Sony: 'Publishers Are Getting the Living Crap Kicked Out of Them by Microsoft'

Last week, a story came to the forefront regarding Microsoft’s Content Submission and Release Policy, obtained by Eurogamer. The gist of it is that Microsoft has some very strict policies on what they're willing to publish on retails discs or on Xbox Live Arcade, and if it arrives on a Sony platform first or has more content on a Sony platform, Microsoft won't publish it. What does Sony have to say about all this? A lot, apparently...

IndustryGamers chatted with Sony Computer Entertainment America's SVP of Publisher Relations Rob Dyer, who was more than happy to highlight what he feels are very damaging policies for Microsoft.

[Dart89]

*"I think what Chris and the other representatives at Microsoft are doing is protecting an inferior technology."

Well time to get a bag of popcorn and let the comments roll in.

Well they do have a point.

@Rabid a little of both:D.

[rabidpancakeburglar]

What kind of popcorn? Sweet or Salted?

[BigPappaPump]

Buttered.

[Bull5hifT]

Chocolate Fudge, Nacho Cheese, tarter sauce Flavored Yummy

[tgh machines]

Cheese popcorn.

[rabidpancakeburglar]

Christ, you americans just put everything on food, don't you?

[MrDead]

I have chips and cheesy dip

I also got a box of Ritalin just in case the the kids go to crazy I can chuck it in there

[evrfighter]

oh nice I thought it was going to be Gabe being the aggressor. Sony usually ignores M$ dealings but here we see some initiative.

Gamers are the winners here when stuff like this happens. Interested to see how M$ responds. steamworks maybe?

[Brosy]

This sony idiot is just jealous of MS dominance. I mean last gen the ps2 dominated, and now the underdog(360) has come on the scene with a suprisingly dominant showing. It's funny how things change gen to gen. This is just a jealous sony idiot, and he has alot to be jealous of. I think its funny lol.

[Silly gameAr]

mmm. Cheese, buttered, and caramel mixed.
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

[REALgamer]

Hang on, when they say Microsoft won't 'publish' anything on retail discs or digital with more content for a PS3 version, I assume they mean that they won't act as the actual publisher for that game.

Ie: when you start the game up you won't see Microsoft Game Studios logo as the publisher. Otherwise Bioshock Infinite and Dead Space 2 wouldn't be on 360 because the publishers for them put Bioshock 1 and Dead Space Extraction packaged with the game too.

In that case, it seems perfectly reasonable to me. Microsoft won't publish a game with more PS3 content, but the developer can still release it on 360 with any other third-party to publish it instead (eg: EA, Activision, Take Two, etc).

[Iroquois_Pliskin]

hmmm butter....

[Boody-Bandit]

The hell with food. I just popped the cork on a fresh bottle of bourbon. I'm going to get a little toasty and watch the war begin.

Come to think of it I think I will grab some kettle popcorn to go along with this tasty bourbon.

On topic: No matter how anyone tries to spin this, things like this are not good for the industry. This holds it back and nothing more.

[jony_dols]

'Christ, you americans just put everything on food, don't you?'

I'd love a six pack of Skittlebrau right now...

[Dee_91]

I have a taste for hotwings :)

[-LUKE_SKYWALKER-]

Cheetos and M&MS FTW!!!

[Micro_Sony]

A double cheese burger with 6 slices of bacon and some sea salt fries please with a large frosty.

[gamingdroid]

***A double cheese burger with 6 slices of bacon and some sea salt fries please with a large frosty.***

That sounds sickeningly good, because that is exactly how I would feel after eating that!

[pixelsword]

Hamburgers and doughnuts on my popcorned cheese.

[Ragnaarock]

@REALgamer

I think that if the "extra content" is completely different than the actual game in question microsoft will still publish it since Dead Space 2 was exactly the same on both consoles. The core content was the same therefore microsoft had no prob with releasing it i guess. I think they would only not publish or release a game on their console if the PS3 version used the space to pack 3 DLC packs of extra content on the the blu-ray leaving MS with 3 downloadable DLC packs on XBL for the same game. So I guess the extra game thing is a bit of a loophole Sony or the publishers found.

[Army_of_Darkness]

Reading this article and Microsoft policy makes me really hate them now. I don't understand why these blind fanboys are still defending ms?! Its stupid.

[TBONEJF]

LOTS OF SALT N BUTTER

[humbleopinion]

@REALgamer
You kinda nailed the point. That dude (who's not even a Sony tech person, just some PR idiot) talks a lot of trash but doesn't even back things up.
Fact it, many games include extra content on blueray when they come on a simultaneous release: be it better quality cinematics (Final Fantasy XIII), extra content (Batman Joker levels, Mafia 2 extra content) or even full extra games (MOH, Dead space 2).

The only thing that Microsoft doesn't allow, is to have a game globally released first on the PS3, and then released later on the 360 with no additional benefits. That's why publishers always had to include extra content when releasing 360 games later than PS3 games (Virtua Fighter 5 online mode, UT2007 extra levels.

What Microsoft is doing is a pretty reasonable tactic so that your console won't look like it's getting the lesser port released later. Mind you, he "forgot" to mention that Sony is doing the exact same tactic: check out every game ported later to the PS3 and you will see that Sony forced the publisher to shove in some extra content just so it won't look to customer like they're being screwed: Ninja Gaiden 2, Bioshock, Mass Effect 2, Oblivion, and even arcade titles like Castle Crashers.

Even funnier is how he talks great things about Gabe Newell and Valve after he praised the PS3 for including access to Steam. Guess he wasn't so fond of him back in the days when Newell called the PS3 "a total disaster":
http://www.1up.com/news/gab...

I guess Allegiance switches a quickly in the corporate world and PR idiots will always be PR idiots who can't get their facts straights (to be honest, the PR suits on Microsoft side are even worse and more clueless about things). Just don't let gamers fall into this trash talk.

[xtremeimport]

@Brosy, Y U SO STUPID?

[JD_Shadow]

You missed the whole point, then.

A policy like this is severely damaging for game companies that want more exposure to their game. Imagine if you had a game company, and you planned on releasing a game on both the PS3 and 360. Since the 360 has or had such a huge lead on the PS3 (I don't believe it has a huge lead anymore, though), and you're game would receive massive exposure if it were on the 360 and/or XBL, then you were denied by MS to have the game on the 360 because it wasn't "equal" to what the PS3 version of your game was, you would be miffed, I would think.

You also mention DLC. Think about the Batman: AA DLC and Mafia 2 DLC you mentioned. Have you SEEN that content on the 360 yet? Also remember that MS only "reserves the right" to refuse devs clearance to release the game or content on the 360. That means that they CAN do it, but not that they necessarily WILL, though they seem to really decide TO DO so with most games.

Why do you think SE cut a ton of content out of Final Fantasy 13 from both versions? We complained for months about the PS3 version suffering from that multiplat announcement, and we cringe about FFV13 360 rumors whenever they pop up. You now know why.

And again, you completely missed the point of everything about why this is a dangerous policy for the gaming industry.

EDIT: I just saw that you not only missed the point, but you didn't even read what MS's policy even WAS: http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

There NOTHING in that article that even suggests that MS is only asking devs to stick extra stuff into the game when and if the game comes out on 360 later on. Where in that article that we're discussing did you see either that or the Sony policy you're talking about?

And what in the hell does Gabe's past comments about the PS3 have to do with ANYTHING?

[humbleopinion]

@darkpower
"A policy like this is severely damaging for game companies that want more exposure to their game."
Of course it is. But as I mentioned before: it's a a tactic that is employed by both sides. I think it's you that missed the point...
MS and Sony want to take care of their own user base and nothing more. Neither wants to see the other console getting the better game. They both don't care about the game on the other console.

"You also mention DLC. Think about the Batman: AA DLC and Mafia 2 DLC you mentioned. Have you SEEN that content on the 360 yet?"
No, it was PS3 exclusive. Are you just trying to prove my point that this "content equality" is just a general guideline that is not always enforced?
It's just like the guideline demanding games to have native resolution of 720P or else the MS/Sony reserve the right not to publish them. We've seen so many time where this was not actually enforced...

"Why do you think SE cut a ton of content out of Final Fantasy 13 from both versions? We complained for months about the PS3 version suffering from that multiplat announcement, and we cringe about FFV13 360 rumors whenever they pop up. You now know why."
If you actually believe that then I'm sorry but you're a delusional fanboy who can't deal with facts.
Fact is, the Japanese version of FF13 was completed before SE even started working on porting it to the X360 (which was done in a remarkable 6 months) so it didn't have any effect on the actual development.
If anything, it was the long and tedious development of the engine for the PS3 (based on specs given to SE by Sony) in the first place that causes such a hugh delay in the development of FF13 to Final Fantasy fans. We can also see how well FF14 fared as a PS3 exclusive without being ported to the X360 at all...

"Where in that article that we're discussing did you see either that or the Sony policy you're talking about?"
It's not in the article. It's a known policy for years - you can look it up yourself, ask any developer or just do the math yourself: just examine every PS3 port in existence and see if if has additional content or not. Then do the same for X360 ports and you'll see a common groung.

It's easy to disprove me: if you can give me even one example of a game that was a late port with no additional content then I will take everything I said back. If not - then simply don't bother replying because you will just be recycling arguments with no facts to back them up.

[Muerte2494]

Was a prominent xbox360 supporter. But like many closed platforms, the yellow tape eventually pops up. Steam on PSN seems to cut out the middle man between the devs and consumers. I don't expect it to be too long before EA announces some kind of Origins on PSN deal.

[OcularVision]

Publishers are already feeding the PS3 with exclusive betas, most notable the Battlefield and Assassin's Creed betas. Which I find kind of strange because both of those aforementioned games sell better on the Xbox 360.

[dragonelite]

@ocularVision dice said the bf3 beta is on every platform so yeah 360 too. But who wants to play bf3 on consoles. pc ftw.

[Redempteur]

"both of those aforementioned games sell better on the Xbox 360. "
Lool you're joking right ? because the better is only a couple of hundred and that's in america ..
In the rest of the world the PS3 is in front by a wide margin

[KMCROC]

Former MS employee has that for irony.

[Blacktric]

Gabe Newell is a two faced idiot. Where were you when he was talking crap about PS3 3-4 years ago for no reason. He and his team was just too goddamn lazy to learn a new architechture and instead of trying, they just kept talking crap until E3 2010. He doesn't deserve the respect and love he's getting from PS3 users.

[gamingdroid]

Valve has their own interest as well. Do you think Gabe would be singing praises about PS3 if they weren't on the platform?

Steam is just trying to skim a little of PS3's business, and Sony just want better support than the Orange Box port to drum up more business. Hopefully a win-win situation.

I like Valve and trust them more than others, but I ain't blind!

It's business, because technically buying up companies and keeping exclusives are technically also hurting the industry. It limits the reach of those games... see I can spin too!

I'm also sure Online Passes is really good for the consumers. We all love to have restrictions on our games.

Fact is companies will do what is best for them first, not what is best for the industry. That tends to be a side effect, not a goal!

MS is no saint, but they do have one the easiest way to publish the game on any console with XNA. Want to publish cr@p and get famous, XNA is for you!

[SuperLupe]

A Sony exec going all out on MS ? PASS !

I dont give credibility to employees that talk crap about the competition.

Especially when you're talking from the perspective of a firm who would LOVE to be in MS's position right now when it comes to online gaming i.e: leader

[factory]

Sorry, but you have to appreciate a well stated and reinforced smackdown. And that's exactly what that was.

[PirateThom]

It's more of a reiteration of what the MS exec said last week and how it's anti-consumer and anti-developer... and he's right, because it is.

[SuperLupe]

Until an indie dev comes ou to say such things sorry but I cant trust Sony on what they think the competition is or is not.

Coca Cola's opinion on Pepsi for instance doesnt mean crap, especially if its a bad one. Same applies here.

[looza]

Isn't it usually Pepsi the one talking crap about Coca Cola? I'm only basing it off their ads.

[kaveti6616]

"It's more of a reiteration of what the MS exec said last week and how it's anti-consumer and anti-developer... and he's right, because it is."

To me it sounds like MS is forcing devs and publishers to make sure that whatever content is coming to PS3 also comes to 360.

The Sony exec was interpreting it a different way.

Nevertheless, the fact is that there are multiplatform games coming to PS3 with extra content. Dead Space 2 came with Dead Space Extraction.

Did Microsoft refuse to let EA publish Dead Space 2 on 360? Nope.

Batman Arkham Asylum came with additional content on the PS3 version not available for 360. Did Microsoft refuse to let that game get published on 360? Nope.

And Battlefield 3 is going to come with a free game on the PS3 version. Has Microsoft declared that EA cannot publish BF3 on 360? Nope.

The statement that the MS exec made can be interpreted both positively and negatively. If it could have only been interpreted negatively, Microsoft would not have made that statement to the public, and if it could have only been interpreted positively, then Sony wouldn't have commented on that statement.

Yes, Microsoft doesn't allow just anyone to publish for 360. But that doesn't seem like a terribly bad thing? Microsoft is competing aggressively to make sure that the 360 remains the dominant console. They want to advertize high quality titles. Quality over quantity. So far, many of the XBLA games that have come out have been of a high quality. There are some crappy games there as well, but that just means that some crappy devs managed to jump through Microsoft's hoops and MS had to let them publish.

Obviously they must be very pleased right now that most publishers opt to cut content from their games than to add them onto the PS3 version. For all the money that Sony has invested in Blu-Ray on PS3, multiplatform developers rarely utilize the space, and MS must be pleased about that.

Additionally, why does this Sony executive claim that publishers are getting their asses kicked by this policy? Have they not adapted beautifully to it? Don't they make plenty of money by releasing the cut content as DLC for an additional cost?

I think the publishers are actually benefiting from it because they make more money now than they would initially.

[Clarence]

"I dont give credibility to employees that talk crap about the competition."

Well then you should have a major problem with M$ then, because they have talked a $h!t load of crap about Sony and the PS3.
http://gamer.blorge.com/200...

Sony is only going at M$ because M$ likes to come at them first.

[jdfoster]

He's speaking the truth though... MS said it them selves... And how was he talking crap about them? Did you read his comments? Also, isn't ps3 out selling the 360 WW? o.o

[Biggest]

First of all: http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

That explains it a bit better for you, kaveti6616. I know that you already know and chose to play the ignorant card to support your argument, but now you know know. The big games from the big developers are free from the selfishness. Microsoft wouldn't dare block a large developer from publishing a game late or with less content. They do it to the smaller teams that can't afford the risk. At least going with Microsoft first they can still double down with Sony. The risk is too great to bank on just one console. Microsoft made sure that the risk was much higher for those that tried to take advantage of better technology.

[DragonKnight]

@Kaveti: You seem to be GROSSLY misinformed. The issue isn't whether or not Microsoft allows devs to publish their own games on the 360, the issue is that Microsoft will not foot the publishing bill for smaller indie devs who do not make their games either appear first or simultaneously on the 360 as well as the PS3, or if the PS3 has more content than the 360 version.

So, take indie dev A. They have a game they want to have take advantage of what tech the PS3 can push, but they also want to release it multiplatform to make more money. Unless the game looks identical to, has identical content as, and is released either before or at the same time as the PS3 version, Microsoft will NOT publish the game and instead will force the indie dev to self-publish or find a publisher themselves.

Sony will foot the bill if the game has some kind of exclusivity with PSN, be it content, release date, or availability. But they won't force the indie devs to make the game equal on all fronts or else pull funding.

[MrBeatdown]

@kaveti

Batman, Battlefield, Dead Space 2... do you think Microsoft wouldn't allow those games to be released on 360?

Microsoft is pushing to keep the PS3 from getting any extras, but it defeats the point if they were to push that policy to the point where the 360 gets nothing. That's a luxury that big publishers have. It's a two way relationship. But it doesn't mean Microsoft isn't trying their damnedest to enforce it where they can.

I don't know how you could see it in a positive light. If they were doing everything possible to make sure the 360 versions were all they can be, that's one thing, but to make sure the PS3 version isn't any better isn't doing the consumer any favors. Rather than mandating the PS3 version can't be any better, they should be going to devs and trying to help them bring any benefits the PS3 version has to the 360.

[gamingdroid]

You do make a very good point, Sony's clout is no longer what it is when they have to resort to complaining about the competition instead of competing.

Sony is free to setup the opposite requirement... and MS is free to complain about it too.

[kikizoo]

"on the scene with a suprisingly dominant showing". "sony is jealous" etc

why are they always in total denial ? (when everyone knows that sony is selling more worlwide) it's probably usefull to forget that they have to pay for playing with inferior games and exclusives, no bluray, etc, but common...stop the delusional state of mind, 2006 has ended, stop the ridiculous hate and buy a ps3, it's cheaper know

[Legion]

And how many games is Sony willing to PUBLISH that has more content for Xbox then PS3?? I would think none.

[thoract]

Your an idiot. He is just telling you the truth about MS's policies.

[SkyGamer]

Wow! Pot calling kettle black... Talk about hypocrisy. How about sony's music deals and publishing deals? Remember when Deep Blue and a bunch of the Korean studios stated it was tough to work with sony because they took all the risk and not sony?

sony will fund up to half of game dev and regardless if it is successful or not, you have to pay sony back. Oh and sony owns the IP as well. Goes both ways. And what Small Dev is going to take advantage of the ps3? The comment above was rediculous. To make a game that looks like uncharted would take a huge staff and tens of millions of dollars!

If MS fits the bill then they want certain perks. Nothing wrong with that. If I pay you for an item, I'd want it the same way. So what you all are saying is that MS should fit the bill that their competition does not have to pay?

Hypocrisy, eigth level of hell guys....

[Persistantthug]

There's really no need to GUESS why we didn't get it.

There really never was.

[kaveti6616]

If Bethesda wanted to bring mods to the console game, they could have.

Microsoft would not refuse to publish a major title just like they're not refusing to publish Battlefield 3.

Epic brought mods to the PS3 version of Unreal Tournament 3.

There are other reasons why Bethesda would not be able to bring mods to consoles, such as them not having enough time to refine the mod tools for consoles.

Again, Microsoft would not refuse to publish Skyrim. They would probably pay off Bethesda if they wanted to, which means that Bethesda and their owner Zetamax would have had to accept the money, which means that Microsoft is not "kicking" anyone's ass.

Edit: I mean "have published" not publish it personally.

[Ice2ms]

Bethesda couldn't have brought mods to the consoles because of MS strict policies is what persistantthug is getting at I think.

Microsoft would have allowed skyrim on the xbox either way, Sony are a lot more lenient when it comes to that. Examples;

- mods on UT3
- Steamworks on portal and future valve games
- littlebigplanet's map sharing

Unless it's a first party title Microsoft refuse to allow things like this. Hell even patches cost money for devs on xbox live.

[DragonKnight]

@kaveti: You are again misinformed. Microsoft DOES NOT allow mods AT ALL because they can't control the content. They claim it is a security issue, but the truth of the matter is that it's because they can't make money off of mods.

Sony is the most open of the big 3 and completely open to mods, it's up to the developers to implement that option or not, Sony does not restrict them at all. Microsoft is the most closed of the big 3, and it's documented fact.

[A-Glorious-Dawn]

I think mod's open up a whole new set of security issues, The fact that there are little to none on consoles means that devs like bethesda have not taken the time to refine a method for doing it yet, I mean if they are to be anywhere like on the PC the game needs to have a mod manager and the available mods need to bee individually screened for security, then there is the possibility of conflictions with the software (Iv'e had serious problems with some mod's on my PC, loosing game data and all sorts).

Not that any of this is impossible, far from it. It's just, for example, bethesda for whatever reason have not tallied that route up just yet, maybe it's a next gen plan? There must be, of course, other reasons. We can not know what Microsoft's strict policies dictate about mods, nor can we know the whole story but IMO there are a myriad of reasons why it has not been implemented just yet. It will happen though, relatively soon if I were to guess.

[killcycle]

wtf is wrong with everybody keep the shit
ON TOPIC!!!!!

[Horny Melon]

They could have brought mods to the console games the same way unreal did. The problem is console gamers couldn't be bothered. Modding unreal on the ps3 was a huge flop. Console Gamers require too much hand holding for something like a modding to be prolific on their platform of choice.

[JokesOnYou]

oh let me guess, a sony spokesman talking about micro is always right, and a micro spokesman talking about sony is of course "OMG so biased".

1 thing for sure sony wishes their online was as popular as xbox live. Nothing in micro's official statements have anything to do with lowering the quality or limiting content, they are simply saying they don't want "sloppy seconds", in other words if a dev wants to offer it on ps3 and not the 360 at the same time then its not good to try to push it on Live once it becomes old news, getting content late actually lowers the market appeal for consumers in some cases, micro's message is that xbox live will feature brand new content or exclusive content or not at all.....if they are not willing to offer Live users the same content that the psn has then micro doesn't want to have anything to do with the game. Xbox Live has plenty of content on it and is always getting new indie & xbla titles compared to psn, so I don't see how this is hurting "consumers" as sony indicates. I don't think this is a huge factor in the amount of content we've seen on xbl or psn, because frankly my time spent with both there seems to be a whole lot of "meh" games with a few gems like Bastion on both.

Actually when you are in a position that you have a good product you don't want to diminish it by receiving old or inferior content, I think this same precedent really hurt the ps3 reputation alot a few years ago when it came to multiplayer games because the avg consumer will begin to think the console itself is inferior when it gets games after they've been released on 360=old, and less content=DLC. sony, simply isn't in a position with psn to tell create this type of standard on psn......eh, jealousy.

[DragonKnight]

Forcing devs to limit the quality to the 360's capabilities, or forcing them to release it either on the 360 first or at the same time does hurt consumers.

If a dev wants their game to perform at its best, they shouldn't be forced to dumb it down in order to make a publisher happy. Said publisher should be happy they even get the game and get to take a cut instead of being a corporate bully. If it's about money, then accept the game whenever you get it, because having the game 6 months down the road is better than NOT having the game at all.

[JokesOnYou]

Again, like I said above nowhere has micro forced devs to "limit the quality to the 360 capabilities",(lol, biggest fanboy lie with no proof) #1 -I think 360 when pushed is perfectly capable of handling its own compared to ps3= different strengths and weaknesses, but #2 this is about xbl and psn, lol if parity in DLC, Arcade, & Indie games is a problem then its on the dev, not the hardware. btw, I've always had the mentality that *IF any dev actually SOLD his SOUL and purposely diminshed the quality of his product just to make extra profits, YOU should hate him far more than microsoft. Seriously, I respect any dev who says hey "I think I can make a much better game on __ compared to ___, because ___ and thats why its exclusive. He might have his reasons and thats fine but saying, "Well I COULD have made the game so much better but I lowered the quality so both would be the same" says more about the developer.

Now back to the question of micro's xbl strategy, if micro allows devs to play favorites by favoring releasing content on psn, later after sales slow on xbl OR release more content on psn than xbl because of a exclusive or time exclusive deals it would indeed create the mindshare/mentality, true or not that xbl gets second rate material, micro is keeping their strength in online identity intact by telling devs that YES we will take xbl favortism=1st, or parity but if you choose cater to psn(exclusive DLC/time exclusive) then thats fine but we won't support you.....they've been doing this a awhile and just look at all the content xbl has to offer. Not every single game on psn is going to be on Live, thats great because otherwise they'd be the same, but as far as content goes xbl users have plenty of quality choices with more coming all the time.

Can you name any games/devs who announced they canceled a game due to micro's "evil" strategy?

[DragonKnight]

"Again, like I said above nowhere has micro forced devs to "limit the quality to the 360 capabilities",(lol, biggest fanboy lie with no proof)"

-Fallacy 1. When Microsoft demands parity in all areas, that's forcing the devs to limit the quality. Fact is, the 360 hasn't had games that perform to the level of PS3 games when a developer, indie or not, chooses to use the full potential of the PS3. That's just fact. If an indie dev sees that the PS3 as a whole outperforms the 360 from a quality standpoint and wants to utilize the PS3's strengths to its fullest, why should they be forced not to because the 360 can't, in some way, keep up and MS just wants to be a baby about it and force the dev to make both releases equal instead of letting the dev create its truest vision and being happy the 360 even gets the game?

"if parity in DLC, Arcade, & Indie games is a problem then its on the dev, not the hardware."

-Common 360 fanboy argument. The hardware is never to blame, it's always the dev right?

""Well I COULD have made the game so much better but I lowered the quality so both would be the same" says more about the developer."

-Ummm, what about when they want to make it multi, and one of the platform holders says "Well you're not allowed to make it better on one, they both have to be exactly the same" and the dev says "But they can't be the same unless I reduce one." and then the platform holder says "It's either that, or your game can't be on this system. Parity or nothing." How is that the devs fault? Especially if the dev is just a small one working to being a big one and needs all the profits they can get? That's on the platform holder, not the dev.

"they've been doing this a awhile and just look at all the content xbl has to offer."

That's only because indie devs are forced into it. They have a choice, either make their game PSN exclusive and NOT make the multiplat money they need and hope for so that they can release the game THEY WANT to release, or they capitulate to Live's draconian policies just so that they can release their game on multiple platforms without incurring huge publishing costs that their small company can't possibly absorb. Tell me how that's a good thing for anyone but Microsoft?

"Can you name any games/devs who announced they canceled a game due to micro's "evil" strategy?"

I'd have to look into it, but I'm quite sure that any PSN exclusives are either due to a generous enticement by Sony, or MS' ridiculous policies. Forcing parity stagnates progress and creates a very closed system. But hey, you're an MS fanboy, so you love everything to be closed. Your name is quite ironic by the way.

[modesign]

jokes on you is a idiot, if you max out the 360, its still inferior to the ps3, devs are beeing hurt when forced with the 360's limitations, GTA4 was set to have big assets to make it huge, it later had to be limited to fit on the dvd9, and to accommodate the 360's hardware, FFXIII was suppose to be the same way, had to be dumbdown alot to fit on the 360, originally FF13/versus was a 2 in one game,

[JokesOnYou]

DragonKnight, OK, I guess you don't get it you keep saying that because micro demands parity that means they are *forcing devs to limit a damm indie game, lol seriously? OK, again what game?= You have no answer. Once again just made up ps3fanboy crap with no proof. Parity simply means the same *amount of content at the *same time.

"if parity in DLC, Arcade, & Indie games is a problem then its on the dev, not the hardware."

-Common 360 fanboy argument. The hardware is never to blame, it's always the dev right?

>huh, wtf? lol are you actually saying Arcade and Indie games can't be equal in quality? I mean you do know that these are very small games many of which could easily be equal on last gen consoles right?....again so what game are you speaking of where 360 tech held it back?

"-Ummm, what about when they want to make it multi, and one of the platform holders says "Well you're not allowed to make it better on one, they both have to be exactly the same" and the dev says "But they can't be the same unless I reduce one."

-damm, I already covered this, You have alot of "what ifs", but no evidence to back up your theory, I assume here you mean full release games and not psn vs xbl games which then I would say if the game is so big use multiple discs, but if thats not the problem and its simply an issue of each consoles capabilities, if the dev likes ps3 hardware and *BELIEVE they CANT get the same results from the 360 then just make it ps3 exclusive, if they don't have the balls to do that because they want every dime they can get by going multiplat then thats their fault for sacrificing their belief that they could make a better game but instead chose more money. It's either that or they lack confidence in it selling well on ps3 so they CHOSE PURPOSELY to make an inferior game and go multiplat to ensure better sells, either way again thats their choice and I'm not going to cry for a dev with that type of mentality but quite frankly I think that scenario is all crap, the truth is closer to reality= some devs make good games/great games, some devs make bad/terrible games from time to time, not even every exclusive is as good as Gears or UC2 quality so its certainly logical that many multiplats were lacking in one way or another on both platforms simply because humans are not perfect.....but of course fanboys would rather go with the conspiracy theory.

-Still waiting on you to name a canceled game.

[shoddy]

The games that explain this holding back is:

ff13 lead on ps3, better on ps3
ps3 exclusive games have better performance.

COD and bayonatta is better on Xbox now you know why.

[insomnium2]

@jokes

Do you really think any indie dev has the luxury to openly say MS's policies are sh*t?

I've heard more smaller dev praise PSN and Sony's policies and open system than I can remember. But hey they are all just saying that stuff cause they want to keep a good relationship with Sony right...? You are effing hopeless....

http://beefjack.com/news/cc...

There is an example but I'm sure they are only Sony nuthuggers to you too right?

Here's another:

http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

"Last year Final Fantasy XIV Online creator and director Hiromichi Tanaka told Eurogamer that a "closed" Xbox Live blocked the game from appearing on Xbox 360.

"The main reason why we couldn't go with Xbox 360 was the Xbox Live system," he explained. "[Live is] different to the normal internet environment, so when we wanted to introduce this game in the same environment as Windows PC it had to be PS3, so that was our choice.

"Microsoft has a different point of view: they want to have a closed environment for Xbox Live. We're still talking to... We couldn't come to an agreement on Xbox Live."

[insomnium2]

Another:

"MMO developer Cryptic chucked in the towel on an Xbox 360 version of Champions Online in early 2010. Producer Craig Zinkievich told Eurogamer he was frustrated with the business side of getting an MMO on Xbox Live; the game itself, he said, ran just fine. "

Could these be considered as cancelled games on x360 due to MS's policies or not?

WOW would you look at that...2 disagrees in 20 minutes. That was pretty fast. How about a reply to back that disagree up huh?

[A-Glorious-Dawn]

@insomnium2

wow, Interesting examples you have there, I had never heard that they tried to get Champions Online on XBL. Seems there is real frustration among developers due to these policies, It's a pity Microsoft can not be more open...

[RealtorMDandDC]

The jokes is on you dude........It's blatantly obvious that there are un-kosher act's going on this generation of gaming. I've been a gamer now for 28yrs...and this generation is totally different than all the rest....

--Sloppy second's....your comments makes no sense...I rather have Sony provide me sloppy seconds so I can have access to as many games as possible cause I'm a gamer...

--Because of your aversion to sloppy seconds you are missing out as a gamers...

---If you had or have a girl(but by your comment I will say neither is the case)...I'm pretty positive that she had a boyfriend before.....so as of this moment you are or was part of sloppy seconds......

[Solidus187-SCMilk]

HAAH hyou people dont seem to understand the difference between microsoft publishing and publishing. Even if MS doesnt publish it, someone else can. This doesnt mean the block games from their platform. It means they wont invest in multiplat games, these developers are still able to release their games, they just need a multiplatform publisher.

This means MS wont invest and publish such games. It doesnt mean it cant be on xbox with another publisher. This really is obvious as MS doesnt publish that much anyways, they are not going to invest in a game that others have first or better versions of.

It no more crooked then sony funding devs that work on a PSN exclusives and dnot make the game available to the competitors. MS will allow the devs to get a third party publisher and release it, but they will not publish it themselvs.

What you MS bashers say if the bastion devs came out and criticized sony for not publishing their game? NOPE, You would all agree with sony and say "why would they publish a multiplatform game that is arriving late anyways."

No different here, If you want sony or MS to invest in your game there has to be something in it for them or else they are just investing their money for little to no gain.

Devs that complain about such things just want to create a multiplatform game, and they have to go to other publishers like Ubisoft, EA or Activision.

both MS and Sony instated these similar policies because they need something in return for their support, otherwise they are just wasting money.

This doesnt mean MS blocks these devs like so many fools here seem to want to pretend. It means MS will not invest/publish it but they are free to find a 3rd party publisher and it can still be released on the xbox 360.

Everyone here should know that games come out on 360 all the time with other versions having additional content, MS didnt stop them from getting a different publisher.

We only hear about this from small devs who think they are somehow exempt from these policies and MS is just going to throw money at them. Not how the business world works. Neither Sony nor MS will PUBLISH(not the same as allowing to release on their platform) a game that doesnt offer them some sort of perks. Sony will fund exclusives, MS will not fund non-exclusives. Either case, these devs can STILL GET THEIR GAMES ON PS3 or 360 BY GETTING A 3rd PARTY PUBLISHER.

I think many here are confused(or just playing dumb) and acting like MS not publishing something somehow blocs it form being released. WRONG, thats what 3rd party publishers are for.

Does anyone here think that sony is going to publish Insomniac's new multiplatform game??? NoPE, multiplat devs neeed to go to 3rd party publishers.

[showtimefolks]

we are all gamers MS needs to open their damn eyes and support us more than casuals and kinect

Valve who were ps3 haters have praised sony over and over along with EA so sony must be doing something wrong and MS has a much more closed platform and XBlive and that is the reason some dlc that could be free to other gets charged on xblive

most big games look and play the same on both consoles this thing is about the download only titles on psn/xblive

peace have fun playing games

[gano]

yea yea we are the world truth is ms is not a real game company.
They are just purely in it for biz of it.

Every company wanna make money.
but that don't mean they are just or honest in it's endeavor

[DARK WITNESS]

the only way you are going to get MS to open their eyes is if you stop spending $$$ on them, because all they see is $$$.

If a large, and I mean large group of 360 owners, stop buying the multiplat games on 360 and bought more on the ps3 because they found more tools and content. MS would pay attention.

As it is MS is happy. they have casual noobs playing kinect and for the hardcore, gears, forza, halo and COD. if MS only had those 3 games and plus is yearly exclusive dlc release (for 6 months) on COD for the next ten years and still have the masses spending $$$ on them they would be happy to do that.

If all the other multiplat games decided to publish on the ps3 only and leave MS to it's 4 franchises only, I bet MS would soon start to look at things differently.

I like the 360, but I don't like MS approach at all and I am disliking it more and more each year.

[Hozi89]

@rabidpancakeburglar
I've lived in America for 11 years and I realized that Americans really love cheese. I mean they put it on everything!!! tell me I'm wrong. I dare you!

On topic. This just goes to show that MS are sissies and feel ashamed that their console can't support all that extra content. I still love them though. That's why I play Halo and Geow!!!

[4Sh0w]

lol, what a load of BS, and some actually eat this up, talking about a indie game being limited as if any indie game exclusive or not on either console is even close to pushing the hardware, and dont even make me laugh with the cutting content claims, hell ps3 exclusives on bluray arent any longer than their 360 counterparts, just language, audio, uncompressed data, etc, dont say its needed for graphics, their alot of great looking 360 games, but ironicly Crysis2 looks better than KZ3, although I liked KZ3 more. Anyway seriously sounds like sony is crying, and making wild accusations, no devs pissed off, if anything vavle is the only one pissed because microsoft wont let them have their way with Live.

[A-Glorious-Dawn]

I respectfully disagree, While Crysis2 looks better on PC obviously, The console counterpart is nowhere near as optimized as Killzone 2 or 3.

This is very clear to see when you play the both one after another.

[snipes101]

Damn I love my xbox, but what the hell microsoft? Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

[zerocrossing]

Late to the party again guys, I see we have the snacks covered =)

[QuodEratDemonstrandm]

@REALgamer

You do realize that if MICROSOFT publishes a game it won't be on SONY'S console, right? I mean, if you don't know that, then you have no business calling yourself a "real" gamer. Do you?

Get back to me when you've expanded your knowledge base, Mme Curie.

[Zir0]

Thats what happens when you have the dominant online service. Publishes will do whatever MS says for a chance to be on XBL.

[ALFAxD_CENTAURO]

The Dominant Online Service is available on PC.

The only thing I can see as the highlight feature from Xbox Live, Cross Game Chat, that's all.

[Biggest]

Why would a person on PC care about Xbox Live's Cross Game Chat? That isn't a highlight, lowlight, or any other light on PC.

[Otheros00]

Cross game chat was on PC FIRST.

[radphil]

"Thats what happens when you have the dominant online service."

You mean like GFWL on PC. /sarcasm.

[radphil]

Gotta love people disagreeing at something that got basically decimated on the PC platform. :P

[Ice2ms]

Are they still using that ? Hahaha it was a fail platform, I remember on DOW2 it had steam AND GFWL up until the latest expansion, it was ridiculous having it tacked on to a game.

[blackburn10]

Dominant? Do whatever MS says to be on XBL? Not sure what dimension you come from but PSN has just as many exclusives as XBL not to metion many games that it has. I don't see any publisher breaking down Microsoft's door to be on XBL especially. Do you ever stop talking garbage?

[neonlight45]

Like blackburn said your comment is garbage. If any of the big publishers, for example Activision or EA were to drop 360 support because of this, the 360 would be fucked.

[Brownghost]

your the second comment congrats

[donniebaseball]

What's amazing after reading that piece is just how much he really went on the offensive to attack MS. I'm stunned.

[KingSlayer]

You saw that as an attack? I saw it as an obvious truth, particularly after Microsoft's comments last week.

"I just wanted to make it clear from Chris Lewis’ comment last week and the fact that he’s saying, 'Well, this is great for consumers,' and that they’re going to protect their consumers. I think that that is an admirable stance to take. That being said, while they might be protecting their consumers, what are they protecting them from? And what it looks like they’re protecting them from is the ability to see great content show up on a superior technology."

What's the problem?

[Machioto]

That is funny!but I wish both gaming division could get past this bs to make sure all of us have the same multiplat experience like windows on sony viaos,that sort of unity.

[dragonelite]

shitty content and unfair content distribution between platforms. And from ms it was a reason to avoid a publisher title. But then again instead of looking for evidence and putting away fanboyishm you should know that deadspace 2 on the ps3 had more content then the 360 version. And there are more games.

[sarshelyam]

Truth hurts...but it most certainly wasn't an attack.

[rezzah]

Emotions can blur reality.

Someone has an emotional attachment to MS

>_>

[stunkilla]

it's M$ not MS

[NYC_Gamer]

Their policy does need some changes

[Rhythmattic]

And with that, it would be better for all console gamers... 360/PS3 brethren alike.

[KingSlayer]

"I think what Chris and the other representatives at Microsoft are doing is protecting an inferior technology."

AND

"We want to welcome the indies and we've seen that become a very big part of our business because indies are recognizing that we aren’t demanding a pound of flesh in order for them to get a game published on our network."

That's some truth for that ass.

[dragonelite]

You have xbox live indie channel.
Where Microsoft put up a complete C# framework.

[CoReI5K]

Indie developers and publishers have no choice but to abide by Microsoft policies or if not go to a (Hackable) open network service as PSN.

[kmanmx]

You think Xbox Live isn't hackable?

Comedy.

[iamnsuperman]

Actually I think you should be talking about how someone from microsoft (can't remember who) openly said that they encourage to get indie games first is by giving a threat by saying if it isn't on our system first or at the very least at the same time they can choose not to release it on our platform. Quite a big threat to an indie developer.

[kaveti6616]

What difference does it make to the indie developer which system them release on first?

For Microsoft, it's bragging rights. For the indie dev, it means absolutely nothing.

I just see this as Sony complaining that MS is throwing their weight around.

The indie developer doesn't suffer at all from releasing first on 360, unless it means that a bunch of PS3 fanboys will interpret their decision as being blasphemy against Sony, and in turn boycott their game when it finally does come to PS3.

[radphil]

@CoReI5K

You must have missed the "threat" policies a while back then, basically stating with some games that either XBox gets them first, or they'll deny them publishing it on their platform.

I wish people would just use some sense of logic with their arguments if they're going to play devil's advocate with articles.

[mr_epsym_knird]

Microsoft will never ever admit they've been hacked. It's bad for business. LOL

The only reason Sony admitted it because they are a Japanese company. Japanese value pride and honesty.

[DiRtY]

Oh come on. The nuclear catastrophe in Japan proves you wrong.
The fact Sony did not tell you that your credit card information were stolen is another point.

Killing whales is not a value I am cheering for either

[Minato-Namikaze]

Where was it reported that CC info was stolen?

[SnotyTheRocket]

Dude, XBL is hackable (nothing is totally, 100%, unhackable, accept mabye the pentagon), wait till M$ dose some thing to piss them off.

[Pikajew]

Indie devs will be more tempted to go to xbox first

1. Bigger community
2. If it goes on PSN first it won't go on XBLA and they will mak less money
3. If the game has online it will be better on xbox

The Sony company is not run by a god it run by a person who want to make money just like MS owner. Both companies are good in there own way

[majiebeast]

Yeah cross game chat really improves games... Think before you start writing.

[JokesOnYou]

Yeah cross game chat is just a silly online gaming feature that does nothing for gamers.....yet it has been 1 of, if not THE most requested feature within hardcore sony forums for years. lol...."Think before you start writing." Good Advice.

[majiebeast]

It was in response to his if it has online its better on xbox comment. The only thing i can think off that psn doesnt have is xgame chat and that rly doesnt make xbox live better, and paying for it doesnt make it better either.

I dont get the whining for xgamechat. I have mumble for pc, but i always turn it off when i start playing a different game. Like i wanna talk to someone when im playing a dialogue heavy game like deus ex HR makes no sense to me.

[thebudgetgamer]

why?

[Rhythmattic]

Because his 360 doesn't work with PSN.

[sarshelyam]

On your points...

1) Arguable that many of these community members are repeat offenders. Banned on once username, inheriting another, etc., etc.
2) Well yes, it appears Microsoft won't be bothered by sloppy seconds due to some douchey semantics.
3) Why? This makes no sense. Is it better because you must pay for it? I fail to see the reason behind this one.

And on your parting statement, agreed...every company is in this to make money. Some, however, run a fair business, while others run shakedowns and dole out threats like they're going out of style.

[MrDead]

PSN has a more varied worldwide audience then the 360 indie devs stand to create a bigger following.

[GamersRulz]

"1. Bigger community
2. If it goes on PSN first it won't go on XBLA and they will mak less money
3. If the game has online it will be better on xbox"

#1 and 3 is complete non-sense, I am not sure about 2 though.

I can't see how XBL has bigger community, 360 sold 55m third of RROD so that an estimate of 19m active accounts, also I think PS3 was declared that it is the most console used for online since 2009.

how come xbox has better online aside from Cross game chat which has nothing to do with online gameplay.

[Skateboard]

Sony had to go get the most crap this gen and it's still standing tall.

MGS4 was hatin on

God OF War III

Gran Turismo 5

Uncharted series

Haze got murdered by fan boys,LOL.

All i know with a $600 price tag on launch how the F it did not die like the Dreamcast it's a miracle lol.

Playstation fanbase is loyal.

[SweatyFlorida]

Here's my take on your points:
1) Nonsense and idiotic to "still" think that as both communities or on par in size, if anything their will be more people online with Ps3 as you have to pay for LIVE.

2) Indie devs aren't "tempted" to go on xbox first, their FORCED to go or lose out. What kinda company does that to the people who will make games for them?

3) Online better? because of what exactly? cross-game chat? please

[SnotyTheRocket]

They think it's better because you have to pay for it, LOL.

[TheDivine]

I think indy dev's benefit from xbla. Look at bastion, braid, limbo, they all went to xbla first and made a name for themselves then went to psn/pc. It gets hype on xbla. Psn is getting better but if i were a dev nd had to chose xbla or psn id go xbla for sure.

The policy makes sure xbla gets the biggest downloadable games. Its cutthroat but it works, xbla has the best library hands down.

[RBdrift]

If your trying to say that dev's on the PSN havent gotten any benefit being on the PS3 i guess you havent seen the PSN's library lately?
Joe Danger
Comet Crash
Crash Commando
Echochrome
Everyday Shooter
Fat Princess
Flow
Flower
The Last Guy
Pixel junk and Pixel Junk shooter
Ratchet & Clank Future: Quest for Booty
Shatter
Siren Blood Curse
Super Star dust
Trine
Wipeout HD 1080p 60fps
and incoming
Journey and Payday The Heist
Also available are the PSone classics
Final Fantasy 7,8,9 ,tactics,etc
Metal gear solid
Dino crisis
RE2
And the list just goes on and on.
So how is it that devs on PSN dont benefit? I'm willing to bet that any of those games on the PSN there would be instant succeses on XBL just as they were on the PSN if XBL didn't have idiotic strict rules.
And in my opinion I believe PSN has more games that appeal to me as a gamer than XBL.

[zinki33]

What fucking community? You mean your friends list on
a payed (taxed) service,.. That you chat with whilst playing Halo or Cod? (Why do you even need cross game chat,.. Don't you need some games for cross game chat? And why the hell would anyone use that while playing a SP game,.. That is hardly a community,..

And it is not even payed, because it generates money for them,.. That is only the part of the picture,.. It is also payed, because they want to control you, with locking you into their social control grid system, because you are monetary invested in it and so are your friends. So you really cannot opt out,.. (Unless you have a PS3,.. and believe you me,.. once you and some of your friends get it,.. You won't be paying a cost of a new game per year, for fucking crossgame chat)

You want to see a global (even though regions are separated,..people have more accounts) community of people? Home is a real community oriented thing,.. I don't give much crap about it,.. but you want to talk about Playstation community? Let's just say it is not a bunch of 13year old talking smack and socialize, while playing Cod.

[Michael-Jackson]

.

[C0MPUT3R]

If MS doesn't change their ways. They will pay next gen. When pubs decide to ignore their next platform and support the PS4 instead.

[dgonza40]

they might still have activision under their wing :p

some fanboys might still calim that's enough lol

[majiebeast]

We all know M$ has been holding gaming back since 2008. Sony is out to steal the indie devs from M$ with the vita and possibly the ps4.

When you look at the devkit price for vita and the support sony is giving these smaller studios to put their games on psn i can see a shift from xbl to psn.

[stunkilla]

i kno right and the psvita has been named for dev easiest platfrom to make games on

[John Kratos]

Damn... Rob just took of the gloves and punched the shit out of the Xbox crew. With some fist of truth.

I wonder how Microsoft is going to respond? My bet is it's going to be some PR bullshit about how the Xbox is the leading platform for...blah blah blah, shut the fuck up.

[sarshelyam]

Well the difference is Microsoft sort of slapped them with a rubber glove and a limp wrist.

Sony comes to bat with a full on backhand in a gauntlet! The truth hurts, and Microsoft made some rather silly comments to start this commentary.

[John Kratos]

I don't really care who started it. But Sony is completely right on calling out bullshit policies that hold out the industry. So yeah Sony attack and fight for what's right, whether or not anybody started it. We need more of this kind of stuff in the industry. So we the gamers are informed on the different ways those in the industry are trying to screw us. No matter who it is.

[MetalProxy]

I read the article and thought it was interesting to read for sure. But for some reason Iam not all that surprised MS would do that to these companies and small indie guys.

[mr_epsym_knird]

Obviously, that's the truth about MS.

They shouldn't be doing those things or else karma's going to bite them in the end.

Considering MS will never get ahold of Japan territory EVER and Sony's regaining their claws over Europe. Next gen, Sony would never make the mistake of pricing their console beyond $500, and America would be all over Sony again because of their exclusives. The battle for next gen is nothing but between Nintendo and Sony.

MS would have to pay for their arrogance this generation as to what it did with Nintendo and Sony in the past.

[kma2k]

I was shocked, seems like companies always dance around flat out saying that there competition is inferior. Wow! Honestly both systems each do some things better than the other!

[schlanz]

I think its becoming more and more clear that MS doesn't give a shit about their fanbase or the development community. Its all about control to them.

[PirateThom]

It always has been. Microsoft only released the XBox because they saw the potential of a media centre in the living room and the PS2, well, it wasn't running a Microsoft OS. Microsoft's end game is to get people signed up to XBox Live Gold, it's to get them signed up to services and, basically, direct the content to them under Microsoft's terms.

If Microsoft could get away with XBox Live Gold and services without a gaming element, directly to a TV, they would do it in a heartbeat.

[WhiteLightning]

Kind of like comparing Hitler to Jesus Christ lol

The dictator who loves money, power and being in control to the friendly savior out to help the less fortunate (PSV dev kits and being developer friendly) :P

[iHEARTboobs]

It's nothing like comparing the two.

[Biggest]

Might be one of the most inappropriate comparisons ever on a gaming forum. Sounds more like a comment about politics.

[Godmars290]

More like making a comparison to a company that wants to control the market for the sake of controlling it, and one that wants to control it by making a good product. By earning its place.

[MrDead]

Your right about control, lets hope Microsoft and News Corp's plans never see the light of day, it's been too quiet.

http://www.pcworld.com/arti...

Scary

[sarshelyam]

(+)Money!

[CoReI5K]

Indie developers have a CHOICE go to a lesser service which is vulnerable to attacks PSN and not make a penny or go to a service which is regarded as Fort Knox which is impenetrable (XBOX LIVE) and make loads of $$$ and i know which i would chose :)

[PirateThom]

You protest too much. I would hazard a guess it's because you don't know what you're talking about.

[Sevir04]

#Dead

[Rhythmattic]

Sevir04

Yes, He/She did.

Brave words.......

[thehusbo]

Typical butthurt m$ fangirl. get out...

[bilbobob]

and we have a choice to. to listen to a n*b jockey like you are keep sane.

Make no money. Wow how retarded can one statement actually be.

[Skateboard]

Dirty but, effective.

[rezzah]

The truth is dirty?

Then lies must be clean.

[Gamer_Z]

The truth is MS is a cancer to the gaming industry.

[DigitalRaptor]

Microsoft are the bullies of the gaming industry.

I wouldn't say they are the cancer, because they have offered a lot and will probably offer a lot more in the future. However I think in its current state, the gaming industry would be better off without them.

They are too cutthroat for me to see them in a positive light.

[Father Murder X]

I am confused as to why everyone is attacking xbox live and Ms's policies.
1. They were the ones that created it. They had the vision they had the plan. xbox live is their baby. They can do whatever the hell they want to.
2. Xbox Live has been an enormous success with them doing it their way. Developers (Valve, etc) have no business telling them what to do with their service.
3. Sony would love for Psn to be on Live's level of success so of course they will try to exploit any avenue that they can.

[PirateThom]

If you'd read it, they care because it affects PS3 with Microsoft demanding parity on discs, this gimping games, or only publishing games for indie developers if they can get exclusivity, thus blocking the games on PSN

[maniacmayhem]

What games were gimped or held back?

[PirateThom]

Eh... we don't know because of the platform parity.

Don't try and defend Microsoft over this, it's anti-consumer, anti-developer nonsense.

[maniacmayhem]

I'm not defending anything. Its just that nobody knows. there's no proof, what have we seen where this affected the industry in a bad way. All we see is Sony bashing MS and everyone including you are quick to believe it.

Words like "gimped" are being thrown around like pies in an old beastie boys video. We have people saying that games are being withheld from psn...which ones? What games were held back from psn?

I'm not defending MS, I just want to know. I know the truth is out there....help me grasp it!

*tear

[XabiTheHumble]

@maniacmayhem
Oh the truth is out there alright, but whether you are trying to grasp it or not is questionable. Lets pretend devs have not either implyed or openly complained about the limitations of that DVD9 garbage. Lets pretend FF13 doesn't exist.

[JokesOnYou]

Well that's the strategy, sony says it and its gospel, its "anti-consumer", the absence of evidence on N4G IS proof enough, sure it *may have hurt sony consumers but thats business 101= offer what your competitor cant, lol I doubt if sony had the upper hand in the online arena like they did with the ps2 market share that they cared when xbox users missed out on some 3rd party games....but devs choosing ps2 over xbox because it made financial sense for them at the time is fine, but OMG if micro is using its position like Apple does with ipod, iphone & ipad to get more support from electronic manufacturers for their brand then its cool, I mean wouldn't it be more "consumer friendly" for sony to make as many Zune supporting products as they do for the ipod???? poor Zune, lol but wait ONLY micro is "evil" for doing smart business, errr I mean being "anti-consumer", pffft and sony loves you.

[Rhythmattic]

JokesOnYou
Well having brought it up, do you like apple?

[Graey]

...What!

Seriously this is what your coming up with. What the article is stating is that Microsoft limits what can be pushed out on their console if its not the exact same thing being pushed out on another console.

Where as PS3 has blue ray which holds substantial more data than DVD. MS has come out with a fix for this. They restrict what can be allowed if your trying to put a game on both consoles. There by limiting the whole blue ray edge.

How is that okay to do? If tomorrow all the developers decided not to publish their games on 360, then would you change your stance on this issue?

[memots]

isn't this proof that Ms is holding back everyone/everything else?

Why would a dev try to make more content and games look better on ps3? That would mean losing the ever important sales aspect if the 360( very important subject).

Dirty dirty dirty tactics.

[Gamer_Z]

Its not about making one machine look better than the other its about pushing each platform to their limits and giving the consumer more content but unfortunately for MS the PS3 can do a bit more than what the 360 can and that's not fanboy bs that's a fact just like the PC can do more than any console but Microsoft will never allow devs to take full advantage because they want to keep up the illusion that xbox is not inferior to any platform even PC. Now that devs are starting not care and are pushing what the PC can do, hopefully they will start doing the the same with the PlayStation.

[RegorL]

Wonder if EA is fighting with this...

Wasn't BF3 on PS3 was announced to have BFBC2 Vietnam as an bonus (@E3)?

BF3 PS3 > BF3 XBOX => MS wont allow EA to publish BF3 XBOX
(What if EA want to add more detailed textures as well?)

"... should the content and features available on the Xbox 360 not be in parity with versions on competing platforms, then Microsoft reserves the right to not allow that content to be published for Xbox 360 ..."

Developers confirming that their games will look the same on both platforms maybe are addressing Microsoft more than their customers.

I wonder if BF3 will actually be released on XBOX...
-"Sorry XBOX players but Microsoft are not allowing us to publish on XBOX"

[mr_epsym_knird]

Are you comparing EA to indie developers? LOL

EA can call the shots, those poor developers can't. Simple as that.

[RegorL]

You didn't read the article did you?

"Here’s the thing... It's now progressed to not just be these smaller indie pubs that are obviously very easy to kick around. It’s moved up the food chain. It’s gone to B and A level publishers"

Edit: No XBOX BF3 showings yet - why?
PAX would have been a natural place to show it in.
(Japan is PS3, Europe is mixed, USA is XBOX markets)

[PhunnyJesta]

If bf3 wouldn't come to 360 it would practically be a ps3 exclusive since EA shat all over the pc community with forced origin with retail and digital copies

i really doubt EA would just drop the xbox version this far in development, they would have to make up for it in some way. Then again EA is also competing with activision as worst publisher lol

[RegorL]

But WHY isn't BF3 released on Steam?

Steam is acting like MS but for PC, but Valve has no veto rights for PC there are other channels.

Edit:
"Game of Games" might even be dirtier than "Game of Thrones"

[PhunnyJesta]

I kinda agree with valve though, dlc should also be sold through steam. Its ok if EA wants to sell it on their own store, just not exclusive to their store. Although it does make me wonder why games like mass effect havent been pulled since you have to get the dlc through cerberus network.

I believe EA is practically forced to sell their dlc on consoles through xbl and psn just cause thats the way a more closed console works, but for PC they really can do whatever they want to.

[JonnyBigBoss]

Once again, Sony is the company I support.

[omi25p]

Yeah I don't support companys that openly attack the competition

[BrianG]

Openly attack or speak their mind on the truth?

You might be confusing the two.

Either way you must not support MS or Nintendo.

[Godmars290]

Would be a bit, only a bit mind, ironic if this gen ended on the down note for MS because of arrogance, just as it started for Sony.

[Sevir04]

Its really gotten ridiculous hasnt it? The truth is that Devs are not benefiting from MS's publishing policies. I forsee the big publishers like EA and activision walk all over MS and do big things but other publishers like capcom and sega and and indi devs will have to play devil's advocate!

[Father Murder X]

Its called business 101. There are not here to make friends. It's all about making money. Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony would not be where they are today being nice. F*ck the crap about loving the developers,gamers etc that is bullsh*t. Microsoft is doing what they got to do. Just like Sony would do.

Microsoft has come along way in a short period of time. You can't become this successful this fast without being aggressive and having aggressive/questionable business tactics.

Personally, I think that Sony will learn from this generation and it will be all out war next gen for sure.

again we are the ones who win!!

[XabiDaChosenOne]

Am I missing something? How are we winning in this situation? I would hate to do business with you.

[maniacmayhem]

Yawn...

Again i'm going to say what games did this affect? If the problem is this big why not release it on ps3 only? i mean if the ps3 has no restrictions and is so open then why deal with MS? I wonder what Sony's TRC'S or policies are?

What indie game suffered from less content because of MS'S strict policy?

I can see this being a problem back in the olden days when it was just Nintendo and Sega. But today with so many viable alternatives to get your game to the masses PC, iPhone, Android, PS3, ETC ETC. i just have to question the severity of this article.

I wish we would actually get a real story on why this is a problem.

[SweatyFlorida]

Dust 514 is living proof of the statements in the article. Was never announced for Ps3 and was considered an xbox exclusive or at the very least multiplat but I guess the guys at CCP ran into these absurd policies that M$ threw at their faces and it ended up being a Ps3 exclusive.

This has more to do with the updating freely and adding content, and since Ps3 restrictions ARE slim to none, CCP joined them and ditched Micro. Another studio that was having problems with Micro's policies was Hi-rez studios and their game Tribes:Ascend, if I remember correctly.

I guess a reason why you don't hear more stories like this that back up the statements in the article is because those small indie devs are embarrassed to admit that they took the money route and held back there game for money.

[Otheros00]

gta4
ffxiii
lost planet 2

Just some of them. If you want to know which games have been gimped that badly then use google.

[younglj01]

Wow so this mean BF3 was going to have 64 players on PC n PS3 with cross platform MP?

After reading this article its making me think about alot of other games that was released that could have more content.

[rhcpfan]

"Wow so this mean BF3 was going to have 64 players on PC n PS3 with cross platform MP?"

How exactly did you come to that conclusion....?

[younglj01]

If EA had 64 players only on PS3 and PC that means it couldnt have been released on Xbox do u understand now?

[qwertyz]

crysis 1 maxed out(even without mods makes uncharted 3 look like a ps2 game stop trying to make the ps3 look more powerful than it actually is both ps3 and 360 are pretty close in power have you seen gears 3, crysis 2, witcher 2, RAGE and forza 4 on 360? MS is just to greedy to create talented first party studios to push their own hardware and instead invests in kinect. aside from that crysis 1 has fully destructible and explorable MASSIVE environments, is NOT scripted while uncharted 2/3 are heavily script and does all effects and physics in realtime while uncharted 2/3(and all console games for that matter) use some prebaked lights, skyboxes, SSAO and pre calculated physics.

the pc verison of battlefied 3 also makes all console games look like ps2 games, so does the following pc games

witcher 2
crysis 1(even without mods)
crysis warhead
crysis 2(even without mods or directx11 patch, mods or high res texture pack)
metro 2033
gta IV with mods
shogun 2

by the end of this year you can also add rage and skyrim to the list. consoles where never powerful even a 2005 dual gpu high end pc is more powerful than ps3/360 a 2006 single gpu high end pc is 5-7 times more powerful than ps3/360 so technically pc completely eclipsed consoles in power by late 2006.

the 512mb ram consoles use has been outdated since 2004!

in fact most multiplatform games that make it to pc look better than anything on consoles including gears 3 and uncharted 3 but battlefield 3 console version does more than uncharted 3/gears 3 in terms of scale, physics, AI etc an still looks better

PC has been a GENERATION ahead of consoles for a while now.

if publishers hated MS so much why won't they just stop supporting 360? because they make more money of 360 than ps3 most of the time and this is because 360 has almost no exclusives.

Developers don't hate MS as much as sony says its just natural that they says such things because they are indeed rivals to microsoft. all developers care about is MONEY and they are making it off 360 so they don't care if 360 fans don't get extra content or not.

ps3 cannot handle 64 players like battlefied 3 pc. ps3 just like 360 isn't even as powerful as a dual gpu high end pc from 2005. if you think ps3 can do 64 players battlefied 3 wit those graphics and all the destruction you are delusional and ignorant a mordern pc required to run battlefied 3 maxed out 1080p 60fps is 35 times more powerful than ps3 so what does that tell you ? ps3 and 360 will run the game at the LOWEST settings because thats the best they can do

and stop riding sonys d%ck because you know they are exagerating right? its onl free to play devs and valve that are mad that 360 is a closed network not all indies devs are upset if they where then why are they still supporting 360. this was the same sony that claimed ps3 would render all game at 120fps(120hz) and will do 4d graphics which don't even exist, just like MS sony isn't credible the only cosnole maker that speaks the truth is NINTENDO

even mordern warfare 2 maxed out 1080p on pc looks better than killzone 3 thats just how pathetic ps3 is compared to pc

[thehusbo]

Good read and well said by sony.

[Optical_Matrix]

What that MS exec said the other week is proof of why games like FFXIII had so much content cut. People tried saying that it was Square Enix's fault or that it was a PS3 fanboy myth. Microsoft themselves basically admitted it. I think it's a pathetic tactic that holds back the industry as a whole. I don't know how demanding parity on discs just because you were stupid enough to use a last gen format in a next gen system can be justified by anyone.

[PirateThom]

Oh, believe me, it will be justified by people burying their head in the sand and pretending it's not as big a deal as we're all making out. The fact it was Microsoft who admitted to this is the most telling thing of all.

As a consumer, I am pissed off. As consumers, everyone should be. It doesn't matter if this affected 1 game or 100 games, it should never happen. Microsoft are, effectively, screwing over a userbase not even connected to them.

[RAmar101]

Sony policy is much better, microsofts is game breaking

[N311V]

Microsoft want us to believe that the PS3 and XBOX are on par. Now that most developers have finally come to grips with Sony's advanced architecture MS are concerned their illusion will be shattered. This policy is essentially inhibiting developers from taking full advantage of the PS3's capabilities and it being revealed as the superior consol, plain and simple and it pisses me off.

[creepjack]

Really? THats funny considering nobody but Sony owned developers even think that the PS3 is superior . Every developer that doesn't have their balls in a Sony vice admits both console have strengths and weaknesses and they are in fact on par with each other in the end. Try again.

[Ulf]

Lol. I get a kick out of the MS fanboy comments, trying to change the subject and divert attention from the topic at hand.

[baodeus]

So how about this hypothetical question:

1. If xlive go free (to play online) like PSN, which would u prefer: xlive or psn?
2. If PSN charge the same fee as xlive for playing online, which would you prefer: xlive or psn?

For this particular question, you have to choose one, can't say i won't take either. This is also base entirely on the current state of xlive and PSN (don't know about future update and what not).

[BrightFalls76]

Personally I'm not a fan of either because I am not into online gaming. As long as I have the ability to download games, dlc, demos, etc I'm happy.

With that said I prefer xlive because you get screenshots and demos of all the games. There are so many titles on PSN that I have never heard of so I have to go onto YouTube to find clips to see what the games even look like.

[P_Bomb]

XBL does not have demos of everything, only Arcade games where I spend little time as they get most of the same multiplat demos PSN gets.

Even as far as their own exclusives, There are NO DEMOS of Left4Dead1, Mass Effect1, Gears of War1, Gears of War2, Fable1, Fable2, Fable3, Halo 3, Halo3:ODST, Halo Wars, Alan Wake etc. Game Marketplace --> Titles A-Z.

[XabiDaChosenOne]

Full truth finally comes smh... Lets see the xbox fanboys spin this one.

[BrightFalls76]

As a long time fan of the Xbox brand and on again off again relationship with Sony I think his comment about "protecting an inferior technology" is more or less true.

I have each slim console sitting under my 60" Sony Bravia and the 360 overall is feeling outdated while the PS3 (to me anyway) feels like it has room to grow from a technological stand point.

However, the ability to install full games to the hard-drive is something I love about the 360 and wish Sony would allow on the PS3 to cut down on heat and the slow, noisy blu-ray lense reading information off of a disc.

[creepjack]

Nah, lack of RAM and a vastly outdated GPU will make sure you aren't gonna get much more than you see now. Go play on an AVERAGE PC and you'll see real fast how out dated they both are.

[modesign]

because modern pc's are just starting to scrape by the quad cores, were as the ps3 had 8 processors back when; 2007. yeah, pc is just starting to be vastly supperior but its no suprise modern pc's are far ahead of consoles from 2007/2006. congrats pc.

[ljh217]

People need to learn to read.

"The gist of it is that Microsoft has some very strict policies on what they're willing to publish on retail discs or on Xbox Live Arcade, and if it arrives on a Sony platform first or has more content on a Sony platform, Microsoft won't publish it."

What this means is that if DLC/Content arrives first on the PS3 OR with more content, then it might not be published on Xbox Live.

The important thing to realise here is it's CONTENT/DLC, not the retail release of a game, that might not be published. How hard is it to get that?

My opinion? I support Microsoft. As a paying Xbox Gold customer I want the most out of my paid subscription. Making sure Xbox customers get the most out of the current games market is definitely a good thing for me personally. It might not be good for PS3 owners but why is that my problem (or Microsofts)?

[modesign]

microsoft is like a anchor to the industry, dragging down everything, starting from before, many multiplat titles were suppose to be huge, but had to be dumbed down to accomodate the 360' architecture and physical storage.

[KendrickGLS]

Father Murder X knows what he's talking about! Xbox is what's happening! Xbox LIVE Forever! Righteous!

[creepjack]

Microsoft has brought more innovation to console gaming than both Sony and Nintendo combined. Indy developers wouldn't even have a console platform if it weren't for Microsoft having the balls to start it. PSN wouldn't even be close to what it is if it weren't for Live to give them the blueprint. Sony has done nothing but copy everyone else this entire generation. They force the only guy out of Sony that even had a shred of imagination and innovation. This is nothing more than Sony being Sony, arrogant for no reason and talking crap cause that's all they can do.

[P_Bomb]

Yes MS deserves credit for launching XBL, but you can't rest on your laurels either as Sony and Nintendo have already learned.

As far as copying, I frankly wish they'd copy Sony sometimes and do things like time stamp achievements, let me check my sent messages, type a message in friend requests, offer a web browser, cancel subscriptions right on the console and not via phone call, copy videos and pics onto the harddrive via USB and not just view them temporarily, give real money MSRPs and not monopoly points, do away with the whole Windows Live/hotmail/gamertag forced link up BS.

I guess my point is nobody's perfect or without room for improvement.

[ShaunCameron]

Actually, Microsoft's only real contribution is popularizing online multiplayer though Sega started it all with the Dreamcast.

Sony may have copied everybody else this generation, but Microsoft copied everybody else their entire console industry existence. Halo and Call Of Duty aside, the XBox was a PS2 wannabe with a little smattering of N64 leftovers.

[Sarobi]

"Sony has done nothing but copy everyone else this entire generation", that is funny you say such a thing, because Microsoft has done nothing but copy off others as well, they continue to try and make Windows similar to OSX, they have tried and failed to push ZUNE in the direction IPOD has went, they have also failed in their phone section, which is trying very hard to be similar to Android phones

So when it comes right down to it, there is no defense argument for Microsoft, because they have not brought out a single product that is original in anyway

[AliTheBrit420]

"Indies are recognizing that we aren’t demanding a pound of flesh in order for them to get a game published on our network."

You say that Sony

But Microsoft STILL has a far, far bigger operation going on FOR Indie gamers aren't they? look at the hundreds of indie games on XBL..

Sorry Sony, maybe you didn't get this, you financially backing a developer to make sure you get their game isn't an Indie game.

Actually making an indie game, and having it up their, for other gamers to buy on XBL is pretty realistic, no where near impossible.

Fairly sure doing the same for PSN would be next to impossible on your own..

[deno]

Where's my vodka boris? oh really, microsoft capped it.

[StarWolf]

well duh. thats why i knew GTA4 would be dumbed down since its playable on the Xbox360

[DFresh]

That's the Microsoft way for you.
:(

[Sarobi]

Gabe Newell would probably agree with this

[TitanUp]

a burger with pickles,lettuce,ketchup,mustar d,bell peper,red peper,onion,sweet onion sauce,cucumber,cricket, and bacon.

thats what i ate about 2 hours ago

kinda random but everyone else was posting about food

this is just business

[cyclindk]

How was it?

[TitanUp]

really great hamburger its what i usually it and people call it disgusting

[0321]

lolololololol Microsoft.

[cyclindk]

Microsoft limiting competition instead of actively competing... Not surprising.

And the people defending and even comending a corporation for such practices, utter stupidity.

[ZeroOnyx]

To all Xbots, Ignorance must be bliss

[hot111]

Sony sounds butthurt,not surprised though,XBLA is destroying PSN.
Publishers must be in love with Sony...oh wait
Sony managed to leak millions of personal data on internet so PSN was disabled for a month,not to mention PS3 crapastic architecture that is so loved among publishers...and so on

[kingslayer1000]

dry your tears

[mrmikew2018]

@hot111

Wow....talk about being hurt.

[Rhythmattic]

Such a well rounded, intelligent post./s

[Knightofelemia]

I can see Microsoft wanting the best but their policy is going to bite them in the ass. Quite honestly if I was an indie studio after reading this I would go with Sony or even Nintendo or pray Sega fires up a new console. Microsoft is no different than Apple when it comes to people making apps for the Iphone they have to jumps through hoops with Apple to get Apples seal of approval. Unlike apps for Android which is easier to produce.

[Objective]

What a gratuitous load of bull! Sony and their execs should really learn to STFU and do better for themselves rather than put the competition down with such childish and baseless attacks. Protecting an inferior technology?? Lol please pray tell how? I can't believe that Sony execs lower themselves to the level of their fanboys in making spurious and ridiculous allegations!

[M1chl]

Would love to see some comments from publishers as well (retail publishers)... I cant say I liked that, talking people of one company, about is their competition...

[M1chl]

*without “is“ at the end* : (

[MasterCornholio]

" I think what Chris and the other representatives at Microsoft are doing is protecting an inferior technology. I think they want to dumb it down and keep it as pedestrian as possible so that if you want to do anything for Blu-ray or you have extra content above 9 gigs or you want to do anything of that nature, you’d better sure as heck remember that Microsoft can't handle that,"

WOW talk about being harsh. As much as i agree with him in some points i think he goes a bit overboard with others.

[DanSolo]

I'm no fanboy of either console, but I have to say Microsoft do have some very cynical and generally shitty business practises.... I know it's a cut throat world out there and in business you have to be ruthless... but it does seem like Microsoft is just basically a bully....

I think Microsoft coming into the games industry definitely helped push things along, online gaming is better because of them, they have forced other companies to up their game, and things like that.... but for everything useful they bring to the table.... they pretty much just throw away any respect you can have for them by acting like a fat greedy kid who wants not only his cake, but every other kids cake too!

[StifflerK]

It's a competitive market , that type of thing is to be expected.

I'm pretty sure Sony and Nintendo do similar.

[Ch1d0r1]

good read.

Im sure MS applies this strict policy so they wont get screwed like with the Final Fantasy 13 incident.

[N311V]

Games should be the best they can be on each platform. If this policy was in place when FFXIII released do you feel it fair that PS3 owners receive a lower quality game just because the XBOX can't produce equal graphics. That is what this policy of parity is trying to do.

[Ch1d0r1]

Obviously it would be unfair if PS3 was the inferior technology. Im sure this policy isn't applied to some of the big AAA games out there. Someone else posted that this policy has been in place since the original xbox days. Im sure Enix told them "this is the FF13 version you get or you get nothing"

[TKCMuzzer]

I can fully believe this happens. History is pretty much in favour of Microsoft wanting to control. If you don't think this happens than your not living in the real world.

[Demented_Sadist]

JERRY JERRY JERRY!!! :D

Seriously though M$ are like Sauron. They want too control, they have the will to and the want to dominate the free people's of the gaming world. You see it all began with the forging of the first Xbox, in the fires of Mount Redmond. And into this console(s) M$ poured their malice, their evilnesss, their greed. One Console too rule them all...

[Bleach]

I don't know what the big deal is, it's the truth. It's a ridiculous policy and in the end it's consumers that lose out.

[Raven_Nomad]

Sony sounds so mad....lol $onyMadBro?

Anyway, $ony actually has a similar policy, any game that comes to the PS3 that was a timed exclusive, like Mass Effect 2, well it has to come with EXTRA content in order for it to be released on PS3.

So it's not like $ony is not without it's faults. If publishers don't want to have their games released on the Xbox 360 they don't have to. It's a business people, not Unicef.

[matgrowcott]

So your argument here is that Sony is as bad as Microsoft because if they don't get the game for 12 months after original release, they want their users to have extra incentive to buy?

Opposed to Microsoft actively going out of their way to effect PS3 games ahead of launch?

If I was a dev, I know exactly which situation I'd be happier with.

[Soldierone]

Ummm generally those games already have bonus content anyways....and they do that so the game sells. Why buy a game at full price when you can just go to the other console and get it for cheap?

Flawed argument...is flawed.

[skullmcrex]

This website should be called news for playstation fanboys, go ahead disagree and take bubbles of whatever the fudge you guys call it, I couldn't give a damn. I also remember when the xbox fanboys were filling this place, but seriously does every comment have to be so biased? Are you guys are 17 year old whores?

[clockworkrazor]

Fucking N4G filled with nothing but fucking PC elitists and PS3 fucking Fanboys.

LIKE i SAID BAN ME YOU FUCKERS. hypocrite bitches.

[tiffac008]

[The user has closed his/her account. The user is not active anymore]

Well it looks like you got what you wished for.

I mean honestly if anyone doesn't really care for flame wars like this why even read the article or post at all?

Just move on and be at peace.

[nix]

poor guy.

[lumley666]

''This sony idiot is just jealous of MS dominance. I mean last gen the ps2 dominated, and now the underdog(360) has come on the scene with a suprisingly dominant showing. It's funny how things change gen to gen. This is just a jealous sony idiot, and he has alot to be jealous of. I think its funny lol''

wat an idiot lol, as if microsoft are dominating, there barely leading, plus they have no games lol awww poor little fagbox fanboy lol

[RealtorMDandDC]

Like I stated before.....this practice straddles innovation in gaming..Microsoft is using the fact that it has inferior technology and leverage it's power to make the competition seem inept.....

--It's like if Apple strong arm their app publishers...and stated if you make an app for Apple you cannot make it better or add more content for Android phones or you cannot sell your apps thru iTunes...

--Seriously this should make every gamer mad...because we as gamers are loosing out....and especially Xbox 360 owners .....

--If a major game is debuting this ensures that the publisher has to make the same generic content across the board or it will not be on Xbox?!?

--This is a terrible ass practice....I'm very happy I THREW AWAY my Xbox 360...when the DVD tray begun to malfunction....

--Because of this I will never ever own another Xbox system(XBOX LIVE ID KMJFNIGUY).....because from my point of view Microsoft is shiting on me as a gamer.......they are regulating how good, great or fun a game should be...their are games and if a developer or publisher wants to add as much content to ensure sure the up most fun why not let them!!!!

[Jazz4108]

Cry mea river Sony. Last I checked Ms has been ahead of you where it counts his entire generation and that is sales. I woul not say going from a powerhouse company with the ps2 and being so arrogant as to say next gen does not start till we say and where they have been this entire gen at the botom looking up is exactly a win for sony andthey know it so like a child they talk bad about there competition. Way to show your true colors sony.

[banner]

Wow... Lmfao he straight out said it's cause ms has "inferior tech" ouch!

Well IMO if devs stand up and just go exclusive to ps3, what if counter strike was exclusive to ps3? That would be the start of something. Last I remember I think what killed the dreamcast was when EA stopped support and madden was huge back then.

All Sony has to do is go around trying to land exclusive stuff on games for ps3, let ms bully them. But it's also important that they market that game very well even if they didn't get the exclusive cause if it sells more then the pubs will bring over exclusivley from that point on. Considering the very small amount of devs, well see who is hurting for games in the long run.

[MARKUS_MAX1MUS]

"Come on now this coming from the company that removed a feature from paying consumers. Allowed their network to be hacked and those same consumers information stolen. Then waited weeks after the fact to tell those same people. With every new remodel they find new features to remove just to save money on a system they overpriced! The same company that felt it was better to have a Blu Ray player instead of RAM. So their consumers couldn't have features like cross game chat. Ya Sony may be pushing the industry forward, but the are screwing their consumers with every step forward they take."

Theres Sonys problems mapped out aswell, niether Sony or MS are any good when it comes to consumers, they can talk about consumer rights all they like but if we werent protected by law, hell would we be in the shit.

MS + SONY = BOTH greedy companies, dont let PR fool you, all they want is your money and thats it.

[RealtorMDandDC]

Gamers....and you can continue to defend Microsoft's ability to short change their obvious loyal customer base.

--As of this moment the core gamers that has helped Microsoft become a player(pun intended) in the gaming industry are getting shitting on... ie: Kinect ("look Ma no hands")

I'm happy i own a PS3 and have to ability to actually play a great deal of diverse games that stretches the imagination.

[MastaMold]

Cant believe ppl still defending M$ WOW what has gaming become?

[Demented_Sadist]

I agree M$ are a cancer on gaming (and a cancer on technology in general). They use their vast amounts of money (money recieved through their de-facto OS monoply), they use that money to stagnate/stop innnovation, to suffocate their compitition/rivals, to bribe others to their will... and they use their vast sums of money too ultimatly ruin the industrys their involved in.

And I know all companys are greedy but M$ are on a another level, they take the cake so too speak. And i do genueinely hope M$'s whole business strategy backfires on them big time, and comes back to bite them on the arse hard. i really do.

[mkcoolsubzero]

Good points. Not innovative or stirring the pot if Microsoft keeps limiting developers on what they can put in the industry. I just think of all the games that could have possibly been made.

I did not like how he said "inferior" or "superior" when categorizing the two consoles. Bad word choice from a representative in my opinion.

[zerocrossing]

Interesting article, M$ standing in the way of progress once again why do people support them?

[zero_cool]

I wish they would just publish news on games instead of the politics of gaming!

[Droid Control]

Its refreshing to see an exec speak out and put the PR trash speak behind him for once.

I've said it before and ai'll say it again. M$ should have included a HD-DVD drive in their launch consoles.

Now they are screwed. They can't add a Blu-Ray drive (Even if they were willing to swallow their pride) because it would split the xbox audience.

[GusBricker]

You go where the money is. You go where the customers are.

Sony, stop bitching about MS tactics and build a better online, because obviously the devs don' give a shit if they're getting their asses kicked and do you know why? They like selling games and making money.

Imagine that.

[AO1JMM]

Indie games sell on 360 we all know that.

[Tzuno]

Hahahahahhh!!! Money Money Money.

[AO1JMM]

Just more MS vs Sony bullcrap with the fanboys and trolls taking sides.

[scark92]

It seems that from the Past few Articles that Xbox360 is in a war with PS3 and PC.. Things have changed huh..

[abczby]

Microsoft is doing this so they can guarantee publishers won't give Sony exclusive deals, which is actually incredibly smart on their part and not bad for the industry at all. No one likes console specific DLC or items because then people playing on other platforms get the shaft. This guy's an idiot.

[Aceluffy]

No, actually you are the idiot who haven't realized that you've been getting the shaft all this time. For a starter, how about paying the same $50-$60 every time a game is released on both PS3 and 360 ?
PS3 gamers get a Bluray disc which is much more scratch resistant while you get a regular DVD.

Are you seriously thinking that it's okay for MS to hold back gaming industries ? Particularly and especially progress from indie developers ?
So nobody except developers owned by Sony can utilize the extra space on Bluray disc or the open policy on PSN just because MS won't condone to it ? Just because their DVD format ( Which is pioneered by Sony anyway ) can't fit all the extra contents the developers intended in the first place ? Or just because their closed Xbox live policies won't allow any different platform integration ?

Wake up dude, learn all the non biased facts first before spouting nonsense, it might do some good for your brain and your reputation.

[BrianC6234]

This explains why PS3 gamers are still stuck with mediocre third party games while Sony's games are way better. The publishers need to wake up and say screw you to Microsoft. They don't own the gaming industry. They wouldn't even be in console gaming but Sony proved it can be a great market for adult gaming. Go back to publishers all backing Sony already.

[mendicant]

I took this from gaf. This about sums it up.

#106

It must be hard for sony, they were once the leaders of gaming being able to dictate to publishers what platforms they develop for due to their 80% domination

But that is no more, get over it sony you are no longer a leader

The only reason PS3 has a reasonable online experience is due to xbox leading the way for many, many years. Sony should be thankful that xbox live dragged the slowly/reluctantly into the online world with ps3

Total sour grapes, sony abused their position in the past and now when they dont have the power they bitch/moan/cry

Karma is a bitch eh :-)

[Soldierone]

I don't see how that is the case. Sony is still using the same business model. You don't see articles about Sony paying out the arse to get "exclusive" third party content....you see them making their own games and then getting companies like EA to willingly put bonus content on PS3 now. If that wasn't true then MS would of never had to state "we won't publish it if it has more content on PS3"

PS2 was dominance.....everyone saying 360 is dominance is full of it. When 360 breaks records and blows away competition like the PS2 did then you can say that. Is the 360 "leading" right now, yeah, but not by that much and if you take away the extra year its even closer of a race. Let alone the only reason Xbox is getting half the stuff its getting is because MS begs third parties and pays out the arse to get absolutely everything. When one of the your two hottest titles for the year is also coming out on the competing platform, how is that good?

MS needs to take their money and use it to create their own base of games like Sony does and things might not seem so desperate. The only people that turn to those tactics are the people afraid of someone being better, and lets face it its just about time for a new Xbox and they are not going to be able to compete with the "early" advantage or "easier to grasp" mechanics next generation.

MS is smart for humping Call of Duty for all its worth, but what happens when COD finally dies? Where are they going to turn to? Back to Halo? Their sales are going to crumble. I say this because I DONT want that to happen. Competition is good, it pushed both console makers further. Take that away and you might as well let Apple jump in the market and make sub par crap. You want to see people actually buy an inferior console? Let them make the iConsole.

[Aceluffy]

We have people defending a company like Microsoft with this kind of policy ? And they call themselves gamers ?

[Allowen]

Get a game such Skyrim, an open world game that has to be in ONE disc because of the Xbox360 's limitations.

It could be in several discs and have a mandatory installation and it would have a lot less problem with content.
But that is not the case and MS does not improve their gaming console allowing installation on the HDD that could benefit a lot games such Skyrim that would gain more content and less scenario repetition.

Many people are happy about it being in just one disc without knowing that Bethsoft problaby had to cut some content ,reduce the quality of the graphics and sound so it could fit on the 360 and then since the game has to be preaty much the same on the PS3 because of MS politics, every one loses.

We will never know how much better Skyrim , RAGE etc could be if the xbox360 had an HD DVD or mandatory installation on the 360.
And what upsets me the most is that epic games such as this are not made every year and so we may be losing a lot more potential that this game could have been if it was PS3/PC or even only PC exclusive.

Don't forget that the single player mode of RAGE was supposed to use almost TWO full DVD9 of space. But then it was shrunk to ONE DVD9 for the 1P mode and other disc is just for the online mode.
Just imagine if this game, Assassin's Creed , Oblivion , Skyrim, Fallout3 etc would not be if they were not limited to the DVD9 of the 360.