| Zanten said:
Based on...? You have to give me something, man, I have figures and everything to back up my point in case you disagreeeed! T__T Anyway, I'll toss out some of my own reasonings to go with this. It IS pretty long, but I like to be thorough. x3 I'll split it into sections, in case for whatever reason you're finished reading a particular point partway through. EDIT: The lines splitting the sections won't display. >< STARS IT IS! *** Microsoft's pattern thus far with the Xbox One, largely, seems to contracting third-party developers to release exclusive titles, as their own Internal studios, lately anyway, don't seem nearly as robust as Sony's, and frankly seem to focus mostly on the aforementioned 'Sure-Sellers.' Ryse was Crysis, Sunset Overdrive by Insomiac, Remedy for Quantum Break, Respawn for Titanfall, etc. Platinum is doing that dragon-thingy game (name escapes me, too lazy to Google.) This could, again, change, but that is still something Microsoft needs to prove over the long haul, as their prior history does not support the idea of using their core studios to really 'branch out.' (This might come across as snide, but I'm actually curious, what titles ARE Microsoft's internal studios confirmed to be working on that are new IPs? I thiiiink Project Spark is one, but not even super sure on that front.) Either side of working with third party studios provides risks and costs- in the case of 'buying' an exclusive, the cost will rise dramatically the more units are being 'Locked Out' by the exclusivity deal, which might explain why Microsoft didn't bite the bullet and push for Titanfall to be a true-blue Xbox One exclusive, keeping it off PC and 360, which would have cost them LOTS more. (And though Microsoft is, yes, obscenely wealthy, they did get that way in part by NOT flinging money left and right, meaning while there is almost no limit to what they COULD spend, there is no doubt a very concrete limit as to what they WILL spend.) In the case of contracting a third party developer, if you do not own the IP, (and I don't believe Microsoft owns the Sunset Overdrive IP, but I don't know about the rest,) it makes it far easier for said developer to go multiplatform down the road, with their bigger, better sequel. Just look at the situation with Metal Gear Solid, Kingdom Hearts, etc, etc. They might have been on Playstation consoles exclusively for a long time, but they were never owned by Sony, so there was nothing to keep them from going multiplat when their publishers saw the value of it. The more exclusives Microsoft contributes to that they can't lock down, the more likely these successful and established franchises will do what Bioshock and Mass Effect did; release, become super successful, and then go to Playstation next. Because, if nothing is legally stopping you from doubling your available market, or more... well, why wouldn't you? ***** Finally, in addition to the aforementioned laziness-on-the-exclusives front, Microsoft does have a reputation of having their exclusives have an asterix beside it, the kind that leads to a footnote saying 'Also On PC,' more frequently than Sony's. Even core franchises haven't been unaffected, as Fable 3 is also available on PC. Granted, this could in part have been because the PS3 was probably a NIGHTMARE to port from, (god knows it was a nightmare to port to) but right now, a PC gamer who knows this might look at both platforms and figure; 'Well, chances are I'll be missing out on more stuff if I get an Xbox One, cause I'll probably get to play a fair number of their exclusive stuff on PC anyway.' Whether it turns out to be correct or not, at the moment it's simply pattern recognition. It's another bad habit Microsoft made last generation that they need to break this one. ***** Please note, this is all subject to change. Heck, Sony could grow mustache-twiddling evil when they get back on top, go nuts porting their exclusives, while Microsoft becomes the bastion of keeping their titles on their platform. (Granted, the latter seems... unlikely...) But it's stuff that would need to change, and change far more dramatically than it currently has, to really sway public opinion. And even if Sony does go to evil ways if they 'win,' there's literally no reason right now to think Microsoft won't as well, because they didn't seem terribly altruistic the last time they were winning. We need to get a bit further past the honeymoon period to really confirm either way. Sony has been very slow to improve the platform, I agree. But it's probably for the same reason that Microsoft was glacier-slow to improve the negative policies of the Xbox 360; because right now, they don't feel the fire under their feet. xP |
It's a pretty straight forward set of conclusions. I glossed over them and there doesn't seem to be anything I disagree with.
I just take it as fact that all of microsofts games are going to end up on the PC as well. They get the license fee for it being a windows game so they'll allow it. I've always seen it as microsoft shooting XBox in the foot, but I guess they don't see it that way.
Anything that's marked as exclusive is debatable. I don't believe much of what any business men say in interviews. What's stopping them from saying game A is exclusive when it's really only a timed exclusive to be released 4 months after. I think it's standard practice now to lie about timed exclusives being timed exclusives.
