@LVT_PTA_PB: I agree with you in one respect and that is I do feel like a lot of people are entitled and make demands which are frankly unreasonable. I don't want to open a whole can of worms discussing it, but the epic exclusivity issues people have are minor in comparison to this one. I felt the reaction by people are overblown there because the only difference is what client you use to play your game. The quality of the game is the same for everyone and while it may be an inconvenience, using another client doesn't have a financial impact on the user. The only thing preventing people from playing Metro Exodus on PC is whether or not they choose to download the free client required to play the game. I know this doesn't cover all the issues but its a great example for my next point.
This is a whole other beast entirely. Exclusivity is nothing new, but locking a mode that is playable from launch IS and not in a good way. To my knowledge, I don't think any other game has done it to this degree. Destiny locked specific content behind 1 year exclusivity too but it was only specific strikes and gear. You could still enjoy strikes and exotic gear if you didn't have a PS4.
For the record, I actually haven't bought a CoD game in the last 4 years and never had plans to buy it in the first place. But this announcement reminds me of one reason I stopped playing CoD in the first place: Alienation from a series I used to love. If you were happy ordering this game before spec ops was announced, I think you should still buy it. But I can't blame anyone who has a sour taste in their mouth after this announcement. This is a very reasonable complaint. You can't charge $60 for a game and choose to give some 100% of it and the others less without expecting their to be backlash. Especially when you consider that this is a much beloved mode from older games in the franchise.
tl:dr Put your fan boy goggles aside. Like whatever platform you prefer. Realize that this is a pattern that no gamer wants to see continue because it always sucks when you are on the losing end and everyone will be on the losing end at some point.
@LVT_PTA_PB: Quite the contrary. I've never been a fan of any sort of exclusivity. Entire game exclusivity is somewhat unavoidable and nothing new. When games started doing timed exclusivity for DLC, I thought it was annoying and disliked it just as much then as I do now. Sometimes it "benefited" me and sometimes it hurt me. In fact I don't care whether this deal was made with PS4, Xbox, or PC.
It sets a dangerous precedent. They are locking an entire feature away from paying customers yet not charging them any differently. I'm not a fan of any policy that has only negative impacts on consumers. Locking away content doesn't benefit PS4 players, it only harms those who use other platforms. You can pick any examples you like to show PC/PS4/Xbox have had an unfair benefit from 3rd party games. The point here is they are charging everyone the same while most get a lot less. Honestly, I wouldn't be as vocal if they charged me $10 less then offered the mode as $10 DLC in a year. That still would suck majorly but some how feels less predatory on the gamer.
Third party games being exclusive to a single platform is annoying but nothing new and understandable when a studio gets a large investment from a platforms developer.
But locking key content to exclusivity for an entire year is frankly insulting to consumers. It was annoying when it was 1-month exclusivity for paid dlc maps on xbox back in the MW2 days. I had an x360 but most of my ps3 friends hated it. But to lock an entire feature for a year from a large portion of the player base is asinine.
@john_price_1 hits it on the head. Same game, same price, except only a specific platform gets the full game.
Remember folks, Sega does what Nintendon't. And Nintendo doesnt put their key characters in movies anymore thanks to that awful Mario movie from the 90s.
KerenskyTheRed's comments