By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
theprof00 on 23 August 2012
Edit Thread
Jazz2K said:
theprof00 said:
Jazz2K said:


When I play a game it's the game I'm playing not the console. The console only allows me to play it. If I have fun it's because the devs are talented not because the console is different from the others. The proof is that there are great games on any console and because of people's fanboyism they refrain from playing some games because it's on the "rival's" console. Also someone that doesn't have money to buy all consoles misses on great games, myself for example I can't justify buying a 300$ PS3 just to pley a few games... 

WHat it seems like you're trying to hard to ignore about my point, is that amazing games are made in order to be competitive. First parties go balls out to bring you the best game, because that company wants you to buy their hardware. Without hardware competition, you would not have the same level of games. Just look at multiplat now. The biggest game is one that virtually has remained unchanged for 5 games (though I would argue it's actually gotten worse).


What you say would be considered offensive to many. Just because a game is is exclusive doesn't make it amazing. This generation proved that 3rd parties had a lot of talent. Games like Mass Effect series are in my book better than anything available on either platform and so are Darksouls, Bayonetta and many more.

Just because COD (if that's what you're talking about) is the biggest 3rd party seller doesn't mean 3rd party games are not as big as "your" exclusives. PC games compete with one another, companies want to sell their games so they do what they can it has nothing to do with being exclusive or not. Halo 4 goes in competition with COD this year, it's not going agains't PS3 still COD sells 360s and so does Halo. But the games are what people want, the console is what allows them to play.

Movie companies go all out to make as much money as they can and videogame companies are the same except that some of them recieve an amount of money to make it exclusive it doesn't mean the devs become superior the day they become exclusive... that weird thinking.

You're missing the point once again, and I have no idea what you're talking about regarding 'offensive'.

You talk about some ideal that all consoles should play the same games, but you really haven't fleshed that idea out. What you end up with is a hardware war rather than a software one, and then you have every company with some extra cash making one as well. I can't even begin to explain to you how bad that idea is, because I'm not sure you're interested in listening.

Your comparison to movies is laughable, and the only weird thinking is your own. You obviously are extremely misinformed about exclusivity. Look it up, there are many devs who attest to exclusivity and explain reason for reason why exclusivity is a good idea. Examples include getting optimization, funding, help programming, expert advice, liberal game engine use, etc etc. So yes, your game does stand to improve quality the minute you go exclusive because the console publisher is willing to lend its system designers to assist you with the code, workarounds, and optimization.

I'm sure you're used tgo arguing the merits of exclusivity among whatever group it is that you discuss things with, and the group think has you thinking that you all siply know better than the industry, but take it from someone who has done the research and done the arguing, exclusivity serves a very good purpose.