Exclusives are a good thing

To answer the topic. Exclusive are not a good thing. Not everyone wants to buy another hardware to play a damn game.

Agteed Consoles need an identity just like any buisness or compay.

@Pedro said:

@Blazed said:

@Pedro said:

How many brands of TVs are there? All these TVs allows the viewer to view any compatible content. Has the competition dwindled in TVs? Why would there be an absence of competition if all three systems can play the same games?

You didn't answer the question.

The same way people decide on which television to buy, features and price. I don't see how that was so hard for you to figure out. Now that has been addressed how about dealing with my questions and points which you are trying very hard to avoid.

You really think exclusive features would have the same impact as exclusve games. Lol Please You've already lost.

And also answering the question with a question is avoiding the question. You were running not me...

Me too.

You actually only have to buy 2 consoles since the xbone has no exclusives.

Fixed

If it weren't for exclusives the Souls games wouldn't have existed. It took Sony to support a niche title from a japanese dev of a style of game that was dominated by the west to support the release of Demon's Souls for it to become a reality. Now thanks to it we have some of the best and more hardcore games last and this gen.

It's good for gamers as well. Increased competition leads to better quality.

@Jag85: Competition of what? Thousands of developers are already competing on multiple platforms.

Kojima on Switch, said the future of gaming is being able to play any game on any device, do you agree with/want that?

“I feel like cloud technology is what everything will eventually move to.

"It's further behind right now than I think where people thought it would be at this point, but I think it will go there, and when the infrastructure is ready, you'll be able to play everything, on every device, anywhere. The Switch is the predecessor to this step."

If a game like The Last Guardian had not been exclusive maybe it wouldn't have sold so badly. More platforms, more potential customer. Simple maths really.

@mems_1224: so you haven't played any Metroid Prime game, neither Mario Galaxy, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess, the best Mario Karts, Smash Bros, Bauonetta 2, Paper Mario TTYD just really quickly off the top of my head an you don't think you've missed anything? Son, you've missed some of the best games of the past 15 years.

@sHaDyCuBe321: played most of the first prime, it sucked. Played about 15 minutes of Mario Galaxy and couldn't stand using the wiimote. Played a lot of wind waker and hated it. Same with Twilight Princess. Don't care about Smash Bros or Mario Kart. Bayonetta 2 is the only game I want to play but I don't really need it. So nah, don't really feel like I've missed much

Breaking up your points in 3:

1. Why does the identity of a system matter though? Instead of remember platforms, why not just remember games?

2. Without exclusives, there is still competition on a software level. Which is what really matters.

3. You don't need to be a console maker to publish great games. EA and Activision (and others) publish many great games. Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft could do the same thing.

If you can play all games on one system, instead of having to buy 3-4 systems, how is that not a good thing for you as a consumer? Having no exclusive would truly force hardware manufacturers to compete. They would have to compete on getting powerful hardware out at low cost in order to stay relevant, since they can no longer just release subpar hardware and lean on their exclusives.

Exclusives are only good for the console manufacturers, due to their exercise of market power. However, the actual practice is more anti-consumer than anything else.

@SolidGame_basic:

I think exclusives are good for companies and gamers.

Since they're used to market and differentiate relatively similar hardware from one another it forces the console makers to constantly try and one up each other resulting in some gems once in awhile.

This guy knows what's up.

Competition is spurred by money dude. Many of the greatest innovations came from console manufacturers trying to one up each other. Look what happened with Sega vs Nintendo, Playstation vs Nintendo, 360 vs PS3. If there was only one system, gaming would be dictated by one manufacturer deciding what is best for gamers.

This man gets it.

PC is only one system and nobody decides what's best for anybody.

Why would you want to own all systems if one does the trick for you?

ROFL these guys don't seem to have thought that out. They keep saying exclusives give systems their identity but why would we wanna spend more money on multiple systems?

in the current market structure its an effective way to sell hardware (though its not always the most effective as we are seeing this gen). but the current market structure is quite sick in console land. i mean who wants to get into it? no one.

in a perfect world though the console market would look more like the DVD player market or TV. console manufacturers make consoles. service providers provide the means of playing games online and selling games n such like. game developers just make games. ideally there would be loads of different consoles from loads of different companies. those consoles could play any game made for console 1.0 standard and could tie into any 1.0 standard service provider (if the customer wishes). thats the best thing for the customer. developers would focus on making the best game they could, manufacturers would focus on providing the best console they could at various price points and service providers would look to provide the best online play experience or sales experience.

but at the moment its just a big mess of eco systems and vendor lock in. some of that has been due to necessity in fairness. games are unique in that they are interactive and that, at least in the past, some of the development of a game was going to be tied into the hardware it was running on. this is not as true now but there is still an element of it. on the services side there is no universal online gaming protocol and there is no incentive to make one. so developers need to integrate many different services into their game if its a multiplat. on the multiplat side things have also gotten a lot better but there is still more to do. console hardware can be quite different between consoles (not as bad now as it used to be) and there are also different OSs and APIs to consider. its still not a case of test on one standard compliant device then press a button to release.

but yeah in the current structure exclusives still make sense up to a point. the cost of development is going to mean that making AAA exclusives is going to become harder to justify (one of the main reasons nintendo is staying out of the arms race) and it may become easier to just compete on horsepower/features and/or value in the future.

It's just the business aspect of the console business the way I see it. Well, business in general really. "Come to our store, we are the only ones who carry these items !"

Yes they help define the identity of the console, but not by themselves. I would buy an NES console to play Mario and Zelda along with everything else that might interest me, also for the system and now these days it's also about the online experience. Basically, it doesn't have to stay this way, things change, and what makes this subject different today is the struggling console business. Notice how we don't have as many trilogies this gen? MAss Effect 1-2-3, Dead Space 1-2-3, Bioschock 1-2-3, etc. all from last gen...this gen, barely any new trilogies. High-profile games are mega-expensive, and even the multiplatform ones are not cutting it anymore, so how do you want the high-profile exclusives to survive?

It would be in their best interest to release on another platform. I wouldn't mind if Forza Horizon 3 released on PS4 to make more money. They could find a way to make it more appealing on the native system(Xbox One). For example, if Forza games release on PS4 from now, they would do it only 6 months after Xbox releases. Just a random hypothetical example, basically they would have to work out a system that would still give the exclusive some appeal on its native system. Why wouldn't the dev want to make more money and put their game in more hands?

If they work out some kind of system like that, exclusives would still maintain their appeal in their native system and then in such a system the console manufacturers could use other tricks to increase appeal to their console, they could have also exclusive features in their services and hardware for example. I'm fine with exclusives, but the market is different today and I think that the business model can improve that's all.

And what would be the incentive of a company like Sony to invest and support these good devs if the game they release is going to all systems? You do realize that many times a game releases (like Nioh for example) because a company like Sony or any other supports it enough for it to get made. Without their support the game will probably have less resources or not get made at all. So I think you guys should learn how the video game market works first.

And LOLOLOL at Pedro crying over anti-consumer practices and supporting one of the most anti-consumer companies on the planet: M$. Crocodile tears from a hypocrite...

Sony would still be able to publish Nioh without the PS4. Nioh would instead get released on more platfroms and have more sales. It simply wouldn't help sell PS4's.

But what would be Sony's revenue?? a small percentage of the publishing rights? That's not incentive enough for a company like Sony to support a game like Nioh. Games like Nioh would stay mostly abandoned.

And you know this how?

@mems_1224: shit taste confirmed.

Because if Sony made enough from just publishing rights they would gladly release the game on all platforms since they would earn more by more sales alone. They publish it because they gain exclusivity with it, that's the whole incentive. If it weren't for the exclusivity deals they get they wouldn't bother and much smaller companies could take care of the distribution rights which would probably make the game less accessible for more people anyways.

ok

Except Sony isn't about making enough money, Sony is about maximizing profits. You're suggesting Sony wouldn't publish a game like Nioh if it wasn't an exclusive because they wouldn't make enough money but how do you know how much is enough?

Regardless we're back to what I said at first, this is all to benefit the company, not the customer.

We're also arguing about a world where there would be a single platform and not multiple ones each owned by a corporation. In a scenario like that Sony would still make money off Nioh except they wouldn't make as much money as if the PS4 existed because Nioh wouldn't help move PS4's.

He's right. You say you don't miss out by not playing Nintendo games yet you like complete trash like Skyrim and Fallout 4.

If every game was released on every console, I would need to find another message board to read daily because 3/4 of the posts on here would be gone.

As someone who has a VERY limited gaming budget, I disagree. Exclusives are expensive and only benefit the console manufacturers.

and?

Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo all of them just care about making money and exclusives help them in this money making process. They not only sell games but also sell the specific hardware to run those games. They are just doing business that's all. Why sell only software and get less profilt when you could also sell hardware and get much larger profit.

And you have shit taste, therefore your opinion on games is invalid.

And Houston still sucks and will get ousted in the second round. Harden can pad his stats all he wants, nobody cares if you get an early exit.

ok, and?

@mems_1224: Surely you can do a better comeback than that.

im still waiting for either of you to make something that even resembles a point.

@mems_1224: Already did. You can choose to play dumb all you want.

who's playing dumb? your post has nothing to do with what I said. you're just attacking me for no reason.

@Blazed: Here is a fact, multiplatform games dominate the charts for both PS4 and Xbone. This clearly shows that gamers are mostly interested in multi platform games versus exclusives. The PS4 success relied on being a better system at a better price which is exactly what you said wouldn't have an impact but it factually did. The average consumer was not buying the PS4 for its exclusives; at least for the first two years, and they still are not based on the software sales. So, instead beating around the bush address the points being made because you are falling apart.

I don't get it then. If we're talking about solely consumers' benefits then lets go ahead and ban profits and capitalism altogether. The existence of different companies is detrimental to the consumer since it makes truly universal play difficult. What I find funny is that lems are outraged at games being used for competition but not hardware or services. Lol talk about hypocrites.

And what cows like the OP fail to realize, are games that come to X1 and PC and no other consoles, are still exclusive to me. Because I don't own a PC. But no matter how many times you say it, they choose to ignore it because of the anti MS stance that dominates these boards.

This.

Exclusives give a reason to own a particular system over another.

Fact: no console with "better multiplats" has ever won a gen so what you think you figured out is mostly just your lem wishful thinking. The console that wins has a mixture of good price, good marketing and good exclusives ALL THE TIME. And the PS4 meets the 3 criteria and that's why it has sold double than xbone. Wake up and smell the coffee lem.

So if Scorpio is becoming a PC more and more and will have window 10 apps and vise versa.

Which sect of fanboys claims ownage when PS now ends up on Xbox Scorpio?

Will exclusives matter then.

What a glorious day that would be ??

You can pretend that the PS4 is moving because of its exclusives all you want. But it had the lead the first 2 years by a large margin NOT because of exclusives but because it was the stronger system, had the BEST multiplats; still do and it was cheaper. Last year had more exclusives than the previous years and multiplats still dominated the top 30 best selling games on both platforms. I know you are incapable of thinking outside the realm of fanboy drivel so I don't expect you of all people to understand such a simple concept. :)

@dakur: FACT: there is no such thing as wining a gen. A company produces something and has an expectation for said product and that expectation is exceeded, met, or fails. Regardless of what another company in the same industry does.