By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Darth Tigris said:
Reasonable said:

I know, but what it means is that MS is often exposed to the risk of loss of exclusives, particularly now when globally, most popular titles sell roughly the same on each console.  For most developers this means multi is the safest route to go.  I don't mean MS has to own the studios outright, but it should engage in deals where it owns the IP fully and the developer is just developing it.  That way they keep control.

The whole 'sorta exclusive' is just a weak position to be in IMHO.

Your average 360 owner, though, doesn't really care about if a game is exclusive or not.  They just want to know if they can play it on the 360.

As for the ip/dev situation you mentioned, I'd really be suprised if the really talented independent studios out there would agree to a work-for-hire situation like that.  Most really want to retain the rights more than anything.

My major gripe is that the game only got ONE decent DLC (Lair of the Shadow Broker), when it had been promised that we would receive major content.  I wasted my credits downloading all those worthless ones that could have been packaged in one decent DLC for a lot cheaper price.  I'm pretty disgusted with Bioware and EA over the piss poor DLCs the game received.  I just want ME3 to conclude the series, and I'm not getting ANY MORE DLC after that game is over.



"...You can't kill ideas with a sword, and you can't sink belief structures with a broadside. You defeat them by making them change..."

- From By Schism Rent Asunder