AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Well that's a false equivalence if I've ever seen one. No one cries about exclusives if they're made by or owned by the company publishing them. Buying a timed exclusive or even an exclusive isn't necessarily good. When people want Microsoft to make more exclusives, they want them to make or buy studios. It's not really the same thing as taking a game that was clearly going to be multi-platform and making it an exclusive for the sake of a cock measuring test. Part of it is Square Enix's fault of course, and I'm certainly not holding a grudge with Microsoft for it (didn't even care about it till early 2017), but I don't think we should pretend like what you're implying is hypocrisy is actually hypocrisy.
I'm 99% sure you'd have a different opinion if Tomb Raider was a timed or permanent exclusive to PS4. |
Im using Tomb Raider as an example. I am not a fan of the series or that genre for that matter. I could care less for it on where it goes. However i hear the term Console A needs more exclusives, weather its timed or made is all up to the buisness. SF5 is a brought out exclusive yet did Capcon get any death threats like Tomb Raider did? Not that i recall. The industry is full of hypocrisy.
I also dont play exclusives i play games. I just hear alot that exclusives matter yet when ever the big three fight over exclusives its a different story. I dont hear Steam gamers talk about Exclusives, must be a console thing.
VGPolyglot said:
No, they can't. If Square Enix tells Crystal Dynamics to make it multiplatform, they kind of have to comply. |
So it happens, its a executive decision, every company has that. Gaming should not be treated any different to any other buisness. Its all about the money.
