A week ago, Sony's president of worldwide studios, Shuhei Yoshida, announced that Sony would focus on first-party titles because they are "more important".
A week ago, that statement didn't seem much more than an off-handed comment from a Sony exec, but little did we know it was a glimpse at things to come ... After Square Enix's shock announcement at E3 that one of the PS3's biggest-hitters Final Fantasy XIII would now be going to XBox 360, it became apparent that exclusivity isn't at the front of many third-party developer's minds. And SCEA's president Jack Tretton admitted that Sony can't afford to "write checks for exclusive software".

It seems Shuhei Yoshida was 100% right. It is becoming harder for consoles to keep a hold of third-party exclusives, even the big-name ones that have always remained "loyal" to one console.
Sony are now planning to follow in the footsteps of Nintendo and will start focusing on their first-party titles. As Yoshida said, exclusive first-party titles are now very important in this-gen.

SCEA president Jack Tretton has aired his feelings on Square Enix's decision to nix PS3 exclusivity for Final Fantasy XIII. During a roundtable chat this morning, Tretton said that he was disappointed by the decision, but not exactly caught off guard.

"Am I disappointed by it? Yes," Tretton told us, adding: "Am I surprised by it? No." He was quick to stress that the game remains a PS3 exclusive in Japan, but that "seeing as there isn't that big of a [PS3] installed base in [there], I don't know how big of a coup that is for us."

Speaking to the concept of paying third parties for exclusives, Tretton said that Sony has "invested so much money in the [PS3] hardware" that it simply "can't write checks for exclusive software."
| More
News story attached to:
Additional sources:
Latest comment:
Most recently commented on by on Jul 20, 2008
Register as a member to subscribe comments.
  • 5
    Sereph Jul 17, 08
    So, that's why MS has like, 2 to 3 times as many exclusives?

    Exclusives are very possible and very doable, you just have to shell out the cash for them, and if Sony wants to win the popularity war in the consoles, they need to give people a reason to spend an extra $50-$100 on their console other than the fact that it's got the Playstation logo on it.
    • 1
      iLLmatic Jul 18, 08
      The title says they couldn't afford to keep it. Microsoft didn't put as much money into their console as Sony did theirs. I think it's pretty obvious that it has more to do with Square wanting to maximize their profits. If PS3 came out first and had a larger installed base, third party developers wouldn't feel so reluctant to stay with PS3.
      • 0
        Arcaida Jul 18, 08
        Microsoft had the money to buy out exclusivity to begin with. Granted, Sony makes a lot of electronics and products outside of video games, but I think Microsoft still has the monetary upper hand. Microsoft has been an incredibly wealthy company dominating the market for ages.

        Plus, you know. PS3s are damn spendy to makes.
        • 0
          iLLmatic Jul 18, 08
          Yea? Why are you telling me?
        • 0
          Fatal Error Jul 18, 08
          I don't know why you assume he's telling you that. If it doesn't seem like he is, then you're probably right.
        • 0
          VeGiTAX2 Jul 19, 08
          Er you're ignoring the whole sale of production plants to their Cell partner Toshiba, their sourcing of LCD panels through Sharp and so on. They seem to be focused on cutting expenses and saving as much as they can to get stable again. Not like they were going to fly out of control but danger can strike quite fast if they don't keep the divisions in check.

          It makes sense that one of the first things to go would be paying people to be loyal to your console for launching. That and reducing hardware cost and improving production volumes.
  • 0
    Bale Fire Jul 17, 08
    Microsoft has two or three times as many exclusives? I doubt that

    Microsoft has lost just as many exclusives as Sony, its just that we PS3 owners don't give a crap about them.
  • 0
    Sonic Flash Jul 17, 08
    Sony really should give a crap about exclusives.

    Though I suppoose it won't guarantee success. Nintendo has lost... how many exclusives now? All but the first party ones probably. Including the FF franchise even!

    Actually Sony probably deserves this. :/
    • 0
      Krunal Jul 17, 08
      Technically the first party content that they create WILL be Exclusive...
      • 0
        Sonic Flash Jul 17, 08
        That's what I mean. I said that a lot of the exclusives nowadays are the first party titles.

        Exclusives only perpetuates console wars and mean that game companies lose money by keeping them exclusive. Bad for the video game communtiy. Suck it up guys.
  • -1
    Cruxis Mana Jul 17, 08
    Sony don't have enough money to buy exclusive games ?

    What a load of shit.
    • -1
      Tenken Jul 17, 08
      Wasn't there something about them losing quite a bit of money from PS3 hardware sales?

      Though I guess that doesn't matter, they're cheap bastards and more or less proved they're losing the war.
      • 0
        Red 9 Jul 17, 08
        Unless they can stop being so damn cheap, I don't think PS3 will ever see a 10 year lifespan. Especially if they don't even have money to keep exclusivity of its titles. People just won't see the point of it if PS3 doesn't have exclusives.
        • 0
          HisServant77 Jul 17, 08
          I think Sony is focusing the ps3 as more than just for games (exclusives), but for all media purposes. That is how they plan to win --- by getting not just gamers to buy the console, but others as well.

          I also think it's not that Sony can't afford it, but that they are against the idea of paying for what they consider loyalty to their brand.
        • -2
          Demonfurby Jul 18, 08
          Does any console have a 10 year life span?
        • 1
          Storm Jul 18, 08
          Support for the DreamCast went on for ten years. No more games were being made for it, but it's products and such were still hot from what I hear. PS2 might have that same deal.

          Sony does seem to be focusing on other things with the PS3, such as Home and of course, Blu-Ray. They need something effective to keep up with the other two competitors, though. Hopefully Home is worth the wait.
      • 0
        Final Blade Jul 19, 08
        Yes, but they gained nearly most of it back by selling their Sony Shares.

        But I laugh at this statement of how they don't have enough to keep it. Stop lying Sony.
        • 0
          HisServant77 Jul 19, 08
          I have to agree, why are they saying they can't afford it? I think they can, but rather like I say I think they just are against it. So, why doesn't Sony stop with the lying, and just be honest and say "I don't think we should have to 'buy' loyalty and friends." They said it in the past, but then said they were considering it, but then now say they can't afford it.

          I prefer to see companies not beat around the bush just to save face. Which is what I feel happens a lot.
        • -1
          Final Blade Jul 20, 08
          Sony this generation are hypocrites. they stated before that they would start paying for future games or exclusives to stay on the Sony system, only to say this load of shit. I can't take sony's word for anything now.
  • 0
    Fatal Error Jul 17, 08
    Well realistically its the game companies that put the price tag on exclusivity, and realistically there's almost no way Sony could afford to give the company enough money to keep them from going multi-platform. After all, having a game on two consoles guarantees a massive increase in profit.
  • -1
    Slumpy monkey Jul 17, 08
    Look, Sony is still not turning a profit from the PS3, Shelling out more cash for exclusives is just going to make that goal of a profit be pushed back further.

    Until the PS3 finally makes a profit and can afford to pay for its exclusives, blue ray is its life line.
  • -2
    Shadow net583x s Jul 18, 08
    "In another breaking E3 news, Microsoft has just announced they're switching over to Blue Ray!"

    "This story is followed by the tragic suicide of Shuhei Yoshida"
  • 0
    Marshal Loss Jul 18, 08
    I am quite surprised by this, and lol@shadow net.

    I must admit I thought they would have put the effort in to keep the title, it's a well respected (if not amusing) name and should reap a steady profit.
    • 0
      Red 9 Jul 19, 08
      Yeah. You'd think that after some four/five years of development, they didn't mind remaining exclusive without being paid off. Now we're less than a year from its release, and suddenly they decide that "Hey, let's multiplatform this after relentlessly advertising it as PS3 exclusive!"

      Why they waited this long is beyond me.

      The reason M$ finds it so easy to pay for exclusives is that 1) its already turned a profit on the 360, and 2) they're not as an expansive company as Sony is, so they can concentrate more funds on their gaming departments.
  • 0
    Bale Fire Jul 19, 08
    quote
    Now we're less than a year from its release
    It'll be lucky if it hits Japan within a year, we'll probably see it in two
  • -1
    Taker4ever Jul 19, 08
    Third-party exclusives are becoming very rare. I don't for one moment believe that Metal Gear Solid 4 would be a PS3 exclusive right now were it not for Blu-Ray making it impossible for the 360 to have it. It's not as if Microsoft have many third-party exclusive titles either, to be honest.

    This doesn't bother me much at all, because a) I'm not an RPG/Final Fantasy fan and b) If Sony are focusing on first-party titles then that can only be a good thing, as they have some fantastic developers, IMO better than Microsoft.
  • -1
    Red 9 Jul 20, 08
    I can't believe that all the FFXIII articles are still getting comments. It happened, get over it.

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