By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
d21lewis on 03 June 2011
Edit Thread
CGI-Quality said:
d21lewis said:
 

Kid just kicked me off the computer! Now I' on my phone.....

Times, they are a'changin.  The thread didn't ask if exclusives used to matter.  It asked if they still mattered.  To a degree, they do--just not as much as they used to.  I'm sure the PS3's inability to gain footing early on was caused by other problems and not just exclusives.  Even now, the list of PS3 exclusives is HUGE.  It's still selling well below the 360 in the USA and beating it by just a few thousand when the worldwide totals come in.  And make a list of the top 50 games based on sales anda seperate list based on reviews (this gen, only).  I don't know the results but I'm willing to bet that (with the exception of Nintendo titles), exclusives don't have the impact we like to think they do.

As for this gen's leader, they were last gens loser.  Did Nintendo's exclusives quality jump that much?  Or maybe it was something extra (hint: rhymes with "lotion fun-trolls) had something to do with it.  I'll elaborate when I 

I told you why exclusives still do matter. Not sure why your second sentence even exists. I talked about how they have mattered, why they still matter, and why they'll continue to matter.

Also, the PS3 is losing in America for the very reasons I mentioned (LIVE/price). Those two things play the biggest roles here and without them, the two would be much closer in numbers. People didn't see a need for PS3 once stuff like FFXIII & GTA IV released day and date with the 360 (also a point I made). I imagine had those titles remained exclusive, the race would look different right now. Since they didn't, people look to other determining factors, which the 360 has pretty much had (and still has in terms of LIVE features and cheaper price) to itself all gen.

Now to the Wii; them being last gen's loser is irrelevant. Nintendo created something EXCLUSIVE to it, thus propelling the system to unprecedented sell rates. The exclusive titles obviously complimented that. However, with the recent inclusion of Move and [particularly] Kinect, along with the slowdown of software, look at how things have changed. A system is only as good as it's exclusive software and if not, then what do we need multiple systems for?

Dude!! You quoted me, first!!  I'm not saying anything I didn't say the first time you quoted me!!  Yeah, exclusives matter but things like price and features do, too (which we both agreed with even though I said it first!!).  They're just not the end-all, be-all that they used to be!  Shit, even things like the controller matter to some people.  I'm sure you could find a guy that thinks the power button is the most important thing about a game console if you look hard enough.  Quit being so anal!

As for Nintendo being last gen's loser being irrelevant, how is it irrelevant and your comment about how "exclusives always mattered in the past" more relevant!?  And Nintendo created something EXCLUSIVE to their platform?  Yeah, I know about the motion controls!!  I thought I gave a pretty good hint......But we are talking about exclusive GAMES!  I'm the one who said EXCLUSIVE FEATURES matter more.  Gosh!!  My blood pressure!!

*takes a deep breath*

Okay.  The OP said that MGS series going mult-plat doesn't bother him anymore.  He doesn't care like he used to.  Not many of us do.  Most gamers (not just the "Hardcore") don't care anymore. 

And we don't need multiple systems.  The only reason we have multiple systems is because the games industry hasn't become united like the movies industry (one format playable on multiple devices), music (one format playable on multiple devices), and television industry have.  It's because the major players don't want to collaborate on a universal standard (and I'm not quite sure how they could just yet.).