@wizard said:
@jsmoke03:
"ms and sony are already doing these things on the software side but with exclusives. you take out exclusives and throw more money on apps and os stuff still isnt going to do much because pc looms as the more superior platform."
So MS and Sony should retreat when faced with the PC? What happens when steam box's arrive and convenience is no longer a console pro? The console market will collapse and have nothing left but their IP's on failing hardware! MS and Sony need to bring PC features like game streaming, entertainment, and social media into a more streamlined and accessible option or regardless of all their exclusives consoles are going to cease to become relevant. MS/Sony need to throw their cash into console development not self sustainable IP's if they are to survive. Halo and Uncharted will eventually tire. Then what?
"hell xb1 had kinect and it flopped. sony had eyetoy and that flopped. wii u tablet flopped."
Sony and Microsoft tried to steal the casual audience that was A) already taken/fatigued by the orignial Wii B) Moving on to mobile gaming. A nonexistent support for motion gaming in the hardcore audience combined with a lack of interest in the first place is why motion gaming failed. The Wii sold like crack originally but the market got tired of it. Kinnect and the Wii U failed because of MS and Nintendo's arrogance in thinking that they could milk casuals and force motion gaming on the gaming core. The Wii U's dismal sales and Kinnects failure shows that investment into gimmicks and forcing the market doesn't work. Goes for 3D gaming as well. Bigger HDD's, stronger GPU's etc. would have benefited everybody. MS/Sony chose not to because they would rather shovel money into IP exclusitivity (Something MS smartly recently said they were going to stop doing), not because they couldn't afford to or the tech wasn't there.
"i still dont see any advantage of having an industry with no exclusives. at least exclusives have pushed the company to outdo each other."
The advantage is to the consumers in not having to pay a hardware premium to play good games, as well as to the devs who benefit from increased sales. MS and Sony are the only party reaping the benefits of exclusives, similar to charging a premium for online services. To me (as a former console gamer) they are very similar.
well to respond to your first point - no i dont think sony and ms should retreat and face with a pc, but i do think being a closed platform limits their ability to adapt and thats why i think those innovative apps and stuff comes with evolving with the tech , and closed platforms are going to have a hard time doing that unless they become a pc. i dont think ppl would enjoy the mobile approach of one console a year iterations right? and to answer your question about ips...when halo and uncharted gets old, there will be more ips to take up the mantle.
second point - yes the casual market was the wrong way to gain a new consumer base, but i pointed out those gimmicks and peripherals because the console manufacturers are doing all they can to advance their consoles as best as they can. i dont think these companies are sitting on their laurels and banking on purely ip and they are trying to do it again with these stupid vr headsets. ms stopped throwing money because they realized third party exclusives are not that reliable. although sony is doing it now, sony actually is using that strat until their own ips start finishing up.
the advantage is to the consumers but it doesnt make sense business wise. if it doesnt make sense to them, then they wont do it. we as consumers would have to demonstrate some kind of fiinancial opportunity for the makers for them to do it. you think ms would have been as inclined to push for bc if they werent getting their asses handed to them? imo, no. would sony not have changed their tactics from kutaragi's stupid vision if they werent getting their asses handed to them? imo , no.
console makers need money and all the features we are presented with are ways for them to make money...and they hope that they offer up something consumers would find of worth for them to get paid. I get that. i understand that this is a business also. these arent just labors of love. the only way i can see no exclusives in this industry , is if we have only one device we play games on. that would be the only solution i can see, and i dont see companies playing nice like that because companies lose leverage and opportunities. square enix leveraged more money from ms because ms was looking to beat sony and uncharted. with one device, those opportunities arent there.
i am not calling you personally as entitled, but in general, all i hear out of gaming forums are coming from that place. this is an exchange with us the consumers and them, the game makers. i think the gamers lose sight of that when they suggest things like these and to an extent, it is true that we get taken advantage of by game makers because they try to extract the most amount of money they can from us. support what you like and dont support what you hate. it makes a difference in the long run. but no exclusives has no advantage for one side, so its not going to happen nor i think they should. they have a right to make money as they see fit but we dont have to take it. playing games is a priviledge, not a right. we dont have to play games, and if we want to play games then we have to decide how much we are willing to pay for it.
oh and charging a premium for online....blame lemmings for accepting that practice. i dont like it, but if i want to game online on consoles, i have to go along, or get a pc (which i cant afford, not tech savy blah blah) simple as that. i didnt pay for online until i had no choice.
Log in to comment