I've always wondered where the advantage for the consumer was in exclusives, and I wanted to see what others thought.  So, are they good, bad or indifferent?

Consider this first though - I mean games that could clearly grace multiple consoles.  I'm not talking about something the needs Wii motion sensing or the like.  However should Nintendo have to provide SSBS for other consoles?  Should HW and SW be made seperate?

Now, my view...

Exclusives are bad for the consumer.  Why? In my view they only serve the console companies, MS, Sony, Nintendo and do nothing for me as a consumer because:

• If I want access to all games I need to buy multiple consoles - fantastic, just what I've always wanted.
• If I don't want all consoles then I can't have access to all games - fantastic, just what I've always wanted.

Of course nothings that simple.  Should Insomniac have to support more than PS3?  Or is it just 'paid for' exclusives that should be frowned upon?

What about innovation?  How could Wii come about without the ability to be different?

Should MS be able to pay for exclusives?

What do others think?  Is there a way to have innovation and choice without denying consumers access to products, or is this just part of the gaming scene and you just have to make the best choice you can and live with it?

Well I don't really think exclusives are the greatest ever created, but I don't think they're that bad. Exclusives give developers the chance to fully use a systems capabilities, so that's a good thing. For instance, right now some (potentially) good Wii games are being held back by the fact that they're being made for the PS2 and then ported to the Wii with tacked on motion controls.

Also having only one dominate console in the industry (which would receive the most exclusives), helps because developers can focus all their efforts into one console and really push it to it's limits. It's sort of like how it's good that there is only one video format, the DVD, and now blu-ray. Yeah, the prices might not come down as fast, but adoption rates will probably pick up as well, meaning that more people will support that format, which will drive sales of that format, until it overtakes the previous standard format.

And consoles are always going to have exclusives, since hardware makers usually own a few developers. To ask them to either stop buying developers (and ridding themselves of the ones they own) would hurt their profits, especially non-Nintendo companies who rely heavily on software sales (though they'll still get royalty fees and such). Or you could have only one console, but that would eliminate innovation without competition. And don't be confused, there is competition. It's just that it only lasts a few years at the start of every generation. That's where exclusives come in. So there's competition to make sure you're the best at the start, so that you'll be the best at the end. It's a pretty good system. Innovation is present, but there's still a monopoly of sorts, and one that can switch hands relatively easily (as we've seen with the PS1 and now Wii).

So in a way they're bad, but for the most part I think they help the industry reach the highest it can go in terms of users in the market and profits.

I believe what you are arguing for is a one console market. At least that is what I got from the OP. I am not in favor of that type of market. Therefore exclusives are necessary and a good thing for the market and the consumer. If they don't want to play Wii sports they won't buy a Wii. If they do, then they must buy a Wii. Sorry, but that is how it works. There is nothing wrong with that, it is simply how any market will work.

Saying exclusives are bad is like saying competition is bad...and we all know that's not true

Not at all.  I'm saying exclusives (or at least some exclusives) are just methods of competing that don't actually favour me as the end consumer.

I don't multiple TVs to watch competing channels, nor does the fact I only have one TV prevent multiple companies making them and competing for my choice.

I'm just noting that certain exclusives are the equivilent of having to buy a Sony DVD to watch a Sony pictures film.  Take the GTA IV DLC for 360.  The actual game is on both platforms - does it really benefit the end consumer that MS can pay to have additional content to aid their own purposes?

I don't have an answer and wondered how others felt.

No, I'm not arguing for one console.  It's hard with a short title to be explicit but I'm more thinking about paid for exclusives or titles which could be on multiple platforms with no downsides but aren't (i.e. not something like Wii Sports).  Take LO for 360 (or Haze for PS3) - either could clearly work on the other platform.  Having to pay the money for each console sure doesn't favour me as a consumer.

This gen I guess its more about PS3/360 exclusives.  To date I haven't seen anything on either console the other couldn't do, so whether its paid for or whatever those exclusives limit me as an end consumer.

BTW - never accept a 'that's just how things are' situation.  Everything can change and should if it needs to.

As long as consoles are not all identical, exclusives will be good for the consumer. 

Imagine if FFXIII or GT5 had to be multiplatform with all consoles even the Wii.

the way consoles are. Unless it's PS360 game, it's PS2Wii game.

there are way too big a gap between those two type of system to allow any type of 'porting'.

That's what I actually stated myself - I'm not saying every game should have a version of everything under the sun, I am saying does it make sense to have Dead Rising and Bioshock only on 360?  No aspect of that decision favours the consumer and it is surely driven by company politics/deals.

Also, I'm not saying I'm total against exclusives - I'm saying that in certain cases they're actually nothing more than a blunt lure / carrot / stick to get you to buy something (a particular console) rather than to assist in better games, etc. when you get right down to it, and wondered how others felt.  DMC4 looks pretty good and look at its sale multi-platform and how it reached a lot of gamers - would it have been better only on PS3 or 360?  Seems unlikely.

exclusives are bad for me as a consumer as i have to buy more than one console to play all the games i want., simple as that. it forces me to spend more money.