News Article

Sony Prefers to Partner with Third-Party Titles That Are 'New and Fresh'

Posted by Sammy Barker

The company's Destiny

Take a quick glance at the Xbox One’s lineup, and you’ll see timed exclusive content coming out of the console’s ears. Microsoft has partnered with titles such as Battlefield 4, FIFA 14, and Call of Duty: Ghosts, whereas Sony has been a little quieter in this department. That doesn’t mean that it’s not out striking deals, though – it just prefers to join forces on games that are “new and fresh”.

“We’ve carefully selected titles where we feel that it’s appropriate to partner with a third party,” SCEE president Jim Ryan told the Metro in an alarmingly candid interview. “We are partnering with Activision on Destiny. This is a new intellectual property from Bungie, and there’s gonna be stuff that is exclusive to PlayStation for a window of time.”

He added: “Destiny isn’t a launch title, but it’s pretty much an exact offset to what Activision is doing with Microsoft [on Call of Duty]. And I would argue that as a new IP coming from Bungie, I would rather be in a position of having a long-term relationship with Activision on Destiny than on Call of Duty, which has obviously been around for a very long time.”

Ryan continued that the platform holder’s association with new releases like Watch Dogs evidence its commitment to original brands. “Destiny is a new IP on this gen, as is Watch Dogs,” he stressed. “We feel that it’s preferable, if possible, to tie these sorts of deals in with stuff that’s new and a bit fresh.”

How do you feel about Sony banking on unproven third-party franchises? It certainly fits the manufacturer’s ethos, but Microsoft does have a lot of huge names on its side. Do these co-marketing deals ever sway your purchasing intent anyway? Have you ever purchased a game on a specific platform due to exclusive content? Let us know in the comments section below.


Game Screenshots

User Comments (26)



ViciousDS said:

Destiny is going to be good I think no matter what, Bungie has way to strong of a record for having solid shooters. There is a reason why the original Halo Trilogy will always be the best 3 and everything after that has been just kind of meh. It seemed on Reach that they were forced to try something like call of duty because they were stuck on Halo. I really believed Bungie didn't want Halo to go past 3. Also evidenced by the fact all the map packs in Reach were made by 343 and Certain Affinity.

This gives Bungie to make the next biggest thing since the first Halo and I have 100% faith that they will deliver an unbelievable experience.



banacheck said:

It's good Sony is doing timed exclusives, put at the same time thay shouldn't do that many. Thay should focus more on exclusives games over timed exclusives, because with timed exclusives it's sort of a waste of money you've only got it for so long. Where as exclusive games can help to sell your console, i know thay've got 12 new IP's coming, the more exclusives the better. Bungie have already proven thay can make good games, Halo wasn't my thing but Destiny look very good.



MadchesterManc said:

@ViciousDS I actually consider Reach to be Bungie's best in the franchise. It was a superb refinement of everything they'd done with the trilogy beforehand. I also have a soft spot for ODST too If you wanna talk 'meh' Halo titles id have to go Halo 2. Aside from 4, 2 is possibly the worst in the whole series. Sure it had decent multiplayer, but Ive only played through the single-player once which is testament to how bland it was for me

I think Sony are doing this right. Microsoft seem intent on pulling in the dudebro gamers which deosnt really draw me towards the XboxOne at all



InsertNameHere said:

Sony loves supporting new and/or niche titles, so I'm not surprised by this at all. Microsoft just seems to be buying up all the established franchises and third party support, which is why I'm not particularly impressed with their launch lineup.

I'm hoping Bungie can deliver with Destiny, because I remember how bad Halo got after 2. As long as they don't repeat that, then they're all right in my book - not many people are in my book.



charlesnarles said:

@MadchesterManc "Heretic!"

CoD is ancient; I got sick of the original on PC after playing the bajeezis out of it in Internet cafes. 4:MW was a cool revamp, but I'd honestly rather be playing the BF1942 desert storm mod. The WWII rehash was awful and only sold cause the fascist undead mode. I'd MUCH rather see what exclusive stuff Destiny's gonna boast



uchinakagema said:

Man I am so sick and tired of hearing "ohh after Game#x the series went downhill from there or game#y sucked the most in the series" I am surprised most devs don't pull a Phil Fish move and just jump out of the gaming world when they hear this type of negativity. It is like hearing that 3~5 yrs of your life was just stupid wasted time.

Halo is a damn good series and Bungie created something amazing which opened the door to some amazing story fps titles ( such as BioShock) Halo was good, Halo 2 was good, Halo 3 was good, and Halo:Reach was good. I went back to replay these just for their story and it is amazing how it all unfolds out. Also 343 did a bang up job with Halo 4. I replayed it with my little brother a few weeks ago, and man when I tell you there was a manly tear shed when Chief lost Cortana. Story was excellent, the graphics superb(way better than any Halo to date), and gameplay was like a new breath of fresh air into the Halo series.

Bungie hasn't shown me that will they disappoint and good on Sony to get the early jump into the new franchise. I hope it treats Sony as well or even better than when Sony partner with Ubisoft for Assassin's Creed.



MadchesterManc said:

@uchinakagema Why deos your opening paragraph sound as tho your butthurt? Are people not allowed an opinion these days? Or maybe we're just not allowed to voice them while your around? Hell Ive been playing Halo since it launched in 2001 so if I wanna say Halo 2 kinda sucks, I think I can seen as Bungie have had enough of my £££'s. And you seriously must've been playing a different Halo 4 to me. It was lackluster. 343 created the most unbalanced MP of all Halo games and the SP was so short it could be done in 4 hours on Heroic with little difficulty. Graphically it wasn't much better than Reach and Killzone 3 still has it beat. Its only saving grace was that it played like a Halo game, albeit a slower paced one tho. Im appalled I actually purchased another 360 to play it =/ lol After 4 Im not interested in what Microsoft and 343 are doing with the series. I laughed at the Halo trailer at E3. I cant beleive it had fanboys getting wet lol I trust Bungie a lot more so I have no doubt Destiny will deliver what Halo no longer deos



PMasterTy9 said:

@uchinakagema Sorry but it sounds like you are butt hurt because people are talking bad about Halo. Just because the franchise is successful doesn't mean every title is great for that franchise. Sometimes developers make a change to their game and it doesn't go over well. It's ok for people to have an opinion and to be able express something they don't like about a particular game. You can't tell me you never felt this way about a series. Think about musicians not every album an artist produces is great or there are some better than others. Also, the Phil Fish thing is a whole other scenario.



Beaston61 said:

Hmmm... I get the feeling that EA, Activision and other big dev's were completey on board (if not driving) with all of Microsofts original intention's for the XBONE. I'm sure that EA wouldn't give games away for nothing.... As far as I am concerned, EA are a plauge to the Gaming world, with activision following suit... Don't get me wrong, games they release are often "good", the concepts are good, but the execution is ruined, by their greed for money.

Battlefield 3 for example, I purchased the game (On PC) and for the most part enjoyed it, heck, I even bought the first map pack (which is rare for me), then soon after, they release Battlefield Premium.... !!! WTF !!! That was it, that was the last straw. I buy a game, and they expect me to buy it again... and if I dont I get an inferior Battlefield experience. Ok, i'm ranting, sorry.
I am glad that PS are thinking outside of the box, im tired of the mainstream - BF, COD... one of the things that surprised me the most about PS, is their large number of exclsuives, as far as I am concerned, Sony's focus on getting more is awesome.

Edit: What is 343?



MadchesterManc said:

@Beaston61 Your Battlefield 3 situation is the same as mine I bought the Back to Karkand DLC n then EA decided to do Premium not long after which left a me a little pissty. Not bothered buying Premium or any other DLC's myself for Battlefield 3.



PMasterTy9 said:

I think its awesome that Sony is focusing on something different instead of going the Microsoft route and mainly focusing on the big names. The big guns this gen might not be the big guns during the next gen. You can only produce an X number of CoDs or Halos before it gets stale and gamers start to look for something different. I have a feeling that indie games are going have a bigger role int he next gen and I think Sony can see that. Personally I don't like timed exclusives and I don't see the point in it. Great you get the game before we do but in the end we still get the game. Either go full exclusive or just launch as cross-platform title.



Beaston61 said:

@PMasterTy9. Well said
We are entering the next gen, I hope everyone doesn't settle for a polished CoD/BF game that can hold more players in a server. When Indie games first came on the scene, I had 0% interest in the games released... now having played alot of them, I think at the moment the indie dev's are the people producing fun and new concepts, with alot of effort put into their games. I Love INDIE.
For example, Terraria, Its amazing... I picked it up on PC when it was released for £5.99. The amount of content with-in the game has kept me entertained for an insane amount of hours (I was still playing it recently)... and they are still releasing (free) patches to this day, with new content. Its one of the reasons I love Sony, they are entirley on board with Indie devs.



uchinakagema said:

@MadchesterManc Then go and replay the story on Normal see why it I see that way. Also I am not butthurt over anything I am just tired of see such ridiculousness in comments about games.

Internet comment boards are a toneless place which every comment is given tone to whoever is reading it. As you did with my comment, when it actually suppose to be taken as someone who is tired of see negativity for any game that is good( hence why I use Game#X and Game#Y instead of specifically point just Halo).

I am telling you right now I don't like the update that they added to Halo 4 multiplayer to rebalance the guns but people adjust and problems typical disappear after a while.

What I am really tired of is close minded groups on the internet that can complain on message boards when in the real world it isn't like that at all; yet the group doesn't ever just accepts that fact. Take CoD for example, on internet gaming boards.." it is horrible... the game should just stop being made... same rehashed **** every year..." Yet it has been the top video game sold for 4 years. Why? Because people like playing it. It is just that simple. The gameplay is simple enough to jump in and have fun yet complex enough to have a competitive side to it.

So take my word for it I am not butthurt or whatever you kids wanna call it I just tired of close mindedness on gaming boards.

Also before you call me an FPS fanboy, My favorite game series are Mass Effect and Jak and Daxter, just so you don't take my words for something they aren't.



uchinakagema said:

@PMasterTy9 I don't care about if anyone downtalks Halo. You down talk it as long as you like. Just bring up valid points to back it up and don't engage in hyperbole. In my last I said that comment boards are typical a toneless place and tone is interpreted by the reader of the comment. When you engage in hyperbole people tend to get mis-skewed in different direction depending on there stance on the subject at hand.

It an opinion is never wrong because it is your opinion, your take on something, but on a message with no tone and amenity, your opinion can be taken as whatever reader thinks it is to them. So using words like, sucks or blows etc, can strong effect even if you didn't mean it in a strong way.

Like take ViciousDS comment for example, shows an excellent example of an opinion comment. Show what he liked or dislike and brought up what he thought without engaging in hyperbole so it be taken with a face value comment. A use valid perspective of the game that universally known by anyone who has played the game before.

I understand some games in game series aren't as great or as good as others but don't engage in hyperbole when comparing games in major franchises. For example I didn't like AC3 or AC:Revelations as much AC2 and AC:Brotherhood. Now with hyperbole. Man I hate AC3 or AC: Revelations. They sucked compared AC2 and AC:Brotherhood. You tell me which one will gather a strong response despite both of them technically meaning the same thing?



MadchesterManc said:

@uchinakagema Your post was a good read until you decided to label people kids and closed minded.

No-one likes to see games they like getting bashed. But the fact that you see a game being good means there will always be someone who deosn't. Games are subjective to tastes and opinions and they always vary. Im a fan of the Hyperdimension Neptunia series and they are absaloutely lambasted by most people I come across. It deosn't bother me. I still get home from work, fire up the Ps3 and play them. Its not close minded of people to have an opinion that differs to yours. To beleive your opinion supercedes others is close minded. In your post's you come across as pretentious, whether you actually were being or not I dont know.

I understand your view of Halo 4. I wanted to love it, but I couldn't. Its not like its due to nostalgia or anythin either as Reach is my favourite. Ive been playing Halo since 2001. 12 years is a long time in gaming. Maybe I just need to take a break from the franchise or maybe it just deosnt interest me anymore. Is my opinion of 4 wrong? No. Is your view of 4 wrong? No.

But this discussion will have to wait till later. One must lock up the office n head home.



PMasterTy9 said:

@uchinakagema Umm... I don't see your point with the AC example. Are you trying to say that I can't say a game "sucks" or that I can't "hate" a game??

You say that you understand that some games in a game series are not as good as others but your initial comment you said that you were "sick and tired" of people expressing their opinions of games in a series. Then you went and expressed your opinion on why the entire Halo series was good which is fine and that is your opinion so, your two comments seems a bit contradictory.

As far as this whole hyperbole thing, I don't see what I said was hyperbole or how I engaged in it or why you had to explain it to me. Also, I wan't bashing on Halo.



-CraZed- said:

This is how Sony does business, always has been. MS has been holding the timed exclusive card since the 360 came out and it never once swayed me to buy a 360 multiplatform title over a PS3 version. Mainly because I hardly ever buy any DLC anyways but also because I don't want to support that type of business practice...

It just seems wrong to put out a game and support one group over another based on the platform they choose to play your game on. They have every right to do it but that doesn't mean it isn't shady IMHO. And so far from the presale numbers on Amazon and Best Buy there are a lot of folks this gen who agree with me as most of the multiplatform games (including versions of BF4 and CoD) are selling better for the PS4. It's a good sign for the future.



PMasterTy9 said:

@-CraZed- Exactly. If you are already developing a game to be on more than one platform I don't see how having it tied to one console for a limited time benefits you unless you are only in it for the money and you are getting paid extremely well. I am sure MS is paying a lot of money for these timed exclusives.



uchinakagema said:

@MadchesterManc I understand games are subjective even more than movies or TV shows because games are interactive entertainment, but I don't like when people become close minded when a fact is pointed out. That is all I had to say in my previous comment.

I never thought or would think my opinion is superior than your opinion or any other opinion for that matter. You said the Halo 2 and Halo 4 sucked, I don't have a problem if you disliked the game but don't engage in hyperbole that can mistaken in a toneless as a comment board.

Halo 2 is has a 95 on metacritic and Halo 4 has an 85 on metacritic, so engaging negative hyperbole puts an opinion as factual incorrect. I just don't want people to be closed minded and use hyperbole. I am not a big Halo fan I just like good games and the Halo series has made some very good games, so when I say the hyperbole I commented on why it was wrong and come of as close mindedness. You may have not meant it that way and if you didn't I apologize, but you need to be careful of using hyperboles in a toneless place like an internet comment board.



jgrangervikings1 said:

For what it's worth, I didn't care for Halo 4 all that much, either. It was solid all around, it looked good, sounded great, and had good multiplayer split-screen and online. It just didn't do much for me. I wanted to like it, and my best friend continues to try to sell me on its merits, but, well, meh.

Timed-exclusives are fine, but I've already decided to buy a PS4. If the timed-exclusive means the game isn't available when I have money to buy a game, it'll only mean that my money will go towards a different game--probably a competitor of BF or COD.

And, I'll say the same thing about Nintendo. For as much as I love Mario games, Metroid, Pikmin, and Donkey Kong games, I won't be purchasing a WiiU. Because Nintendo doesn't license their games out to other systems, they won't be selling any games to me. Bummer for them and me--I could've been a valued customer of theirs. That's the way it goes, and I'm ok with that.



JayMiller1988 said:

I'm not huge into FPS games, but Destiny looks similar to Halo, all things considered. I can literally call some enemies that come out of the drop ships "Elite 2.0" or whatnot. I'm not saying a shite game, but the storyline looks like where it will divide Destiny from Halo.

Overall: May try, will see reviews first though.



Daryusp said:

Timed exclusives should never sway a true gamer's decision on which console to buy.



MadchesterManc said:

@uchinakagema Your not honestly insinuating that Metacritic's scores should be regarded as a factual statement on said games? Metacritic is an aggregate score of multiple reviews converted into a percentage. A review in itself cannot be regarded as a factual statment either as its an opinion of the reviewer. An aggregate of opinion is still just an opinion, not fact. A Metacritic score is not fact.

Im not sure you fully understand what hyperbole is. When I said "If you wanna talk 'meh' Halo titles id have to go Halo 2. Aside from 4, 2 is possibly the worst in the whole series. Sure it had decent multiplayer, but Ive only played through the single-player once which is testament to how bland it was for me" - its clearly just a short statement of opinion by myself. If I was to engage in hyperbole as you say then I would've said something more along the lines of " Halo 2 was so bad Id rather cover my genitals in fish paste and dangle em into a pool of hungry piranhas than play that disgrace of a Halo game ever again" - A clear and obvious exaggeration to emphasise my opinion or effect a response from someone. So please stop assuming that your the only one here that understands what hyperbole is and use it as beating rod to adhere people to your way of thinking.

I dont understand why you've decided to enact your crusade here. PushSquare has one of the best communitys of any game orientated website you'll find on the net. Discussions/debates never degenrate into trolling n the like plus any banter is always tongue-in-cheek. Theres far more malicious communitys on other websites like Gamespot/IGN that could do with some teaching of proper use of the English language



Gamer83 said:

Considering a lot of the best games in a new gen are new IPs, I don't mind this approach. But as much as I hate to say it, I think what Sony really needs to do is start playing MS' game a little bit. Getting a timed-exclusive on Destiny and Watch_Dogs would change my out look on things quite a bit. Even if its just 6-8 months it'd be big for Sony, especially in the next-gen picture. For all the talk going on about Titanfall-and it's certainly a game I'm interested in despite the lack of any kind of singleplayer- I think Destiny is going to blow it away and it would be a nice game for Sony to have in its arsenal. Not to mention a nice little 'f you' for Bungie to MS for forcing them to work on Halo and nothing else never really giving Bungie a chance to prove how capable it is.

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...