NieR: Automata coming to Xbox One on June 26

[Chazore]

DonFerrari said:

Chazore said:

We are deviating away from talking about timed exclusivity to "you're taking jabs at Sony, how dare you".

I asked because of the way you worded platform holder. Here it's worded as console company or "one of the big 3".

No, I've said before that it is bad when all of them do it. Then we ended up circling around to basically singled out one of the big 3 being allowed to do it and "earning" the right to egt away with it, it's definitely not MS and not Nintendo, so the only answer becomes Sony. 

It isn't okay for either of them to make the deals and then defend them on it. Timed exclusivity is vile and bullshit no matter what excuses one pulls out of their backside. 

1) ok let's ignore it

2) Nope, VGC have used platform holder as one of the companies creating the platform for a long time as I can get. But as I said I was explaining what I meant not deviating the subject.

3) You were the only one singling out, I haven't said it was bad if MS done or good if Sony did. All I said was that the examples I checked we had clear evidence of TR losing sales because of it, and that the ones during PS3 era still outsold X360 version but probably also lost sales due to it and that this one probably will sell less than if launched together.

4) We can't rule out all of them as being bad without context, they are all potentially bad, but some where the only option for the game to see the light of the day.

1)Well we have to, because we know where accusations like that lead.

2)VGC is not the dictionary, or the law of definition. 

3) It was singled out because this conversation went from timed exclusive deals to "it can work with the platform holder", and then we also had "funding" tossed into the conversation. The ones that are often talked about as "getting it right" are Sony, while the others that have made timed deals or "bad" funding decisions would be MS and to a degree Nintendo.

I said, and I still say it now. Timed exclusivity deals are just flat out bad for the consumer and the the one who makes the game. I don't care if it "benefits" the one making the deal. It doesn't benefit me in any way, let alone the game producer that I'd like to buy from.

4)making that excuse that it was the only possible option is just defending the concept of money hatting something for exclusivity. We now live in an age where we have multiple venues to choose and support to and from. The gaming industry is not solely based on MS, Nintendo and Sony.