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

Forums - Gaming - Opinion: Is Microsoft Running Out Of Exclusives?

The_BlackHeart__ said:

I understand having problems understanding resolution and framerate. But please don´t tell me that defending a brand made you forget basic math too.

Even if Microsoft releases 14 Gears of War, 14 Forza Horizon and 14 Halo games, during the next years. They will still not reach the amount of exclusives released during the first 5 months of 2016 on PlayStation.


Math is simple guys: 5 months of PlayStation exclusives equal more than 10 years of XBox exclusives.

 

PlayStation Exclusive Games (During 5 months)
PlayStation + PC Shared (During 5 months)
   
93 Uncharted 4: A Thief's End 87 The Witness
86 Ratchet & Clank 86 Salt and Sanctuary
84 MLB The Show 16 85 Crypt of the NecroDancer
82 Severed 85 Assault Android Cactus
80 Alienation 85 Valkyria Chronicles Remastered
80 Gravity Rush Remastered 84 Day of the Tentacle Remastered
78 Heavy Rain & Beyond: Two Souls Collection 83 Invisible, Inc.
76 Klaus 82 Enter the Gungeon
75 Digimon Story Cyber Sleuth 78 Street Fighter V
75 Atelier Escha & Logy Plus 77 Hitman GO: Definitive Edition
74 Amplitude 76 Firewatch
72 Ray Gigant 74 Not a Hero
71 Megadimension Neptunia VII 74 Stories: The Path of Destinies
71 Samurai Warriors 4 Empires 73 Futuridium EP Deluxe
71 Amazing Discoveries In Outer Space 73 Neverending Nightmares
70 Rainbow Moon 72 The Magic Circle: Gold Edition
70 Nitroplus Blasterz: Heroines Infinite Duel 72 Republique
68 Nights of Azure 72 Dead Star
68 Rocketbirds 2: Evolution 72 The Deadly Tower of Monsters
67 Senran Kagura: Estival Versus 67 BROFORCE
67 Shadow of the Beast 66 The Last Tinker: City of Colors
65 The Witch and the Hundred Knight 65 Tharsis
65 Trillion: God of Destruction 63 Kholat
61 MegaTagmension Blanc 59 Catlateral Damage
56 Aegis of Earth: Protonovus Assault 58 Attractio
56 Hardware: Rivals 56 Table Top Racing: World Tour
52 Koi 50 Shadwen
43 Dead or Alive Xtreme 3  
   
Total: 28  /  Scored 80 or above: 6 Total: 27 /  Scored 80 or above: 8

 

Its too late into this generation cycle to say that 14 games distributed into the next 5 years is something to be proud of.

I can already hear people defending a certain brand by saying that quality is more important than quantity. Before you even say that, please tell me the last time that this brand won Game of the Year, or even better, when was the last time that this brand produced a game scored above 90 on Metacritic?

Math is easy, don´t try to twist it.

For starters, who exactly is this directed at? The OP made a thread about Microsoft exclusives. It's a flawed premise from the start, because we'll never have the foggiest idea of what Microsoft has in the works. But where exactly are you getting 14 titles over the next 5 years? You realize MS revealed Horizon 3 in June and will release it 3-4 months later? Why exactly do they only have 14 games coming over the next 5 years?

Secondly, can you not bring console warz BS into the thread? What exactly is the relevance of that list of games? The thread is about Microsoft exclusives. Your list is nothing but Playstation exclusives, spread amongst multiple platforms, and many of them are not even Sony games. No offense, but who cares?



Around the Network
Swordmasterman said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

Whether you see it coming or not doesn't change the fact that it exists and looks great. I can't imagine the flack and probably ban I would receive if I made a thread saying some nonsense like God of War 4 is irrelevant because we all knew it was coming. Legend of Zelda looked amazing but who cares, we knew it was coming. GT Sport is like the 13th or 14th iteration of GT since it launched, might as well not even talk about it. lol

I don't really care what "most" would say. "Most" wouldn't agree with your logic, either. Also, I don't think you understand what an indie game is. Unless you could tell me you actually understand what an indie game is, don't bother replying.

Gran Turismo is a franchise that launched 20 years ago, and they don't release or announce a new game every year, Since the launch of the Xbox One, from 2013 to 2016 the console had Forza 5, Forza Horizon 2, Forza 6, and now Forza Horizon 3, meanwhile not even a single Gran Turismo game.

And a Indie game is a game made by independent developers, Kojima's game is a Indie game, Recore is a Indie game, No Man's Sky is a indie game.

The last God of War or Zelda game launched much time ago so those games aren't yearly franchises like Forza.

Sounds like a failure on PD's part that we haven't seen a GT yet. Either way, it doesn't discredit or change a thing I said.

You sound equally confused as to what an indie game is as the guy who made the thread. No Man'y Sky is a full price retail title with backing from Sony. Labeling it an indie game is misleading. Same with whatever Kojima is making.



LudicrousSpeed said:
Swordmasterman said:

Gran Turismo is a franchise that launched 20 years ago, and they don't release or announce a new game every year, Since the launch of the Xbox One, from 2013 to 2016 the console had Forza 5, Forza Horizon 2, Forza 6, and now Forza Horizon 3, meanwhile not even a single Gran Turismo game.

And a Indie game is a game made by independent developers, Kojima's game is a Indie game, Recore is a Indie game, No Man's Sky is a indie game.

The last God of War or Zelda game launched much time ago so those games aren't yearly franchises like Forza.

Sounds like a failure on PD's part that we haven't seen a GT yet. Either way, it doesn't discredit or change a thing I said.

You sound equally confused as to what an indie game is as the guy who made the thread. No Man'y Sky is a full price retail title with backing from Sony. Labeling it an indie game is misleading. Same with whatever Kojima is making.

The term "indie" pretty much needs to die because people argue over it when it's so nebulous that it doesn't even matter.  It's not "indie" because they have a promotional deal with Sony?  Because "indie" only applies if a game is at a certain price point?  Who cares.  The "indie" studios of yesterday are now making our new middle-ware, which is awesome.  Arguing about the label is empty.



Veknoid_Outcast said:
Normchacho said:

Because they don't stop exsisting just because he personally hasn't played them.

A list of games is just that, a list of games. It's a reference for the reader.

If someone was making a list of war movies made between 1970 and 2010, they wouldn't leave off movies that they hadn't seen. Because then it would be an incomplete list.

 

As for using Metacritic scores in the list, it's simply an easy way to show a critical concensus. It works in this context because we all see a Metacritic score from the same perspective. An 85 is higher than an 80 no matter who is looking at it.

 

Now, if we were having long, scholarly debates of each consoles library and going through each game and talking about their merits and issues. Then yes. You're going to want to have played all of the games in question, and have very defined beliefs about each of them.

But, for someone making  a very rhetorical list of a consoles exlcusives and their critical standing, none of that matters.

I never said the games cease to be, or that they should be removed.

I'm making a very clear distinction about what is and what matters

Let's be real: no one making a list like the one that started this debate is doing so to provide edification for the reader. They're doing it as part of an anatomical measuring contest, to use an artful euphemism. But the list is useless on its own. It's simply a collection of numbers and letters. Unless those games are good or great, who cares?

The same goes for Metacritic, a poor measurement of quality. Yes, it shows the critical consensus. Again, a collection of numbers and letters that mean nothing if we disagree with them.

What matters and what doesn't is up to the reader, not the author (curator in this case).

I would agrue that it matters less if it's just the games he has played and enjoys. Because as it stands, that list is cumalitive. If you asked enough people what their favorite PS4 exclusives were, you'd get every game on that list eventually. Every game matters to somebody and it's silly to claim that games don't matter because the person who made this particular list doesn't personally have experience, or enjoy a certian game.

The reason it's important to include a baseline meassure of quality, is because if you don't it's the first thing that will be brought up. By including a metric you avoid that. Now, people will certainly argue the merits of that particular metric. But that's a different topic than the one at hand.

There's nothing wrong with people having conversations about their favorite games and how the compare to other peoples favorite games. But that's a totally seperate conversation.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Normchacho said:
Veknoid_Outcast said:

I never said the games cease to be, or that they should be removed.

I'm making a very clear distinction about what is and what matters

Let's be real: no one making a list like the one that started this debate is doing so to provide edification for the reader. They're doing it as part of an anatomical measuring contest, to use an artful euphemism. But the list is useless on its own. It's simply a collection of numbers and letters. Unless those games are good or great, who cares?

The same goes for Metacritic, a poor measurement of quality. Yes, it shows the critical consensus. Again, a collection of numbers and letters that mean nothing if we disagree with them.

What matters and what doesn't is up to the reader, not the author (curator in this case).

I would agrue that it matters less if it's just the games he has played and enjoys. Because as it stands, that list is cumalitive. If you asked enough people what their favorite PS4 exclusives were, you'd get every game on that list eventually. Every game matters to somebody and it's silly to claim that games don't matter because the person who made this particular list doesn't personally have experience, or enjoy a certian game.

The reason it's important to include a baseline meassure of quality, is because if you don't it's the first thing that will be brought up. By including a metric you avoid that. Now, people will certainly argue the merits of that particular metric. But that's a different topic than the one at hand.

There's nothing wrong with people having conversations about their favorite games and how the compare to other peoples favorite games. But that's a totally seperate conversation.

Anyone can google "PS4 exclusives" or visit Metacritic and compile such a list. It's out there. It's real. Uncharted 4 is a PS4 exclusive. That's a fact. It has a 93 on Metacritic. That's a fact.

I don't come to VGChartz to look at data I can find on any search engine. I come here for insight, for analysis. So I'd much rather members provided information on games they love, and why. I don't want them to show off a list of games other people like. I want personal recommendations.

Your argument seems to pre-suppose there's some objective measurement of quality out there. There isn't. My opinion is no more true than the 50 opinions assembled on Metacritic for any given game.



Around the Network

I would have said this was true back in the last few years of 360, where exclusive releases basically dried up and previous exclusives were ported to PS3. (Mass Effect) Now they either have no upcoming exclusives (available on two separate platforms) or are barely treading the exclusives water (if you consider Xbox now just an extension of their primary platform, PC).



LudicrousSpeed said:

People keep talking about that interview and 14 games and trying to list the games but they ignore that she said most of the games haven't even been announced yet. Also it's hard to take a discussion seriously when it starts off saying Horizon 3 is a yearly franchise and means nothing, and reduces an incredible game like State of Decay to "a $20-30 indie game" lol.

MS has plenty of games coming soon and apparently at least 8 that aren't even announced. I highly doubt they are making this games on Windows push and new Xbox hardware push but decided not to include games.

Pretty much. 



Mr Puggsly said:
Normchacho said:

The point the OP is trying to make is that they've already said that they have 14 games in development and we know what like 11 or 12 of them are.

Basically the OP is saying that he thinks they didn't announce new stuff because they don't have anything new to show. Which seems to be supported by statements they themselves have made.

Did MS run out of money? That theory just seems highly unlikely especially with new hardware coming and the Windows 10 gaming push.

Again, I think they have so much to release in a relatively short period that announcments are probably being held off. MS has a history of announcing some games not long until release as well. I mean Forza Horizon 3 just became offical.

Microsoft don't have a history of announcing games not long before release and neither Sony nor Nintendo have, Forza is now a yearly franchise so if they announce Forza Horizon 3, 1 year before the release this would hurt Forza 6's Sales.



Wakey wakey mods. This thread has gone on long enough.

In fact, 4 pages in, and not one ''mod'' has come in to say anything...hmmmm... I wonder why???



It´s too risk and expencive.

Microsoft never had many exclusives to begin with.

And last be honest neither Sony nor Nintendo is doing any much better. "Horizons" is probaly the first AAA first party Sony new IP since "Drive Clube" (and I almost forget about it, I was about to write "The Last of Us").