Feder – PS3 exclusivity will “help launch” Agent

Monday, 8th June 2009 07:42 GMT By Patrick Garratt


Take-Two boss Ben Feder has explained the reasoning at announcing Agent as a PS3 exclusive at E3, citing timed GTA PS2 exclusives as examples of how the strategy can work for a franchise.

“The trade-offs a publisher will typically make is, if you’re platform-agnostic, you get a larger installed base,” he said, speaking to Gamespot on the E3 showfloor. “You’re platform exclusive when you get the right kind of support from first parties.”

Feder said he believed Sony will offer the same kind of support that made GTAIII, Vice City, and San Andreas – all initially PlayStation 2 exclusives – three of the top 10 selling games of all time.

Said Feder, “At this phase in the cycle, when you’re trying to launch a new franchise, exclusivity can really help you launch the franchise. It can give you the kind of platform that you need to start exclusive, start in the right kind of way with the right kind of partner. Exclusivity does work.”

Full thing through there.



  1. Syrok

    Didn’t he say the same thing a few days ago? Or was that someone else?

    #1 5 years ago
  2. Anders

    He did.

    #2 5 years ago
  3. Blerk

    He’s probably right – you get a bunch of money up front, and you get a guaranteed larger number of first day sales because whichever flavour of fanboy you’re targetting will be sure to pick it up immediately just because it’s an exclusive and therefore full of brag.

    On the other hand, this is Rockstar. People pick up their games anyway, regardless of exclusivity. Unless the game’s somehow a bizarre diversion from their usual type of output, it’s hard to imagine how it could have ever been a failure.

    Which just leaves the money. :-)

    #3 5 years ago
  4. Patrick Garratt

    Sorry. My bad.

    #4 5 years ago
  5. Michael O'Connor

    The one major difference being that the PS2 completely dominated the console gaming market in its lifetime, to the point where the competition was largely null and void.

    #5 5 years ago
  6. Anders

    I love Agent already – it’s Rockstar, after all. Too bad I don’t have a PS3…

    #6 5 years ago
  7. Tonka

    It helped propell LBP to the top 10. Same for Resistance and Killzone 2. I mean just look at these chartz

    #7 5 years ago
  8. Cort

    Highly arbitrary choices there, Tonka. How about the several multi-plat games which have sold more on PS3 than on 360 – despite there being 40% more of the latter in homes?

    Yes, they’re not exclusives, but it shows games can do better on PS3.

    #8 5 years ago
  9. Goliath

    Hmmm . . . relying on fanboyism to launch a new IP. Not a bad idea. Not a bad idea at all.

    #9 5 years ago
  10. Quiiick

    Some call it “fanboyism”, other call it “brand loyalty”.

    Non the less, It’s a clever marketing strategy and good exclusives are a perfect way to establish a strong brand-image.

    #10 5 years ago
  11. Captain Fruitloop

    The last non-GTA game to come out of Rockstar North was the first Manhunt. Based on that, can we confidently say that Agent will
    a) be automatically great, and
    b) be automatically successful?

    #11 5 years ago
  12. Aimless

    I’d wager that if MGS4 wasn’t exclusive you wouldn’t still be hearing about a year old product. As is a new rumour about a 360 port seems to appear every month, giving the game constant bumps of exposure from an enthusiast press that are forever obsessed with what’s coming next and rarely discuss things once they’re released.

    Similarly a lot of 360 owners want MGS4 on their machine simply because they can’t play it. If they did there’s a fair chance they wouldn’t even like it as, whilst an excellent game, it relies heavily on nostalgia and fan service.

    #12 5 years ago
  13. No_PUDding

    I think we can safely say ‘Agent’ won’t be rated AO, and that’s difference enough.

    #13 5 years ago
  14. Blerk

    Then again, not many 360 owners bought a PS3 just to play MGS4. If it’d been dual-platform from the start, would it have actually sold more copies? I suspect it would have sold significantly more units, even if it had dropped out of the public mindset more quickly.

    Whether the same applies to a new franchise, I don’t know. But in this day and age limiting yourself to a single machine doesn’t sound like a great idea, especially when the machine is currently sitting in third place, sales-wise.

    /proud member of the ‘all games for everyone’ society

    #14 5 years ago

    Looking at sales figures of the latest 1st party PS3 exclusives (KZ2 for example), it’s difficult to see exactly where the benefits of exclusivity lie for 3rd party devs.

    #15 5 years ago
  16. No_PUDding

    Well it creates buzz socially. It still needs good marketing, and to be released at a more sensible time of the year than Killzone 2.

    Sony enjoy sending their IPs out to die.

    #16 5 years ago
  17. Quiiick

    “Then again, not many 360 owners bought a PS3 just to play MGS4. ”

    Correct. But that’s not the purpose of doing exclusives. It’s sole purpose is to establish a well defined brand-image. All exclusives combined (of one platform that is) constitute the image of said brand. And sometimes this is more important to the platform-holders than an additional few thousand of copies sold.

    #17 5 years ago
  18. Aimless

    Not that many 360 owners, perhaps, but how many people bought a PS3 instead of an Xbox in order to play MGS4? It’s sold over 4 million copies, too, which isn’t exactly shabby for an exclusive on the machine with the smallest market share.

    In any case, my point was that exclusivity drives hype and exposure; rarity increases desirability. By positioning Agent as a PS3 exclusive a certain amount of coverage is guaranteed, and when all’s said and done there’s (most likely) nothing to stop them coming out with a 360 version at a later date, giving the game a whole new wave of press.

    #18 5 years ago
  19. theevilaires

    once again for all the people who keep crying kz2 was a disappointment need to realize some things, first you don’t own a ps3, and second playstation was not built around a FPS like another console out there that would have never existed this generation if a title named HALO didn’t save its ass last gen.

    Didn’t Tomb Raider sell better on PS3, ohhh i wonder why….because Tomb Raider was a title that help launch the playstation name in homes. Killzone never had that affect when it first launched on ps2.

    #19 5 years ago
  20. No_PUDding

    The disconnect is what it is… It’s a great game. There’s an install base.

    No marketing and putting it out when people are payign the bills after Christmas, in a recession is what is ridonkulous.

    #20 5 years ago
  21. Captain Fruitloop

    “first you don’t own a ps3″

    So you have to own a PS3 to be able to properly read a sales chart or graph?

    #21 5 years ago
  22. theevilaires

    my statement was meant as, if the xbox only owners did own a ps3 they would have probably picked up killzone2. since they love fps so much, and don’t argue by say, well if they wanted killzone they would have just bought a ps3 for that game, No they wouldn’t have for a number of reasons.

    oh and fruitcake feel free to quote the rest of my statement if you think i’m wrong.

    #22 5 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.