Why bother buying consoles next gen?

[Nautilus]

Burning Typhoon said:
What are we arguing sales numbers for? The PS2's 120+ million console sales didn't help the PS3 any. I'd argue the PS2's numbers actually helped the 360. What I'm asking is what is the point of next gen consoles?

But you know what I've noticed? The consoles don't have any reason outside of exclusives, so when a console loses exclusives, the fans get mad. More people with the opportunity to play a game, and it's a problem. Look at all the people mad about xbox exclusives going to PC, and PS users saying PS exclusives will never do the same. More people able to access the game without owning the box, and people are so upset. Why?

I'm beginning to see that is the outlining issue with a console. People can't just think to themselves, "it's great that PC people get to play God of War." Just, "my exclusives will never come to PC, xbox or nintendo!" You know.. despite more software sales fueling the life the series and helping to ensure we see proper sequels. Maybe if those boxes were actually worth owning outside of the games locked to it, people wouldn't feel the need to be like that. More people playing what they want regardless of what console they own is a good thing.

It starts with fornite, i guess, allowing PS4 and Xbox one users to play together. Don't think exclusives will be a thing of the past in due time.

Look at sega. The games they made, wasn't limited to the 10 million dreamcast units, but xbox, gamecube and ps2's total sales. Eventually sony will figure it out, like microsoft already has, and exclusives wont exist. They will come to everything.

Its seems that you are the one that dosent really get it.

Yes, i think its silly to deny that we all dont have a bit of a emotional investment in our consoles of choice.Much like football, we like to see our favorite developer and hardware manufacture of choice doing well.But there is a reason that games are made available exclusively to it.And the reason is quite simple: the hardware manufacturer wants to not only sell the games, but also the consoles, so that he earns more money and have "power" over the industry, since he is a leader.And with power, he makes even more money, and so it goes on and on.

The "Hardware manufacturer, or the Big Three, should go third party!" discussion is almost as old as the industry itself.And honestly, If it were to happen, it would suck, because innovation in hardware for gaming happens mostly because of the Big Three and because of their interests in having a ecosystem of their own.But thats neither here or there, because if I were to discuss with you the benefits and disavantages of going third party, we would be here until tomorrow.And lets face it, Sony and Nintendo are not going anywhere anytime soon.MS is another story, but also a story for another time.

I think that, at the end, the most compelling argument for there to be different ecosystems, and thus exclusives to one console or another, is quality.Look at Sega.The quality of its games plummeted after it became a third party developer.If it were to happen to the other developers, they would lose their biggest motivation to make excellent games:To sell a console.And while I am not saying thats what would happen for sure, you dont have to look much further than Sega or Valve to see its effects:How many years has it been since Valve made a decent game?Or made an actual improvement in their storefront?How many years has it been since a Sonic game has been deemed as excellent, outside of Sonic Mania?Or any Sega property, outside of Atlus(thats wasnt part of Sega to begin with) and a few odd titles?

Competition is essential, and a rival always needs to exist.