My one issue with the "exclusives" argument

[sales2099]

Aldro said:

sales2099 said:

Aldro said:

Also the word exclusive has really lost its meaning with this generation. Sure you  can throw around "Console exclusive" or "HD Twin exclusive" but seriously =>

 

"ex·clu·sive - Not divided or shared with others."

If you can experience it somewhere else: Then it is not exclusive in any way. Period.

This isn;t about exclusives. This is about comparing what one has and the other doesn't.

Your filtering of just exclusives is the real problem; sweeping Xbox games under the rug like they don't exist. And even PS multiplats not on Xbox. Two way street. Just comparing exclusives is increasingly closed minded in this age, especially in a strict Xbox vs PS comparison.

I don't know what you're doing here then because the Thread title is "issue with the 'exclusives' argument".

If anyone asks me if Ico & SOTC are exclusive to the PS3, I will say no.
If anyone asks me if DC Universe is an exclusive to the PS3, I will say no.
If anyone asks me if MGS1 is an exclusive to the PS3, I will say no.

 

That's just my stance on it. I have a PS2, PS3, PC and I can play every single game that the "360 has and the PS3 does not". How some call that a 360 exclusive is beyond me as I ..very obviously don't need a 360.

The OP specifically says the point is to move away from just exclusives, because it filters out some really great titles that the rival platform doesn't have.

I know its hard, but try to stop living by that word.

Is SOTC on PS3 but not 360? Yes. Is DC Universe on PS3 but not 360? Yes. If its a PS3 title and 360 doesn't have it, count it. Its a differentiating feature. Mention it. Nevermind exclusivity.