By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
d21lewis on 23 May 2010
Edit Thread
CGI-Quality said:
d21lewis said:
.jayderyu said:
here are my 2cents in regards to the topic

Well as some one who trying to start up a company I can honestly say no. When I work on a game I'm making the game to share the experience I'm envisioning. Of course I can't consider it free. I need to invest money in the game and I would like to make my career sharing my visions. This is a circle. So while I consider the highest priority as the game and vision, money cannot take a back seat. The game is the engine and chassis Money are the wheels and steering wheel.

Having said that. Exclusivity sucks. It essentially defines that sharing my vision becomes less important. I want my vision to go to as many people there are. That way more people/gamers/consumers know what I make.

In pointing out the OP
"For me yes. Exclusivity drives the market and sets brand recognition."

This explains a lot of the consumer point of views. Who's Brand Recognition? my game? or the platform? TMNT, Mega Man have appeared on multiple console brands. Clearly in the case of the OP the Platform is more important than my company or the game. Where as what really drives the market is the reverse. Exclusives don't drive the market. The Market is based on supply and demand. A game produced in a limited scope of potential demand does not need more supplies. As is the last Generation the GC has the minimal potential demand. How could that drive the market in anyway? It can't and doesn't. What the OP is actually saying is this. "I want MY preferred console to have higher demand. That requires more exclusives to MY console."

So in the end. Exclusives only support a console, but hold back the industry as a whole. In many ways. As others have pointed out elements that are considered positive in light(as in graphics) generally have the cost that the code is not as portable and come next generation there is a lot of building from scratch again. So yes PS3 Exclusive can and will do fabulous graphical games, but at the cost that all the hours spent working on the games engine is borrowed from the next generation.

So Exclusives make bragging, fapping rights are in overall more harmful to the gaming console industry than helpful.

Eloquently stated.

Who wins if Street Fighter 4 or Call of Duty:  Modern Warfare were exclusive?  Certainly not the gamers.  For me, multi-platform gaming means that I can choose the "best version" (being a multi-console owner) and people who only on one console can play some version of a game.  What's wrong with that?

But I still don't get how the gamers "win" if all the resources going into these games go into the SAME games for multiple systems. How do we wi, we're actually losing on games. The bigger the library of one console is, that is unique, the better it is for people looking for a particular system.

Are you guys saying it would be cool for the 360 & PS3 to have a library that's 100% the same? OK, if so, that's your opinion , no problem, then what would be the point of mutliple consoles? I think you guys are not looking at the big picture.

Fortunatley, folks like Nintendo and Sony ARE looking at the larger picture, and know you're console is only as good as it's games (meaning what it offers on it's own). This gen would be pathetic if the Sony was like: "look at what we have, these awesome games. See our buddy over there (the 360), look what he has, oh wait.................he has what we have". "Buy our product though, we're still different" (even though there's virtually no difference in the libraries).

See how that sounds/looks? This idea that "more gamers get to play" is bullocks to me. As long as the system a game is on is available, gamers get to play. It's always been that way. We don't need two consoles with the same damn games to prove that. It's not just about "optimization" for me, but difference. I bought a 360 to play 360 games, not to know the majority of what's available is also available on ANOTHER console that I bought.

As I've said, this subject will keep people split.

Let's just lay it all out on the table.  The PS3 and the 360 are very similar as far as their performance.  Maybe there is some slight performance upgrade for one system over another.  Maybe.  Maybe if a developer focussed an extra few million dollars on one console, the game that they're designing will look 3% better than if it were a multi-plat.  Is that worth losing another million units sold by going multi?  Is it worth it to gamers who honestly don't care (most aren't performance whores like us). 

This is just an analogy but:  What makes one car stand out from another?  Air conditioning is now exclusive to Honda.  Honda has bragging rights.  Everybody else loses.  Only Samsung TV's can connect to DirecTV.  Samsung gets bragging rights.  Everybody else loses.

To play Metal Gear Solid 4, you HAVE to buy a PS3.  It's all well and good for Sony.  They have their great exclusive.  PS3's sell......but then there are those people who would've bought MGS4 but didn't buy a PS3.  They'll never buy a PS3.  Konami lost those sales.  Gamers lost that game.  There are those gamers that would but Lost Odyssey but don't own a 360.  Good for Microsoft and Xbox fans.  Bad for everybody else.  Those people will NEVER play that good game.  They won't even consider it.  It's not on their platform.  Could these games have been multi-plat?  Yes.  They aren't. 

Think back to the HD DVD/Blu-Ray war.  Some movies were only being released in HD for only one format despite the fact that both formats were capable.  When that format war ended, there was a huge sigh of relief.  Movie studios didn't have to pick a side anymore.  People were free to buy their movie players without fear that they'd have to shell out money for another device that did basically the same thing.

--It doesn't matter to me.  If there's something I want, I'm gonna get it.  Most people don't have that luxury.  And the arguement of "That's the way it's always been":  I was knee deep in the 8-bit/16-bit wars.  There was a huge difference between what a Genesis and a Super Nes could do.  Not so much, now.  Things change.  CD's are dead.  VHS is gone.  Magazines are dying.  The old ways of thinking tend to die off as things evolve.  Gaming and the mentality of gamers seems like it's in need of a little evolution........