• Welcome to the Angry Joe Show Army!

    Join our community of gamers passionate about our community and our hobby! Whether it's playing, discussing, or watching games, regardless of platform, genre, or location, we have a place for you, always!

  • PS4 Forum

    The AJSA Playstation 4 Division: Game Nights and More!

    The AJSA is on Playstation 4! Join us for weekly Game Nights with a selection of the best games the PS4 has to offer!

  • XBO Forum

    The AJSA Xbox One Division: We Got You Covered!

    The AJSA Xbox One Division is ready to connect with you on XBox Live with a ton of events for the best Xbox games!

  • News Archive

    The Best News from the Best Sites, Every Week.

    The AJSA News Collection Team is hard at work condensing a week's worth of news into one giant-sze digest for you to chew on and discuss! Links to source articles are always provided!

  • More Info

    The AJSA Expeditionary Force: Deploying to Play the Best PC Games!

    The elite vanguard of the AJSA, the Expeditionary Force (EF) chooses a new PC game every week! Join us for weekly events and help decide if the game has a future in the AJSA.

  • The Team

    Streaming Now: The AJSA Stream Team

    Joe can't stream every game, but our talented AJSA Stream Team covers a wide variety of games and personalities! Check them out, and show them some AJSA Love!

  • The Tube

    The AJSA Community YouTube Channel

    Featuring news, gameplay clips, and more from the community! The Community is a chance to showcase the best moments in AJSA Gaming!

Variloh

Are console exclusives good for the gaming industry?

46 posts in this topic

Hello all, Variloh here.

So im back with this weeks question, keep in mind we discuss these questions every thursday at 10:00pm GMT+1/CET on www.twitch.tv/variloh. Come join the conversation and be a guest on the show!

This weeks question is: Are console exclusives good for the video game industsry?

Some background: It is safe to say that in comparison with the previous decade, console exclusives are pretty much gone. "Back in the day" exclusives used to sell consoles, today, a great majority of games come out on both major consoles (Xbox and PS) as well as on PC. (A good modern example would be dark souls, both 1 and 2 are on pc, xbox and playstation while demon souls, its "father" if you will, was a PS exclusive)

Is this overall good? what are some pros and cons? how has this affected the industry? post your opinions below!

 

PS: i post this in the general discussion since i want all members of the AJSA from diffrent games to participate, as well as the discusion topic is pretty open and is not about my channel, which is why i post it here and NOT on the user created section (plus it DOES say discuss "anything and everything" here  :) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The truth is quality console exclusives benefit Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo because they help move hardware..There wouldn't be a need for multi consoles to exist if they 100% shared the same software.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say no. The fact that I can't move over to PC exclusive and have my Halos too must benefit Microsoft because it gets to hold its hostage with a very high ransom, but it also sort of hinders consumer options if a franchise you love is tied to a singular console.

 

I may just be bitter about saying goodbye to Halo though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may just be bitter about saying goodbye to Halo though.

Are we not all bitter about saying goodbye to Halo after that train wreak of a Halo 343 released. R.I.P Halo :(

Recoveryanonymous likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind console manufacturers and their partner studios developing games exclusive for their own console, what I'm not okay with is with manufacturers paying large sums of money to studios so they release only on their console, giving the middle finger to everybody else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think console exclusives are a good thing to have as they do give inhouse studios the task of showing why a particular console is good and show what kind of games/mechanics/features/etc. one can expect from the console. Also, games like Bayonetta only have a sequel because Nintendo was willing to make it so as long as it was console exclusive, thus giving a game a good number of people loved another chance to be in the spotlight. Plus it's kind of cool to think what consoles can do with their own characters, like how companies like Disney, Warner Bros., Hannah Barbara and the like have been able to create products where in their entire roster of characters interact with each other and work together/do things with one another. The best example of this being Nintendo's Super Smash Bros. series (although I really wish Sony would reconsider giving PSABR another shot and fix all the problems that game had).

Variloh, argetlam350 and Emphase like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll say yes. I don't really have a reasonable argument as to why I think so, but my thoughts kinda go along with IrishRogue's. How I see it - the developers of their respective consoles and the developers of the exclusives for said consoles shouldn't be catering to every single person. If there were no exclusives at all, there would be no consoles or at least no need for them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An exclusive that is written to harness the particular features of a paltform is good. One that is done purely as a marketing tool is bad for consumers, as are exclusive missions/add-ons.dlc etc. If a game will be capable of running on any platform, it doesn't serve gamers at all one little bit to have it denied. It may make sense to the suits, but to us? No way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no. they drive fanboyism. how many times have you heard sony fanboys whining towards xbox fanboys about how uncharted and last of us games are better than what the other side has, and vice versa?

 

a lot of console exclusives are also shit. they normally come with bland and often repeated storylines / plots, have the same sort of game mechanics repeated, and are normally a series of the same title. there's not much in the way for new console exclusives, and if there is, those will also become a series and get repeated.

 

i believe it's a trend, mr OP. console exclusives cater to console fans / fanatics, the core base of people who are likely to buy those games. if these people are used to games that never last, and get played once or twice and are either shelved or sold off for them to go and buy more games to repeat their gaming style, then these are the games each console will get as exclusives.

 

multi plat games are normally either brand new, or part of a series but usually always come with something new about them that make them unique. they don't just repeat the same formulas previous games had. they also normally have much longer content / playtime for them, and larger in content, and are cheaper than console only exclusives, and have better development and ethics behind their gameplay for the gamer, and normally are good enough to not be sold or traded in. example: when last of us came out, i recall it being £49.99. when borderlands 2 came out, i recall it being £39.99, for all platforms.

MuddledMuppet and LoneWolf like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no. they drive fanboyism. how many times have you heard sony fanboys whining towards xbox fanboys about how uncharted and last of us games are better than what the other side has, and vice versa?

 

a lot of console exclusives are also shit. they normally come with bland and often repeated storylines / plots, have the same sort of game mechanics repeated, and are normally a series of the same title. there's not much in the way for new console exclusives, and if there is, those will also become a series and get repeated.

 

i believe it's a trend, mr OP. console exclusives cater to console fans / fanatics, the core base of people who are likely to buy those games. if these people are used to games that never last, and get played once or twice and are either shelved or sold off for them to go and buy more games to repeat their gaming style, then these are the games each console will get as exclusives.

 

multi plat games are normally either brand new, or part of a series but usually always come with something new about them that make them unique. they don't just repeat the same formulas previous games had. they also normally have much longer content / playtime for them, and larger in content, and are cheaper than console only exclusives, and have better development and ethics behind their gameplay for the gamer, and normally are good enough to not be sold or traded in. example: when last of us came out, i recall it being £49.99. when borderlands 2 came out, i recall it being £39.99, for all platforms.

If there weren't any exclusive games, fanboys would be arguing over the consoles themselves. PC Elitists and Console Fanboys prove that time and again.

 

Exclusive games also help with healthy competition within the industry. It's the fanatics/fanboys are the ones that turn it ugly.  Remember that console exclusives such as "God of War", "Halo", "The Last of Us" drive hardware sales as well. If a game were available on every single console, there's very little reason to have more than one console. If that happens, then that company will have monopoly over the console business. Just think of last year's E3 if Microsoft was the only company that made consoles, announced the X1 just like they did then. Sony's not around to counter their "Always Online", "No Used Games" and other terrible policies. They'd have kept them as they know that people wouldn't have a choice.

 

Exclusives can also give you new experiences such as "Ico", "Shadow of the Colossus", "Metal Gear Solid" and such. Then there are the exclusives that can show what can be done with the system such as "Goldeneye" showing how First-Person-Shooters could work well on a console. Yes, exclusive games series are coming out with more and more sequels, but they're still coming out with new exclusives as well. You can't say that some multiplatform titles like "Call of Duty", "Assassin's Creed", "Battlefield" aren't getting bland with each sequel.

 

The exclusive games aren't what made fanboys. Fanboys will find anything to hold over their opposition's heads. Remember how Xbox Fanboys kept saying how Multiplatform games always looked better on the 360? Or how about how Playstation fanboys keep saying how the PS4 is technologically more powerful than the X1. Then there's the PC Elitists always touting how much more they can get with their rigs over consoles. All of these are facts, and all of them don't necessarily have anything to do with Exclusive Games.

 

Are we not all bitter about saying goodbye to Halo after that train wreak of a Halo 343 released. R.I.P Halo :(

I speak strictly of the Single Player since I haven't had Gold since Reach, but I actually thought that 4 was alright. It's the first Halo that I played on Legendary difficulty right out of the gate, and I got over 20 hours out of it, and I thought the story was passable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the past, yes, because there could have been advantages to making something for one console compared to another, even when adding the PC to the equation a game could still turn out much better if the focus was only on making a game for one console, especially back in the 90s. Currently though I would say no, with everything running on similar hardware, with similar feeatures, I see it as only a way to sell your game to less people and to allow less people to be able to play it. The only people it is going to help is Sony or Microsoft if one end up selling more consoles than the other because of exclusives. Whenever possible I would prefer games to be made for everything so the largest number of people can enjoy them.

 

 

Are we not all bitter about saying goodbye to Halo after that train wreak of a Halo 343 released. R.I.P Halo

 

Probably one of the worst campaigns I've played and a very lazy job with the multiplayer.

MuddledMuppet likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe they are good for the industry. Sometimes they are necessary, such as a developer only having the budget to make one version, but with today's hardware being so similar that excuse is losing it's merit.

MuddledMuppet and Mexiguy like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only downside to exclusivity that I can think of is that companies are limiting their profits. They'll have to make sure the platform they're making the game for has a big enough install base that they'd still make money back. Even then, it's not like 100% of people who have that particular console would buy the game.

 

 

but with today's hardware being so similar that excuse is losing it's merit.

Think that makes console exclusives even more important for companies. Without exclusive games for each console, consoles would have one less thing to attract people to buy a particular one. The exclusive games can help people decide which console they choose to get. I've already explained why there has to be more than one console previously, so I won't get into that again.

MuddledMuppet likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your question is are they good for the industry? I would say yes to that for the sole fact they benefit for the companies, is it good for you as a consumer ....naw not really. Sure mario on something like steam would drive large sales but just like in the world i come from you want that market for yourself, it's all about driving those numbers to your platform not theirs. Therefore it should "hopefully" fuel competition between them all i say that with a big hopefully because that never seems to happen lawl. It's just like when dota2 first came to steam, valve didn't care if it lost money early on because look at the numbers it brought to there platform in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind console manufacturers and their partner studios developing games exclusive for their own console, what I'm not okay with is with manufacturers paying large sums of money to studios so they release only on their console, giving the middle finger to everybody else.

That's business. In the console market the 2 biggest factors that separate consoles are price point and console exclusives. If you have an exclusive that is amazing and worth playing then people might overlook other flaws in your system like a price or all that shit that was removed from Xbox One that people still feel the need to bitch about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only downside to exclusivity that I can think of is that companies are limiting their profits. They'll have to make sure the platform they're making the game for has a big enough install base that they'd still make money back. Even then, it's not like 100% of people who have that particular console would buy the game.

 

 

Think that makes console exclusives even more important for companies. Without exclusive games for each console, consoles would have one less thing to attract people to buy a particular one. The exclusive games can help people decide which console they choose to get. I've already explained why there has to be more than one console previously, so I won't get into that again.

    I should clarify that I mean third party exclusives. Where the hardware manufactures pay a third party to muscle out the other platforms. For example, Nintendo making their own games for there own hardware isn't an issue to me at all. Microsoft or Sony paying a third party studio to keep a game off other platforms is something I have an issue with. Not games they are personally funding mind you, games that already had a budget and were being made regardless. It isn't all on the hardware guys either, developers that exclude a platform on their own free will is something that ticks me off far more.

 

    I also disagree with you on the point of a console monopoly. If there were absolutely no exclusives in any form I still believe there would be at least room for 2 choices, not including handhelds. Instead of having to rely on the crutch of exclusives they would have to rely on making a system that is better than the other. Not necessarily power vs power but the experience the user will have while using either system through software or whatever innovative uses they could imagine and implement, all while maintaining affordability. There will also always be a divide between some gamers that will have their preference of a console no matter how much power it has or how many features it has vs the other. Though this will never come to pass anyway because Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft will continue to make games with their own money. Which again, I have no issue with.

Mexiguy likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The truth is quality console exclusives benefit Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo because they help move hardware..There wouldn't be a need for multi consoles to exist if they 100% shared the same software.

Hm... Not sure, ATI and Nvidia still both exist and play the same games, brand loyalty and personal preference for slightly different features(also price!) will still be very strong even if you take away all exclusives. Console exclusives are way lower now and hopefully with the unified PC architecture they'll be rarer now well and at least if they port to PC like Titanfall(which is basically best played on PC all adverts aside) I'm happy.

As a guy who went exclusively PC after the PS2/gamecube I've missed a few good games I'd like to have played but weren't enough to convince me to buy a console. I imagine there's lots of other people like me who would have liked to play Infamous, maybe Halo or the Indiana Jones games... Uncharted is it? But we're just not convinced enough to buy a console or we'd rather play with a mouse instead.

Some people are saying that without exclusives there would be no need to have more than one platform, well there already is very little need. Worthwhile exclusive titles for the average person can be counted in a hand or two when compared to hundreds of multiplatform releases that dominate the market nowadays. Making games a free market would(and maybe will) benefit pretty much everyone but the console makers. 

Ironically, mainly due to a lack of complexity in console's control schemes and inexplicable inability to hook up a keyboard to the goddamn things the PC actually has way more exclusives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. If there weren't any exclusive games, fanboys would be arguing over the consoles themselves. PC Elitists and Console Fanboys prove that time and again.

2. You can't say that some multiplatform titles like "Call of Duty", "Assassin's Creed", "Battlefield" aren't getting bland with each sequel.

3. The exclusive games aren't what made fanboys. Fanboys will find anything to hold over their opposition's heads. Remember how Xbox Fanboys kept saying how Multiplatform games always looked better on the 360? Or how about how Playstation fanboys keep saying how the PS4 is technologically more powerful than the X1. Then there's the PC Elitists always touting how much more they can get with their rigs over consoles. All of these are facts, and all of them don't necessarily have anything to do with Exclusive Games.

1. If there weren't any exclusive games, fanboyism would not exist. i'll do my best to clarify why i believe that:

 

the PS4 has a unified memory architecture of 8GB GDDR5. That is ALL it has for it's GPU and it's CPU. it also uses Open GL. the xbox one, has 8GB of DDR3 (whether that's dual channel or quad channel i don't know), and also has 8GB of flash memory, and 32MB of esRAM. it also was developed and tested with direct X 12, but due to it's rushed release it came out being capable of utilising a variant of direct x 11. currently, with  Open GL, games can be made to look and perform better than on direct x 11.

 

that is why the PS4 currently has better and smoother performing games than the xbox one. fanboys blame the kinect, but that's a camera. it has nothing to do with the console underperforming what so ever. the PS4 however, cannot improve on what the games will look and perform like, at all. it is currently having games released all performing and displaying at maximum capacity of the hardware, the xbox one isn't because direct x 12 is not here yet. when it does... i guarantee you, that games on the xbox one will perform the same or slightly better than ones on the PS4, and look the same as ones on the PS4, because direct x 12 is better than the version of Open GL the PS4 can only use, but no doubt it's bloated and games at the end of development are going to look pretty much the same, and perform the same, since both consoles have a very similar GPU and CPU architecture. it's only xbox one that is actually with more up it's sleeve due to the 8GB flash memory and the 32MB of esRAM. simple as that.

 

BUT... fanboys believe it's hardware and / or the kinect. they simply dont and never will understand any of it. they think they argue about hardware but they never really do... they argue that games look better on x or y, and yeah, that bit is true but they believe so for the wrong reasons. how many fanboys here knew about direct x 12 and the PS4 being maxed out on it's version of Open GL? anyone? didnt think so... at the end of the day, fanboys complain and whine about what game looks better on what system, and have no idea on the facts except they know how to whine about it.

 

with these guys, it's ALL about the video games. that's where it starts and stops. all the time. they don't understand console mechanics, what's under the hood / bonnet, game development, money, economics, business tactics and strategies, they just know how to use the controller and they know how to yell very loudly about what looks better and what does not - and the things we buy that look good or dont, for the consoles, are video games. so as i said at the start, they just whine about games, all day long. they really do. if games were never exclusive, and came out every console, fanboys would have nothing to complain about. no one would be missing out on anything, so long as direct x 12 in the xbox one vs PS4 scenario is in effect.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. i never did. those games you mentioned are of course bland and repetitive on their releases, but you also picked some of the worst ones you could have possibly thought of. you didn't mention anything to the likes of borderlands games, destiny, south park stick of truth, the evil within, alien isolation, all of which are excellent multi plat games, and are not hindered in any way by the hardware provided by either rival console company. they all look as good and play as well on either console they are available for.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. i pretty much answered this with number 1.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. i hold nothing against you. you got your beliefs and opinions, i got mine, and i stand by them. im not arguing or trolling you here, im just presenting my what some people would say, very "alien" side of the argument. ive played many, many exclusive games on different consoles, and more times than not, those games were never really as good or better than games i could buy for the vast majority of all gaming platforms.  here's a few final examples:

 

the last of us (hyped to be a new game from naughty dog exploring a different genre: survival horror). this game was not a survival horror, and i played through it and platinumed the game, waiting for that survival horror moment, or moments. it never happened. it was pathetic marketing. it's not a survival horror game at all. then i played outlast on the PC, which is also a PS4 game, so although not an xbox one game, it's still not a PS4 exclusive, and this, is a survival horror game. THIS is what i was expecting from the last of us. so i naturally enjoyed it a lot more and had a better experience from it.

 

uncharted 3 (the third game in the series). uncharted 1 was made and came with a game engine. uncharted 2 was made but came with a far better game engine and new cliff hanging / climbing moves and mechanics which gave me a reason to play it over uncharted 1. it was great. uncharted 3, has pretty much, the same game engine as uncharted 2. it's just continiung the same game, on the same mechanics, the same climbing, jumping, shooting, but in different areas. uncharted 3 for me, felt like what the matrix revolutions and revelations felt like when you watched matrix 1. matrix 2, was different to matrix 1. matrix 3, was exactly the same as matrix 2. and uncharted 3 for me feels just like uncharted 2, so i was dissapointed and found no reason to finish it and i still havent, and wont.

 

gran turismo 6. (6th game in GT series and hyped to sky heaven). comes with microtransactions. comes with races locked out. doesnt require you to earn your licences to race specific races. still has the same crappy online lobby system that GT5 had, so no one, and i mean NO ONE, actually does a race. if it was matchmaking like on COD, and forces you to race, then people would do racing. but today, people just chat on mics and sit around on the racetrack doing nothing. that's not what i had in mind for GT6. it was just a repeat of GT5, with worse conditions for the player. im thinking of selling it.

 

all these games examples i have given, contain facts about how the games are made and played, but these negative facts are ALWAYS overlooked and ignored and not even noticed by the vast majority of the people who have played them or reviewed them, and this is the kind of thing that hurts the gaming industry. these games are accepted by the average gamer's "standards" that they expect, but they don't fit MY standards, because i notice a lot more, and i see what is bad and what is not, and the bad a lot of the times with these exclusive games, outweighs the benefits. i could go on, with more game examples, but you get what i mean. it's not all rosey tinted eyes with these exclusives, a lot of them aren't that good, as i have shown above.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. game studios / developers that make exclusive titles for specific consoles, are normally in "golden chains" or contracts, and their talent and decisions are all monopolized by the owners of the consoles they make games for. the last of us COULD have been a survival horror game, and im not pointing fingers, but, doesn't it seem expected that Sony turns around and says... NO, you make something like Uncharted 3. We don't mind you trying new things, but keep the formula the same. You have to make us money. Keep it like Uncharted 3, make sure people understand how to play it, since the most people who will buy it are naughty dog / uncharted fans. Jak and Daxter, was amazing, but Jak 2 and 3 werent compared to 1, and the first game was ALSO a platformer, just like crash bandicoot. see. monopolies.i bet if ND was independant, they would do something different and fresh. and if they did, guess who's at fault? the console guy / Sony.

 

the same could be said for microsoft. why did bungie and oddworld inhabitants manage to break free from their contracts and stop making exclusives for them? who knows? but my guess would be that bungie was so fed up of Halo, that they didn't want to make ANOTHER Halo just yet. but MS did want that, but bungie didn't. so, they took off, and now are coming out with destiny. that wasn't a microsoft decision, that was a bungie decision. microsoft probably would have never said yes to Oddworld Abes Oddysee HD remake, and we havent seen a sequel / new game in the quintology series since stranger's wrath, and that's a frikin xbox 1 / original game, donkeys years ago now. so i bet the HD remake, was an oddworld inhabitant decision, it certainly wasnt microsoft, and neither of these studios are with them exclusively any more, but... look at those games. they ARE multi plats, and they probably will be amazing.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. if you managed to read all that, thanks, i appreciate it. that also goes for other forum users, not just the guy im replying to. thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

    I should clarify that I mean third party exclusives. Where the hardware manufactures pay a third party to muscle out the other platforms. For example, Nintendo making their own games for there own hardware isn't an issue to me at all. Microsoft or Sony paying a third party studio to keep a game off other platforms is something I have an issue with. Not games they are personally funding mind you, games that already had a budget and were being made regardless. It isn't all on the hardware guys either, developers that exclude a platform on their own free will is something that ticks me off far more.

I think the first part of my post about what I perceive as a downside to exclusivity applies to this as it wouldn't matter who's funding the game. The company is pretty much limiting the amount they can make back by making a game exclusive. Even with the money the developer gets from the company to make it exclusive, it doesn't mean that it would be enough to recoup their expenses.

 

As an example, "Bayonetta 2". Nintendo payed Platinum Games to make it. Now, considering the install base of the WiiU, how many copies of the game will they have to sell in order to turn a profit? What amount of WiiU owners will buy it? How much did Nintendo pay them to make it? Will all these be enough for "Bayonetta 2" to be successful as a WiiU exclusive? My personal guess would be no. It's great for fans of "Bayonetta" or Platinum who have a WiiU, but we can't say that 100% of the people who own the system is going to go out and buy it.

 

As to how this affects the consumer negatively, I'm not entirely sure.

 

 

  I also disagree with you on the point of a console monopoly. If there were absolutely no exclusives in any form I still believe there would be at least room for 2 choices, not including handhelds. Instead of having to rely on the crutch of exclusives they would have to rely on making a system that is better than the other. Not necessarily power vs power but the experience the user will have while using either system through software or whatever innovative uses they could imagine and implement, all while maintaining affordability. There will also always be a divide between some gamers that will have their preference of a console no matter how much power it has or how many features it has vs the other. Though this will never come to pass anyway because Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft will continue to make games with their own money. Which again, I have no issue with.

Some people are saying that without exclusives there would be no need to have more than one platform, well there already is very little need. Worthwhile exclusive titles for the average person can be counted in a hand or two when compared to hundreds of multiplatform releases that dominate the market nowadays. Making games a free market would(and maybe will) benefit pretty much everyone but the console makers.

 

The console manufacturers are already doing that despite having exclusives though. PSN vs Xbox Live, Twitch Streaming on one compared to the other, even the HDCP. I understand what you're saying about how people will still choose between consoles if there weren't any exclusive games. However they would have less incentive to buy one over the other without those exclusives to attract them.

 

Looking back at the past generations, the PS2 and First Xbox (do we need an acronym for that now?), where the former is the weaker machine, but had more exclusive games, and thus attracted more people.

 

Let's not forget that these exclusive games are also a way to boast the capabilities of the console itself. A way to show what can be done on one console that the other can't replicate, and therefore attract more people to that product.

 

If both consoles are that close to each other, hardware wise, and are pretty much copying each others in terms of features, it would sort of say that we don't need more than one. Without the exclusive games, there really isn't much to differentiate between them.

 

 

 

1. If there weren't any exclusive games, fanboyism would not exist. i'll do my best to clarify why i believe that:

 

the PS4 has a unified memory architecture of 8GB GDDR5. That is ALL it has for it's GPU and it's CPU. it also uses Open GL. the xbox one, has 8GB of DDR3 (whether that's dual channel or quad channel i don't know), and also has 8GB of flash memory, and 32MB of esRAM. it also was developed and tested with direct X 12, but due to it's rushed release it came out being capable of utilising a variant of direct x 11. currently, with  Open GL, games can be made to look and perform better than on direct x 11.

 

that is why the PS4 currently has better and smoother performing games than the xbox one. fanboys blame the kinect, but that's a camera. it has nothing to do with the console underperforming what so ever. the PS4 however, cannot improve on what the games will look and perform like, at all. it is currently having games released all performing and displaying at maximum capacity of the hardware, the xbox one isn't because direct x 12 is not here yet. when it does... i guarantee you, that games on the xbox one will perform the same or slightly better than ones on the PS4, and look the same as ones on the PS4, because direct x 12 is better than the version of Open GL the PS4 can only use, but no doubt it's bloated and games at the end of development are going to look pretty much the same, and perform the same, since both consoles have a very similar GPU and CPU architecture. it's only xbox one that is actually with more up it's sleeve due to the 8GB flash memory and the 32MB of esRAM. simple as that.

 

BUT... fanboys believe it's hardware and / or the kinect. they simply dont and never will understand any of it. they think they argue about hardware but they never really do... they argue that games look better on x or y, and yeah, that bit is true but they believe so for the wrong reasons. how many fanboys here knew about direct x 12 and the PS4 being maxed out on it's version of Open GL? anyone? didnt think so... at the end of the day, fanboys complain and whine about what game looks better on what system, and have no idea on the facts except they know how to whine about it.

 

with these guys, it's ALL about the video games. that's where it starts and stops. all the time. they don't understand console mechanics, what's under the hood / bonnet, game development, money, economics, business tactics and strategies, they just know how to use the controller and they know how to yell very loudly about what looks better and what does not - and the things we buy that look good or dont, for the consoles, are video games. so as i said at the start, they just whine about games, all day long. they really do. if games were never exclusive, and came out every console, fanboys would have nothing to complain about. no one would be missing out on anything, so long as direct x 12 in the xbox one vs PS4 scenario is in effect.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. i never did. those games you mentioned are of course bland and repetitive on their releases, but you also picked some of the worst ones you could have possibly thought of. you didn't mention anything to the likes of borderlands games, destiny, south park stick of truth, the evil within, alien isolation, all of which are excellent multi plat games, and are not hindered in any way by the hardware provided by either rival console company. they all look as good and play as well on either console they are available for.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. i pretty much answered this with number 1.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. i hold nothing against you. you got your beliefs and opinions, i got mine, and i stand by them. im not arguing or trolling you here, im just presenting my what some people would say, very "alien" side of the argument. ive played many, many exclusive games on different consoles, and more times than not, those games were never really as good or better than games i could buy for the vast majority of all gaming platforms.  here's a few final examples:

 

the last of us (hyped to be a new game from naughty dog exploring a different genre: survival horror). this game was not a survival horror, and i played through it and platinumed the game, waiting for that survival horror moment, or moments. it never happened. it was pathetic marketing. it's not a survival horror game at all. then i played outlast on the PC, which is also a PS4 game, so although not an xbox one game, it's still not a PS4 exclusive, and this, is a survival horror game. THIS is what i was expecting from the last of us. so i naturally enjoyed it a lot more and had a better experience from it.

 

uncharted 3 (the third game in the series). uncharted 1 was made and came with a game engine. uncharted 2 was made but came with a far better game engine and new cliff hanging / climbing moves and mechanics which gave me a reason to play it over uncharted 1. it was great. uncharted 3, has pretty much, the same game engine as uncharted 2. it's just continiung the same game, on the same mechanics, the same climbing, jumping, shooting, but in different areas. uncharted 3 for me, felt like what the matrix revolutions and revelations felt like when you watched matrix 1. matrix 2, was different to matrix 1. matrix 3, was exactly the same as matrix 2. and uncharted 3 for me feels just like uncharted 2, so i was dissapointed and found no reason to finish it and i still havent, and wont.

 

gran turismo 6. (6th game in GT series and hyped to sky heaven). comes with microtransactions. comes with races locked out. doesnt require you to earn your licences to race specific races. still has the same crappy online lobby system that GT5 had, so no one, and i mean NO ONE, actually does a race. if it was matchmaking like on COD, and forces you to race, then people would do racing. but today, people just chat on mics and sit around on the racetrack doing nothing. that's not what i had in mind for GT6. it was just a repeat of GT5, with worse conditions for the player. im thinking of selling it.

 

all these games examples i have given, contain facts about how the games are made and played, but these negative facts are ALWAYS overlooked and ignored and not even noticed by the vast majority of the people who have played them or reviewed them, and this is the kind of thing that hurts the gaming industry. these games are accepted by the average gamer's "standards" that they expect, but they don't fit MY standards, because i notice a lot more, and i see what is bad and what is not, and the bad a lot of the times with these exclusive games, outweighs the benefits. i could go on, with more game examples, but you get what i mean. it's not all rosey tinted eyes with these exclusives, a lot of them aren't that good, as i have shown above.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. game studios / developers that make exclusive titles for specific consoles, are normally in "golden chains" or contracts, and their talent and decisions are all monopolized by the owners of the consoles they make games for. the last of us COULD have been a survival horror game, and im not pointing fingers, but, doesn't it seem expected that Sony turns around and says... NO, you make something like Uncharted 3. We don't mind you trying new things, but keep the formula the same. You have to make us money. Keep it like Uncharted 3, make sure people understand how to play it, since the most people who will buy it are naughty dog / uncharted fans. Jak and Daxter, was amazing, but Jak 2 and 3 werent compared to 1, and the first game was ALSO a platformer, just like crash bandicoot. see. monopolies.

 

i bet if ND was independant, they would do something different and fresh. and if they did, guess who's at fault? the console guy. the same could be said for microsoft. why did bungie and oddworld inhabitants manage to break free from their contracts and stop making exclusives for them? who knows? but my guess would be that bungie was so fed up of Halo, that they didn't want to make ANOTHER Halo just yet. but MS did want that, but bungie didn't. so, they took off, and now are coming out with destiny. that wasn't a microsoft decision, that was a bungie decision. microsoft probably would have never said yes to Oddworld Abes Oddysee HD remake, and we havent seen a sequel / new game in the quintology series since stranger's wrath, and that's a frikin xbox 1 / original game, donkeys years ago now. so i bet the HD remake, was an oddworld inhabitant decision, it certainly wasnt microsoft, and neither of these studios are with them exclusively any more, but... look at those games. they ARE multi plats, and they probably will be amazing.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. if you managed to read all that, thanks, i appreciate it. that also goes for other forum users, not just the guy im replying to. thanks.

It's the nature of fanboys to argue about anything that supports the company they're backing. It wouldn't matter to them whether a game looks good or not, they'll make some excuse  to say why not having it run at 1080p and 60 fps is beneficial over a version that does. Also don't forget that fanboys also argue about the features on the consoles themselves, "XBL vs PSN", the Streaming services of one over the other and so on. Exclusive games is just one of the things they can choose to fuel their "War". Do you honestly think that if Xbox fanboys knew that Dx12 was coming back then, that they wouldn't be swinging it in front of the opposition's faces? It would just be more ammunition to support their console of choice.

 

Bottom line, fanboys will fight over anything they can just to say how their choice of system is better than the others no matter how informed they are about it or not. Last year's E3 is proof of that with the Sony fanboys giving it to the Microsoft guys over the crappy policies, while the Microsoft fanboys kept defending the anti-consumer policies no matter what. As I've said before, take away exclusive games, and they'll just find something else to fight about. Tale away exclusive games, and fanboys will argue as they do now on what system a multiplatform game sold more along with the other things they're arguing about already.

 

See, the problem about saying how one game or franchise is bland or not is that the answer is always going to be personal preference.  You may say that exclusive titles are bland and repetitive, while another person may not. It also goes for multiplatform titles, one person may look at "Borderlands", or "Destiny" and despite of what they're doing new in terms of the genre, that person may still say that it's just as bland as the other games in the genre. Just like how it's your opinion that "The Last of Us" isn't a surival horror game, while other people may say that it is.

 

Regarding what you said about Uncharted and Gran Turismo 6, being multiplatform doesn't mean those things wouldn't happen. As far as similar engines go, look at "Call of Duty" and other sequel frenzied multiplatform games. Microtransaction in games, "Dead Space 3" and some JRPG's like the "Tales" series. Being exclusive is not the reason these things happened. Take "Dragon Age 2" for example. It was still a multiplatform game, and the changes they made to it over the original were terrible.

 

Bungie's new game is still a sci-fi First Person Shooter, just like what they've been doing since the first Xbox. Sure it may have new features like a dynamic world and persistent multiplayer (not sure if I interchanged the words Dynamic and Persistent), but the bottom line is that it's still similar to the game series that they're known for. At least with Naughty Dog you could see the change, from "Crash Bandicoot" to "Uncharted" to "The Last of Us".

 

Indie Companies such as Double Fine are doing different things as well with "Stacking", "Brutal Legend" and "Broken Age". The first two weren't critically acclaimed, but people are singing praises for that third title. But "Broken Age" is Tim Schaffer returning to his adventure game roots, and judging by how successful the Kickstarter for that is, people wanted the same thing from him. So the Company alone isn't at fault here.

 

Let's not forget "Star Citizen" a PC exclusive title from the guy who worked on "Wing Commander" (not sure if he just worked on it or it was his idea). It also had a very successful Kickstarter, and though it's sort of an MMO (or is it a full fledged MMO?) it's still space dog fighting at its core. Also, being exclusive to the PC meant that it can really cut loose with hardware limitations, but the main point of my argument is that developers are sticking with what they know, and the consumers want them to. It's the developers that have to take the initiative to give people something new that they'd want and the blame doesn't rest solely on the companies that own a studio. Sure if the developer still works for a company like Dice with EA or Blizzard with Activision, they still need approval, but that's not a problem that only exclusive developers have.

 

I have no reason to think that you hold anything against me, we're all just stating opinions here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. If there weren't any exclusive games, fanboyism would not exist. i'll do my best to clarify why i believe that:

Explain to me hardcore Intel or Nvidia fanboys or AMD and ATI fanboys for that matter. Because those very much exist, people who will not buy a different brand GPU even if they're buying at a tier where the other brand is cheaper and just as or more cost-effective.   Evaluating the options in a money/benchmark strength ratio is beyond all possibility for those guys and I know some of them. People don't need logical motivation to be fanboys, there are no logical motivations as it is*!

There are examples outside of gaming too. Apple built it's entire modern market on the principle that if you convince people that your thing is special it will be special while other smartphones, datapads and etc with Android and even Windows do the same things but are far cheaper or free, still not seem the same way by "common" people and hipsters. People will fanboy over things even if they're practically the same thing. 

*Unless you're a PC fan, then you're right and everyone else is wrong.

IrishRogue likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking back at the past generations, the PS2 and First Xbox (do we need an acronym for that now?), where the former is the weaker machine, but had more exclusive games, and thus attracted more people.

not really, it attracted more People because the PS2 could be easily modded. You could download and burn the games and Play them, depend on the modification (Mod Chip or Swap Magic CD/DVD). The easier the Modding the more PS2 were sold. Simple as that.

 

BTT: I don't think that exclusives are good for the Industry. Take the new Super Mario. Imagine this game would be multiplatform. The sales would skyrocket, giving Nintendo a huge income. Nintendo, Sony and MS (X-Box department) doesn't make Money through sold Console Units (massive HW expenses),but through sold games. Less exclusives = more Income because more People have Access to the game.  

 

and like Auron said

Some people are saying that without exclusives there would be no need to have more than one platform, well there already is very little Need.

This

 

But there still will be People buying them no matter what. Because of nostalgia and memories, because of supporting they fav. Company, because of being a traditional console gamer. That's ok. The Consoles would not die so fast now a days.

 

 

 

Let's not forget that these exclusive games are also a way to boast the capabilities of the console itself. A way to show what can be done on one console that the other can't replicate, and therefore attract more people to that product.

like the Virtual Boy, Atari Lynx, Atari Jaguar, Atari 7800, Game Gear, Neo Geo, SEGA Mega CD, SEGA 32X, SEGA Saturn, Gizmondo, Nokia N-Gage, Laser-Active, Pippin, Panasonic REAL 3DO Interactive Multiplayer, Phillips CDi...? Lot's of exclusives and they failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not really, it attracted more People because the PS2 could be easily modded. You could download and burn the games and Play them, depend on the modification (Mod Chip or Swap Magic CD/DVD). The easier the Modding the more PS2 were sold. Simple as that.

As I remember, the Original Xbox was also moddable, yet the PS2 still beat that. You can't honestly say that the people chose the PS2 over the first Xbox just because it can be easily modded. The games that people couldn't get on the other console would also be a factor in people's decisions. One could mod the Xbox and have games installed right in its hard drive, but people were still going with the PS2 depite that.

 

BTT: I don't think that exclusives are good for the Industry. Take the new Super Mario. Imagine this game would be multiplatform. The sales would skyrocket, giving Nintendo a huge income. Nintendo, Sony and MS (X-Box department) doesn't make Money through sold Console Units (massive HW expenses),but through sold games. Less exclusives = more Income because more People have Access to the game.

 

Yeah, if anything, that's the only thing I can think of that's bad about exclusivity. I've also raised this point and gave "Bayonetta 2" as an example.

 

But there still will be People buying them no matter what. Because of nostalgia and memories, because of supporting they fav. Company, because of being a traditional console gamer. That's ok. The Consoles would not die so fast now a days.

 

It would also take away the need for people to have both consoles. Doing that would make it so that only fans of a certain company will get that particular console, cutting off potential sales that the console can have.

 

Look at the sales numbers now, PS4 has 7 million, X1 has 4 - 5 million shipped. I'm hoping to get a PS4 by the end of may (real life permitting), and waiting to see how "Halo" will be on the X1 before getting it. If there were no exclusive games, there'd be no reason for me to get the X1. Do I need to get these two consoles? No, this laptop's pretty powerful enough to play multiplatform games on high and depending on the game, on highest settings. But it's the exclusives that make me want (not need of course) to get the consoles.

 

Then we also have to think how long can one company sustain itself if people like me only wanted one console because of the lack of exclusives. Nobody needs more than one of anything, but wanting is a different matter. To put it differently, exclusives make us want the game, and in turn it makes us need the system to play it.

 

like the Virtual Boy, Atari Lynx, Atari Jaguar, Atari 7800, Game Gear, Neo Geo, SEGA Mega CD, SEGA 32X, SEGA Saturn, Gizmondo, Nokia N-Gage, Laser-Active, Pippin, Panasonic REAL 3DO Interactive Multiplayer, Phillips CDi...? Lot's of exclusives and they failed.

The factors of their failures vary of course. But we can't deny of course that the games showed what the hardware can do for better or for worse. Seeing good or bad exclusive games factors into some people's buying decisions.

 

People who see "Dance Central" and liked it bought a Kinect (or if they don't have the console yet, a 360) because of it. It's something that the competition couldn't do either.

 

There are multiple stories you can find on how exclusive games help boost hardware sales.

 

Heck, even with PC's exclusives matter as games that can't be done on consoles are often waved in front of console gamer's faces. There are other factors on why people choose the PC over consoles of course, but again, we can't deny that the exclusive games factor into it.

Recoveryanonymous likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now i'll say a thing........F*** EXCLUSIVE GAMING!! God, nothing makes me more mad than seeing Halo 3 Xbox exclusive!! Halo one and Halo two were multi platform, I was a good Halo fan, I loved the story of Halo, its gameplay, but I never got past the second! Im not going to buy a frikking Xbox 360 or One just because Halo has been turned into a platform exclusive game. Im sorry if I sounded mad, but really guys, I got f***ed in the a** because of it! Since then I've developed some deep grudge to exclusive platform games. And im not a fan of PC of anything. Im only saying that I dont want to buy another console for it! Im perfectly fine with one! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now i'll say a thing........F*** EXCLUSIVE GAMING!! God, nothing makes me more mad than seeing Halo 3 Xbox exclusive!! Halo one and Halo two were multi platform, I was a good Halo fan, I loved the story of Halo, its gameplay, but I never got past the second! Im not going to buy a frikking Xbox 360 or One just because Halo has been turned into a platform exclusive game. Im sorry if I sounded mad, but really guys, I got f***ed in the a** because of it! Since then I've developed some deep grudge to exclusive platform games. And im not a fan of PC of anything. Im only saying that I dont want to buy another console for it! Im perfectly fine with one! 

I understand your anger. I was angry that "Dead or Alive 3" was an Xbox exclusive back then. It made me hate the Xbox. But even then, I also liked Halo, and was happy to find out that came out on PC (which I pirated at the time, original copies of games in the Philippines, not enticing). In the end, it was my loss. People who liked "DOA3" and got an Xbox to play the game enjoyed it, while I, with my lack of funds, and hate of the Xbox, made me miss out.

 

Would it have been nice if "DOA3" came on the PS2". Of course, but after everything, I also understand why companies spend money on exclusivity.

Menofwarfan. likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, from a company and financial standpoint, console exclusives are good things because they boost sales of that console, not to mention licensing and whatnot.

But from a gamer standpoint, it's kind of a pain. Would it really be that much trouble to release the game on all consoles? The negative for that though, would be a lack of different consoles and overall things to try out. But what WOULD happen if console exclusives just stop happening? We'll probably never know.

Mr_E_Meatshield likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now