Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
XBox (Games) GameCube (Games) PlayStation (Games)

Soul No Longer Burns on Xbox, GC 52

Posted by Zonk from the so-no-sophitia-for-me-then dept.
GamesIndustry.biz has the word that what was just speculation the other day is now fact. Soul Calibur III will be a PS2 exclusive title. From the article: "The new game, which is scheduled only for 2005, will add three new characters to the mix as well as a new character creation mode, allowing players to create their own fighters in the game."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Soul No Longer Burns on Xbox, GC More

Soul No Longer Burns on Xbox, GC

Comments Filter:

  • Now.... (Score:3, Funny)

    by GreyWolf3000 ( 468618 ) on Thursday March 24, 2005 @07:16PM (#12040750) Journal
    Three consoles are fiercely entangled!

  • Makes sense (Score:4, Interesting)

    by clu76 ( 620823 ) on Thursday March 24, 2005 @07:17PM (#12040757) Homepage
    Especially since SC2 sold more on the cube. Wait a minute...

    • Re:Makes sense (Score:3, Informative)

      by RogueyWon ( 735973 )
      Clearly some console manufacturers are better at giving sweet lovin' to their third party devs than others. Nintendo seem to be consistently at the back of the pack in this regard. It's their own decision not to encourage third party developers (they occasionally talk the talk on this, but haven't really walked the walk since the days of the SNES)... although personally, I think it's a stupid one.

      Besides which, Soul Calibur 2 only broke the usual sales pattern because Nintendo decided to allow some GC-excl
      • They're doing this a lot now. They did it with NBA Street (Mario, Peach, Luigi... all playable), Fight Night Rd. 2 (Little Mac unlockable, Super Punchout playable). Definitely on the right track for them.
      • Namco clearly took the "easy" way out on their other release this year - Tekken 5. While its still a good title its very obviously to an experienced observer that it has a fraction of the budget of previous games and was definitly their first "console" fighting game ala DoA. They took the money and ran in other words.
        • Umm... No. Namco is concerned with the arcade market, primarily. Not consoles. Take a look at the arcade unit that houses Tekken 5 if you're lucky enough to have a decently stocked arcade near you. You can bring your PS2 controller and plug it into the machine to play with.
          Tekken 5 is NOT a budget release. It's intended to be an arcade title, because Tekken is a highly competitive game in Japan's significantly larger arcade scene.
          The game has changed. You may be seeing the game as a console fighter "
          • uhm.. yes. I don't have the time to look up numbers but I'm almost postive namco cares much more about console sales than arcade units. But regardless the fact remains that the "jump" in terms of graphics in T5 is no where near any other versions. In fact other than walls and some "pretty" things like the ground breaking, T5 looks almost identical to TTT and no where near as good/realistic looking as T4. The only conclusion is their budget was much smaller than other games.
      • All three versions had content specific to the console, not just the GameCube. The reason the Nintendo version was more popular is because their exclusive content was Link.

    • Re:Makes sense (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Goosey ( 654680 ) on Thursday March 24, 2005 @09:06PM (#12041757) Homepage
      I am confused as well. The game was a huge success on all 3 consoles - I am extemely surprised they are cutting out that kind of installed user base, regardless of what back-room dealings Sony has been whoring out.

      Another reply commented that it may be due to Microsoft and Nintendo being more forthcoming about their new systems, scaring off users from buying current-generation games.. But what sense does this make when you consider that Nintendo has officially announced that Revolution will be backwards compatible with GameCube?

      My only hope is that this is a 'for 6 months' type exclusitivity deal, otherwise Nintendo and Xbox fans are getting royally screwed over.

      • I suspect a lot of this comes down to it being more cost-effective for Namco to code for the most popular system, rather than investing in a multi-system game. Most casual gamers who own an X-Box or GC own it alongside a PS2 anyway, and they're by far the most lucrative market.

        • The sales were evenly distributed among the systems so the porting would triple the sales. I don't think it's that expensive to port a game...

          • Would porting triple the sales? Or will Namco sell as many units for the PS2 as they did across the three systems, while significantly cutting down their development and licensing costs, and probably collecting a fat fee from Sony for the exclusive?

            It strikes me as something to think about. Namco is probably doing exactly what makes the most business sense.

            • Many of those customers don't have a PS2 and can't buy SC3 now. The rest is disappointed that they're forced to buy SC3 on their weakest system. On the other hand there are of course a few insane fanboys that only buy games that are exclusive to the console but I doubt they make up a large part of the sales.

              And besides, out of all companies I'd say EA has the most business sense as shown by their success. What does EA do? Exactly, multiplatform releases for almost all of their games.
            • The past has shown no indication that a PS2-exclusive fighter has any inherent momentum over say, SC2's cross-platform sales.

              Tekken 4: ~700k sales, PS2 exclusive.
              Virtua Fighter 4: less than 600k sales, PS2 exclusive.

              You see where this is leading? As a PS2 exclusive, SC3 would be one fighter among many, in an already tired franchise. I guess they figure they can save a lot of money in going single-platform, as that's the only thing that could justify such a sales drop.

              Of course, I would only be upset if
            • I ewould never buy PS2 version if an alternative was available. As beutiful as people can make games for PS2 (god of war) I'd rather get SC for a more powerful platform.
        • Namco actually used middleware to put SCII on all three platforms IIRC. Continuing to code for that middleware would actually be easier than switching to PS2-focused code, especially since it appears that this sequel uses the same graphics engine and much of the same art as SCII.

          I could understand if they were trying to make their new Soul Calibur look good (a la Tekken 5), but it still looks completely like a below-average middleware game. One of the 'new' levels shown is actually a much uglier version of
    • Especially since SC2 sold more on the cube. Wait a minute...

      That is mostly because Link was in the Cube version. Unfortunately, the planned character, Mario, kinda looked dorky in SCIII so they decided to scrap it before embarassing themselves.

  • Kudos... (Score:2, Funny)

    by Khakionion ( 544166 )
    ...for one of the funniest Slashdot headlines I've read in a long time.

  • it is soul calibUr (Score:3, Funny)

    by 100lbHand ( 676832 ) on Thursday March 24, 2005 @07:27PM (#12040861)
    you could atleast spell it right, after all the discussion about it yesterday when this story was posted first.

  • Whatever... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hollismb ( 817357 ) on Thursday March 24, 2005 @07:28PM (#12040863) Homepage
    I'm sure this is that same 'exclusive' deal that Grand Theft Auto had with the Playstation (seeing as San Andreas will be out on the Xbox this year), as D0A2 had on the Dreamcast (which came out on the PS2), and as Splinter Cell had on the Xbox (which later came out on all systems).
    • We don't know that. Saying something like that when you've got no proof is just stupid. Even if it's likely, there's no guarantee at all that it will make its way to the other consoles.

      Besides...we all know the saying about assuming, right? ;)

  • Nintendo lobbies Namco to include Link in SCIII anyway, to gain more recognition for it's failing console. SCEA was unavailable for comment.

    (Disclaimer: I am a Nintendo fan, but this was too good to pass up)
  • I never quite understood exclusive deals like this one. If you programmed the game in a platform-independent manner and sold it for more than one console, wouldn't you stand to gain more money than if you had released it only on a single platform?

    I rather enjoy SC2 on my GC, but SC3 is not going to make me go out and buy a PS2.

    • Royalties per Unit (Score:3, Insightful)

      by LordZardoz ( 155141 )
      For any game that comes out on any console, the platform owner takes a royalty cut. By taking a smaller royalty cut, Namco can potentially earn more money on the title then they could by going to all 3 platforms.

      I would assume that Sony negotiated this with the following points.

      1) A large number of people who bought the game on X-Box or Gamecube probably also owned a PS2, and bought that version based on either graphics or Link.

      2) If Soul Calibur 2 was PS2 exclusive, it would probably have sold nearly

  • First MGS3, then god of war now this! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AzraelKans ( 697974 ) on Thursday March 24, 2005 @08:54PM (#12041686) Homepage
    Crap.. Im being tempted by the evil forces to acquire a ps2!!!! argh!... must remove hand ... from Wallet!!! Oh crap! they have Tekken 5 too! no hand! put that Credit Card away no! NOOOO!!! Klatu- Varada- Nictu!
  • So if an editor sees a 'new' news story which has a slightly different take on a story that he's seen previously, it's fair game! So all I can say is, I welcome our dups overlords! I'll do the same; I'll post similar but slgihtly differently worded posts for each one to garner karma with less effort than ever before ;)
  • A petition was created earlier today to bring Soul Calibur III to the Gamecube (and I would assume if they brought it to GCN and PS2, they would go ahead and do Xbox too).

    The Petition can be found here [petitiononline.com]

    Rumors say that the popular Katamari DS petition to Namco worked, so maybe this one will work too.

  • Dear Namco, do you realize that pacman can't cant save you this time!, so why are you doing this to your customers, specially when Nintendo has been so kind to you, they even lend you Mr Miyamoto last time. How rude Namco!, now I'll have to hate PacPix... uhm I'm still playing it, but I will still be mad at you Namco,tsk I'll have to fix my broken ps2......

  • the numbers show (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Bobtree ( 105901 ) on Friday March 25, 2005 @11:29AM (#12046138)
    Sony's PS2 comes in last place for buyers of multi-platform games who have multiple systems. The Gamecube and Xbox "ports" tend to have nicer graphics, quicker loading, and so on.

    Sony obviously benefits when a would-be portable title is released only on their system instead of two or all 3. There's also less lost development energy on a single-platform title in general (no porting and cross-platform worries), and it can make a big difference in the quality of PS2 titles (take Gran Turismo 4 or God of War for example).

    Even if they aren't permenantly exclusive, just having the initial release on the PS2 is a pretty good bet that the PS2 version will sell the best.
    • Yea, it's generally XBox, Gamecube, PS2 for people with all 3, in that order. Live functionality tends to firm up the XBox version, exclusives and controller preference can change it up a bit as well, but very few people I know will buy the PS2 version if there is an XBox and/or GC version.

      There just isn't any point to it. You get nicer graphics, and insanely better load times(provided the port doesn't suck) as you mentioned. Oh, and don't forget 4 controller ports.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close