, because as we all know, the "only here" thing is meaningless
No SKU yet; it is coming next year.
In the meantime, there will be a few headsets at launch to buy and a free (albeit inexpensive) one in each box.
The reason for the change makes sense, since the new headset port carried data way beyond just audio, can support accessories and can also do a high quality stereo audio feed from the console, SUPPOSEDLY meaning you can plug one of the new stereo headsets into it and listen to game audio through the controller with your TV muted and no cables running from your entertainment center to you.
Still, they should have had the legacy converter at launch for the people who have already paid hundreds for fancy xbox headphones that need a minijack on the controller.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Resident Evil 4 was originally to be an exclusive but it was said to not be shortly before it came out, iirc. Also Mass Effect 1:
Original release date - November 20, 2007
PS3 relase date - December 4, 2012
So, we're talking several years after the fact, which also makes this a poor example of the point you're trying to make.
edit: Old IGN article about RE4. I mostly remember the outrage though.
I find this rather interesting; that EA is calling Respawn an "EA Partner" and not an EA internal studio, and that they do not have control over where and how Respawn chooses to publish their titles.
Maybe a little fuel in the "gonna remain exclusive" camp, since it seems to neuter EA's ability to control things.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Does EA take a larger cut of per-unit sales in exchange for being able to use EA's advertising, distribution and product placement machinery?
Kind of like how Apple takes 30% of every sale on the App Store, but you are free to price things how you want and Apple doesn't keep you from porting your software to Android or elsewhere?
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Same applies to your defensive stance on its exclusivity, doesn't it?
Online only games aren't my thing so honestly, I don't care about Titanfall. I only got involved in this argument because of the silly comparison to Mass Effect and Gears.
Yeah, Mass Effect 1 isn't a great example. A better one would be Bioshock.
Which isn't a problem when one of the big players want's to show you off to everyone.
I have a feeling there is not a standardized contract. The list of deals that are included under it are pretty varied -- anywhere from Funcom copublishing The Secret World with EA to Crytek with all the Crysis games or id with Rage (who is now obviously owned by Bethesda). However, it sounds like the publishing deals are mostly related to leveraging EA's global distribution capabilities.
This article from back in 2010 has a lot of interesting insight into the EA Partners program, though. Since 2010 EA is very different from 2013 EA in terms of competitive positioning it's all pretty out of date, but I think it gives a good idea on the sort of deals that they've been able to pursue through the program.
http://www.ea.com/labels
honestly, I am more confused at this point. I guess this means Respawn is its own standalone company, but gets some help from EA in the form of dev support, publishing and selling the title... and EA gets a slice of the profits but is otherwise hands off?
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
edit: And of course, I'd expect Respawn was VERY particular about conceding as little control as possible to EA, given the reason the studio formed in the first place.
Yeah. MTV Games was also a publisher in the more traditional sense (Harmonix absolutely needed their connections to get licensing deals from artists and record labels). EA dealt with the logistics of shipping all those fucking crates of plastic instruments around. Once MTV Games and EA both soured on the whole thing, Harmonix bought themselves back out from MTV Games (who did own them for a while), ended their partnership with EA Partners and then struck a publishing deal with Mad Catz that had the peripheral manufacturer both distributing Rock Band 3 and all of the plastic instruments.
Yes, I know the circumstances behind both
It is not a poor example - it is in fact a perfect example! Both of those games say "Only on" this platform, which is poor wording no matter how you say it, especially since Mass Effect 1 was on PC a couple months later and eventually came to the competitor's console. That it came five years later is irrelevant - those consoles are still in competition.
They need to work something out in a contract that says "Never on PS4 and we fucking mean it, breach this contract and pay out your assholes."
But why? The value of exclusivity wanes as the game gets older or replaced by sequels.
Mass Effect 1 did not move any PS3 sales when it ultimately came out. Every year after its launch, Titanfall will likely be less valuable as a mover of consoles, unless they somehow decide to stay exclusive to Microsoft throughout the console generation with future titles.
Some kind of sliding scale exclusivity makes more sense, honestly... "Every year you keep your game exclusive to us will reduce your buy-out from the contract" kind of a thing.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
short of owning the studio and/or IP there's no way that you can 100% guarantee that the game wont be posted later. no developer would sign a contract that put such a limit on something they own. a timed exclusive is generally the best you can get, and if you can capitalize on that then its worth it.
do you really think MS is beat up over the fact that Mass Effect 1 eventually made it to the PS3? hell no! they made their money off that and were able to position it as a system seller. they got exactly what they wanted from the game. they may have been less pleased with ME2 and 3 getting released on the PS3 though but that's a separate issue.
as for the PC, it doesn't count. none of the console manufacturers see PC gaming as being in direct competition with their products*. yes there's some cross over, but generally PC gamers and console gamers are different crowds.
*this may change once Steamboxes start dropping, but until they start to reach the market its still unsure how that's going to go.
I am feeling much more confident in the xbox one after watching this video.
Sure, there are a couple framerate dips (for both consoles mind you), and I know that the XBO is running at 720p instead of 900p (with both using hardware scalers to reach 1080p) but I watched this at 1080p a few feet away from my 27" monitor and aside from brightness I do not see a difference at all.
Unoptimized launch titles LOL and all, but at least out of the gate, it really should (and always has) come down to what games you want to play, and who has the better exclusives for your tastes.
Dead Rising 3, Crimson Dragon and Killer Instinct are gonna be fun.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Wait, seriously? I would LOVE to be sold on Dead Rising 3. I was a HUGE fan of the first one, and enjoyed 2 a lot. But so far they have done zero to sell me, as a fan of the series, on 3. It looks like they sucked all the personality, color, quirkiness, and fun out of it and made a generic Zombie brawler. Has there been anything in the past couple months released about the game that I've missed or something? Because with the exception of a tacked on weapon scene at the end of the trailer, nothing really screamed Dead Rising to me about that game.
They followed the path of advertising it like the walking dead at launch, and introducing more and more silly in announcements leading up to launch.
It's totally a Dead Rising title.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Haha. I hadn't seen that one before. That is excellent.
Okay, yeah. That's much more like what I was looking for in a Dead Rising
I think it is more matching the lighting / feel of a town like this, as opposed to a mall or a casino.
Because it is a much bigger playground, I am hoping there is a mall, casino or somewhere similarly garish and bright in this town that you can romp through, just for contrast.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I'm probably the only one who noticed, but running while shooting still looks like shit.
Well tbf, if you're playing Dead Rising and not using melee weapons all the time... you may be doing it wrong. :P