By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Cerebralbore101 on 22 August 2018
Edit Thread
Lawlight said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

Because Zelda CDi was nothing like the Nintendo games, and a complete joke? Tekken on GBA was nothing like the PS2 games. It wasn't even 3D. And Tekken is a 3D fighting series. The same thing can probably be said for Zone of the Enders, but IDK because I never played it on GBA. 

Not moving the goalpost here. Just pointing out that the only reason why Timesplitters/SSX was exclusive was due to there not being anything else to release it on at the time. In other words Timesplitters/SSX were never meant to be exclusives. 

Gamefaqs has Burnout releasing five months after the PS2 version for both Xbox and GC. So it wasn't really an exclusive, but rather just a multiplatform game that had two versions delayed.

What was the first Ridge Racer to come to Xbox, GameCube or PC? I might give you that one. 

I'm sorry man, but so many of these seem to be a stretch. GBA gets a spinoff game, completely unrelated to the main series. A game comes out in early 2000, before Xbox or GameCube even exist, and then promptly goes multiplat in a year or two. A game gets an unplayable, awful port to PC. A game gets ported to Wii in 2007 when the PS2 era was technically over. 

It’s not my fault if those Zelda games are a complete joke. BotW looks nothing like those 3DS games - are they not Zelda games either? Tekken GBA looks like Tekken with less good graphics.

It’s 6 months between the Burnout releases. Factor in the dates.

So let me get this straight. Only games that fulfill the following criteria are valid;

- Must be released on the PS2 after the GC and Xbox have been released.

- Must be released on PS2 first and then on other systems.

- I will let you specify the time between the releases as 6 months doesn’t seem to be enough for you.

- The game has to be part of the main series.

- The game needs to not have bugs.

- The game has to be released during the PS2’s generation.

Any more conditions you want to add to your original statement? Keep in mind, this all started because you claim that the PS3’s sales is what caused devs to go multiplatform. Now you’re bending backwards to show that this wasn’t happening before the PS3.

1. If the other two systems don't exist yet, it was never meant to be exclusive. There just wasn't anything else to release it on at the time. And it would have been faster to release the sequel on those systems than bother doing a port of the first game.

2. Of course it must be released on PS2 first. Otherwise we're not talking about Sony exclusives going multiplatform. And the argument was that Sony exclusives have been going multiplatform since before PS3. 

3. Prove to me that Burnout wasn't always intended as multiplat. They probably started working on ports of Burnout before the PS2 copies even shipped. 

4. If I were to make a thread titled "Animal Crossing going multiplatform", and then use Animal Crossing Pocket Camp as my example, the thread would be derided as clickbait. The argument is over games going multiplatform, not series. Games. Ask 99% of the people on these forums if Animal Crossing is exclusive to Nintendo. They will all answer, "yes" without even thinking about the phone game. 

5. Yeah, I gave you DMC3 releasing on PC. 

6. Yes of course it has to be released during PS2's generation. This argument is about games going multiplatform before PS3. Post 2006 isn't before PS3, and therefore doesn't help your case.