According to an insightful Wall Street Journal report, Sony is looking to make deals with major publishers in order to put the PlayStation 5 in the best possible position when it launches next year. The publication claims that the platform holder is focusing on major, big budget titles – and it’s lining up both timed exclusivity and exclusive content to differentiate itself.
This will likely end up an extension of its PS4 strategy, where it partnered closely with major releases like Destiny and Watch Dogs to give it the upper-hand. If anything, its bargaining power is likely to have strengthened since the launch of its current-gen console, so don’t be surprised if it spotlights some whopping third-party titles when the PS5 is finally revealed to the world.
All this, according to WSJ, is coming at the expense of smaller indie studios – but the Japanese giant will no doubt be remembering the IndieStation 4 reputation it earned at the beginning of this generation. Look at the reaction to Sony’s earlier E3 press conference and even the recent State of Play: it’s pretty obvious what fans want, and the company looks poised to deliver.
[source wsj.com]
Comments 34
it's awful but good for business at a console launch
I suppose if it helps shift consoles but I generally hate timed exclusivity.
I hope they don't completely ignore indie games. You don't want to be giving up so many games to other platforms.
Terrible practice. Paying money just so that the competition doesn't get a game till later on was Microsoft's thing and was heavily criticized.
Fund new games. Don't waste money on keeping players from playing third party games.
I hope this is tactical (for launch) and not strategic (long-term). Many of the finest, most innovative and downright joyful games this generation were created by Indie devs. Ignore them at your peril Sony.
It depends on the games in question. FF VII makes sense because of it's history with the brand. Loads of Japanese games are likely due to Xbox been a low selling platform for most of them. At the end of the it's business, not a charity and if it helps keep PlayStation on top then I personally don't give a damn what it does to the competition because I'll never buy an Xbox and any Nintendo console I'll get will just be for exclusives.
Timed exclusivity is annoying, and bad for the consumer.
@SaikoWaifu2003 Microsoft has been doing this for nearly decades on xbox 360, if sony didn’t take the exclusivity, microsoft will. It suck but it’s just business 🙁
I guess having your own Trade Show at the start of the year has its benefits.
Not the kind of practice that makes you look good, look at Epic Games (situation is different, Epic Store is free to use).
@crimsontadpoles not bad for ps4 consumer
I hope they don't forget indie games
@naruball Sony is bringing amazing games to there consoles though. This is a buffer for the early part of a gen it seems. They want have an extra front, so they’ll have a strong exclusive for two, and then the big third-party games won’t be on Xbox at first which will help convince more early adopters who want the big games now on there new device
Dont forget the value of indie developers. They play a key role in plugging the gaps between big releases now that the AA market has largely disappeared
@naruball Payback for Microsoft doing it to Sony this past generation as far as I’m concerned, lol! Maybe it’ll put a stop to it, or Microsoft will probably fire back. Let’s not act like they don’t have something in the works, cuz they probably do.
No different to this generation...
Negotiating for deals with Activision, EA, WB, Ubisoft, Square Enix etc like they have this generation. If its not 'exclusive', its timed exclusivity and that relates to Digital content like exclusive (timed or otherwise) DLC, Skins, missions etc...
So far, all I have read is that Sony are planning to continue what they have been doing for years...
@JesWood13 two wrongs don't make one right.
@Jaz007 The strong exclusives are one of the main reasons I mainly game on ps consoles. But bad practices are bad no matter who's behind them.
I dislike timed exclusives, but don't mind true third party exclusives.
@naruball was your reply for me there? 🙂 think you wanted Jeswood (and i agree with your sentiment)
@naruball What I’m saying is that it’s a decent complementary strategy to have with big exclusives. It can work as part of a strategy, but not as the strategy. It’s not because it’s Sony and not MS doing it, but because it’s being used in a much more reliable way and as a big sweetener rather than the meal.
@Jaz007 You could say the same about MS. It wasn't THE strategy. They released plenty of games that MS fans wanted, like Halo, Gears, Forza, etc.
Having read the article, it doesn't exactly state that Sony are locking timed exclusives. It was more a comment from the the author of the article about the typical business practices among console manufacturers. Rather then a Sony executive saying this. And if it was then it wouldn't be wise to publically say that is their strategy.
Not a good idea I don't believe in it, the PS4 backwards compatibility will sell consoles as it is where it's going.
WSJ isn't the greatest of sources for gaming news, or any news come to think of it.
My guess is that the business strategy of the PS5 will not stray far from what we have now. If it ain't broke.....
I'm pretty sure they're treading very closely to the monopoly laws that exist here in the US.
In this new future of streaming... makes sense. I don't like it, because the competition will definitely be doing it to, and it doesn't benefit gamers. But I get it. And sony really has shown they are for the gamers unlike the others, so I can get on board with this. Streaming will ruin gaming.
I get the play it first on PlayStation mentality. It kinda sucks but at the same time they are in the business of making money. But the other side is if you are a PS fan they are making it well worth it Ive owned every PS, VR and handhelds because one thing....games. Glorious games.
People saying "it's bad for the consumer" are not seeing the bottom line here. It's actually good for the consumer when you think long term.
If companies didn't use such tactics then people will always go to just one place, the popular one. Meaning that one by one all other companies will eventually cease to exist due to lack of customers. That then creates a monopoly when only one company is left. A monopoly creates high prices and bad support, why? because no competition and THAT is what's bad for the consumer.
See what I'm getting at. These companies need to stay afloat for our sake and exclusivity deals are one way of creating a competitive marketplace. It's not like other platforms will never get the games jeez.
I had to wait a year for Rise of the Tomb Raider on PS4, not ideal but I got it eventually.
Just remember, without competition we all lose. Because the monopoly company will give us all the middle finger when we have no where else to turn.
Ask yourself one hypothetical question, would you like EA in charge of the industry? (Just an example but think about it.)
Why is there a picture of batman on this article?
I hope they continue to support indie devs. Many of this generation's best games are indie games.
MS, Sony, Nintendo, Google and whoever else need to agree a pact where nobody is allowed to do this. It’s very annoying...
@GADG3Tx87
I agree competition is good but that's what first party studios are for. Sony and Nintendo both have first party games than move units. If MS and now Google can't come up with first party exclusives to carry their consoles (or platform I guess in the case of Stadia), maybe it's better they're out of the hardware market. Games made by independent devs should be made available to everybody unless they're working on an IP owned by a console manufacturer like Ratchet & Clank or Smash Bros.
Awchicadles
Just do the same as they did with the PS4 and SONY should be ok
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...