For a long time PS3 owners believed they've been recieving the short end of the stick when it comes to getting exclusive content for multiplatform games. But with the PS3 exclusive Joker DLC, many people were left wondering why Sony have chosen now to start buying into the exclusive content deals, and whether it could mean a change of tactics for the company. Sangria of n4g.com takes a look...

Remember the times when it has been announced that Microsoft paid $50 millions (which represents twice the budget of an AAA game) to get exclusive DLCs for GTA IV. Certainly a smart move considering the prodigious sales the game benefited. On a same side, Eidos announced an exclusive chapter for Tomb Raider : Underworld. Fallout 3 also obtained 5 DLCs on PC and Xbox 360 while PS3 is still waiting for its first one.

For a gamer that only owns one console, it's either considered as a good deal (if you own the good console) either an irritating choice (if you own the wrong console). And for gamers that owns both PS3 and Xbox 360, the platform of choice is pretty obvious when one gets DLC and not the other.

But when Sony proudly announced an exclusivity deal for the upcoming Batman : Arkham Asylum game (scheduled for PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 the 28th August 2009), most of the gamers praised Sony as a smart move, a great slap for Xbox 360 owners that kept exhibiting their exclusive DLCs on other games. They probably feel as much irritated about it as PS3 owners for 360/PC-exclusive DLC.

We should wonder what does this PS3-exclusive DLC represent for Sony?
| More
News story attached to:
Register as a member to subscribe comments.
  • 1
    FinalFantasyFanaticc Aug 29, 09
    Two Words:

    Timed Exclusive.
    • 1
      HisServant77 Aug 29, 09
      I thought so too, but the devs said otherwise. Until they prove to me that their word cannot be trusted, I'll believe the devs.
      • 1
        FinalFantasyFanaticc Aug 29, 09
        Don't forget, Bethesda kept stating that the Fallout 3 DLC was never ever coming to the PS3 then all of a sudden 5months down the line it's announced for the PS3 plus the rest of them is announced for PS3.

        Pretty sure the only reason Rocksteady are saying it's never coming to 360 is because like Microsoft paid Bethesda for timed exclusivity Sony have paid Rocksteady therefore they have to be quiet about it being timed and just keep stating that its "Exclusive".
        • 1
          HisServant77 Aug 29, 09
          Ah, true. I keep forgetting about certain dev companies being part of a bigger one like that

          Guess you're right, it is very possible and very likely, Unfortunately (I like exclusive stuff, gives the consoles variety).
    • 1
      Existence Aug 29, 09
      Eidos and R* respectively said that the Tomb Raider and GTA4 DLC would never come to the PS3, and so far, they haven't, and its been several months since their release.

      This could very well be timed, but one can't really say anything at this point.
  • 1
    Star of Spurs* Aug 29, 09
    I'm not quite sure why people made such a big fuss over the Joker DLC. I'm certain it's because it's on the PS3, and if it was a whole game or a segment I'd understand. But for a skin? Why such a big deal?
    • 0
      HisServant77 Aug 29, 09
      Yeah personally I'd have rathered if we got to play the whole game from the joker's perspective or something! Now THAT would be awesome!
    • 1
      Red 9 Aug 29, 09
      It's more than just a skin, it's a whole set of challenge rooms and such.
  • 0
    Smoke Aug 29, 09
    Well, I believe that Batman was one of the few multi-platform games that sold better on the PS3 than the 360... pre-order wise. Not by much, but it's a start for the PS3.

    Bah, I hate console exclusive stuff; it's one of the many things that is killing the industry on the gamer's side.
    • 0
      HisServant77 Aug 29, 09
      Nah I love exclusive stuff. But give each console something exclusive to itself. It adds variety. I've said in the past that I would love if multiplatform games were unique for each console. It'd be awesome if the game for each console had something different to the story, or different features unique to the console.

      I BETCHA the devs would sell more copies . . . especially with people owning multiple consoles who would be willing to buy each copy of the game to see and enjoy the variety in the game/gameplay. I know I'd buy them!
      • 1
        Smoke Aug 29, 09
        Yeah, but doing so you're screwing the fans. Why not just release the game in it's entirety to both sides instead of taking advantage of your fanbase. (Here's looking to you, Capcom)
        • 0
          HisServant77 Aug 29, 09
          Well not so, if each exclusive thing is equal to the other. I just really think they need to develop multiplatform games, still for each console specifically so that they get the most out of each console, instead of trying to make them all equal to where a lot of potential gets missed out because they try to make it good for all the consoles, if you know what I mean? Exclusive features would be at least a step in that direction, as long as one is not awesome while the other is pointless.
  • 4
    Red 9 Aug 29, 09
    I *bleep*ing love GameGrep. Where else can you find such insanity?
    • 0
      HisServant77 Aug 29, 09
      I know! I've often thought of letting a few people read a handful of the articles with their comments to see what I see daily . . . And I'm imagining them making it through a single article before passing out from overload!
  • 0
    Mudkip94* Aug 29, 09
    You only get him for 8 maps. Thats about it. No big deal if it heads to Xbox. If they add more to joker later like add a little storyline for him I can see fanboys getting really upset. But it's just 8 maps.
  • 1
    Seeker X Aug 30, 09
    I always figured this was a nice sale incentive for the PS3 side from the developers, seeing as the 360 doesn't really need much help in making sales.

This news story is archived and is closed to comments now.