Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Two 360 Titles Lose Their Exclusivity

Posted by Zonk on Wed Apr 25, 2007 12:51 PM
from the now-we-go-back-the-other-way dept.
XBox (Games) PlayStation (Games)
While for the most part we've been hearing about formerly PS3-exclusive games heading to Microsoft's console, as the PS3 begins to get some momentum up in the marketplace we'll start to see the opposite happening. The first converts are the titles Kane & Lynch (a stealth shooter), and Crossfire (a co-op military shooter). Both are now slated to launch on the PlayStation 3, as well as the Xbox 360. Opposable Thumbs reports: "'[SCi Entertainment's] Board believes that a release of these products simultaneously on all three platforms (PS3, Xbox 360 and PC) including the two next generation platforms will benefit the long term revenue potential for these two strong franchises rather than releasing different versions at different times.' It's hard to say that this move is all that surprising. We've said time and time again the high development costs of current generation software are going to lead to an increase in the number of cross-platform software, as extending the possible player-base for a title is crucial for profit. From the looks of these two games, this is a solid win for the PS3: two more quality games to add to the growing list of the PS3's star software."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Two 360 Titles Lose Their Exclusivity 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Personally it doesn't seem like these games carry the same weight as the PS3 exclusives that made it to the 360, but still good for Sony taking something back.

    • Re:What can you say (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Kelbear (870538) on Wednesday April 25 2007, @01:01PM (#18873119)
      I visit game news sites daily, and have never even heard of these two games.

      • Re:What can you say (Score:5, Insightful)

        by suv4x4 (956391) on Wednesday April 25 2007, @02:43PM (#18874681)
        I visit game news sites daily, and have never even heard of these two games.

        Now you know the reason this article exists. On the surface it's an article about XBOX360 games losing exclusivity. However, on second read:

        "IO Interactive's Kane & Lynch is a strange and mysterious action game that focuses on the relationship between two men on opposite sides of a deal gone wrong. The developer is best known for the Hitman series, so stealth and careful gunplay are likely to be the order of the day. As for Crossfire, information is somewhat scarce, but the Pivotal Games-developed title is a two-player co-op FPS that revolves around two government agents on a mission behind enemy lines." ... "From the looks of these two games, this is a solid win for the PS3: two more quality games to add to the growing list of the PS3's star software."

        What actually happened is you were introduced to two games you never heard of, and they were placed as "two quality games" to add to the "growing list of PS3's star software".

        Ninja advertisement at its best.

        • Ninja advertisement at its best.


          If it really was ninja advertising, none of us would realize it - kind of like the GP. Plus it would have been delivered on the shaft of an arrow, or tactfully placed with a shuriken, killing the would-be submitter instantly. Ninja are sneaky like that.
  • I still can't believe that one's exclusive.
  • K&L is not a 'stealth' shooter. It is a shooter alright, but with more gameplay in common with IO Interactive's Freedom Fighters than the Hitman series.
  • Oh boy, more military shooters! There certainly aren't enough of those out on the market!

  • Wow, what a sea change (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Control Group (105494) * on Wednesday April 25 2007, @01:07PM (#18873197) Homepage
    Let's see, the PS3 loses Assassin's Creed and Grand Theft Auto IV to multiplatform releases.

    The 360 loses two games I've already forgotten the names of to multiplatform releases.

    Yep, the tide is definitely turning.
    • yeah I'm not impressed with a man biting a dog, but it is "news"

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by mgabrys_sf (951552)
      GTA4 isn't exclusive like GTA3, Vice City or San Andreas?!!! OMG! Oh wait - those came out for Xbox and computers. I forgot - what's the fucking point here?

    • Re:Wow, what a sea change (Score:5, Interesting)

      by badasscat (563442) <basscadet75@yah o o . c om> on Wednesday April 25 2007, @02:43PM (#18874683) Homepage
      Let's see, the PS3 loses Assassin's Creed and Grand Theft Auto IV to multiplatform releases.

      GTA4 was never a PS3 exclusive. I'm not sure why the assumption would even be made, as GTA1, GTA2, GTA3, GTA:VC and GTA:SA were never exclusives either.

      I think people need to make a distinction between "exclusive" and "coming out on one platform six months before being ported to another". They are not the same thing, and never have been. This notion of a "timed exclusive" is one of those either meaningless or wrongly-applied industry buzzwords that really needs to go. There is no such thing as a "timed exclusive" - a game is either exclusive or it isn't.

      Assassin's Creed I don't know about, but GTA4 was always multi-platform. The only difference in GTA4's case is the simultaneous release. Losing six months of "exclusivity" isn't losing exclusivity, it's losing six months. Again, not the same.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by (A)*(B)!0_- (888552)

        "I think people need to make a distinction between "exclusive" and "coming out on one platform six months before being ported to another". They are not the same thing, and never have been. This notion of a "timed exclusive" is one of those either meaningless or wrongly-applied industry buzzwords that really needs to go. There is no such thing as a "timed exclusive" - a game is either exclusive or it isn't."

        There is a difference between "exclusive" and "timed exclusive" (for lack of a better term) but I th

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Babbster (107076)
        Here's the problem with your thesis that timed exclusives don't mean anything: If a company releases an exceedingly popular game for one console and refuses to (or contractually cannot) confirm development and eventual release for another console then the "timed exclusive" status can mean quite a lot. There were Xbox owners who bought PS2s in order to play GTA3 and Vice City because they couldn't be certain that an Xbox version was ever going to come (Rockstar and Sony repeatedly denied it would happen, r
        • I'm going to agree - a month advantage isn't going to do much, but I think there was almost a year between the releases of the Xbox and PS2 versions of GTA3 and later, Vice City.
          • It was longer than that. GTA3 and Vice City arrived on the Xbox simultaneously (and were packaged together), almost exactly - likely due to contractual obligation to Sony - a year after the latter made its PS2 debut. I owned both on PS2 (and later bought the Xbox versions) because I had no idea that they would come out for Xbox. With San Andreas, on the other hand, I went ahead and waited the 7-8 months for the Xbox release because, thanks to the previous release, I was certain the port was being made.
  • I am not familiar with these games. The impact is lessened considerably.
  • It's not a franchise until two games in the series are released (i.e. there's at least one sequel).

    It's not strong until it sells well.

    Both of these titles are new properties, unreleased and without sequels. Therefore they are neither franchises nor strong. Calling them so is merely wishful marketing.

    Hans

  • How about the Wii? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by HalAtWork (926717) on Wednesday April 25 2007, @01:11PM (#18873257)
    The Wii is the system creaming the competition, how about offering this on the Wii? The article states: "...a release of these products simultaneously on all three platforms (PS3, Xbox 360 and PC) including the two next generation platforms..." -- That's a pretty curious omission of the Wii... It's definitely possible to scale down the graphics and offer the same exact game on the Wii, a system even more powerful than the original XBox, which could handle Half Life 2.

    • Re:How about the Wii? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Dan Ost (415913) on Wednesday April 25 2007, @01:15PM (#18873313)
      It's possible that the Wii's lack of processing power makes it unsuitable for these games.

      As developers learn to take advantage of the 360 and the PS3(!), expect this to happen more and more often.

      • Re:How about the Wii? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by revlayle (964221) on Wednesday April 25 2007, @01:22PM (#18873415) Homepage
        As much as i like the Wii.... i would have to completely agree with the above statement. Point: I want to get a 360 for games like Mass Effect or Bioshock. I just don't ever expect them to be ported to Wii... EVER. Wii is fun for other games, however.
        • By the same token, there are going to be some awesome games for the Wii that could never work on the 360 or PS3 by nature of design. Here's to hoping for an epic Jedi game and/or Castlevania or Indiana Jones.

          • By the same token, there are going to be some awesome games for the Wii that could never work on the 360 or PS3 by nature of design.

            Unfortunately, that won't prevent developers from trying. Rayman Raving Rabbits is now multiplatform, and for the life of me I can't imagine how that would work with a "regular controler".

              • Almost everyone agrees that the controller for the Wii is a leap forward in terms of interacting with a game. Why has a similar product from MSFT or Sony not been released? Figure it would have been done by now. Are there patent issues? ~Matthew

                Actually they both have respective patents for thier own Wiimote solution, the issue is now 'Default configuration' vs 'Mee-Too add on'. Developers can make games for the limited owners of that periferial (like making games for the Eye Toy) or they can make it co

      • It's possible that the Wii's lack of processing power makes it unsuitable for these games.

        As developers learn to take advantage of the 360 and the PS3(!), expect this to happen more and more often.

        Lack of processing power, didn't stop high energy games like Need for Speed Underground to be ported (and successfully) to any platform under the Sun, including Nintendo DS and PSP.

        Wii has enough power to transfer the feel and gameplay of any high-end PS3 game. All it takes is cutting few effects and reducing the
        • "High energy" is not equivalent to requiring lots of CPU power. Just look at the Burnout series on the PS2 (or Xbox). However, having intelligent AI systems, good physics processing and some goodies like accurate dynamic 3D sound are out of reach on the Wii. Lots of games will be lots of fun without those things, but designers who want to go for gusto in those areas will not be making their games on the Wii.
    • Just because a system has more processing power for the GPU and CPU does not mean that the internals are similar or capable of outputting the same graphics. It should be noted that the XBOX has more advanced pixel shaders and lighting capabilities than the Wii, so just because the Wii's CPU and GPU have higher clock speeds doesn't mean they can magically replicate what the XBOX could. Think of replacing your old P4 1.7 Ghz processor with a new Intel Core 2 Duo 2.66 Ghz but still keeping your old nvidia MX
    • The Wii is "on par" with the Xbox. With a slight bit more memory no HD and slightly more horse power on paper. Not much better. Although it's hard to compare from nothing more then the specs. I'd think it's more capable but not by that much.

    • It's definitely possible to scale down the graphics and offer the same exact game on the Wii...
      And why exactly would anyone want to buy the same game with much worse graphics?

  • Wait, people give a shit about this? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by RichPowers (998637) on Wednesday April 25 2007, @01:18PM (#18873343)
    Let's say I own a 360. A videogame I really want will also be released for the PS3 and PC. So what? I still can purchase a 360 copy.

    People who bought a console for just one game (ya, such people exist) might be upset if a title's exclusivity is lost. But why should anyone else care? These "OMG UR CONSOLE DOESNT HAVE EXCLUSIVES!1" pissing contests represent videogame geekery at its worst.

    Would this even be a story if the headline read: "Videogame publishers increasing profits"? Because that's exactly what they're doing by releasing a game on multiple platforms.

    And as far as I know, Kane & Lynch was never totally exclusive; a PC launch was planned from the beginning.
    • Right on point. Why is this news? I hadn't heard of either game and my choice of purchasing a console definitely wouldn't hinge on one game. I guess the PS3 is just hard-up for any compliments at this point.
    • This would be news if they were A-list games, because Sony has lost two A-list exclusives in recent days, and it would indicate that influential publishers are deciding not to be exclusive and not just that influential developers are deciding not to be Sony-exclusive. They are B-list games at best, and so no one actually cares, and it doesn't mean anything.
    • Fanboys use exclusives to demonstrate their superiority over people who were not "smart" enough to buy the same console as themselves. A bit of a "haha, I have x and you don't." Rather childish really...
    • Obviously it doesn't matter at all if you already own a console that the game was originally targetted for and still is, except of course for the fanbois and their pissing contests. It does matter if you own a console that the game wasn't targetted for but is now.

      The important part, though, is for people who don't own a console but want one and are deciding which to get. That's the whole reason why exclusives are important, as it gives a reason to buy that console instead of another. At least theoretical
      • There was a big spread on Kane & Lynch in Game Informer several months ago. I could've sworn it listed PS3 as one of the target platforms, but I can't seem to locate the issue now. Either way, it's not a big title. The only time exclusivity matters is if the game in question is a potential system seller. Gears of War moved some systems. So did Blue Dragon (in Japan). God of War II definitely sold some PS2s, and definitely kept some PS2s around (quite a few people traded in their PS2 after beating

  • Good for everyone (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Perseid (660451) on Wednesday April 25 2007, @01:26PM (#18873465)
    Exclusivity sucks. The more even the 3 systems are in sales the more even the game releases get. If we can all just buy one system and get all the games we want, even if one version is slightly better, this is good.

    I expect to see more of this, too. It really has little to do with the success or failure of any one system. It has more to do with the insane development costs games are amassing. If you're spending $20mil on a game is it really that bad to spend another couple mil to port it?
  • SCi Entertainment's Board believes that a release of these shitty products merely on the 360 would deprive PS3 and PC owners of the absolute crapfest that is to come. So, we're releasing them on all platforms with the hope against hopes that we'll be able to make our money back and won't be forced to file Chapter 11.

  • Bigger News - Beautiful Katamari 360 (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Alzheimers (467217) on Wednesday April 25 2007, @01:39PM (#18873679)
    From a recent NAMBCO/BANDAI press release:

    "Leading video games publisher and developer NAMCO BANDAI Games America Inc. announced that The King of All Cosmos, everyone's favorite pint-sized Prince, and the whole wacky and wild Katamari crew will be making their hilarious next generation debut in Beautiful Katamari for the PLAYSTATION 3 computer entertainment system and Xbox 360 video game and entertainment system from Microsoft later this year."

    Still no compelling reason to invest in a PS3 if you've already got the Wii60.
  • Like the article states its more profitable to go cross-platform then exclusive. The days of staying on one platform is over for the 3rd party companies, theres no incentive to stay exclusive unless your being paid by the big dogs(Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft).
    • It also depends on the cost of portability. While the 360 and PS3 are similar in capabilities, the Wii might lack a bit in power for some games. Alternately, WiiMote games wouldn't port well to Xbox/PS3

      In theory, a game heavily optimized for either the 360 or PS3 might also be a little time (and time==$$$) consuming to port.
  • this is a good thing. Neither of these titles are as big as say Mass Effect or Final Fantasy (although the exclusivity of FF13 is in question)...I actually want to see smaller lesser known titles such as these on multiple systems just to get their exposure increased (even though prior to the comments above, I didn't realize that Kane was a lesser known title...then again, I had never heard of the other one so ::shrug:: whatever)

  • There's no advantage (from the gamer's POV) to exclusives.
    I hope PS3 owners enjoy these games as much as we 360 owners will.. and hope some PS3-exclusive devs will give us 360 gamers some lovin' by releasing their game for our consoles..
  • SCi's biggest hit was Conflict Desert Storm which was found in bargain bins weeks after release. While I understand the desire for something positive for the ps3 fanboy crowd, they may want to skip the bravado over this crapfest.

    Here's a list of all of SCi's accomplishments to date, look at all the hits...

    Alfreds Adventure
    Aqua Aqua
    Battlestations:Midway
    Carmageddon
    Carmageddon II: Carpocalypse Now
    Carmageddon TDR 2000
    Conflict: Desert Storm
    Conflict: Desert Storm 2 (a.k.a. Back to Baghdad)
    Conflict: Global Terror
  • No, seriously. I can see why you titled this "Two 360 titles" instead of giving the names of the actual games. Nobody would have recognized them of course because they are obscure and by no means AAA titles. This, in turn, means that this "news story" has no value whatsoever and I suspect the only reason it got approved is because it falls in the "bad news for m$" category.

    Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

    • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Wii's not a next-gen platform. It's a modified, over clocked GameCube. Even Iwata and Miyamoto recognize this.
      • How many times do I need to read that statement? Generation has nothing to do with system capabilities. Nothing. The Wii is the system Nintendo made after making the Gamecube which means it is the next generation after the Gamecube. This would be true even if it had a 1Mhz 6502.

    • One might have thought they meant the Wii.

      "What kind of music do you usually have here?"
      "Oh, we got both kinds. We got country and western."
        • Wow, that looks *worse* than a GameCube/PS2 port game! ugh!

          The 360 trailer right beneath it shows how nice the true next gen systems look...without all the wonky arm flailing. (imagine a couple of hours of that at a time?!?!)

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ki8DfkdHa74&NR=1 [youtube.com]

          JON
        • Yeah. I don't see the situation changing for the forseeable future either

          Activision are producing the game for every console. It doesn't mean all consoles are equal though, or as IGN puts it [ign.com] - "Although we didn't see the PS2, PSP, or Wii versions running, Activision has told us that they will still have a large, streaming world only with weaker graphics. To you and me, that means a lower resolution and less draw distance. All of the versions will have 10 storylines, though the PS2, PSP, and Wii iterations

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.