MarkMe2525
Member
Maybe just less games all together... I think that would be the ticket.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Do you want more or less exclusives on each console?
- Thread starter In Cold Blood
- Start date
crackajack
Member
While (first party) exclusives are almost obliged to be the best or at least strive to be, RDR, GTA, FIFA, CoD, Crysis, Battlefield, Madden, Apex, AC:V, Fortnite etc all prove that neither most successful nor get most juice out of underpowered machines is necessarily exclusive to exclusives. They are possibly necessary differentiators if we have competing plattforms and maybe or maybe not having only one plattform, would be bad, but having only BR or only HDMI or only FHD/1440p/4k, some standards isn't bad either.
I'd assume abandoning those exclusive shenanigans would rid us of list wars. Good games will get played by more players which should anyway motivate more than some corporate overlord and a goal to push your plattform. Just try to sell your game to as many people as possible should be the goal.
Consoles have less and less secret sauce anyway. Even a Switch and ARM isn't incapable to run the same downport games. Nintendo should have left proper consoles long ago and be a third party for the other consoles, maybe outsource the ports and only keep their handheld division. Releasing the wii as a Guitar Hero like addon for PS360 and PC. MS is anyway fighting for mindshare and not necessarily for hw units sold, could bring Halo etc. to everything and once you have the market in your pocket stop supporting the other plattform. Not the other way round which must be harder challenge.
Exclusives make most sense for Sony since they are defending their leader position. Having the nice stuff in their walled garden.
Basically it comes down to who gets the 30% sort of just for existing. For companies the fight might be worth it, for consumers I don't think it has any benefit even though this fight is supposed to bring us the best. The best would anyway deliver, just not with some brand attached to them.
I'd assume abandoning those exclusive shenanigans would rid us of list wars. Good games will get played by more players which should anyway motivate more than some corporate overlord and a goal to push your plattform. Just try to sell your game to as many people as possible should be the goal.
Consoles have less and less secret sauce anyway. Even a Switch and ARM isn't incapable to run the same downport games. Nintendo should have left proper consoles long ago and be a third party for the other consoles, maybe outsource the ports and only keep their handheld division. Releasing the wii as a Guitar Hero like addon for PS360 and PC. MS is anyway fighting for mindshare and not necessarily for hw units sold, could bring Halo etc. to everything and once you have the market in your pocket stop supporting the other plattform. Not the other way round which must be harder challenge.
Exclusives make most sense for Sony since they are defending their leader position. Having the nice stuff in their walled garden.
Basically it comes down to who gets the 30% sort of just for existing. For companies the fight might be worth it, for consumers I don't think it has any benefit even though this fight is supposed to bring us the best. The best would anyway deliver, just not with some brand attached to them.
well its fun times for devs but a boring experience for gamers... a playstation 6 with a custom peculiar architecture from sonys magic team and ibm would be a monstrosity of computing technology imagine a cell processor made today but ooooh noooo we cant have that we just have to contend with good old x86 and whatever mainstream technology grandfather amd and grandmother nvidia come up with... eat that crap, say amen and go to sleep... its like living inside a black mirror episode.
MikeM
Member
I don’t think anyone wants the Cell era back. I surely don’t.
i do minus the complexity the cell was actually a revolutionary chip its exactly how gpgpu actually started the cell is the mother of compute units
Topher
Gold Member
Not at all. There is no reason for specialized gaming hardware. Far too many games are left behind as backward compatibility just isn't feasible and emulation not worth the investment (apparently).
ProgenitorCastle
Banned
More exlusives that make systems worth owning, that utilize a system's unique features e.g. NintendoLand, Astro's Playroom, etc.
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
No definitive PC version = bad for everyone, so no.
Guilty_AI
Member
Without backwards compatibility and the ease of porting games from the ps4/xone, the new consoles would have barely any games to play.
Last edited:
The more people that get to play, the better IMO.
DrumNBassDanTTV
Member
Game devs would benefit more from being able to release games across more platforms, for instance the upcoming Zelda game looks great on switch but imagine it on pc/ps5/xsx ... longer draw distance, more enemies on screen, more complex environments & enemies. Its a shame really.
thats alright why would i buy a ps5 to play ps4 games... actually removing bc improves products... we are now year 3 since ps5 came out and were still playing crossgen games because all this consoles are semi pc's! so the greed and ease of access for devs and supporting bc has inturn made nextgen games obsolete...
Aguero9320
Member
Get rid of them completely. Let me buy the best hardware for me and play whatever I want on it. So weird being forced to buy hardware even if I don't want it.
Guilty_AI
Member
You're seeing it backwards. Ps4 is the more popular machine and most devs would give it priority if the ps5 archtechture as too esoteric. The result would be less adoption on the new hardware
nope not really the only reason you had nice games that took advantage of ps4 is because it didnt support ps3 bc and had 16x the memory 512mb to 8gb this gave developers ability to produce great games and to only focus on the future... if ps3 was x86 then we would have a boring ps4 generation, whats happening now is developers are
1. wondering why they should only make a ps5 focused game while there is only 2x the memory difference 8gb ps4 to ps5 16gb... 2. why not make a crossgen game since both consoles are x86 and therefore cash in from both ps4,pc and ps5 users... capitalist greed... u can see this in jim ryans smile... add all this and the stupid series s then we have ourselves a boring cross generation and trust me until the ps6 comes out we will still have ps4 ps5 crossgen games all because of x86 cult.
ABnormal
Member
The question is misleading.
If you mean first party exclusives which are an addition to the market, then the more the better. If you mean timed exclusives of existing IPs, then the less the better. Second party exclusives are fine: they exist by the joint effort of both producers.
Schmendrick
Member
Where`s the "I don`t care as long as the games are good"-option?
I´m not a poor schmug with an inferiority complex so I´ll just buy whatever platform those games are on ( but I´ll obviously prefer the one with the best performance if I have a choice ).
I´m not a poor schmug with an inferiority complex so I´ll just buy whatever platform those games are on ( but I´ll obviously prefer the one with the best performance if I have a choice ).
Last edited:
Aenima
Member
Less, but with 1st party games being developed with 1 console hardware in mind to push the console hardware. Then take some time to do a decent port to other platforms. Unless is some dark magic studio like Rockstar that manage to pull a RDR2 as multiplatform from day 1.
So i would be ok if fully exclusive games completely disappeared if ment everyone could eventually play them no matter what platform.
So i would be ok if fully exclusive games completely disappeared if ment everyone could eventually play them no matter what platform.
Last edited:
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
The more exclusives (i.e. games developed from the ground up to fully exploit the hardware), the better.
However, exclusives should be funded by first parties. The fewer money-hatted third-party exclusives the better.
However, exclusives should be funded by first parties. The fewer money-hatted third-party exclusives the better.
EverydayBeast
thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
Exclusives are valuable.
cireza
Member
Games don't have to be exclusive for competition to exist.
Bond007
Member
I enjoy consoles differentiating themselves. I like to own multiple consoles.
While i may have my preference and a go-to console- i grew up in an era where they all offered different things.
These days I think that's the case with Sony and Nintendo. I really wish Microsoft would find its niche and do something well or different for itself. Kinect was hated- but it was a product unique and exclusive to them and i had my enjoyment. Or how they used to excel greatly in the multiplayer aspect for years.
While i may have my preference and a go-to console- i grew up in an era where they all offered different things.
These days I think that's the case with Sony and Nintendo. I really wish Microsoft would find its niche and do something well or different for itself. Kinect was hated- but it was a product unique and exclusive to them and i had my enjoyment. Or how they used to excel greatly in the multiplayer aspect for years.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 471617
Unconfirmed Member
I don't want Microsoft or Sony to put their first party exclusives on their competitor's platform. I can understand an exception here and there like Minecraft or COD but otherwise, nah.
If you're talking about third party exclusives, it depends. First and foremost, I hate timed exclusive games and content. If you're going to pay for timed exclusivity, just pay more to fund the game itself and make it fully exclusive instead because waiting an undetermined amount of time accomplishes nothing. Second, for games like Rise of the Ronin, Contraband, etc., these are third party development studios in which their publisher signed an exclusive deal in order for the hardware manufacturer to fund/publish/market the game. No issue with this at all. My main issue is simply timed exclusivity for games and/or content. Either make it fully exclusive or don't do it at all.
With that said, I would prefer an ultimate gaming console where Microsoft and Sony join forces to make just one console where you get everything but I don't see this ever happening, or at least not in my life time.
Putonahappyface
Member
I'll take the more exclusives option please Jeff.
Guilty_AI
Member
"The only reason" is too reductive. Going with that x86 is also a huge factor, something more portable and that devs were used to working with. Drastic changes on a new gen would infer the same results they got on the start of the ps3 gen.
1. Vast majority of devs are interested in getting players, and similarly the vast majority of players want cool games and convenience. Neither of most devs or players are too interested in tech boundaries being pushed.
2. If being forced to choose, majority of players would go to the more affordable system with the most content, and devs would also choose the same. Times changed. Nowadays you can make huge open world games like Elden Ring run on a ps4 or a gtx 16xx (or even weaker/older) cards without too much issues. Demand for more powerful systems for gaming isn't as big as it once was, so factors like convenience, portability, amount of content and affordability will always take priority over some new ultra efficient esoteric system you need to learn and develop from scratch. Otherwise, every single big developer would be prioritizing VR over anything else.
Any changes can only happen slowly.
Last edited:
ShadyAcshuns
Member
Exclusives mean the devs can focus on one hardware spec for a game. As someone who owns all current consoles, exclusives are not a threat to me.
Last edited:
cinnamonandgravy
Member
if consoles had unique hardware, id want more exclusives.
begotten
Member
More exclusives and first-party output.
I wish we'd have a generation start to finish like NGC / Xbox / PS2 again.
Play NGC with the family and for decent Nintendo first-party.
Use a chipped Xbox for Halo LANs and random third parties when friends came over.
Use PS2 for everything as my personal console.
Now it's like a weird and jarring balance of quality and output, with Xbox barely in the picture.
I want a reason to own and juggle every console.
I wish we'd have a generation start to finish like NGC / Xbox / PS2 again.
Play NGC with the family and for decent Nintendo first-party.
Use a chipped Xbox for Halo LANs and random third parties when friends came over.
Use PS2 for everything as my personal console.
Now it's like a weird and jarring balance of quality and output, with Xbox barely in the picture.
I want a reason to own and juggle every console.
LostDonkey
Member
I want a machine that can play everything at a decent click.
I've done the PC route, I'm getting old now I can't keep up.
I just want a console like box that can play anything the studios make and we all work together to pull in the same direction.
Magic.
I've done the PC route, I'm getting old now I can't keep up.
I just want a console like box that can play anything the studios make and we all work together to pull in the same direction.
Magic.
FF:Enhanced_Reality
Member
Your choices of answers in the poll are terrible. What about I'm happy with console exclusives as long as third parties aren't negatively affected?
I would like to see XBOX step up their exclusives. But I wanted them to make their own franchises not fucking buy publishers.
I would like to see XBOX step up their exclusives. But I wanted them to make their own franchises not fucking buy publishers.
sachos
Member
ZoukGalaxy
Member
I love them, they give us the best of an hardware.
I own all platforms anyway and most of the time multi are a mess.
I own all platforms anyway and most of the time multi are a mess.
Last edited:
They console doesn't have to be that exotic. Just push the envelope on some type of hardware to make it more unique.
A large part of the reason games are taking longer to make is that the games are just bigger in time length, detail, and size. A lot of people now won't buy a 60 to70 game at full price if they don't hit a certain amount of hours.
captainpat
Member
As long as these are just console exclusives that will come to pc and their 1st party exclusives then it's good.
Gamerguy84
Member
I want more games. I can say I want more exclusives because they tend to be the highest quality there are.
In Cold Blood
Banned
I mean just having more unique content between the two consoles, Wether by first party or third party. In a perfect world Sony and MS would have three times the amount of first party studios than they do now.
No reason the platform owners shouldn't have more studios and IPs than the big publishers do.
Similar threads
- Poll