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

Forums - Gaming - Why such a huge gap in quality between Playstation and Xbox exclusives?

VanceIX on 28 March 2014
sales2099 said:
VanceIX said:
Xbox doesn't have much variety. The target audience of Xbox is perfectly content with shooters like Halo and the occasional Fable or Forza, so Microsoft has almost no need to expand IPs, as disappointing as that is.

Maybe 360 didn't in the last few years with retail, but XBLA certainly gave it the variety. 360 gamers certainly bought more then whatever was selling on PSN. Hell look at Minecraft for 360 and you see that it ain't all shooters for us.

That said, X1 has been great so far. Reintroducing Killer Instinct, Project Spark, 3rd party new IPs like Ryse, Quantum, Sunset Overdrive, while keeping up with the holy quad (Halo, Forza, Gears, and Fable). I get it that X1 is losing to PS4, but people should at least give credit to MS's efforts in games this gen.

X1 is certainly doing better than the 360 did, it remains to be seen whether their audience embraces the IPs, and if Microsoft will continue to support those IPs. There were many games on 360 that weren't on PS3, but I was alluding to Microsoft themselves expanding their IPs, which they didn't in the second half of last generation. Halo, Fable, and Forza all were IPs from the original Xbox, while Gears was added at the beginning of the generation. After that they (Microsoft) didn't release any new IPs of interest.

Meanwhile, Sony expanded their range of first-party IPs throughout the generation with games like Uncharted, Wipeout, LittleBigPlanet, Heavy Rain, Infamous, Resistance, and the Last of Us, while expanding older IPs like Gran Turismo, God of War, and Killzone. They also fostered the development of games like Journey and Flower. Of the Big 4 on Xbox, 2 are shooters, one is an RPG (which I actually like, I got my 360 for Fable 3), and one is a racing simulator. PS3 has all those, plus JRPGs, creative games (LittleBigPlanet), adventure games, cinematic games (Heavy Rain and Beyond Two Souls), etc. 

Sony simply annihalated Microsoft when it came to first party IPs last generation, and it remains to be seen how it will go this gen. 



                                                                                                               You're Gonna Carry That Weight.

Xbox One - PS4 - Wii U - PC

Around the Network
Aldro on 28 March 2014
selnor1983 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
selnor1983 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
TarHeeLsALLday said:
I ask myself the same question. Why can't Sony make anything as good as Halo or Gears or Alan Wake?


Easy... Uncharted and The Last of Us shit on all of those games and unlike all of those games you mentioned they were concieved first party. Unless Microsoft does something Halo is only going to get so popular and the same with Gears. Of course I love Gears but I have to accept reality. Those two games are all made by only one of Sony's teams.  ;)


Luckily not everyone agrees with this. As I said I and many others wouldnt trade Xbox for Playstation. Sony dont have anything to compare to Hslo in our opinion. Its an OPINION.


Sony doesn't need Halo. FYI, the next Halo comes out next year so no matter what everyone will be waiting for it. Sony owners dont really have to wait for first party since Sony dishes out enough of it every year. Can't wait to play halo myself but thats kind of the point of the topic. When it comes to making exclusives in terms of the amount of high level titles pumped out Sony dominates Microsoft on almost every front outside of Halo.

You miss the point. I dont value sonys titles that highly. So as far as Iim concerned microsoft put out higher quality titles.



Mr_No on 28 March 2014
VanceIX said:
Xbox doesn't have much variety. The target audience of Xbox is perfectly content with shooters like Halo and the occasional Fable or Forza, so Microsoft has almost no need to expand IPs, as disappointing as that is.

Don't forget about Left 4 Dead and Dead Rising. They love their zombie games.



Jereel Hunter on 31 March 2014
fps_d0minat0r said:

clearly you dont know what accessible means, and its clear when someone talking about killzone can only mention graphics and nothing else, that person hasnt played the game.

if killzone is less of a game than halo because it sold less, then XB1 is less of a console than PS4 because it sold less.... oh wait... it actually is. lol.

I know what accessible means, yet somehow people think they can call a game 'less accessible' to explain why it's less popular. Guess what? Making a game accessible' is a point of quality. You have to take time and craft a game that anyone can play and enjoy, without sacrificing extra features that make the game great. 

StarCraft was very accessible. Blizzard RTS games always followed the rule of "easy to learn, hard to master". They make their games accessible, and also the best. Quality developers can do that. 

And comparing X1 to PS4 at this stage of the game is shortsighted - especially when it costs notably more. At least games are apples to apples - When halo or KZ come out, they cost $60, there's no price disparity to sway people.