By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Anyone else sick of MSes Timed "Exclusives"?

dsister44 on 10 February 2010

It kind of annoys me. Now whenever a third party exclusive is announced. I always here something like "I'll just wait a year for the extra content"



Around the Network
chocoloco on 10 February 2010
disolitude said:
CommonMan said:
disolitude said:
CommonMan said:
Let's play the "Guess who's alt account!" game. Hmm. . . This is a tough one, because they aren't really screwing the English up that badly. Could this be wild stealth Shio troll?

Its not smart to play this game on VGchartz...I got banned for a week making a similar post to yours.

I rescind my statement. This is a legitimate complaint from a new poster, I should have been more respectful.

I would prefer true exclusivity, makes for better games.

Also, I've already gotten a warning this week.


We need rafichamp, megaman2 and other Michael Jackson avatar posters back on VGchartz. :)

With them posting crazy trolling statements left right and center, mods didn't have time to give out week long bans and warnings for no reason what so ever :)

Boy what an entertaining sight this would be if that happened. SIGH... 



hope_lost89 on 10 February 2010
rocketpig said:

Yes, it annoys me that Microsoft lets developers make the game they want to make and if they see interest in the title, throw additional money at the developer to improve the game or just break even on its development.

Damn them.

You know what's even worse? That later on, PS3 fans MIGHT GET TO ENJOY THAT SAME GAME!

ARGH! Damn you, Microsoft!

Yes Rockstar couldn't of broken even without that $50 from MS *eye roll* stop deluding yourself 



Mr Puggsly on 10 February 2010

I have no problem with timed exclusives. But I hate that developers add exclusive content to the late port. That's a slap to the face to the fans that bought the original.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Seraphic_Sixaxis on 10 February 2010

I dont mind anymore to be honest, i have a 360, i'll jus' get it the an' there like i did with SO4 and quite a few other games.

They'll jus' come to PS3 later with more content of some kind most likely. which is worth waiting for imo.



Around the Network
rocketpig on 10 February 2010
Xoj said:
rocketpig said:

Yes, it annoys me that Microsoft lets developers make the game they want to make and if they see interest in the title, throw additional money at the developer to improve the game or just break even on its development.

Damn them.

You know what's even worse? That later on, PS3 fans MIGHT GET TO ENJOY THAT SAME GAME!

ARGH! Damn you, Microsoft!

only if they did it for that :p.

So what if they do it for other reasons? At the end of the day, the developer creates the IP THEY want, MS gets timed exclusivity, and the developer gets additional funding to put into that game or their next title.

Oh, and PS3 owners may get the game at a later date. As a consumer, that business model is way better for us than the typical first or second party developer system.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

epicberserk on 10 February 2010

ThIs is why I always wonder I've a 360 and just got a 40gb ps3 but microsoft just buy damn developer studios to have fully exclusive >:/



rocketpig on 10 February 2010
hope_lost89 said:
rocketpig said:

Yes, it annoys me that Microsoft lets developers make the game they want to make and if they see interest in the title, throw additional money at the developer to improve the game or just break even on its development.

Damn them.

You know what's even worse? That later on, PS3 fans MIGHT GET TO ENJOY THAT SAME GAME!

ARGH! Damn you, Microsoft!

Yes Rockstar couldn't of broken even without that $50 from MS *eye roll* stop deluding yourself 

That was a loan and yes, Rockstar was in MASSIVE financial trouble at the time. The company hadn't had a hit game since San Andreas and rumors were swirling that EA may initiate a hostile takeover manuevre. Rockstar had been losing its ass for several quarters in a row before that $50m was handed to them.

MS did them a big favor and got two neat exclusives in return. Fair trade.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

hope_lost89 on 10 February 2010
rocketpig said:
Xoj said:
rocketpig said:

Yes, it annoys me that Microsoft lets developers make the game they want to make and if they see interest in the title, throw additional money at the developer to improve the game or just break even on its development.

Damn them.

You know what's even worse? That later on, PS3 fans MIGHT GET TO ENJOY THAT SAME GAME!

ARGH! Damn you, Microsoft!

only if they did it for that :p.

So what if they do it for other reasons? At the end of the day, the developer creates the IP THEY want, MS gets timed exclusivity, and the developer gets additional funding to put into that game or their next title.

Oh, and PS3 owners may get the game at a later date. As a consumer, that business model is way better for us than the typical first or second party developer system.

The problems are these 

1. MS lies and suppresses any information suggesting it's going to go to ps3 so anyone who doesn't know better gets ripped off

2. 360 owners get screwed out of decent exclusives since MS doesn't bother making any



nightsurge on 10 February 2010
hope_lost89 said:
Fumanchu said:
Are the games somehow worse after they're on multiple systems?

FFXIII is, and my point is I wouldn't of bought a 360 if I knew it's exclusives weren't you know exclusive

So you would have waited all those extra months/years to play those games?  Don't be silly.  Grow up and get banned, tr***.