Not impressed with Ghostbusters exclusivity for PS3
One of the biggest criticisms Sony has received is in regards to the company’s inability to play nice with itself. Sony Pictures and Sony Computer Entertainment apparently do not talk to each other well. However, it seems that the two divisions came together for once to work in harmony to bring the PS3 an exclusive game.
As many of you may already know, SCEE has secured the rights to publish the new Ghostbusters game from Atari exclusively for the PS3, PS2 and PSP in Europe. The exclusivity deal will be a timed exclusive with the 360, Wii, and DS version releasing near the end of the year. Sony Pictures brokered a deal with Atari and SCEE to publish the new Ghostbusters game exclusively for the PS3 alongside the launch of the blu-ray release of the Ghostbusters movies.
If you recall I actually broke this story as a rumor almost one year ago last August. In my story I talked about the rumblings going on between Sony Pictures and Sony Computer Entertainment regarding the struggle for exclusivity around the Ghostbusters game.
I criticized Sony in the past by stating that the left hand does not talk to the right as Sony Pictures has brokered exclusive deals with Microsoft in the past for Xbox Live. Case in point, Sony-owned “The Jace Hall Show” is only available on Microsoft’s XBL. The ironic thing about the show is that they talk about Sony and the PS3 all the time, I am sure that the 360 owners love it.
The handshaking going on between the two divisions can be attributed to Sony CEO, Howard Stringer’s latest move to bring many of the divisions under one umbrella. Am I impressed with Sony’s latest move to secure Ghostbusters as an exclusive? To be honest, I am a little impressed, but not by much.
Let’s face it, Ghostbusters is a Sony Pictures owned IP (movies), and the division shelled out dough to get a developer and publisher to sell the game. This is ridiculous when you consider the fact that Sony itself houses one of the largest publishers in the world, the SCE. Yes, I know it’s pure madness. However, I do have to hand it to Sony as it seems like the company has been flexing a little of its muscle to make things happen lately. It will be interesting to see if Sony can ever achieve true harmony within the organization.
Related Posts:
45 Responses to “Not impressed with Ghostbusters exclusivity for PS3”
Leave a Reply:
You must be logged in to post a comment. Don't have an account? Register today!
May 7th, 2009
The problem with this time exclusive is the fact that It’s Ghostbusters. No big loss there. Sure………. save it for Christmas.
May 7th, 2009
PS3 have a problem with selling systems…
WHO YA GANNA CALL?
May 7th, 2009
So when Microsoft have a timed exclusive it’s daylight robbery. When Sony have one, it’s ‘a little impressive’.
Maybe Atari might do the ‘Alone In The Dark’ thing and release a buggy version of the game and then after a few months of complaints release a better version on the other HD system.
May 7th, 2009
@harry,
Well, I’m mostly unimpressed. Its pretty ridiculous..
“when Microsoft have a timed exclusive it’s daylight robbery.”
build that straw man..
May 7th, 2009
@ mike,
I am not following!
May 7th, 2009
I’m actually starting to like Ghoshbuster: The Video Game I’m getting it for PSP PS2 PS3 Xbox 360 and maybe for PC legit from the sore. Please don’t ask why. This was a great move but why no PSP love. PSP is my fav bad Sony lol.
May 7th, 2009
OMG! THEY ARE CREATING A GHOSHBUSTER GAME? I didnt even know…
May 7th, 2009
haha GHOSHBUSTER.
May 7th, 2009
definitely one of the games I’m looking forward to.
May 7th, 2009
Ghashbusters news has never raised my eyebrow. Maybe it is just the game-based-on-a-film-inevitably-crap* thing.
Though if it gets shit hot reviews and everyone goes crazy for it, well, I’ll get in line.
*I can’t think of any which aren’t shit, but I only scanned my own collection of games to see if I had any at all.
May 7th, 2009
riddick
May 7th, 2009
Loving all that ‘timed exclusivity’ hypocrisy.
May 7th, 2009
Yeah, almost move games are crap. I loved Ghost Busters when I was a kid… I had all of the toys and the Proton Pack and everything else… The game looks like it might have potential though. I’ll hang back and see what the general consensus is first before i decide.
Glad to see Sony beating M$ at it’s own game. Take that EU 360 owners!
May 7th, 2009
Who cares about some Groshboosters game?
…sorry, since everyone else is butchering the name, figured I’d throw my hat in…
-Arvis
May 7th, 2009
“So when Microsoft have a timed exclusive it’s daylight robbery. When Sony have one, it’s ‘a little impressive’.”
Ummm…umm…Harry, i don’t think you read the article or understand how Sony works as a whole…There is a big difference in this situation, as when Microsoft robs, an IP made from another company….in this case how is Sony “robbing” anything? Because you know, there is the small point in that Ghostbusters is owned by..Sony itself….How can one rob from itself???
See thats the difference in this case: Sony owns the IP, albeit a different division of Sony…
May 7th, 2009
Most of the Ghostbusters games have actually been good though
May 7th, 2009
this really can’t be considered a movie tie in game that automatically labels it as crap. Those games have a schedule based on the movie so they are usually rushed and turn out like garbage. This game only exist because of the unreal3 engine mid someone created, created so much buzz
May 7th, 2009
Not really a system seller
May 7th, 2009
“… as when Microsoft robs, an IP made from another company….”
Sorry jojo29, when did they “rob” an IP? They have paid third parties for timed exclusivity, as Sony is doing now with Eat Sleep Play, which is actually good for other console owners who wish to enjoy the game as well without having to make another console purchase.
May 7th, 2009
Again, Eat Sleep Play NOT a third party. They are an independent development studio. Sony is publishing their first three games. ESP preferred not to go to a third party publisher (like Capcom, Ubisoft, EA, etc) in order to have the creative freedom Sony would give them. Sony, as publisher, would not need to pay for exclusivity, it would simply be a part of the publishing deal that Sony would only publish the game(s) on Sony systems.
When Microsoft “pays for a 3rd party exlcusive” they are paying a 3rd party publisher for the exclusivity, but have no hand in publishing it themselves.
I have a feeling I’ll be repeating this a lot in the coming weeks…
-Arvis
May 7th, 2009
Ahh… the wonderful smell of ignorance… it re energizes me…
ok… lets see… Eat Sleep Play was founded by David Jaffe…. they are working on a full blu ray game exclusive to the PS3… they have a 3 game contract with Sony… and would like to make a game for the iPhone…
next… I never heard of Microsoft paying for timed exclusivity… GTA 4 and Fallout 3 DLC were supposedly paid for by Microsoft… not as timed exclusive…. but some people do like to dream… also… those DLC were public knowledge before the game even hit the shelves… and they never took away anything from the ORIGINAL game… it wasnt Microsoft shafting PS3 users by asking devs to cut content from the final game…. it was them paying the devs to MAKE EXTRA content…
now it could be argued that whether MS bought the DLC or not… the devs would have made DLC either way… but we all know this isnt the place for intelligent conversation…
GHoosh Boobers is being made by terminal reality… the same people who made Bloodrayne and that SPy Hunter game with The Rock…. the Wii and PS2 version is being made by the devs who made Spore Wars the rise of the fungi…. both devs have never made a AAA game… but the NutGobblers game does show promise… you guys should definately check it out…
Dan Akroyd and the original casts worked on the game… they made enough efforts to make this the un official third movie in the series… these people aint playing around folks…
you know… you couldve just went to NegativeGamer for the article… now I gotta bust my bawls twice…
also…. Insomniac… Naughty Dog… SUcker Punch… NOT OWNED BY SONY! THEY ARE INDEPENDANT! retards…
May 7th, 2009
the ESP point was by far the worst example I have ever seen from carlb. Duh. Of course they will have a deal, kinda similar to how bungie has a similar deal after ms dropped them.
A real 3 rd party would have made a better example. Mgs4?
May 7th, 2009
here’s an example of ms robbing ip’s made popular by the ps brand.
Ace combat
Ridge racer
Star ocean
If I had more tIme I’m sure there’s more. I can only name one time Sony got something xbox brand had first without ms getting it also and that’s ninja gaiden sigma, and that should hardly count as it’s a remake of if black.
May 7th, 2009
Chris,
What’s the difference between an independent studio and a third party studio? Are you comparing oranges with oranges again?
May 7th, 2009
@ jojo,
You missed my point entirely. I was saying that whenever games such as Rock Band 2 had timed exclusivity the PS3rd fanboys would be up in arms, saying that timed exclusives were ruining gaming etc. But now that it’s happened the other way around, there’s not so much of a peep from the PS3rd fanboys stating their previous point. Seems a little hypocritical.
May 7th, 2009
PS3 is getting Ghostbusters timed exclusive then eh..
A big ‘meh’ from me. I bet it will suck just as %99 of movie tie ins suck.
Altho bringing down that mother fucker stay puft will make me happy…
May 8th, 2009
LMFAO
May 8th, 2009
Arvis,
“Again, Eat Sleep Play NOT a third party. They are an independent development studio.”
As an “independent development studio” they are a third party developer. As a clarifying example, Microsoft currently publishes the Halo series of games from Bungie, a third party developer. The games from the third party will remain exclusive for as long as it is written in the contract.
Sony just purchased the publishing rights, made the ESP games exclusive in the contract, and Jaffe hasn’t worked with any other company in ages, but I’m sure other publishers (especially Microsoft) would be happy to snap him up and let him have his hearts content of “creative freedom” if given the chance, considering his proven track record.
phranctoast,
Microsoft and Sony still pay third party developers for games.
I already mentioned MGS4 in an earlier thread, but I believe Sony made their “non-exclusive” third party announcement after it (for some strange reason). Konami developed and published MGS4; ESP is only developing, while Sony publishes.
May 8th, 2009
doesnt Microsoft own bungie? like not all of it… like a small piece? some research would help peeps…
May 8th, 2009
Ok, since Harry and Carl seem insistent on being ridiculous, let’s try again…
“3rd Party Exclusivity” refers to 3rd party publishers exclusively publishing a game on one platform. Publishers. PUBLISHERS. Not developers. Sony (and to a lesser degree, Microsoft) publishes games for development studios all the time. It’s a common practice. Like DWH said, they publish games for Naughty Dog, Insomniac, etc. These are independent development studios, but they don’t make games for THIRD PARTY PUBLISHERS like Capcom or Konami. MGS4 is, in fact, a 3rd party exclusive, because it is published by Konami, not Sony.
When Microsoft buys 3rd party exclusivity, they are not paying the developers, they are paying the publishers. Obviously when the developer and publisher are one and the same, that is the exception (Capcom w/ Dead Rising, for example). The reason Halo IS NOT a 3rd party exclusive is because Bungie is not a publisher, they developed, Microsoft published. Eat Sleep Play is exactly like Bungie in this regard.
Are we all on the same page yet? Where is kev and his “infinite knowledge of the business?” He should know all of this.
-Arvis
May 8th, 2009
but… but… isnt bungie owned by Microsoft… I mean they dont have to own all of it… I heard from someone or whatever…
SOMEONE DO THE FUCKING RESEARCH!
also… one reason for MGS 4 on PS3 is because Kojima likes to dream big… and the final product is always “not the same as his initial plan”… otherwise Im sure Konami would have wanted to make the series multiplatform…
May 8th, 2009
Konami DID want to make the game multiplatform, but Kojima productions got them to allow development for one console.
Konami, of course, got them to make up for the smaller consumer base by fleecing the heck out of the hardcore players online.
Re: Bungie… wikipedia.org/wiki/Bungie
That should tell you what you want to know. Microsoft had “acquired” Bungie in 2000, now it retains a minority stake and still publishes/promotes any Halo-related properties…
-Arvis
May 8th, 2009
“On October 5, 2007, Bungie announced that it had split with Microsoft and become a privately held independent company, Bungie LLC. Despite splitting from Microsoft, the studio will still be producing products for Xbox 360 but is free to develop for other platforms.”
Arvis,
This is what I was trying to tell you when you stated, “Eat Sleep Play NOT a third party”. They are third party developers, as I said before, and can still own their own IP, regardless of who publishes it, or they can sell it to the highest bidder. As we do not know the specific terms of exclusivity in the contract, we probably will not know how exclusive they truly are until a few years down the road, if ever (or even if they are worth having as exclusives). Publishing rights have expired before though, which may leave those games open for other companies to publish.
May 8th, 2009
Fair enough, but my point stands, Carl. Sony is not paying a 3rd party publisher for exclusivity, and therefore are not caught in any sort of pseudo-lie that kev/cad/con would love to bring up for the next 10 years.
As long as Bungie is making Halo games, Microsoft will not need to pay anyone for exclusivity since they will still be publishing those games. Time will tell if Sony has a similar arrangement with any new ESP IPs that are released during this three game span.
-Arvis
May 8th, 2009
“Fair enough, but my point stands, Carl. Sony is not paying a 3rd party publisher for exclusivity”
It’s semantics, which is I believe is why Harry was questioning what you said as well. It is not what you mean (which, btw, thanks for adding “publisher” now), it is what you stated.
Little statements like, “When Microsoft ‘pays for a 3rd party exlcusive’ they are paying a 3rd party publisher for the exclusivity, but have no hand in publishing it themselves.”
3rd party exclusives can and do exist now without a publisher. Publishers pick them up, and if they also happen to have a console, tend to make them exclusive to that console, at least for a time (ex. Rare and Banjo-Tooie).
“not caught in any sort of pseudo-lie”
What are you talking about with this statement specifically?
“As long as Bungie is making Halo games, Microsoft will not need to pay anyone for exclusivity since they will still be publishing those games.”
Microsoft owns the Halo IP. They do not need to pay anyone for exclusivity and could have anyone develop future titles for it, but Bungie has the most proven track record.
Who owns the IP of Twisted Metal? I don’t think it’s Jaffe and ESP.
May 8th, 2009
BUNGIE OWNS THE HALO IP!
WTF!
May 9th, 2009
“As outlined in a deal between the two, Microsoft would retain a minority stake and continue to partner with Bungie on publishing and marketing both Halo and future projects, with the Halo intellectual property belonging to Microsoft.”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bungie
May 9th, 2009
@ Chris “Ok, since Harry and Carl seem insistent on being ridiculous”
I was just asking you what the difference was between an independant studio and a third party studio. How that is ridiculous baffles me, but carry on.
May 9th, 2009
ok… I get it…
now… interesting discussion… if for some reason… relationship between Bungie and MS got sour… or Bungie just wanted to create a multiplatform game that is not halo… I have heard rumors that Gearbox is working on a Halo game… really just rumors…
do you think Bungie’s new game would have the fanbase as wide as Halo… granted we are talking about them creating a game in a genre that is fairly marketable… no turn based RPG shit…
its kinda like the whole Call of duty thing… does it matter to the uninformed idiots that the new game is Modern Warfare 2 and not Call of Duty… and that Treyarch makes a new COD game instead of Infinity Ward?
food for thought… no shitheads allowed…
May 9th, 2009
I’d say it matters if its good and not who made it.
But that’s just me…
May 9th, 2009
Load of nonsense. Business is business. Sony fans crying foul over MS “stealing” PSX hit IPs is stupidly ironic, you people act as if gaming began on the PSX.
May 9th, 2009
well lets say its another FPS… but a completely new IP… will the Halo fans rally to Bungie’s new game? or will they stay with the next Halo game made by Gearbox?
Is the Bungie name stronger than the Halo brand?
May 9th, 2009
That would all hinge on the next product’s quality dwh. People knock on Halo Wars, but Halo was originally designed as an RTS. With the new product, Bungie would need to start the process all over, then only another 10 years would say whether it was as successful as Halo.
May 9th, 2009
well but technically… Halo Wars was VERY simple… very very simple… I think they dumbed it down for the consoles… even though more complex RTS are available on the 360…
and Im not talking about quality… Im talking about the rabid fan base… if lets say Gearbox made the next Halo… Halo 4 with Master Chief… and bungie was working on something else… do you think Halo 4 would sell as much as Halo 3… or will people hold off from buying it since it was not made by bungie…
May 9th, 2009
Each of the past iterations has gotten high reviews across the board… if the next one was the equivalent of Haze then no, it would not do as well as any of the others, but there would still be fans and people who bought into the hype, just like Haze.
If the game was just as good as, or better than past iterations, I believe the majority of Halo fans would not hold off from buying it just because it was made by somebody other than Bungie.