Regarding the article about sony that kikizo wrote about...
One question though,if you " SONY" claim you doesnt bribe or pay developers to develop for them why did you pay 10% of the stocks in Square-enix and has people in their boarding room.

Is that why so little 360 love?
Buying stocks and having people in their boardroom in one of the biggest gaming companies doesnt count as " bribe" apparenltly.

Be you a fanboy or not, Tretton' s an ass and everyone knows it. Quotes like this don' t help either:

" We don' t buy exclusivity. We don' t fund development. We don' t, for lack of a better term, bribe somebody to only do a game on our platform," Tretton said

Since when has business become bribery? If a company wants a particular good/service they pay money for it. Simple. It' s like he' s trying to make up some moral high ground that only Sony knows about.

Sounds like they' re sore about Gears and the GTA content...

Sounds like they' re sore about Gears and the GTA content...

Hell if you were Sony you would be too.

And as for them having crontol in Square Enix that is not bribery that is corporate espionage I' m guessing that is what the quote meant which is funny because that means they are somewhat smarter than MS in that way because as long as they have enough shares than Square is theirs but I mean its not really original but whatever. Personally I don' t care I think that if you can be good enough to make sure developers only make games for your system then you deserve it and its not like MS doesn' t have developers in their pocket just like Sony it just depends on well they are in their respective pockets(wow that was a bad anology) so this is like saying Oh no Sony is lying to us Imean ofcourse they are they want to make money right then they aren' t going to reveal everything to the republic.

as you say funding development companies is business, backhanders to developers or junkets is bribery. If Jack Tretton is suggesting this, I' m sure I can hear MS sharpening their lawyers.

Buying stocks and having people in their boardroom in one of the biggest gaming companies doesnt count as " bribe" apparenltly.

Actually that isn' t a bribe, thats simply buying part of a corporation. Which obvioulsy is not illegal. I' m not saying Sony is devoid of using dirty tactics, I' m just saying that buying stock in another company in itself is not illegal or unethical.

Actually that isn' t a bribe, thats simply buying part of a corporation. Which obvioulsy is not illegal. I' m not saying Sony is devoid of using dirty tactics, I' m just saying that buying stock in another company in itself is not illegal or unethical.

My point was,it doesnt matter if MS gives money to developers,then its the developers choice to choose what they want or not.

But buying stocks isn' t something a game developer can prevent.

So its more dirty if you ask me.
Yes buying stocks isn' t exactly a " bribe" .

MS at one point wanted to buy bioware or atleast its been rumored and biooware turned it down,and MS didn' t buy them.
That is how it should be,up to the dev.

Anyway im not against sony' s move to buy stocks but dont claim you dont do dirty moves when u bought 10% of Square-enix-no wonder the sony love...

Sony also brag they have 1.8 million people regged for PSN.

But they gaved away free Bond movies to over 500k for those who regged.

That isn' t a bribe to get good numbers to show off for e3?

Nintendo & Microsoft are going about it the wrong way.

Nintendo is going to be getting some great first-party titles, and Microsoft has amazing third party support.

Well, y' see, we don' t really need either of them. Because we' ve got the entire market' s 2nd party support covered! Better known as dumbed-down portville township.

They need to kill their PR reps & start fresh.

The only instance where I can think of a company doing something wrong to ensure exclusivity is Nintendo in the 80' s/early 90' s with their liscensing.

I' m just saying that buying stock in another company in itself is not illegal or unethical.

No, its smart.