In the latest issue of Playstation Magazine, Sony Computer Entertainment America President Jack Tretton had a few things to say about PSM’s observation that there are fewer exclusives for PS3 than there could be.
Tretton basically says that Sony takes a different approach to exclusives than their competitors do, and that Sony doesn’t “buy exclusivity.” In fact he said, “Yeah, ‘fewer exclusives’ is a term, and I don’t know what makes an exclusive. We have a very different approach to exclusives than some of our competitors. We don’t buy exclusivity. We don’t fund development. We don’t, for the lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform.”
Now, I’m not sure I’m totally on board with the idea that paying someone for an exclusive fits the definition of bribery. I mean, I know it’s giving money to someone, but using the word ‘bribery’ implies some sort of back-room, under the table kind of deal, and I don’t believe that’s accurate. But there’s more!
Tretton went on to say that since Sony doesn’t buy exclusives. Instead, as John Houseman would say of Smith Barney, they earn it. “We earn it by saying ‘you can build a better game on our platform. If you focus your development on our platform, you will ultimately be more successful. We can try to partner up with you from a technological standpoint. We can try to partner up with you from a marketing standpoint. But just economically and technologically, this is the system that makes the most sense for you.’”
While I’m a fan of the PS3, I can’t really see it as the system that ‘makes the most sense’ right now. Sure, maybe down the road when the install base is larger, or perhaps if you want to make use of the full potential of the high-end hardware in the system. When is Sony going to realize that blanket statements like these are what incites people against them? Even more importantly, when are they going to realize that paying for exclusives is how the industry works? It seems to me that they’re banking on an erroneous assumption that has little potential to pan out.
7 Comments to Jack Tretton Speaks Out on Sony's Approach to Exclusives
by: :)
On July 3, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Mabey SONY doesn’t know anything and need u the guy who wrote this how too spend billions for them? lmao get real guys the games coming out soon look great it takes time so called reporters and media dont know how things work but trust me SONY knows.
by: William
On July 3, 2007 at 7:50 pm
I think people have the entire Sony thing wrong right now. They heavily criticize the PS3, yet they fail to remember that Sony has always been a long term planner. The PS1 and PS2 were slow starters as well. You also have to look at how many PS2 units are still selling, which was also part of their plan. How many original Xbox systems or Gabe Cubes are selling right now?
I honestly do not expect the PS3 to hit the upswing until 2008, but when it does it will quickly catch up with the 360 and Wii.
by: Ron
On July 3, 2007 at 7:58 pm
I’d agree with that, William. The point of what I wrote above was not that the PS3 is a failure, or even a bad system. Heck, I want one so bad I can taste it. The point was that calling paying for exclusives bribery is a crock. It’s how the industry works.
I think the PS3 will be huge by Q4 2008. Once it hits its stride, look out.
by: Booberry
On July 3, 2007 at 8:16 pm
I’d sure as hell rather have a console with exclusives that were bribed for than a console without exclusives.
by: pcgamer
On July 4, 2007 at 7:00 am
Yes the PS2 and PS1 were slow starters, but the difference was the competition for the PS2 and PS1, their competitors weren’t exactly selling much more than the PS2 and PS1 when they were selling slowly.
This time round the Wii is racing ahead saleswise by a quite a large multiple (5/6 times the number of PS3 in Japan, more than double in the US). And the Xbox 360 has a years head start, which means it has more games and more support from 3rd parties.
I’m not saying that the PS3 will fail by the way, but using the PS2 and PS1 performance to indicate why the PS3 will eventually ‘catch up’ doesn’t work. Also the PS2 and PS1 weren’t the most expensive/high end console on the market. So there is very little you can compare tactics wise between what sony did before in the last 2 generations and what they are doing now with this generation.
If anything I think the PS3 will do ok, just not anywhere remotely near to as well as the PS2 did or even the PS1.
But yeah Sony Playstation really really needs to sort itself out, its burnt a hell of alot of bridges in the last 2 years due to alot of decisions its made and really bad PR. “Even if the PS3 has no games it will still sell out”.
by: Ron
On July 4, 2007 at 7:15 am
The thing I think a lot of people forget about Sony is something that William said. They do build consoles for the long term. Let’s face it, the 360 is showing its age already. Not in games or graphics, but in hardware issues. How long was the original XBox around? The PS2 hit a year before the XBox, and it’s still going gangbusters. Heck, the PS2 titles that are coming out now are good enough to compete in the market today.
The big deal for Sony right now is games. The system is just short on titles that make it a must buy. You know when you think of the 360, you think of Gears, Dead Rising, etc… The PS3 doesn’t have a defining title…yet. Once it does I think that the numbers will begin to change drastically.
by: somewhat
On July 4, 2007 at 10:07 am
I was just at my friend’s place last night. He has all of the consoles, and just finished installing his high def projector a few days ago. I have a projector that can downscale any high def to my output of 600 x 800, but he’s running at 720p.The picture is incredible. The only problem with his PS3 at the moment is the gaming roster. There isn’t much of one. After Halo-3, I’m not so sure there’s going to be much more going for the 360. The PS3 will definetly be the one to have. Only right now it’s only good as a computer or blu-ray movie machine (and there aren’t many places renting blu-rays at the moment either). If Halo-3 were available on the PS3, they would sell a load more of them, so exclusives are more important than I would like to admit. But comparing it to bribery is a little much. It IS how the industry works, and exclusivity does come at a hefty price. Developers aren’t willing to risk it on the PS3 at the moment, but that will change as Sony ups their online experience, which happens to be the main attraction of owning a 360 at the moment.