Lack of Metro 2033 for PS3 was a “business decision”, says THQ

Thursday, 25th February 2010 15:18 GMT By Johnny Cullen


THQ’s Huw Beynon has revealed that the reason Metro 2033 is not coming to PS3 was a “business decision”.

Speaking with VG247 at an event for the game in London alongside author of the novel Dmitry Glukhovsky, the game’s producer did state, however, there would be “no reason” at all why it wouldn’t work if it did happen.

“That’s probably more of a business decision, and one that I wasn’t part of when I was at THQ,” he said.

“The studio architect of the 4A engine did a lot of the initial work on the PS3 first, just to get to grips with the architecture.

“A lot of the early prototypes you saw were of the PC version… You’d probably have to ask someone up in senior THQ finance to find out why we didn’t greenlight a PS3 version at the time, but there’s no reason why the engine wouldn’t work on PS3.”

Beynon further said that all 4A Games titles from here on out will have the PS3 architecture in place, so future titles for the console can be developed with the 4A engine.

But as it stands, Metro 2033 is due for release on PC and Xbox 360 on March 16 in the US and March 19 in the UK.

Our full interview with Huw Beynon and Dmitry Glukhovsky can be found here.



  1. Erthazus

    Actually thats a lie. Developers said in Moscow GameWorld that Publisher THQ tried to ask them if they could make a PS3 port till release date, 4A said: NO, we don’t have much time to do a PS3 version.

    #1 5 years ago
  2. mington


    #2 5 years ago
  3. daytripper

    i cant see many ps3 only players being up in arms about this to be honest

    #3 5 years ago
  4. Alakratt

    A business decision, good, a little honesty. Just a little more and he was about to say “due to a big ass check from MS so that they can claim it as an exclusive”. I’ll call it right now and say that in 6 months it’ll come out in PS3 or it’ll be announced for it.

    #4 5 years ago
  5. Goliath

    I don’t think you can capitalize on timed releases. I really don’t think timed exclusivity works. Even if it’s 6 months later, consumers have moved on. I haven’t seen 1 situation where it was successful for both parties. I think THQ weighed delaying the game to complete the PS3 version against releasing just the XBox 360 and PC version.

    #5 5 years ago
  6. Eregol

    How odd.
    I did wonder why they’re not bringing this to the PS3.

    I’d laugh if it ended up being rubbish. Highly plausible.

    It’s first person anyway, so not something that I will miss.

    #6 5 years ago
  7. Razor

    “I really don’t think timed exclusivity works. ”

    GTA games on PS2 say hi

    #7 5 years ago
  8. Goliath

    @ Razor

    I think you missed my point so I’ll explain. For a publisher, I don’t see how it’s successful. GTA games on the XBox didn’t sell very well, however you have the investment of developing and marketing the titles and you’re unlikely to recoup. Fanboys wont agree but timed exclusivity works for Microsoft but not quite the same way it worked for Sony last generation. This generation you have parity. The hardcore gamer will buy the console for a game he wants. If he’s a multiplatform owner he’ll get the game when it’s released rather than wait for it to come out on his preferred platform so it influences consumer purchasing power. The flipside is that, when that game comes to the PS3, the publisher has invest money in development and marketing and sales are pedestrian. Casual gamers don’t care, exclusivity means litte to them as they’re more likely influenced by advertising and word of mouth when purchasing a game. In chosing a console they don’t look at the software so much as they look at price, advertising and again, word of mouth; it’s what their friends have and their personal recommendations that sway a casual gamer. The early part of this generation has been a battle to reach the core gamer because they spend money on games.

    #8 5 years ago
  9. Alakratt

    @ Goliath

    You may have a point, but that’s hasn’t stopped Lost Planet, Bioshock, GTA4 DLC, Section 8 (recently it was announced), Fallout 3 Expansions to come out some time later on PS3. So my point is there MUST be a reason, or profit, that the publishers gain in risking to re-release a product on the PS3 6 months to a year later.

    #9 5 years ago
  10. Goliath

    My thing is, just release the games day and date on both consoles. It makes more financial sense to do so and it’s better for your brand.

    #10 5 years ago
  11. Alakratt

    Agree with you completely.

    #11 5 years ago
  12. NiceFellow

    A pure timed exclusive will always have an incentive always. That’s business. It might not be a straight money transaction – i.e. here is $5 Million pls give us 12 months timed – it might be advertising support – give us a 6 month timed exclusive and we’ll pay for the advertising, or any similar business arrangement.

    I’d say 9 times out of 10 a timed exclusive has been bought in some fashion.

    Sometimes, though, it’s down to cost/time – a smaller developer if they are up and running and able to deliver on PC/360 on time (which is the normal way these things work) may genuinely find supporting PS3 outside their capability without getting more money or taking longer. In those cases I can see why they decide to drop PS3.

    Mind you, mostly such titles turn out to be weak, such as Velvet Assassin, which is one such example where PS3 version was clearly cut due to lack of funds/time and the need to quickly get the game out on PC and 360 which they could just about manage.

    I think in general seeing Bioshock 2 release day / date for 360/PS3 confirms this all the more. Unless you’re getting paid to loose the sales – as most timed exclusives sell less on the delayed platform so far as I can see – you’re not going to do it.

    #12 5 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.