|
ameratsu said:
2) Saying it's "just business" is such a copout. Microsoft doesn't do this to benefit their existing customers, but rather to deprive others of it or create artificial differentiation between them and the competition. Someone who already owns an x360 gains no benefit from a game not appearing on ps3, pc or wii. Like I said above, instead of funding or otherwise ensuring games that will never leave the platform, they want those without a system to think timed exclusive games are actual exclusive games. Microsoft is deliberately decieving those looking to buy a console and who want to HONESTLY compare what is available / what will be available for the console. It's absolutely an anti-consumer tactic. 3) I won't argue that Microsoft has more significance in the industry than before, but how you tie this point to timed exclusives is haphazard at best. Please clarify. 4) Of course businesses are here to make money. While their motive is profit, I would say Sony is doing a better job of securing actual exclusive content and listening to their customers. Microsoft entered this generation a year early in an attempt to beat competitors to the punch, cutting corners in hardware design in the process. That was a "business" decision but it doesn't mean that those who experience RROD or who are wary of unreliable hardware have to put up with it because Microsoft is out to make money. Same goes for Sony cutting ps2 playback in the ps3. 5) When Sony (or whoever) buys a company, they are actually funding and taking a risk in creating new games and content. While Microsoft did (I think) fund the GTA DLC, the focus with buying companies or funding new games is to produce original content that differentiates one system from another. Microsoft tries to sidestep this with timed exclusives. Of course to the casual observer this sort of thing is fair game, and it works. Someone who wants to buy a system compares what is available for each system, and buys the console with the most features/games/whatever they're looking for. Since at any given time Microsoft has a number of games that appear to be exclusive, there is a benefit they get from it. Doesn't mean I have to like it or defend their actions. edit: I think I fixed the formatting now. |
Well, I think that Squillian said everything that needs to be said, I will just complement his opinion about 3 and 4.
3) Microsoft had a bad third party support in the last generation. Microsoft is making some people pay more attention to their console now because they have some big third party titles 5~12 months before the competition, it's really a big step in my opinion. Of course, what Squillian said is important, those timed exclusives are indeed pushing hardware sales but I think that Microsoft is trying to make people realize that they can be as powerful as Sony now (or even more powerful, with some games coming first for the x360). Do you remember when they said at the E3 2009 "Metal Gear is another franchise to jump to our console" (or something like that) when Rising was announced?
4) Does it works? What Sony is doing is probably good for you. You have games like Uncharted, LBP, Killzone, God Of War, etc but does it works? It's more expensive than timed exclusives and the impact is almost the same. While Sony is securing some expensive exclusives, Microsoft is just using the cheaper and easier path. I asked "does it works?" because Sony is at the third place anyway.
