Sony Exec Blasts Microsoft for Content Policy

[Findlebob]

Im a PS3 gamer, just getting that in the open now. I think the PS3 is the best consol for my owwn resons. However this article is coming from the consol that removed the ability to install other none gaming programs on. To me this whole rant somes a bit double standard.

 

[Sparrow]

BU-BU-BU-BUUUUUUURRRRRRNNNNNN

See, I've gotten so jaded with execs talking smack to each other that I just love it when they do. It's a hoot of a time, as far as I'm concerned.

Here's hoping Microsoft responds to this with some scathing remarks of their own! It's good to have a healthy piss-off once in a while, no?

Oh man, wouldn't it be hilarious of Microsoft were actually the bigger person/company about this? Also, how does Sony allow these jackasses to keep their jobs when all they do is make them look like children? You'd think they'd fire them for trash talking other companies for the sake of trash talking.

 

[quantumsoul]

So he's saying multiplatform releases will be inferior because of microsoft. That makes some sense, but it seems microsoft is ok will multi-disc games. So the lack of disc space, which seems to be the biggest limiting factor, won't be an issue. So absolutely nothing has changed from before.

It makes me wonder. Microsoft has a history of not following through with its policies when it doesnt suite them. So AAA big budget games Like LA Noire they dont mind having multiple disks, but indie Joe's Pew Pew deluxe suffer...

How many 360 games are multidisk? I dont have one.

Multidisks isn't anything new for the 360. Lost Oddysee was one the first 360 games released and I think it was on 4 disks. I'm sure the other hardware specs are similar enough that developers can and should have mutliplatform games looks and play the same. Why Microsoft is bringing this up now? Maybe sales are dipping? It just seems pointless to me otherwise.

 

[Jumplion]

BU-BU-BU-BUUUUUUURRRRRRNNNNNN

See, I've gotten so jaded with execs talking smack to each other that I just love it when they do. It's a hoot of a time, as far as I'm concerned.

Here's hoping Microsoft responds to this with some scathing remarks of their own! It's good to have a healthy piss-off once in a while, no?

Oh man, wouldn't it be hilarious of Microsoft were actually the bigger person/company about this? Also, how does Sony allow these jackasses to keep their jobs when all they do is make them look like children? You'd think they'd fire them for trash talking other companies for the sake of trash talking.

Oh please, let them mouth off to each other, they already do it and there's no use scolding them telling them to "act better". Nobody outside of the "know" in this industry even gives a crap about what they say, so I say let them at it and enjoy the results.

 

[The Random One]

Even when I half-agree with Sony they still come across as Disney movie villains.

 

[WanderingFool]

So... anybody suddenly feel the urge to look up female mud wrestling?

But all kidding aside, while im not sure just how right or wrong his statement is, it is really nothing better than a mainstream fanboy crap we hear most everyday...

 

[MajorDolphin]

Speaking of fanboys.. this article seems like it was written by a hardcore xbox fanboy whose trying his hardest to appear neutral.

 

[Plazmatic]

So basicly he just wanted to say that the 360 is weaker? Multiple games are PS3 exclusive, if someone wants to make a game that the Xbox cant handle then do it exclusively on the PS3, it would probably end up beeing cheaper since they would work only for one system. I dont see what Microsoft has to do with anything here.

this isn't the point, your looking at one place, say some one is making a game Mainly for the PS3, but also wants to release it on the 360 for extra sales, but they have more capablities on the PS3, now they can't take advantage of the ps3's capabilities, and in-order to make enough money, they are forced to also sell on the 360, now with this statement from microsoft, they hope to make the PS3's superior capabilities obsolete.

Really doesn't matter to me though, I play PC, save a lot of money in doing so, and get more for it. console-fied games like dues ex (not gameplay wise, but engine wise) wash up here all the time, and we don't even have to upgrade our graphics cards or anything on our computers to play them, you guys still use directx9, and have 512mb of ram.

 

[oldtaku]

Pot, Kettle

 

[josemlopes]

So basicly he just wanted to say that the 360 is weaker? Multiple games are PS3 exclusive, if someone wants to make a game that the Xbox cant handle then do it exclusively on the PS3, it would probably end up beeing cheaper since they would work only for one system. I dont see what Microsoft has to do with anything here.

this isn't the point, your looking at one place, say some one is making a game Mainly for the PS3, but also wants to release it on the 360 for extra sales, but they have more capablities on the PS3, now they can't take advantage of the ps3's capabilities, and in-order to make enough money, they are forced to also sell on the 360, now with this statement from microsoft, they hope to make the PS3's superior capabilities obsolete.

Really doesn't matter to me though, I play PC, save a lot of money in doing so, and get more for it. console-fied games like dues ex (not gameplay wise, but engine wise) wash up here all the time, and we don't even have to upgrade our graphics cards or anything on our computers to play them, you guys still use directx9, and have 512mb of ram.

If the game company is doing a PS3 game and going over that leap that makes the game not possible on the 360 then that company is a AAA title company. They can release the game for the PS3 and if its good then it will sell enough. Just look at the PS3 exclusives, they can survive, they dont need to make them 360 compatible, the ones that dont its because they suck.

 

[Plazmatic]

So basicly he just wanted to say that the 360 is weaker? Multiple games are PS3 exclusive, if someone wants to make a game that the Xbox cant handle then do it exclusively on the PS3, it would probably end up beeing cheaper since they would work only for one system. I dont see what Microsoft has to do with anything here.

this isn't the point, your looking at one place, say some one is making a game Mainly for the PS3, but also wants to release it on the 360 for extra sales, but they have more capablities on the PS3, now they can't take advantage of the ps3's capabilities, and in-order to make enough money, they are forced to also sell on the 360, now with this statement from microsoft, they hope to make the PS3's superior capabilities obsolete.

Really doesn't matter to me though, I play PC, save a lot of money in doing so, and get more for it. console-fied games like dues ex (not gameplay wise, but engine wise) wash up here all the time, and we don't even have to upgrade our graphics cards or anything on our computers to play them, you guys still use directx9, and have 512mb of ram.

If the game company is doing a PS3 game and going over that leap that makes the game not possible on the 360 then that company is a AAA title company. They can release the game for the PS3 and if its good then it will sell enough. Just look at the PS3 exclusives, they can survive, they dont need to make them 360 compatible, the ones that dont its because they suck.

and then there's reality, You have to be already struck in with the Sony crowd to make it as a sony exclusive, 360's got every one beat now in sales (even wii now I think)

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

On a side note, if, hypothetically MS DID want to incorporate Blu Ray to a console, could they legally? I mean, isn't that Sony's baby there?

Yes, they could legally do it. The Blu Ray Disc format is controlled by the Blu Ray Association (BRA) and Sony is only one of a dozen or so members of that group. While Sony wouldn't be compelled to sell their own manufactured BRD players they can't stop other Association members or licensees from selling theirs. There's also the wee fact that Sony Electronics is a completely different division of the company to the various Sony Computer Entertainment divisions and subdivisions and they'd probably be happy to sell a few million BRD units to Microsoft rather than have MS go and buy them from Samsung or Phillips (both are Foundation members of the BRA like Sony is) or whoever.

 

[Mikkaddo]

So basicly he just wanted to say that the 360 is weaker? Multiple games are PS3 exclusive, if someone wants to make a game that the Xbox cant handle then do it exclusively on the PS3, it would probably end up beeing cheaper since they would work only for one system. I dont see what Microsoft has to do with anything here.

What Microsoft has to do with that is the more systems you put your game on, the more hands get on it, the more money your company gets to pay the people making it and to put in that profit jar.

However, on the original article, I for one can't say I'm surprised. Microsoft has always been behind on it, when they first made Xbox live no one used it cuz no one knew what the hell it was, when they finally started to figure it out, Xbox died and the 360 had come out shining in everyone's eyes. However, it got overshadowed by having been out for more than a year when the PS3 came out, Microsoft having released it early (too early I think considering the problems it continues to have) to try and subvert Sony by saying "everyone will already have a 360, so they won't WANT a PS3" however, the PS3 comes out, and everyone rushes out to buy one because they've had their 360 for so long it's become a piece of furniture. So, Microsoft had to do something to keep making money, they had Live's "Gold" membership be paid as it had been before, but they still kept losing ground because Sony released FULL Multiplayer and online co-op FREE OF CHARGE.

Frankly, Microsoft's only option is multi-console games that aren't exclusives to make their money. And let's face it, the Blu Ray technology, the higher capacity the PS3 has, the built in wireless, it really is better technology. Even if you ignore any press releases, Sony had at LEAST a year on Microsoft, not to mention the fact that you know, you just KNOW that as soon as the PS2 was released they started work on the PS3. Hell they'd been planning one since the Playstation was released (I have magazine articles to prove that at home). Microsoft was brand new to the console market with Xbox, and they weren't ready . . . they're still not ready I think.

Right then, primarily PC gamer here, have a 360/PS3, though the PS3 has become a glorified blu-ray player, and the 360 usually just gets played for the occasional bit of Gears or Halo. That being said, we are fairly overdue for a new console generation, and I certainly hope that both guys have learned from their mistakes for the next gen. MS will likely implement blu-ray for their next console, and that alone really ought to help games start pushing forward again, and hopefully end this whole stupid "protecting 'inferior' technology" nonsense, for a while at least.

Really now, this guy has a bit of a point, but he just comes of as childish.

On a side note, if, hypothetically MS DID want to incorporate Blu Ray to a console, could they legally? I mean, isn't that Sony's baby there?

Yes, they could, since it was the same case for DVD's. It's just a matter of it not being practically for the current gen, but really no reason why it shouldn't be a thing in the next xbox.

The only problem there might be about them trying to put in Blu Ray on their next console is they tried that before, anyone remember the HD DVD player for 360? that was external . . . sold on it's own, for almost the same price AS a 360 at the time? the one that became worthless plastic a year later? At this point, if they do put Blu Ray in, it'll almost seem like conceding the point the Sony Exec is saying, that MS was working from a weaker position.

 

[Mikkaddo]

accidental double post, move along.

 

[josemlopes]

So basicly he just wanted to say that the 360 is weaker? Multiple games are PS3 exclusive, if someone wants to make a game that the Xbox cant handle then do it exclusively on the PS3, it would probably end up beeing cheaper since they would work only for one system. I dont see what Microsoft has to do with anything here.

What Microsoft has to do with that is the more systems you put your game on, the more hands get on it, the more money your company gets to pay the people making it and to put in that profit jar.

However, on the original article, I for one can't say I'm surprised. Microsoft has always been behind on it, when they first made Xbox live no one used it cuz no one knew what the hell it was, when they finally started to figure it out, Xbox died and the 360 had come out shining in everyone's eyes. However, it got overshadowed by having been out for more than a year when the PS3 came out, Microsoft having released it early (too early I think considering the problems it continues to have) to try and subvert Sony by saying "everyone will already have a 360, so they won't WANT a PS3" however, the PS3 comes out, and everyone rushes out to buy one because they've had their 360 for so long it's become a piece of furniture. So, Microsoft had to do something to keep making money, they had Live's "Gold" membership be paid as it had been before, but they still kept losing ground because Sony released FULL Multiplayer and online co-op FREE OF CHARGE.

Frankly, Microsoft's only option is multi-console games that aren't exclusives to make their money. And let's face it, the Blu Ray technology, the higher capacity the PS3 has, the built in wireless, it really is better technology. Even if you ignore any press releases, Sony had at LEAST a year on Microsoft, not to mention the fact that you know, you just KNOW that as soon as the PS2 was released they started work on the PS3. Hell they'd been planning one since the Playstation was released (I have magazine articles to prove that at home). Microsoft was brand new to the console market with Xbox, and they weren't ready . . . they're still not ready I think.

Lets look at this in a diferent way, a game company wants to make a game that looks awesome, the visuals are one of the most important things about the game, they ARE capable of said game, why the fuck would they want to release it on a console that cant handle it? If that game is so great then why cant they just release it on the PS3 as an exclusive like other games do? Why has this become a problem? Sony has a console that is capable of doing things that others cant and they are bitching that Microsoft doesnt want the games that only the PS3 can handle, thats a big plus on my book, you have an exclusive title right there. It means less market, I know, but if it is a title so ahead of the 360 then it will only fail if it sucks. PS3 exclusives can survive.

Why arent they bitching about the Wii not beeing capable of running the latest games? Isnt Nintendo the one that sold the most consoles overall?


What bothers me in here is that there is no need to ***** about this. Yet, they keep on doing it, after this Microsoft will ***** about something that Sony did and so on.