That depends. Exclusive games of a known IP can be a system seller, same with timed/exclusive DLC. However, the same cannot necessarily be said of an unknown IP.

A Halo game or a Uncharted game on their respective platforms will sell consoles with the anticipated release. However, few unknown IPs draw enough interest to inspire people to buy new consoles. The people most likely to pick up the game first are people who already own the console.

Timed Exclusives obviously help to sell more systems then DLC exclusive. Games like Halo, Super Mario Galaxy, Gears of War, FF XIII, GT5, Uncharted, Super Mario Kart, etc.. all helped the XBox 360 PS3 and Wii to sell lots of hardware. Even games that aren't exclusive help to sell systems better then DLC. Sure exclusive DLC helps to sway a few more games to the system that gets it early, but it's not as significant as a full exclusive game.

Well if no one cares about the exclusive games you release and the exclusive dlc is for titles that resonate with consumers such as say...CoD, Elder Scrolls, or even GTA, I have to say exclusive dlc.

obviously depends on the game and the dlc.

Timed exclusives for huge games like skyrim, CoD, and Battlefield obviously would help move more consoles than sequels to small exclusives like crackdown or Resistance but will obviously move less consoles than bigger exclusives like Killzone or Forza. And big exclusives with limited edition consoles and huge launch events such as halo and gran turismo probably move the most consoles.

It is entirely dependent on when the question is being asked. Exclusive games generate diminishing returns over the coarse of a generation, but timed exclusive content has a cumulative effect over time. Games go from strong to weak, but timed content goes from weak to strong. In the public perception the criteria for deciding on a purchase will change.

Exclusive games sell early adopters on hardware. They are choosing a handful of titles over another handful of titles. As the generation progresses the ranks of exclusive games basically cancel one another out. Each console is going to have a lot of games you would like to play, and the later you go the more there are. Until there are so many that a late adopter stands little chance of even getting through a decent fraction of them.

That isn't to say that a game can't move hardware late in a generation. It just isn't going to be the majority of the decision making process. Nobody is going to buy a console solely based upon a single game at that point. The game is just a tipping point for people that are already leaning into making a purchase. It just gives them that one last little tap.

Timed exclusives however are almost totally irrelevant early in a generation, because it is the exclusives that are selling consumers on a console. They become relevant as they add up over time. A specific timed exclusive isn't going to do anything. However if you get enough of them together. They create a powerful impression on the consumer considering a purchase. Late in a generation telling someone that one console gets all the games first even if that is a exaggeration. Will make them think that console is a far better choice. Who wouldn't choose to get better service.

I know some will argue that it isn't fair, and it probably isn't the way things should work. That said we aren't talking about sophisticated gamers late in a generation. You throw a bone at their feet, and they are your. In previous generations it was other equally useless generalities. Acting like gravity pulling in the dull witted. Remember the claims about the Playstations having more games. Yeah it was true, but the majority of those games were crap, and the majority of games today are crap. What should it matter in any case if there isn't any way you could play even a fraction of all the games available.

I suppose what it boils down to is this. Early on it is a game specific experience that is up for sale. Later on it is the reputation that is up for sale. To be fair they are equally valid perspectives. Both mindsets are flawed. You should never buy a box of cereal you may not like to just get that one toy at the bottom. Just as you shouldn't buy any thing, because people are generally telling you great things. Is impulse buying any better then buying in?

Anyway that is my two cents.

Forever Exclusives

Add poll

Poll added