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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Games should be made "EXCLUSIVE" for one platform again

Ganoncrotch said:

Oh aye indeed I had forgotten about the in fighting on PC as well of EA pulling their games for Origin, Activision for Battle.net or Microsoft deciding it wants to bury their games behind candy crush clones on the Win10 store :D

That counts as fighting? That's more like those companies deciding they want little competition and all of the profits, than it does fans using a storefront against one another (which sounds silly to begin with).

GoG also works via their own set of rules to operate their own store, which no one else follows but GoG.



Around the Network
Chazore said:
Ganoncrotch said:

Oh aye indeed I had forgotten about the in fighting on PC as well of EA pulling their games for Origin, Activision for Battle.net or Microsoft deciding it wants to bury their games behind candy crush clones on the Win10 store :D

That counts as fighting? That's more like those companies deciding they want little competition and all of the profits, than it does fans using a storefront against one another (which sounds silly to begin with).

GoG also works via their own set of rules to operate their own store, which no one else follows but GoG.

Hey guys lets offer the choice to have no DRM versions of all the games.... guys..... guys? ..... okay

But not sure would you call it fighting, I know for a fact that my PC won't ever have Uplay or Origin installed on it.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

Third parties want to be able to sell to the highest number of players possible. Unless some type of partnership happens giving some title exclusivite to one platform is involved, making AAA exlusives is not a smart move for third parties today.



Nah, some third party publishers are already struggling as it is.



Ganoncrotch said:

Hey guys lets offer the choice to have no DRM versions of all the games.... guys..... guys? ..... okay

But not sure would you call it fighting, I know for a fact that my PC won't ever have Uplay or Origin installed on it.

That's their thing though. They only sell games from their store that are DRM free, which means all those AAA companies, like Ubisoft who love their DRM, means they cannot sell those games from their storefront, thanks to another company wishing to enforce their rule (which is clearly designed to benefit the company, not the consumer)

I chose not to install Uplay, simply based on the fact that that storefront lacks in the games I want to play, let alone the client missing out on features that Steam has had for years. That and most of those games sold by Ubisoft have multiple layers of DRM and aren't very well optimized, while also going for high prices. That all coupled together, just doesn't scream "must have" and "consumer friendly" to me. 

I only have Origin installed for Battlefield, Burnout Paradise, SW Battlefront, Titanfall 1-2 and the C&C Collection. It has some features that Steam has, but lacks others and their client is entirely web based, making it quite useless whenever internet connection is lost. 



Around the Network

Third party games going exclusive would create strong divides and could quickly kill one platform and much more easily create monopolies.

Also it would not be good for consumers because if you buy one system, you don't know whether the games you love will be available on it or not, it will be a gamble and one I believe most people are not looking forward to.

First party exclusives are good enough, no need to push beyond that.



No. This industry benefits from games being playable on multiple platforms. Give players the option to play on the platform they want.



Conina said:
ZODIARKrebirth said:

as developers could put the max effort all for one system (with probably a smaller budget due to less expected sales), what at the end means could mean the best results and quality for a game, and maybe even (slightly) shorter development time and probably less revenue and profit...as making one game for three or even more different systems...

 

 

Right.  Games are far better now, and that's largely due to the fact that they can sell a shitload more copies of the game.  Devs and publishers exist to make money.  The more potential sales, the more they're able to spend to make a great game.  As a gamer, I prefer games to be great, rather than mediocre.  So, I can't support a return to the bad old days of forced exclusives (looking at you, Nintendo of the 80's).



God, that would be terrible.

I fail to see how that would benefit consumers and games don't seem to benefit much from being on a single platform. I mean look at PUBG or Ark (both launched on X1 first). If the game is poorly optimized to begin with there is little benefit from being focused on a single platform.

Multiplat = more sales. If a developer doesn't have the resources to optimize their game for multiple platforms, they should launch on one console. But if the sales potential is greater as multiplat, then they could bring in more people.

Sometimes developers get paid to go exclusive or a timed deal. But realistically Sony and MS won't do that often. Its not financially worthwhile, especially for the platform with a significantly larger userbase.



Recently Completed
River City: Rival Showdown
for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

I feel like the only IPs that have any business being exclusive are the ones owned by the console manufacturers. Otherwise, it doesn't make any financial sense... unless a combination of moneyhats and lack of interest (such as JRPGs on Xbox) makes exclusivity more lucrative.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames