I feel as though I've missed out on some pretty spectacular games because of my lack of PS3 ownership. It seems crazy to me that if an individual wants to have the opportunity to play all of the current generations best titles they have purchase something like 5 different gaming systems and upgrade the crud out of their PC, I'm all for a little competition in the market between companies (at least it's a buffer against a gaming monopoly) but our current system seems pretty flawed. What do you guys think?
Console exclusives: are they really necessary?
- Thread starter arber man
- Start date
Recommended Videos
The reason I like exclusives is that they really kick the system up to 11 and squeeze's everything it can out of the system.
For example, a game like "The Last of Us" is a game that I'm not certain the 360 could handle. That's not to say that graphics are everything but LoU is a VERY purty game. If it was developed on both systems, I don't think it would be nearly as good as it was.
Exclusives are seen as system sellers because they are very very good. Usually, they are very very good because they take advantage of what the specific system does.
For example, a game like "The Last of Us" is a game that I'm not certain the 360 could handle. That's not to say that graphics are everything but LoU is a VERY purty game. If it was developed on both systems, I don't think it would be nearly as good as it was.
Exclusives are seen as system sellers because they are very very good. Usually, they are very very good because they take advantage of what the specific system does.
They aren't necessary, because consoles aren't necessary. But I am glad its not like it used to be.
It used to be you had a Nintendo, or a Sega. And if you had a Sega you were dead inside, or so its been relayed to me.
I mean other than if you were a diehard Sonic fan, you were pretty much fucked if you didn't have a SNES.
Now though, there are maybe 5 exclusives per console that would seriously warrant choosing one over the other as opposed to almost zero multiplatform titles of the earlier gens. And even fewer in the launch titles of the new gen.
I imagine that the dev costs for these titles would drop drastically if they weren't forcing themselves to essentially double or triple (in rare cases where Nintendo's consoles are remembered to exist) their work by having to develop the same game for multiple consoles.
Especially aggravating is Nintendo's refusal to make their VC titles available on all their consoles. If the DS can handle Chrono Trigger, then why can't I DL the Secret of Mana or any other SNES VC title on my 3DS? Where is my Earthbound? Super Metroid?
Oh thats right, they need them exclusive to their Wiis so that someone will HAVE to buy them for something. It certainly isn't for the NEW games.
It used to be you had a Nintendo, or a Sega. And if you had a Sega you were dead inside, or so its been relayed to me.
I mean other than if you were a diehard Sonic fan, you were pretty much fucked if you didn't have a SNES.
Now though, there are maybe 5 exclusives per console that would seriously warrant choosing one over the other as opposed to almost zero multiplatform titles of the earlier gens. And even fewer in the launch titles of the new gen.
I imagine that the dev costs for these titles would drop drastically if they weren't forcing themselves to essentially double or triple (in rare cases where Nintendo's consoles are remembered to exist) their work by having to develop the same game for multiple consoles.
Especially aggravating is Nintendo's refusal to make their VC titles available on all their consoles. If the DS can handle Chrono Trigger, then why can't I DL the Secret of Mana or any other SNES VC title on my 3DS? Where is my Earthbound? Super Metroid?
Oh thats right, they need them exclusive to their Wiis so that someone will HAVE to buy them for something. It certainly isn't for the NEW games.
I like exclusives. They're not necessarily better than multiplatform games, but more like a specialty.
They make people who can only afford one particular platform feels like their purchase was worthwhile too, so there's that.
They make people who can only afford one particular platform feels like their purchase was worthwhile too, so there's that.
They are for console makers, otherwise they hurt the market all around, devs and users get shafted just the same.
Also seems to encourage wild delusional theories and turn people even more fanatic toward their choice of hardware... I can't even begin to describe how awful that is.
Also seems to encourage wild delusional theories and turn people even more fanatic toward their choice of hardware... I can't even begin to describe how awful that is.
I despise them and the console war bullshit it causes.
But it's necessary for the current "you have two choices which franchises do you like better" console landscape. As consoles become more and more like PCs and hopefully a standardize "console PC" landscape comes about exclusives won't be required, but at the moment they certainly are.
But it's necessary for the current "you have two choices which franchises do you like better" console landscape. As consoles become more and more like PCs and hopefully a standardize "console PC" landscape comes about exclusives won't be required, but at the moment they certainly are.
Well from a first party standpoint (mircrosoft, sony and nintendo) yes they are necessary because otherwise there would be little if no incentive to choose one console over the other. Granted the necessity does feel a bit artificial since now a days consoles use virtually the same technology (at least with XBOX and PS), and unlike back in the cartridge era it feels more like they are holding your favorite games hostage.
All exclusives do is ensure the producer/developer is excluded from accessing my money. Should the game be released on PC I would purchase it, if it isn't released on PC I will not purchase it.
They do allow the developer an easier time making the game with kickbacks from the console they're making it on... but they also essentially alienate them from ~75%~ (in theory, how many people own every type of console + PC?) of the marketplace.
I'm hoping games like Grand Theft Auto show developers that they need a clause in their contract of "Exclusive for 6 months with no announcement 2 weeks prior to launch" for everyone to be happy. That way they can gain the benefit of first week sales for multiple platforms and users of non-exclusive platforms can have some idea what they're going to see before buying blindly.
I mean, how awesome would it be for Naughty Dog if Last of Us was released on PC in 3-4 months time? How much money would they make from those sales? I mean, how many sales would Sony miss out on then? Next to none because all of those who were going to purchase it have already purchased it or have it second hand, but Naughty Dog would potentially see a million more sales... everyone wins, nobody loses.
They do allow the developer an easier time making the game with kickbacks from the console they're making it on... but they also essentially alienate them from ~75%~ (in theory, how many people own every type of console + PC?) of the marketplace.
I'm hoping games like Grand Theft Auto show developers that they need a clause in their contract of "Exclusive for 6 months with no announcement 2 weeks prior to launch" for everyone to be happy. That way they can gain the benefit of first week sales for multiple platforms and users of non-exclusive platforms can have some idea what they're going to see before buying blindly.
I mean, how awesome would it be for Naughty Dog if Last of Us was released on PC in 3-4 months time? How much money would they make from those sales? I mean, how many sales would Sony miss out on then? Next to none because all of those who were going to purchase it have already purchased it or have it second hand, but Naughty Dog would potentially see a million more sales... everyone wins, nobody loses.
How about one console being better, objectively or otherwise, than the other? If a game can easily be ported to a number of platforms there isn't any reason (from a consumer standpoint) to restrict it to one. If it requires an amount of processing power not offered by all consoles, relies on a specific peripheral like the Kinect or WiiMote, or the developer can't afford to port to multiple platforms then making it 'exclusive' is really the only way to go about it but for the most part the actual console should be judged on it's own, not by the games that the manufacturer buys out.krazykidd said:
While certainly not as many as we have today, there were TONS of crossplatform titles in the SNES/Genesis era. There were also a few "almost" crossplatform titles, like Turtles in Time/Hyperstone Heist. There weren't as many on the NES/SMS, but that was due to Nintendo's third party policies.KoudelkaMorgan said:
Well, yes they are. They aren't good for the consumer in the direct way, but if we look at the more indirect paths then well, yes it might be.
I did until recently own a Wii, a wii U, a 360 and a good gaming PC. Sadly this means I missed out on great titles such as Tales of Graces F (that and Tales of Xillia made me buy a PS3) Valkyrica Chronicles and probably some other titles too. Obviously this is a negative thing for me since I had to buy a console at the end of its lifespan rather than buy those games which aren't exclusive for the one platform I had.
Then we'll take a hypothetical situation where console exclusives don't exist. Then what will happen? Well first off I will get rid of all consoles except one to save place and maybe have a PC just to play those games best fit for PC and let my console be for titles I like playing on console and for travelling. It sounds great, no need to buy more than one expensive thingy to occupy my HDMI ports.
Well what will happen on the console market? Consoles can't compete with exclusives anymore and no console with have an edge simply because of games. One console is likely to become dominant either for price or convenience. While the others might fail one will come out on top. We will be reduced to having one console. No competition, no reason no impress us because we don't have a choice.
That is when the only console maker got the chance to royally screw us over. You know why the Xbox One dropped DRM? It's not because customers complained, it's because customers would buy the other console. The kind of shit that Microsoft tried to do could actually happen somewhere down the line if we abandoned console exclusives.
This might be a stretch and it's a worst case scenario, but it is certainly possible.
I did until recently own a Wii, a wii U, a 360 and a good gaming PC. Sadly this means I missed out on great titles such as Tales of Graces F (that and Tales of Xillia made me buy a PS3) Valkyrica Chronicles and probably some other titles too. Obviously this is a negative thing for me since I had to buy a console at the end of its lifespan rather than buy those games which aren't exclusive for the one platform I had.
Then we'll take a hypothetical situation where console exclusives don't exist. Then what will happen? Well first off I will get rid of all consoles except one to save place and maybe have a PC just to play those games best fit for PC and let my console be for titles I like playing on console and for travelling. It sounds great, no need to buy more than one expensive thingy to occupy my HDMI ports.
Well what will happen on the console market? Consoles can't compete with exclusives anymore and no console with have an edge simply because of games. One console is likely to become dominant either for price or convenience. While the others might fail one will come out on top. We will be reduced to having one console. No competition, no reason no impress us because we don't have a choice.
That is when the only console maker got the chance to royally screw us over. You know why the Xbox One dropped DRM? It's not because customers complained, it's because customers would buy the other console. The kind of shit that Microsoft tried to do could actually happen somewhere down the line if we abandoned console exclusives.
This might be a stretch and it's a worst case scenario, but it is certainly possible.
Yes, they're necessary.
None of the consoles are really all that special in any way when looking purely at the console itself. Note, I'm not saying they're bad, I'm saying they're not unique.
As such they need exclusives to distinguish themselves from each other and from the PC, especially now when you've got console game that need to be installed, firmware updates to download etc.
It's so special it can be run on Windows 7 with a NVidia card...
None of the consoles are really all that special in any way when looking purely at the console itself. Note, I'm not saying they're bad, I'm saying they're not unique.
As such they need exclusives to distinguish themselves from each other and from the PC, especially now when you've got console game that need to be installed, firmware updates to download etc.
It's so special it can be run on Windows 7 with a NVidia card...
All I know is that I'm missing out on two apparently truly special games, The Last of Us and Journey, because I don't want to buy a PS3 just for them, and that's a bit sad.
It goes both ways.
There are exclusives I'd like to try on consoles, but I have a whackload of PC exclusives at my disposal, so my sadness never lasts for too long. If games were all designed with cross-platform in mind, then consoles wouldn't get the excellent fighing games and platformers that they do, and PC gamers wouldn't get things like Dwarf Fortress or Uplink or the various Tycoon games.
As for between consoles... I dunno. Ask Sony.
There are exclusives I'd like to try on consoles, but I have a whackload of PC exclusives at my disposal, so my sadness never lasts for too long. If games were all designed with cross-platform in mind, then consoles wouldn't get the excellent fighing games and platformers that they do, and PC gamers wouldn't get things like Dwarf Fortress or Uplink or the various Tycoon games.
As for between consoles... I dunno. Ask Sony.
It seems to be the easy way out for driving console sales, instead of ... you know making a better service for your platform, finding new ways to accommodate newcomers by being attractive (like special multiplayer features, distribution, quality etc.) without limiting the fanbase of certain titles (which is bad for consumers and developers to some extent) they just make shit exclusive... wanna play it? Tough luck.
Anyway, I for one hope, since the hardware in the new platforms is increasingly standardized as the PC hardware market, things go the way of the digital distribution services present on PC which rival themselves with great customer service (Steam, GoG, Amazon etc.) rather than limiting access to game software (E.A. and their Origin, even VALVe is guilty of this with their games, but at least they're available on the same platform) and attractive prices, amongst ease of use and accessibility (gotta respect CD Projekt and their GoG service for that, and VALVe's increasing support of modders with their Steam Workshop).
There are always ways of doing things without limiting access, it only depends on the quantity of laziness and time schedule/investment in these Corporations, which has got fuck all to do with our enjoyment of the medium... tough luck it seems.
Cheers!
Anyway, I for one hope, since the hardware in the new platforms is increasingly standardized as the PC hardware market, things go the way of the digital distribution services present on PC which rival themselves with great customer service (Steam, GoG, Amazon etc.) rather than limiting access to game software (E.A. and their Origin, even VALVe is guilty of this with their games, but at least they're available on the same platform) and attractive prices, amongst ease of use and accessibility (gotta respect CD Projekt and their GoG service for that, and VALVe's increasing support of modders with their Steam Workshop).
There are always ways of doing things without limiting access, it only depends on the quantity of laziness and time schedule/investment in these Corporations, which has got fuck all to do with our enjoyment of the medium... tough luck it seems.
Cheers!
Exclusives annoy me heaps, there's really nothing positive about them to me. There doesn't seem to be any point.
I get that most indie games can only really function with PC unless they get onto XBLA, but there's no excuse for triple A games. MAYBE graphical requirements, but I would rather own a game than watch a selected corner of the community play it.
I get that most indie games can only really function with PC unless they get onto XBLA, but there's no excuse for triple A games. MAYBE graphical requirements, but I would rather own a game than watch a selected corner of the community play it.
Unless there are exclusives why even desire to own more then one console. It is the exclusives that are the spice of life, a multi console game can be a great meal but it is when you find a JRPG that only comes out on lets say the Wii that life gets really interesting.
Also they drive console sales, why is halo from microsoft? It sells consoles! Why is uncharted from Sony? It sells consoles!
You want to play a certain game you have to buy the console that has it. It also is a great reason to own for instance a Wii. Xenogear Chronicles for instance is Wii only. Monster Hunter tri is.. indeed Nintendo Only.
And it is for that reason why I own a Wii.
Also every console is slightly different. The Wii for instance has waggle, okay the controller gotten better and more accurate but movement control and the likes. This allows for certain types of games to happen. Think of an even more accurate Lets Dance!
Also exclusives mean it can made specifically to run on said console. This means that the different hardware compared to other consoles can be really used well. In a multi console game yes you can optimize for a console but you tend to use a basic shared code path.
With an exclusive you know your target is one specific console. THAT allows you to highly optimize your code and game assets just for that console. Does the PS2 has some kind of texturing trick that allows you to get more textures on the screen? Kewl.. it will take some work to program for it BUT you know you can and will. With a multi console release though you are not going to really program for SPECIFIC console things.. I mean you have the base code and assets and yes every console is different so needs to be handled different. BUT you won't spend allot of time into using very console specific tricks.
So a console specific can really be coded and game asset optimized to run as good as possible on that console.
A multi console game just.. just doesn't. There is not enough time and money to really optimize for all platforms.
So yes exclusives are needed. That and they can provide a brand, an image to game developers. Think Uncharted and you think Playstation. Think Halo and you think Microsoft. Think Mario and you think.. yes Nintendo.
Bungie might be cut lose [they made Halo] but Microsoft owns the rights on Halo. Sony will never get a Halo, Nintendo neither.. PC.. eh maybe a console port :!
So it also a brand thing.
What if you run a coffee shop in your town. And you are known to have the best coffee, coffee beans well known to be provided by CoffeeBeans & Co. And you have an exclusivity contract with them for your city. This is your City and your brand.. people know your coffee is the best.
Obviously this means people will go to your store to buy coffee!
Now what if that contract ends and three other local coffee shops now also get coffeebeans from COffeeBeans & Co. You just lost power in your brand! Now the others also can claim they have the best coffee beans. Time to get working on to make sure you stay better then them.
So exclusives also have a slight loss. Being the one with the brand name can make you lazy. Having to fight with other coffee shops over who is best can lead you to work hard to make even better coffee.
But really would bringing Mario to Sony and Microsoft really help? Mario = Nintendo ..
Think about it. It opens up the ability to have a different Identity. I mean not everybody wears blue Denim right. Some want to wear brown Denim.
Also they drive console sales, why is halo from microsoft? It sells consoles! Why is uncharted from Sony? It sells consoles!
You want to play a certain game you have to buy the console that has it. It also is a great reason to own for instance a Wii. Xenogear Chronicles for instance is Wii only. Monster Hunter tri is.. indeed Nintendo Only.
And it is for that reason why I own a Wii.
Also every console is slightly different. The Wii for instance has waggle, okay the controller gotten better and more accurate but movement control and the likes. This allows for certain types of games to happen. Think of an even more accurate Lets Dance!
Also exclusives mean it can made specifically to run on said console. This means that the different hardware compared to other consoles can be really used well. In a multi console game yes you can optimize for a console but you tend to use a basic shared code path.
With an exclusive you know your target is one specific console. THAT allows you to highly optimize your code and game assets just for that console. Does the PS2 has some kind of texturing trick that allows you to get more textures on the screen? Kewl.. it will take some work to program for it BUT you know you can and will. With a multi console release though you are not going to really program for SPECIFIC console things.. I mean you have the base code and assets and yes every console is different so needs to be handled different. BUT you won't spend allot of time into using very console specific tricks.
So a console specific can really be coded and game asset optimized to run as good as possible on that console.
A multi console game just.. just doesn't. There is not enough time and money to really optimize for all platforms.
So yes exclusives are needed. That and they can provide a brand, an image to game developers. Think Uncharted and you think Playstation. Think Halo and you think Microsoft. Think Mario and you think.. yes Nintendo.
Bungie might be cut lose [they made Halo] but Microsoft owns the rights on Halo. Sony will never get a Halo, Nintendo neither.. PC.. eh maybe a console port :!
So it also a brand thing.
What if you run a coffee shop in your town. And you are known to have the best coffee, coffee beans well known to be provided by CoffeeBeans & Co. And you have an exclusivity contract with them for your city. This is your City and your brand.. people know your coffee is the best.
Obviously this means people will go to your store to buy coffee!
Now what if that contract ends and three other local coffee shops now also get coffeebeans from COffeeBeans & Co. You just lost power in your brand! Now the others also can claim they have the best coffee beans. Time to get working on to make sure you stay better then them.
So exclusives also have a slight loss. Being the one with the brand name can make you lazy. Having to fight with other coffee shops over who is best can lead you to work hard to make even better coffee.
But really would bringing Mario to Sony and Microsoft really help? Mario = Nintendo ..
Think about it. It opens up the ability to have a different Identity. I mean not everybody wears blue Denim right. Some want to wear brown Denim.
[/thread]Desert Punk said:
Yahtzee has said this over and over and I agree, consoles essentially just hold games hostage and for no reason. There used to be dramatic technological differences between consoles but now they're all nearly identical except for whatever bogus hardware gimmicks they try to use to justify their existence.