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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - My one issue with the "exclusives" argument

sales2099 on 16 July 2013
Aldro said:
CGI-Quality said:
 

No point for argument (with that thinking), then, since said rules prohibit any kind of realistic discussion. 

+1 On this. A forum is a place for discussion where users give their own views on so much. Now suddenly everyone is to pretend they're living in someone elses' situation to create what is a completely illogical discussion.

Why should I ignore my PC to create some "rivalry 1v1" discussion? It makes absolutely no sense to me.

Judging by most of the responses here: It feels like those who actually lack a PC that can play decent games are in the minority.

 

That is also probably also why there's a more vast Playstation centric userbase here on VGC than there is for Microsoft. It is 2013: PC's kinda feel like a norm.

So then in theory you would have no problem if Xbox ever beat PS3 in a 1 vs 1 comparison for a given year since you could just play some of those games on PC right?

The idea is what consoles can do, not what you can do.



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

Around the Network
Necromunda on 16 July 2013
Aldro said:
CGI-Quality said:
sales2099 said:
CGI-Quality said:
sales2099 said:


Rivalries always vut out the entire picture and focus on the tunnel vision-like competition. Its the nature of it.

2010-present? I count everything since the gen begain. But regardless, I like keeping the games on each platform out in the open, regardless of exclusivity. Your point is to bring in other platforms for what they are. Which is fine, but again it would have no place if someone wanted to make a strict 1 vs 1 comparison.

"The nature" of something doesn't make it right - which you agree with or wouldn't argue against it in situations where things you like are on the "losing" end.

Right or wrong, it is what it is. If someone wants to make a 1 vs 1 comparison, they have every right to adopt said tunnel vision that comes with such a rivalry comparison. You stick to the criteria involved. Feel free to make a more "open" comparison thread and I therefore would not have any cause to stand in your way.

No point for argument (with that thinking), then, since said rules prohibit any kind of realistic discussion. 

+1 On this. A forum is a place for discussion where users give their own views on so much. Now suddenly everyone is to pretend they're living in someone elses' situation to create what is a completely illogical discussion.

Why should I ignore my PC to create some "rivalry 1v1" discussion? It makes absolutely no sense to me.

Judging by most of the responses here: It feels like those who actually lack a PC that can play decent games are in the minority.

 

That is also probably also why there's a more vast Playstation centric userbase here on VGC than there is for Microsoft. It is 2013: PC's kinda feel like a norm.

It's pretty sad when you have to exlude other platforms (PC) that your Xbox games launch on just to be able to remotely compete against your competitors platform. Kind of says something about the Xbox brand at the moment...



dsgrue3 on 16 July 2013
sales2099 said:
dsgrue3 said:

I like the underlined part, but it applies to you not to me. You're the one blind to the fact that if I already have a PC and I'm analyzing which console to get, I certainly don't care about titles already available to me. This is why one must exclude them from consideration. 

In other words, PS3 - PC, 360 - PC.

You're arguing from a position of no PC. That's fine, but it's abnormal and you should simply admit it.

What you make of a 360 vs PS3 list is of no concern to me. If you have a gaming PC, then by all means you can play the games that benefit Xbox and not PS.

Using your own princliples and assuming they are universal is abnormal. The comparison is unbiased in nature. What you make of them depends entirely on your preferences. But if god forbid, Xbox has more games then PS on a given year, due to multiplats not on PS, it shouldn't affect you and you shouldn't defend PS because you'd just play on you PC, right?

You seem concerned enough to reply about it. 

You don't need a gaming PC to play many of the titles available like Minecraft for instance. Again, my laptop from 2006 handled it appropriately. How many people do you know who don't own a PC? Of course it's abnormal not to own one. You're just being ridiculous at this point.

I don't care which platform has the most games; you seem to for whatever reason...

I care about games that interest me. I don't care which platform it's on, but I'm certainly not picking up an additional platform when I already own a viable one for playing these games. 



platformmaster918 on 16 July 2013

That's nice and I do count console exclusives as well as Playstation exclusives (cross platform with vita) against 360. Doesn't matter cause I have PS3 for Uncharted, Infamous, Ratchet, Heavy Rain, GoW, Killzone, Resistance, LoU, and Sly along with all the HD collections. Also Journey, Flower, and my PS+ games count (just started SR3 which I wasn't going to pay for but is great fun).




Get Your Portable ID!Lord of Ratchet and Clank

Duke of Playstation Plus

Warden of Platformers

Torillian on 16 July 2013
sales2099 said:

exclusive vs exclusive is simple too, but the difference is that it filters out current gen/recent releases, as opposed to filtering out games that aren't from the current generation.

I guess "time" would be the main reason, but again, its my own personal view to not count past gen games. What I do think should be universal, its expanding beyond typical exclusive lists when comparing the merits of 2 consoles.

But you're telling everyone else in this thread to ignore their personal isutation and look only at the merits of the two consoles in comparison with one another.  If that's the case then there's no reason games from previous generations that can be played on one console but not the other should be made.  Seems hypocritical to tell people to ignore their personal situations and preferences on what matters for a console comparison and do exactly the same thing when it comes to titles from previous generations.  



...

Around the Network
Madword on 16 July 2013

Ok so after all this discussion that it should be Console exclusive comparisons, has anyone actually done a comparison and seen what the end result is, or are people just complaining about semantics :)

Ps - guessing it would be shocking if after all this, the PS3 still came out on top with more exclusives.

Pss - I've got minecraft on my iPad, does that make things worse ;)

But i can understand why PS3 owners who have a PC can say - platform exclusive
I can understand Xbox users saying - its not available on PS3 - its console exclusives
But if i was a PC only user looking in at the consoles what would i see/think?



Making an indie game : Dead of Day!

kupomogli on 16 July 2013
sales2099 said:

Thank you. PS3/PC, PS3/Vita, PS2 games remasted as a PS3 retail game, they deserve to be mentioned just as much as a exclusive, as it in the end isn't available on Xbox.

The difference between PS3/Vita and 360/PC is that the PS3/Vita games are exclusive to Sony and these games were released as multiconsole titles.  They were released at the same time, not a port.

Ports that were released after the fact shouldn't count as exclusives.  Examples are games like Jak and Daxter HD Collection, God of War HD Collection, etc.  Remakes though.  Halo Anniversary, Fable Anniversary, Mega Man Maverick Hunter X, Star Ocean First Departure, etc, those should count as exclusives because they're new games even if based on an old game. 



attaboy on 16 July 2013
Madword said:
Ok so after all this discussion that it should be Console exclusive comparisons, has anyone actually done a comparison and seen what the end result is, or are people just complaining about semantics :)

Ps - guessing it would be shocking if after all this, the PS3 still came out on top with more exclusives.

Pss - I've got minecraft on my iPad, does that make things worse ;)

But i can understand why PS3 owners who have a PC can say - platform exclusive
I can understand Xbox users saying - its not available on PS3 - its console exclusives
But if i was a PC only user looking in at the consoles what would i see/think?


Lol! That's the thing. I never bothered (and never will) to do a full comparison of everything availabe on both.  I kinda think the PS3 still would come out on top is someone made a comparison.  The 360 did have that one year lead and a shit ton of $1 indie games, though.  The thing is, regardless of which console won, I'd be okay with it. I just think it's better to include everything available instead of excluding exverything multi-plat.  Heck, I'm the guy that was hyped to buy Arkham City on Wii U despite owning the 360 version.  Even that multi-plat had weight with me!



irstupid on 16 July 2013
Miguel_Zorro said:
sales2099 said:

THANK YOU. I thought I was the only one lol.

In short: PS3 has multiplats not on 360 like MLB, FF14, and a few others. But Xbox multiplats not on PS3 are vastly numerically superior. It is one of MS's #1 strategies this gen.

Sony fans praise the almighty exclusive not just because they are what they are, but in short doing so cripples Xbox's main strategy: to secure games NOT on playstation.

Gears of War, Left 4 Dead 1/2, Dead Rising, Witcher 2, Minecraft, etc etc etc........not on PS3. Doesn't count, it aint exclusive. Upcoming X1 games that are shared with Windows 8, XBLA games shared with tablets.......sorry, not exclusive. It doesn't exist.

This is a Sony world unfortunately, something Ive been trying to fight for a while, and sadly it comes to the point where we just live in their world and play by their rules. It sickens me to no end.

If its on one and not the other, it counts, both ways. In a true Xbox vs PS debate, these titles deserve a mention. Any filtering of these games is propaganda, nothing more.


I've never seen anyone make the "it doesn't count" argument because something was also on PC.  It has probably happened,  but I haven't noticed it.  It's a stupid argument if people made it.

IMHO, you compare the libraries of both consoles, and buy the console that has the games you like.

basically every list one "exclusive" has people say you can't list games on PC.

My feeling is that depending on what your comparing should be the rules.  If your comparing PS3 vs. 360.  Doesn't matter what other systems any games are on.  If the game isnt' on the PS3, then it can be on the 360 list.  and vise versa.  

Cause as the opening topic shows, if you thinking what System should I get PS3 or 360.  Shouldn't it really only matter what games are on each of those consoles, not what you can get on others.  If you have a Wii or PC or something else that those games are available for, wouldn't you already know that and thus have bought the game back when it was available on said console?  

If I dont' have a Wii shoudl I give F*ck that something is on both 360 and Wii, if I'm wondering which system to get PS3 or 360?  No.  



iceboy151 on 16 July 2013
sales2099 said:

THANK YOU. I thought I was the only one lol.

In short: PS3 has multiplats not on 360 like MLB, FF14, and a few others. But Xbox multiplats not on PS3 are vastly numerically superior. It is one of MS's #1 strategies this gen.

Sony fans praise the almighty exclusive not just because they are what they are, but in short doing so cripples Xbox's main strategy: to secure games NOT on playstation.

Gears of War, Left 4 Dead 1/2, Dead Rising, Witcher 2, Minecraft, etc etc etc........not on PS3. Doesn't count, it aint exclusive. Upcoming X1 games that are shared with Windows 8, XBLA games shared with tablets.......sorry, not exclusive. It doesn't exist.

This is a Sony world unfortunately, something Ive been trying to fight for a while, and sadly it comes to the point where we just live in their world and play by their rules. It sickens me to no end.

If its on one and not the other, it counts, both ways. In a true Xbox vs PS debate, these titles deserve a mention. Any filtering of these games is propaganda, nothing more.

If you mean MLB: The Show, that franchise has never been on a PC.