What's wrong with wanting identity and exclusives for your console?

Is it wrong to want nice things? I get made fun of for wanting an exclusive game for a PS5. By who? Society.

Anyway, Why is it bad to have exclusives? You know that take advantage of the features of the PS5 and Xbox series X capabilities? I mean they are both very nice machines but Game pass and PSplus can only take you so far.

I just sorta miss when Japanese developers would make games you could only find on PS2 and PS1.

Is my selfish desire going to confuse some casual consumer from being able to buy their friend or family a gift?

Why is it wrong to want more charm, Gamespot? Because everyone wants it, Gamestop.

There’s nothing wrong with wanting exclusives. I agree with you, and if you’re looking for an argument, then you won’t find it from me. 😆.

I think exclusives make the industry want to be better.

Exclusivity is bad for the consumer, and stifles competition so it is ultimately bad for the industry.

Think about it this way: why create a better platform, when you can just buy the rights to a game people want to play and force people to come to your platform? This leads to stagnation, which is what we see now in so-called "AAA" development.

Ask yourself: how many people buy Playstations to play the exclusives, and not because of the Playstation itself? Replace Playstation with Xbox or Switch or PC as you like.

This is also why it is bad for the consumer: it removes the element of choice. Instead of buying the better hardware (whether it's objectively better hardware, or hardware that fits your budget or needs) and being able to play any game you want, now you have to buy hardware based on the games you want. Even if that hardware is too expensive or doesn't fit your needs.

These corporations do not encourage exclusivity for our benefit; they do it for the benefit of their shareholders. It is a profit- and growth-driven decision, and is actively hostile towards people that care about games.

Additionally we have seen time and time again that when a Sony game is ported to PC, it sells like gangbusters (so long as it's a good port *coughTLOUcough*).

The only exception are for what I would call incidental exclusives (or perhaps logistical exclusives), for example games that are too demanding for a platform, or platforms where the audience is too small. For example DCS World is a study sim on PC that would not find an audience on consoles in large enough quantity to justify porting it over, nor are any of the hardware offerings from MS, Sony, and Nintendo powerful enough to run it.

What features and capabilities do these platforms have that you couldn't have on any platform?

I'll answer for you: none.

How?

@mrbojangles25: you know how Zelda exists??

PlayStation really wanted an answer for this. Remember the game Alundra for ps1?? It got mixed to positive reviews, and it was supposed to be the PlayStation answer for Zelda.

Also look at what’s going on with Pokemon (despite not liking the title) going up against x-box.

It makes me say…..for example, someone had a game that quality, but I want to emulate it, hell, not only that, I want to top it. That’s what I meant when I said good for the industry.

@outworld222: fair points and true to an extent, but I think that's also how we end up with imitators.

If every platform has to do their own version of eachother's game in some corporate equivelent of dick-measuring and imitation, then again...we lose. Because we can't play the game we might want to play, we have to settle with a potential imitator that could be worse than the real thing.

Additionally, it's how the market get's flooded with clones. Instead of a company going "well let's make something new, there's no room for open-world shooters" we get companies going "Hey, there's five open-world shooters on Playstation but only three on Xbox! Let's make another open-world shooter" so now we have even more crap that is stemming not from a place of developers making games they want to make, but instead corporate suits trying to fill a void.

I also think that "Zelda vs Alunda" competition would have happened anyway, maybe? I don't know. I think if a developer wants to outdo Zelda they might do it regardless of platform.

I see your point though. And the pokemon thing is disgusting, this is why we SHOULD NOT have exclusives because you get these protective fanboys so anchored to a franchise and platform, they send DEATH THREATS to developers.

I think it's more third party exclusives that people have a problem with.

The most upsetting example I recall is when Monster Hunter moved to be a Nintendo exclusive everyone went nuts! A known multiplatform franchise closing the doors on a large sum of players. It was considered a huge betrayal of the fandom, and while a fourth generation game is my favorite from the series I know many veterans that took the exclusive deal very personal. Capcom did it once more with Street Fighter V.

First party is to be expected, and even those who are apparently against exclusives are typically hypocrites that just want as many games as they want on the platform of preference. Even P.C. has 'exclusives' I don't see League of Legends on a console despite being among the biggest games in existence. Valve has a flood of games they will never put on a console as well.

But I'm not against first party, makes sense from a business point of view. To be frank a lot of new IPs from first party would have never seen the light of day if it wasn't for one of the big three green-lighting the project, because games require funding and a company to believe in the teams vision. As such, while they would potentially make more money putting it elsewhere it's a factor to some that one platform has that as an advantage. A bargaining chip to customers.

If games ever get ported later I'm in a huge favor of it, if I like a game I want to talk about it with as many people as possible. And this is why Counter Strike 2 should be on consoles.

I mean that's all fine and dandy and stuff, but exclusives aren't nearly as important as they used to be with the industry consolidating as much as it is. It's not like SONY or MS have been kicking down the door with exclusive 1st party titles. 3rd party games are carrying them both and there are different reasons to get each subscription service. At least we know some exclusives (from each other) are coming, but we still have a wait. Honestly I'm impatiently waiting for the PS5 Pro so next gen can actually start. Until all games are next gen only then the tech doesn't accommodate the extra speed, power, and features when they still have to cater to the lowest common denominator. Until then the market and industry (although doing well) are kind of suspended in a locked purgatory. The time is getting closer, and consolidation is both daunting and exciting, but either way it's unavoidable.

What? PS5 is the Marvel console. Is that not good enough?

Seriously tho.... The landscape has changed since the early days. We have much better tools that allow devs to target multiple platforms. If you see a AAA exclusive it's usually because the dev/publisher decided it was more profitable to take a payout from Sony or MS than it was to do the extra work to test on many platforms.

Is that charming? Sony paying a publisher to keep their game off other platforms? I say no it is not.

Well I like exclusive it gives consoles an identity I agree on that. So you won't hear anything bad from me. Without playstation there would be no Final Fantasy 7.

People want to feel justified in their half a grand purchase. That is it. The reason why you chose one box over the other is more than likely because it has something the others don't. It mattered more back in the fourth and fifth generations. It does not matter as much now because all three boxes use a lot of the same technology. Granted, they each have their own customized chips, which is annoying for developers since they have to program a game and make all of these different "versions." Gaming is the last medium that requires a specific box from a specific company to play games. You can watch any DVD in any DVD player. You can listen to music through any low or high quality speaker. You cannot play video games on a generic "game player" and get the basic experience. The closest thing to a generic game player is a PC. Even then, your PC has to be up to snuff to play the newest games. You cannot buy a generic game player for $50-$100 and get the same basic experience as someone who has an Xbox or PS5. There are not twenty different companies making game players.

Absolutely nothing. Microsoft is just completely missing the point by playing good guy all the time. I MEAN C'MON MICROSOFT you mean I get TWO copies of Tetris effect when I buy it digitally?? Stop spoiling me with 1 dollar game pass subs. It's not like I have a massive collection of hundreds of digital games already from GWG. For heaven's sake no I do not want to play crappy old nostalgic split screen games like Time Splitters 2 via backwards compatibility.

Your looking at it in a bit of a messed up way.

1. It's not your console. It's MSs/Nintendos/Sonys console. Them making games exclusive is not for your benefit. It's for their benefit. I'd suggest not to make them a part of your identity.
2. Exclusives do you no favours. It limits your choice.
3. The argument that exclusives use the unique characteristics of a system would have held quite a bit of weight about 15 years ago....but not now. The last systems where that argument could be made really were the wii and DS (Developers basically needed to think outside the box). The functionality and capabilities of consoles in general is pretty standardised. There is nothing the PS5 can do that the XSX can't do and visa-versa. Controller wise they are basically the same. Sony have really only pushed the unique parts of the Dualsense in 1-2 games (which is a shame, great controller) and 3rd parties don't really bother. They treat it like an XSX controller....even when the game is not on the XSX. Even the switch is not really unique. I think there are 2 games that use the camera on the joycon (and only 1 is good...even then it's a minor side use in Ring fit adventure). The wiiu was a lot more unique in terms of functionality.

Exclusives are, at the end of the day, there to drive system and platform sales for consoles. Content is king. So exclusives are a business reality. But they are not good for us in terms of our options.

There's nothing wrong with it. Gives the system some identity.

Nothing wrong with it, you want the most out of your console.

If you can't afford to buy more than one system, like most people, then buy the one that has the most games on it that you like to play. I don't lose any sleep over missing a few exclusives on other platforms as long as I have plenty of other games I like to play.

Do you get exclusive music for your brand of receiver? Do you get exclusive TV shows for your brand of TV?

The plastic box is just a plastic box. The thing you care about is the content. The gaming industry is pure garbo anti-consumer because it forces you to buy multiple boxes if you want to access all the content.

They brainwash you into thinking about identity for a plastic box to limit your choices and lock you in. Don't repeat their tropes...but, but, what reason do I have to buy box A, or B, or C? Who cares? What reason did you use to choose to buy an LG TV or Sony TV or Samsung? The box shouldn't matter.

But it gets worse. They also lock you into their ecosystem and accessories. Don't like your TV remote...no problem get a universal one. Good luck with that with controllers, which are disgustingly over priced as are all console accessories. Locked in.

Identity for your plastic box is laughable. The console market is recycled PC parts. Gamer identity is the content you care about which is exactly the same as movies, TV, music, etc. Gamers like racing, or FPS, or RPG, or sims, or puzzles, or all of it.. whatever...that's identity.

Next you will be telling me that the 'cell' was a good idea for PS3. Or that RROD was a minor inconvenience. Or that Switch h/w is good value for money.

But exclusive tv shows and music exist tho.
the Switch is the perfect example. no way Nintendo would have its massive success without exclusives. That’s just part of the business.

Gamepass is a great example of identity and added value.