Exclusivity sucks as a gaming practice

mxbison

Member
So when God of War, Spider-Man and Last of Us got ported to PC, they magically stopped being incredible feats of dev engineering and best games and suddenly became plain?

A multiplatform game is only made for maximum profit.

An exclusive game can also be made to be a high quality showcase for the brand. (like huge budget single player games with no MTX)

Different development circumstances that can lead to different results. Porting a game later to rake in some extra cash has nothing to do with that.
 

Drell

Member
Different consomes by differnet manufacturer would have no reason to exist in a world where everything gets released everywhere.
Also I see people mentionning PC. My take may sound laughable but don't forget Windows is a propriety of Microsoft. And while it has a monopoly on consumers OS, if you want to be true to the statement of everything getting released everywhere, you have to port games on Mac OS and Linux too. And that's not the case for the majority of PC games.
 
I get what you're saying. I just do not agree.

Xbox sales have increased. That's a fact. To which you answer with, "Well, yeah, but they *could* have done even better!" Which I understand, but it's a hypothesis that cannot prove that xbox games coming to pc damaged the brand.

But perhaps there is a way to see it from another angle. For example has the ratio between playstation gamers and xbox gamers dramatically shifted since xbox games came to pc? Do playstation gamers now outnumber xbox gamers analogically a lot more now? Are there 10 playstation gamers for every 3 xbox gamers while they used to be 10 playstation gamers for 6 xbox gamers? If that is the case, It's safe to assume that xbox games coming to pc hurt xbox console sales.

If not, they didn't.

You're still not seeing the picture right.

That's not the only metric here. In fact that's the metric LEAST likely to be impacted here. What would be most impacted is Xbox users who now buy only PC rather than some shift towards PlayStation.

What we do know is that Xbox One was significantly less successful than the Xbox 360, and this is despite the game market expanding. The PS4 actually sold considerably better than the PS3.

So even by your broken argument, Xbox sales have indeed diminished.
 

Nickolaidas

Member
You're still not seeing the picture right.

That's not the only metric here. In fact that's the metric LEAST likely to be impacted here. What would be most impacted is Xbox users who now buy only PC rather than some shift towards PlayStation.

What we do know is that Xbox One was significantly less successful than the Xbox 360, and this is despite the game market expanding. The PS4 actually sold considerably better than the PS3.

So even by your broken argument, Xbox sales have indeed diminished.
Oh, stop it. You know perfectly well why the x1 sold less than the x360, and it had nothing to do with pc games coming day one (which happened WAY after the x1's debut).
 

SHA

Member
I'm afraid a universal console will become a real thing , it's just common sense , I don't see it not happening.
Microsoft original vision will become a real thing , when they approached Nintendo 20 years ago.
 
Well, with your consumer lenses it doesn't make sense to you. If you were running a business however, it might make more sense.

There's something to be said about having users being incentivized to be locked into one ecosystem vs another, or simply, to be a part of a specific ecosystem - that's all it is. Once they're a part of that ecosystem, they spend more while there.

Microsoft has found the key to expand their user base, while still having people tied in, with Game Pass. Play anywhere once you're subscribed to their platform. If they get their way, in the coming years, you might be able to access Game Pass even on PlayStation. That's a huge IF, but I don't think it matters too much to them. Why? Because, once people can access Game Pass from any TV and any mobile device or computer, they'd have won. That's the end game.

It's all just business lad. And if it didn't work, exclusives wouldn't exist, would they?
 

ScHlAuChi

Member
Its so fucking annoying when a burger you're so amped up about eating is limited to a particular fast food chain. Countless times I've been frustrated finding out I can't eat my burgers anywhere cuz they're exclusive to different fast food chains.

Before select fanboys come at me, NO, I'm NOT excluding anycorp from criticism. Mc Donalds, Burger King, Kentucky Fried Chicken, etc. Not going indepth into their practices for time&space, but they're currently going all into different exclusivity strategies.

This sucks for fast food man. Why do companies cage burgers from more gourmets? Why lock and limit burgers to just one fast food chain? What happens to those burger exclusives when those fast food chains reach end-of-life or burgers stop getting made? The burgers just die there?

These guys have to smarten up, see reason in broader reach, UNSHACKLE exclusives for the sake of fast food preservation; & focus on making good burgers. Fast food doesn't need to be exclusive to be a quality standard. Pizza's are proof! Non-exclusive, acclaimed, among the best-selling & greatest fast foods.. Give me more chain agnostic, top-tier, competitive foods! Why's competition stuck to being about fast food chains and exclusives? Should've always just been about striving to make quality fast food!

Exclusivity sucks! Bring forward legacy burgers like the Mc Rib, etc. at TacoBells! Big Mac, Whopper, Zinger at every chain! Let people have OPTIONS. Let gourmets eat burgers wherever they want! THAT'S WHAT FAST FOOD'S ABOUT! STOP this practice of forever restricting burgers to one fast food chain, franchise store, etc going forward!
I hope you dont mind me having changed the subject of your quoted text with some creative edits to demonstrate how ridicilous your argument is....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TristanIV said:
Its so fucking annoying when a burger you're so amped up about eating is limited to a particular fast food chain. Countless times I've been frustrated finding out I can't eat my burgers anywhere cuz they're exclusive to different fast food chains.
Before select fanboys come at me, NO, I'm NOT excluding anycorp from criticism. Mc Donalds, Burger King, Kentucky Fried Chicken, etc. Not going indepth into their practices for time&space, but they're currently going all into different exclusivity strategies.

This sucks for fast food man. Why do companies cage burgers from more gourmets? Why lock and limit burgers to just one fast food chain? What happens to those burger exclusives when those fast food chains reach end-of-life or burgers stop getting made? The burgers just die there?

These guys have to smarten up, see reason in broader reach, UNSHACKLE exclusives for the sake of fast food preservation; & focus on making good burgers. Fast food doesn't need to be exclusive to be a quality standard. Pizza's are proof! Non-exclusive, acclaimed, among the best-selling & greatest fast foods.. Give me more chain agnostic, top-tier, competitive foods! Why's competition stuck to being about fast food chains and exclusives? Should've always just been about striving to make quality fast food!

Exclusivity sucks! Bring forward legacy burgers like the Mc Rib, etc. at TacoBells! Big Mac, Whopper, Zinger at every chain! Let people have OPTIONS. Let gourmets eat burgers wherever they want! THAT'S WHAT FAST FOOD'S ABOUT! STOP this practice of forever restricting burgers to one fast food chain, franchise store, etc going forward!
 
Last edited:

SHA

Member
Third party games don't benefit from the evident bias their is for Sony and Nintendo first party, their games being largely overated. So this is definitely a metric that works well for you.
I'd rather play my favorite genre than rely on metacritics , imagine your handpicked physical library based on metacritics recommendations ? I'd vomit instantly.
 

fart town usa

Gold Member
Money hat stuff can definitely be frustrating but if Sony/Nintendo/MS outright own a studio, that's a different story and exclusivity is to be expected.
 
Last edited:

sainraja

Member
I don't think you can get away from exclusivity. Businesses need to give people a reason to pick them over their competition. It's not all kum-ba-yah!
I mean, it would be great if the three companies could co-ordinate efforts with designing a console and then compete on content but I am sure there will be downsides to that or something about that might "suck" as a gaming practice.
 
Last edited:

Nickolaidas

Member
Also, come to think
Enlighten us... and that is MORE evidence that it played a part...
Oh, I don't know ... how about the fact it had weaker specs than the PS4 yet cost 100 bucks more at launch??

Or how about the fact they wanted you to be online always otherwise your console would become deadweight and your disc based games were getting locked in the X-Box console you would install them on, making game trade a bitch?

Or how about the fact they wanted to ship it with an installed camera which you could really turn off?

Or how about the fact that the marketing was 'TV TV TV' and had fuck all to show about games in the reveal?

Or how about the infamous 'there is an offline version of the X1 ... it's called an X360' quote?

But sure, yeah, it was the PC-on-day-one (which was announed 2-3 years later on) that ruined that X1 sales.
 
Last edited:

BbMajor7th

Member
Boxes aren't that compelling - games are. You want to make your box compelling, you need games that other boxes don't have. Pricing, features and FOMO play their part, but the key driver is always those games you're excited to play. All media is headed that way now: that's why you won't be watching Andor on your Netflix subscription, or Ted Lasso on Disney Plus.
 
Last edited:

Roxkis_ii

Member
This thread sounds like the testing grounds for the next cross play thing Microsoft is going to try to push as a community issue.

PHIL: Xbox gamers should be able to play God of war, and it unfair that Sony won't allow gamers to do THIS! Push back against exclusives!
 

XXL

Member
There are positives and negatives to it.

Thinking anything else is delusional.

It's always Playstation and Xbox fans arguing this.

The reality is Nintendo has been living off of the benefits of exclusivity for a long fucking time and people rarely mention it.....

You know why?

Because Mario (and Zelda) is literally synonymous with Nintendo.

That is the power of exclusivity. Too deny that again would be delusional.
 
Top Bottom