By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kyuu on 06 May 2025
Edit Thread
Soundwave said:
Kyuu said:

It's not news that Monster Hunter is bigger on PC. Sales splits aren't relevant to the publisher so long as the totals remain high. Had Capcom chosen to handle MH Wilds like World or Rise, the final platform splits would have been different, but the totals wouldn't have necessarily been lower. Evidence to the contrary (at least revenue wise) is stronger, it's just that I think Sony (and certainly Microsoft) is less interested in moneyhatting big games compared to the old days, because exclusives that sell less than 10 million on an individual platform are typically not huge system sellers on dominant platforms, and the more a game sells on a competing system, the more a platform holder has to pay to keep it off said system.

But timed-exclusives, even on less 3rd party centric systems like Switch, remain a thing for a reason. The Duskblood's existence speaks for itself, as did MH Rise before it. If the platform holder is willing to pay a fortune, almost any deal can be made, including full exclusives.

For a publisher, timed exclusivity isn't inherently a bad decision. The question is just whether or not the platform holder is paying enough. And you cannot possibly prove that Final Fantasy fell/stagnated due to timed exclusivity, because the series is marred by a ton of poor decisions. You're hyper fixated on exclusivity as if Playstation never had any successful timed or console exclusives lol.

Again I would disagree with that. 

I guess they could have not released on PS5 at all and the sales also would've been the same? See now some Sony fanboys will throw a little fit if you even suggest that. 

The way people consume games has been shifting for years now, I think it really started to accelerate around 2020 and has picked up steam (no pun intended) since then. 

The modern generation of kids really don't have much/any brand loyalty to Sony and if you're not putting games where they're at they're simply going to ignore said game. 

Playstation exclusivity as it existed in the 1990s/2000s is an outdated concept, even Sony themselves (lol) won't even commit their IP to being exclusive to Playstation consoles any longer, who even knows if we're not that far away from something like Last of Us or Spider-Man 2 ending up on a Switch 2 eventually. You can't operate any longer like it's 1999 or even 2010 anymore, you're gonna lose significant amount of sales. 

The big, fat brick stationary home console in a lot of ways is becoming an outdated thing ... lots of people simply don't care for that form factor, the PC or Switch hybrid gives satisifies a lot of gaming needs more than a home Playstation can.

I just saw AMD's latest earnings report ... everything is up for them as a company except for one thing ... their sales from home consoles (so PS + XBox) are down big time, lol. PS/XBox are a drag on their earnings release, tells you that brand momentum is not with those systems. People need to understand Playstation and XBox for a lot of up and coming gaming audience is their *dad's* generation, it doesn't speak to their generation in the same way. 

Most people don't care if the games arrive late on their preferred platforms. Those who do care will play it on the other systems, those who don't will just wait. There is no "penalty" to timed exclusivity, especially if said exclusivity is on a popular platform.

It's an "outdated concept" because its very expensive now, and timed exclusives just don't sell enough consoles, because again... most people will choose to wait for those games to come to theirs platform.

Playstation does face challenges and I spoke about this in length in multiple threads. But it's not really related to my argument that timed exclusives don't kill games or necessarily impact sales negatively in the long run.