TOO bad GeoW is 360 exclusive...

Epic paid for the development of the unreal 3 engine not ms and owns the ip for gears, just what don't you understand ??

Also where is this contract you refer to stating that gears will only be featured on the 360 or games for windows please provide a link.

LordoverFeind

The Unreal 3 Engine was developed in house by Epic, yes, but Gears of War still cost millions to make on its own. All those endless hours of making models, textures, storyboards, programming,sound effects, music, etc.

And I don't need to provide you a link. If you're not business savvy to understand that contracts between two corporate entities are commonplace, then that's your fault. Fact of the matter is, LordoverFiend, Microsoft financed the development of Gears of War which cost millions of dollars to make.

Now here is the million dollar question: why would Microsoft pay millions to make the game, add 512 megs to the Xbox 360's hardware architecture because Epic said it was necessary, and also pay for the marketing costs of the game to help make it an elite gaming franchise.......why would they do all this if it means the game will also go to the PS3 as well? Seems like Microsoft would be extremely stupid if they made such a deal like that, and Microsoft is one of the most business savvy companies around.

Common sense tells you that Gears will NEVER come to PS3. Again, quote me on that.

If Gears was published by a third-party publisher like EA, then it would have a good chance of going to the PS3, but Microsoft is the publisher and they financed the development of the game. They have a say where it goes, and that does not include going to the console of their #1 competitor.

Sorry dude, but them's the facts.

[QUOTE="JeffGenocideX"][QUOTE="LordoverFeind"][QUOTE="thinicer"][QUOTE="LordoverFeind"]

Okay let me try this again epic not microsoft owns the ip to gears of war (speaks slowly) microsoft is ownly the publisher for the game. When gears comes to the movies ms has nothing to do with that and gets no money for it either or has any input because they don't own the ip for gears. The contract for gears with ms is a publishing contract, ms again does not own the ip epic games does.

A game publisher is just the company that is responsible for the marketing, manufacture, advertisement and distribution of a game made by another company that's all. So if the owner of the ip in this case epic games wishes to port gears to the pc or ps3 as the owner of the ip they can. I tried to make this as simple as possible so you could understand the diffrence between the game developer (ip owner and game creator/maker) and the game publisher (advertisement, game manufacturing, distribution ect).

LordoverFeind

I know that Gears is Epic's IP, which means that Microsoft cannot make a Gears game themselves. However, because Microsoft was directly involved in the development of the game and paid for virtually all of the development costs of it, as well as its marketing, they have a say as to where Gears goes. You act like all those millions of dollars Microsoft put into the project don't mean anything. You have to ask yourself, what does Microsoft get out of being the financial backer of the game? That is stipulated in the contract, of which you do not have a copy of.

Again, and I shall speak slowly for you, if Microsoft and Epic have a contract that stipulates that Gears of War will only be featured on the Xbox 360 or Games for Windows, then it is NOT....COMING.....TO....PS3. Okay? If Epic tries to port it to PS3, Microsoft will take them to court and they will win because of the contractual obligations that Epic must adhere to.

And you can quote me on this: Gears of War will NEVER EVER come to the PS3. I promise you that. There won't be even RUMORS of it going to the PS3.

Epic paid for the development of the unreal 3 engine not ms and owns the ip for gears, just what don't you understand ??

Also where is this contract you refer to stating that gears will only be featured on the 360 or games for windows please provide a link.

Owned by who a fanboys with no proof or didn't know ms was only the publisher of gears of war ??

Oh and just to be clear I already have gears and a 360 as well as a ps3 so don't think I am some cow dreaming about a port. I am just setting the record straight here and am probably wasting my time debating with you fanboys.

[QUOTE="LordoverFeind"]Although this is just bait it is true that gears of war is not owned by ms or is a 1st party game so epic could port it to the ps3 if they wanted to in the future.thinicer

No they cannot. Microsoft was directly and heavily involved in the development & financing of Gears, and they paid for all the marketing of the game. It is never going to the PS3. 

True.  And if you look at who the publisher is, you guessed it, Microsoft.  There is no way this game will ever, ever be released to the PS3.

Epic can't do anything to GeOW.  Microsoft won't even allow it to go to the PC.............yet.  That is a darn shame.

But whatever.  The game is probably massively overhyped and would never score high on the PC list because the PC's standards are much higher than consoles.

[QUOTE="LordoverFeind"]

Epic paid for the development of the unreal 3 engine not ms and owns the ip for gears, just what don't you understand ??

Also where is this contract you refer to stating that gears will only be featured on the 360 or games for windows please provide a link.

thinicer

The Unreal 3 Engine was developed in house by Epic, yes, but Gears of War still cost millions to make on its own. All those endless hours of making models, textures, storyboards, programming,sound effects, music, etc.

And I don't need to provide you a link. If you're not business savvy to understand that contracts between two corporate entities are commonplace, then that's your fault. Fact of the matter is, LordoverFiend, Microsoft financed the development of Gears of War which cost millions of dollars to make.

Now here is the million dollar question: why would Microsoft pay millions to make the game, add 512 megs to the Xbox 360's hardware architecture because Epic said it was necessary, and also pay for the marketing costs of the game to help make it an elite gaming franchise.......why would they do all this if it means the game will also go to the PS3 as well? Seems like Microsoft would be extremely stupid if they made such a deal like that, and Microsoft is one of the most business savvy companies around.

Common sense tells you that Gears will NEVER come to PS3. Again, quote me on that.

If Gears was published by a third-party publisher like EA, then it would have a good chance of going to the PS3, but Microsoft is the publisher and they financed the development of the game. They have a say where it goes, and that does not include going to the console of their #1 competitor.

Sorry dude, but them's the facts.

You keep referring to investments ms made for gears of war to epic aside from publishing the game but nothing was heard about it anywhere but here again do you have a link or is this some insider info ???

Oh and your common sense is not proof 

It isnt exclusive, it's coming to the PC.Dahaka-UK

The 360 is really holding the game industry back with it's low storage compacity. JimmyT2

[QUOTE="thinicer"][QUOTE="LordoverFeind"]

Epic paid for the development of the unreal 3 engine not ms and owns the ip for gears, just what don't you understand ??

Also where is this contract you refer to stating that gears will only be featured on the 360 or games for windows please provide a link.

LordoverFeind

The Unreal 3 Engine was developed in house by Epic, yes, but Gears of War still cost millions to make on its own. All those endless hours of making models, textures, storyboards, programming,sound effects, music, etc.

And I don't need to provide you a link. If you're not business savvy to understand that contracts between two corporate entities are commonplace, then that's your fault. Fact of the matter is, LordoverFiend, Microsoft financed the development of Gears of War which cost millions of dollars to make.

Now here is the million dollar question: why would Microsoft pay millions to make the game, add 512 megs to the Xbox 360's hardware architecture because Epic said it was necessary, and also pay for the marketing costs of the game to help make it an elite gaming franchise.......why would they do all this if it means the game will also go to the PS3 as well? Seems like Microsoft would be extremely stupid if they made such a deal like that, and Microsoft is one of the most business savvy companies around.

Common sense tells you that Gears will NEVER come to PS3. Again, quote me on that.

If Gears was published by a third-party publisher like EA, then it would have a good chance of going to the PS3, but Microsoft is the publisher and they financed the development of the game. They have a say where it goes, and that does not include going to the console of their #1 competitor.

Sorry dude, but them's the facts.

You keep referring to investments ms made for gears of war to epic aside from publishing the game but nothing was heard about it anywhere but here again do you have a link or is this some insider info ???

Oh and your common sense is not proof 

[QUOTE="thinicer"][QUOTE="LordoverFeind"]

Epic paid for the development of the unreal 3 engine not ms and owns the ip for gears, just what don't you understand ??

Also where is this contract you refer to stating that gears will only be featured on the 360 or games for windows please provide a link.

LordoverFeind

The Unreal 3 Engine was developed in house by Epic, yes, but Gears of War still cost millions to make on its own. All those endless hours of making models, textures, storyboards, programming,sound effects, music, etc.

And I don't need to provide you a link. If you're not business savvy to understand that contracts between two corporate entities are commonplace, then that's your fault. Fact of the matter is, LordoverFiend, Microsoft financed the development of Gears of War which cost millions of dollars to make.

Now here is the million dollar question: why would Microsoft pay millions to make the game, add 512 megs to the Xbox 360's hardware architecture because Epic said it was necessary, and also pay for the marketing costs of the game to help make it an elite gaming franchise.......why would they do all this if it means the game will also go to the PS3 as well? Seems like Microsoft would be extremely stupid if they made such a deal like that, and Microsoft is one of the most business savvy companies around.

Common sense tells you that Gears will NEVER come to PS3. Again, quote me on that.

If Gears was published by a third-party publisher like EA, then it would have a good chance of going to the PS3, but Microsoft is the publisher and they financed the development of the game. They have a say where it goes, and that does not include going to the console of their #1 competitor.

Sorry dude, but them's the facts.

You keep referring to investments ms made for gears of war to epic aside from publishing the game but nothing was heard about it anywhere but here again do you have a link or is this some insider info ???

Oh and your common sense is not proof

Here 's one link for you. 

Do you honestly believe that Gears could go to the PS3? That's like saying that Resistance or GoWIII could go to the 360. 

You keep referring to investments ms made for gears of war to epic aside from publishing the game but nothing was heard about it anywhere but here again do you have a link or is this some insider info ???

Oh and your common sense is not proof

LordoverFeind

Like I said before, I don't need to give you any proof. You know what will be enough proof for you? Gears not showing up on the PS3. That will tell you all you need to know. Again, quote me on that!

it woulda looked at least 2x better on the PS3.  The cell has better graphics, just look at Oblivion.   Blue ray would make the game 2x longer too.WheresMyChippy

[QUOTE="LordoverFeind"]

You keep referring to investments ms made for gears of war to epic aside from publishing the game but nothing was heard about it anywhere but here again do you have a link or is this some insider info ???

Oh and your common sense is not proof

thinicer

Like I said before, I don't need to give you any proof. You know what will be enough proof for you? Gears not showing up on the PS3. That will tell you all you need to know. Again, quote me on that!

LMAO all that means is epic did not think it was profitable enough to port gears to the ps3 that's all lol. You make statements about investments ms made to epic for the development of gears as if epic was some tiny startup development house and when I ask for proof you completely avoid it. Epic makes more than enough money from licensing it's game engines to developers to to "need" money from ms just to ship a game.

LMAO all that means is epic did not think it was profitable enough to port gears to the ps3 that's all lol.LordoverFeind

Why wouldn't it be profitable?

 

You make statements about investments ms made to epic for the development of gears as if epic was some tiny startup development house and when I ask for proof you completely avoid it. Epic makes more than enough money from licensing it's game engines to developers to to "need" money from ms just to ship a game.

Microsoft financed the development by giving Epic advanced royalties on the project.

Epic spent two years and invested about $10 million to develop "Gears of War," making it the most-expensive game by the 15-year-old company, said Mark Rein, vice president. As is typical in the industry, Microsoft financed the game's development by advancing royalties to Epic.

Link: http://www.newsobserver.com/104/story/508220.html

Why would Epic want to finance their own project when somebody else, somebody who has something to gain from it, could do it for them? Microsoft gains with keeping Gears an Xbox 360 exclusive, and they paid handsomly for it. 

And again, why would Microsoft spend $1 billion to modify the Xbox 360 to have 512 megs of ram just for Gears of War, why would they finance the game, why would they market it and hype it, etc. if it means it goes to the PS3? Answer me that one. If it was not a guaranteed Microsoft exclusive, why would they do all these things? The only reason Microsoft would do all these things is if they had an agreement in place with Epic that stipulated Gears would never go to a competitor's platform. I promise you that.

PLUS, the sixaxis controller you could use the motion controller to jump from cover and peek over rocks, it only makes sense.WheresMyChippy

[QUOTE="LordoverFeind"]

LMAO all that means is epic did not think it was profitable enough to port gears to the ps3 that's all lol.thinicer

Why wouldn't it be profitable?

 

You make statements about investments ms made to epic for the development of gears as if epic was some tiny startup development house and when I ask for proof you completely avoid it. Epic makes more than enough money from licensing it's game engines to developers to to "need" money from ms just to ship a game.

Microsoft financed the development by giving Epic advanced royalties on the project.

Epic spent two years and invested about $10 million to develop "Gears of War," making it the most-expensive game by the 15-year-old company, said Mark Rein, vice president. As is typical in the industry, Microsoft financed the game's development by advancing royalties to Epic.

Link: http://www.newsobserver.com/104/story/508220.html

Why would Epic want to finance their own project when somebody else, somebody who has something to gain from it, could do it for them? Microsoft gains with keeping Gears an Xbox 360 exclusive, and they paid handsomly for it. 

And again, why would Microsoft spend $1 billion to modify the Xbox 360 to have 512 megs of ram just for Gears of War, why would they finance the game, why would they market it and hype it, etc. if it means it goes to the PS3? Answer me that one. If it was not a guaranteed Microsoft exclusive, why would they do all these things? The only reason Microsoft would do all these things is if they had an agreement in place with Epic that stipulated Gears would never go to a competitor's platform. I promise you that.

Ownage Approved.

Hmmm.... how to put this.... NO.

By the way, it's Blu-Ray, not BLUE ray

[QUOTE="WheresMyChippy"]it woulda looked at least 2x better on the PS3. The cell has better graphics, just look at Oblivion. Blue ray would make the game 2x longer too.Stonin

Blu-ray is so advanced that the creators of Motorstorm couldn't even implement offline vs mode into the game. Behold, the power of Blu-ray, LOL!!! :lol:eastside49er

[QUOTE="-Spock-"]

How would it cope with the PS3 memory requirements?

WheresMyChippy

[QUOTE="LordoverFeind"]

LMAO all that means is epic did not think it was profitable enough to port gears to the ps3 that's all lol.thinicer

Why wouldn't it be profitable?

You make statements about investments ms made to epic for the development of gears as if epic was some tiny startup development house and when I ask for proof you completely avoid it. Epic makes more than enough money from licensing it's game engines to developers to to "need" money from ms just to ship a game.

Microsoft financed the development by giving Epic advanced royalties on the project.

Epic spent two years and invested about $10 million to develop "Gears of War," making it the most-expensive game by the 15-year-old company, said Mark Rein, vice president. As is typical in the industry, Microsoft financed the game's development by advancing royalties to Epic.

Link: http://www.newsobserver.com/104/story/508220.html

Why would Epic want to finance their own project when somebody else, somebody who has something to gain from it, could do it for them? Microsoft gains with keeping Gears an Xbox 360 exclusive, and they paid handsomly for it.

And again, why would Microsoft spend $1 billion to modify the Xbox 360 to have 512 megs of ram just for Gears of War, why would they finance the game, why would they market it and hype it, etc. if it means it goes to the PS3? Answer me that one. If it was not a guaranteed Microsoft exclusive, why would they do all these things? The only reason Microsoft would do all these things is if they had an agreement in place with Epic that stipulated Gears would never go to a competitor's platform. I promise you that.

I went over this before ms is the game publisher and game publishers frequently give developers advances on royalties this is nothing new or uncommon. Also ms upped the memory of the 360 to improve the graphics of all 360 games not just for gears. All epic did is show them the difference in graphics between 256mb and 512mb and ms decided it was worth the money.

I thought I explained what a game publisher was but I guess you still don't understand the relationship between developer and publisher. The proof you state is just normal business the only difference is ms is the owner of a platform as well as a publisher. As I have stated from post 1 epic is the owner of the ip and has all the rights in deciding how their property is used and by whom not ms.

I asked you for your proof of gears being contractually restricted to the 360 and you have yet to deliver on your claims. You also claimed ms funded the development of gears but you didn't understand that ms was the publisher and that is what publishers do. If for example ms ordered 1 million units of gears but it only sold 200,000 it would have to eat the loss as the publisher or supposed gears shipped late ms would have to eat the advertisement cost. Publishers back a promising game in development that is why the industry goes by a formula of what sells so the publisher can recoup their investment and make a profit. So of course it's in ms's interest to make gears a hit as the publisher of the game to make a profit for themselves.

The game publisher again (speaks slowly) does not own the ip the developer does for the last time. The owner of the ip can do what ever they want with their ip even port it (pc/ps3/wii) or make books,movies,anime,manga ect if they want.So far I have seen no proof that ms has signed a deal with epic to limit gears to the 360 and you have yet to show me any either as well. So again do you have insider info or are you trying to pass off your hunch as proof ???

Unless you work for epic or ms (I really doubt it based on your limited knowledge shown here) how could you know what deal ms made with epic ?? 

The PS3 cannot handle Gears of War. It requires 512MB of unified RAM which the PS3 does not have. The X360 wasn't suppose to have it either, but Epic pushed Microsoft into implementing it because it was required to run Gears. PS3 doesn't have it so it can't even run it.

/thread 

I went over this before ms is the game publisher and game publishers frequently give developers advances on royalties this is nothing new or uncommon. Also ms upped the memory of the 360 to improve the graphics of all 360 games not just for gears. All epic did is show them the difference in graphics between 256mb and 512mb and ms decided it was worth the money.

I thought I explained what a game publisher was but I guess you still don't understand the relationship between developer and publisher.LordoverFeind

The publisher-developer relationship varies. It's not always the same thing. In many cases the publisher provides direct investment to the product and does the market research and searches for programming know-how for the project. It really depends on what is stipulated in the contract agreement between publisher & developer. But I have already provided evidence to you that Microsoft financed Gears of War, so you cannot backtrack and tell me that "oh, well everybody does this!"  You asked me, flat out, "Prove to me that Microsoft financed Gears!" and I did that. I have nothing more to prove to you.

I asked you for your proof of gears being contractually restricted to the 360 and you have yet to deliver on your claims.

I don't need to deliver it. Microsoft is the publisher, and that means Gears is an exclusive. End of story. Can you please provide me with a link or evidence that Gears can legally go to PS3? I bet you can't. Why don't you do your own grunt work for a change on the internet and try to "own" me? Give Epic a call yourself if you want. Gears will remain a Microsoft exclusive. You won't find any evidence to the contrary.

You also claimed ms funded the development of gears but you didn't understand that ms was the publisher and that is what publishers do.

You told me earlier in this thread that I don't have any evidence that Microsoft financed Gears, now you're telling me that's what publishers do and that it's nothing new? Okay dude, well....I guess if you can't beat them, join 'em...but do it in a way so they don't feel like they won!

Yes, Microsoft is a publisher and they also have a video game console. So clearly they are going to finance a game so that it is an exclusive to that console, they are going to finance it so that it benefits their product. Otherwise, why do it?

The game publisher again (speaks slowly) does not own the ip the developer does for the last time. The owner of the ip can do what ever they want with their ip even port it (pc/ps3/wii) or make books,movies,anime,manga ect if they want.

I never said that Microsoft was the IP owner, did I? But Epic still cannot bring Gears to PS3. Sorry bud. They are legally disallowed from doing so. There is no freaking way that Microsoft, in their agreement with Epic, would allow this game to go to the PS3. If Epic wanted to bring this game to both PS3 and Xbox 360 then they would have never selected Microsoft as their publisher. They would have gone with another third party company like EA or Midway.

Microsoft financed the project, and I think it's absolutely hilarious that you see nothing wrong with bringing a game that Microsoft helped finance & develop to the PS3 which is directly competing against the Xbox 360. I think you need to take a couple more business classes. Epic owns the Gears IP, but there are still restrictions on it because they entered into a contract. You cannot break legally binding contracts.

So far I have seen no proof that ms has signed a deal with epic to limit gears to the 360 and you have yet to show me any either as well. So again do you have insider info or are you trying to pass off your hunch as proof ???

Why do you need proof? Isn't testimony from Epic & Microsoft themselves enough for you? They have said Gears of War is an exclusive. That's enough evidence for you. If you want to get into legalities, then call Epic and ask them for more details about their arrangement with Microsoft. Or, better yet, ask them if Epic can legally bring Gears of War to the PS3. Go ahead. Call them yourself or email them. Do the grunt work dude. Prove me wrong. Do it. 

it woulda looked at least 2x better on the PS3.  The cell has better graphics, just look at Oblivion.   Blue ray would make the game 2x longer too.WheresMyChippy

hahaha XD

Because everyone loves longer games.

What about Mass Effect? How does that fit on one DVD-9? Magically...right? Mass Effect is a huge game and it fits on one disc, Blu-Ray ain't got nothing good anyways, it should be used as a movie disc and nothing else.

Blue ray would make the game 2x longer too.WheresMyChippy

It is developers, not disk formats that determine a games length.

lol at last sentenceTimesplitter14

it woulda looked at least 2x better on the PS3. The cell has better graphics, just look at Oblivion. Blue ray would make the game 2x longer too.WheresMyChippy