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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony is losing playstation console exclusives left and right this 2018.

DonFerrari on 22 August 2018
Lawlight said:
shikamaru317 said:

You're right about Spyro, I apologize there, it did go multiplat before this gen. You're wrong about the others though.

Grandia 1 was PS1 exclusive in the west according to wikipedia, and now the remaster is Switch console exclusive, that's a big change without doubt. 

Valkyria has never been multiplat before this gen. Was only ever on 3 systems, PS3, PSP, and PC before this gen, which made it Playstation console exclusive up until Valkyria Azure Revolution released on XB1 this gen. 

Yakuza only went multiplat in Japan with the Wii U collection, in the west it was only on PS platforms before this gen, now it's going to PC with hints of possible Xbox and Switch releases in the future. 

Grandia still was only exclusive to PS if you’re only looking at the first one and only looking at the west. The remaster is not an exclusive to any platform.

Yakuza being exclusive in the west does not invalidate what I said. It cannot be considered and exclusive if it’s on another platform.

Wait until MS coin a term for debuting first in USA on X1 as a type of exclusive =p



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
Eric2048 on 22 August 2018

I think all of those games were meant to be temporary exclusives from the start. basically if a game does not have "only on playstation" on the box it has the chance to become a multi-platform title. But that's ultimately up to the company that owns the game.



Rafie on 22 August 2018
contestgamer said:
CGI-Quality said:

Which are shovelware titles?

Well No Man's Sky is plain shovelware. Crash and Hellblade are pretty bad, both below 85 Metacritic. Firewatch was mediocre and Edith was decent, but super short and pretty light on gameplay. So I suppose I overstated it by calling them all shovelware, but they're mediocre titles

I never heard anyone call those 2 games "pretty bad" before. That's a new. Also, just because a game is below 85 doesn't necessarily make it a bad one.



PSN ID- RayCrocheron82

XBL Gamertag- RAFIE82

NNID- RAFIE82/ Friend Code: SW-6006-2580-8237

YouTube- Rafie Crocheron

Mnementh on 22 August 2018
Lawlight said:
Mnementh said:

That's true, but the fanbase is there because the games used to be exclusive. If they are multiplats and new titles are too, then with time people will consider other consoles.

The Sony exclusives make a difference.

Yes, first party is important, an area Microsoft lacks still.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

potato_hamster on 22 August 2018
contestgamer said:
CGI-Quality said:

Which are shovelware titles?

Well No Man's Sky is plain shovelware. Crash and Hellblade are pretty bad, both below 85 Metacritic. Firewatch was mediocre and Edith was decent, but super short and pretty light on gameplay. So I suppose I overstated it by calling them all shovelware, but they're mediocre titles

This is one of the most ignorant posts I've ever seen posted on it. If anything below 85 on Metacritic is "pretty bad" that makes the vast majority of games (like over 95% ) pretty bad, and you must play very, very few games in the run of a year.



Around the Network
ResidentToxy on 22 August 2018
contestgamer said:
CGI-Quality said:

Which are shovelware titles?

Well No Man's Sky is plain shovelware. Crash and Hellblade are pretty bad, both below 85 Metacritic. Firewatch was mediocre and Edith was decent, but super short and pretty light on gameplay. So I suppose I overstated it by calling them all shovelware, but they're mediocre titles

For people living on planet earth 5/10 is an average game. Anything below that is when games range from pretty bad to being terrible. A mediocre title is something that is just above average - 6/10. Anything above this is when games enter the territory of being good to excellent. 
For the sake of simplicity, I have not included half grades such as 6.5, 7.5 etc. 

I always thought shovelware games were considered to be games with no substance and/or ambition. They are shallow games with the intention of making a quick buck of unassuming consumers. 
Example: Nickelodean: Party Blast, Fast and Furious: Showdown. Most movie tie-in games are good examples of this, as well as terribly implemented party games and simulators. 



 

Games and debauchery.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCo5KaqdBQCo62CvkHeea_lw

BoseDK on 23 August 2018
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Spike0503 said:
Years ago, when I saw FF XIII announced for the 360 I realized one thing, if the console manufacturer doesn't own the developer, the "exclusivity" is as frail as a house of cards.

There have been a few notable exceptions that I've noticed like the Persona series (the main games at least) staying PS exclusives for over a decade now as well as SMT (Main eries) staying Nintendo-exclusive for at least 20 years or so?. Yet other deals like Disgaea which I thought were rock solid with Sony ended up on the Switch not so long ago. My suggestion is to take the third party "exclusives" as "side-dishes" and focus on the main output coming from the first party developers.

It's more important to own the IP or individual games rights than the developer (Bayonetta 2 and 3 being owned by Nintendo, Crash Bandicoot not being a Naughty Dog owned property, etc) 

That depends on the IP or Developer in question. Sony's devs like Naughty Dog, Santa Monica, GG, etc. are more important than IPs, they can make a new IP from scratch and have it be more critically and commercially successful than anything they've done in the past. While in case of say MS/Nintendo IPs like Halo, Mario, Zelda are more important than any devs they have as they are nothing without the IPs. Nintendo/MS' IPs are the brands, while Sony's devs don't need big IPs because they themselves are the brands.



Azzanation on 23 August 2018
DonFerrari said:

Wait until MS coin a term for debuting first in USA on X1 as a type of exclusive =p

MS already use a quite effective term for 3rd party games, its "Play the best version on Xbox" or something like that.



BoseDK on 23 August 2018
Azzanation said:
DonFerrari said:

Wait until MS coin a term for debuting first in USA on X1 as a type of exclusive =p

MS already use a quite effective term for 3rd party games, its "Play the best version on Xbox" or something like that.

I don't think "effective" is the word I'd use, every multiple sells anywhere from 2-5 times more on PS4. That marketing clearly isn't working.

The only thing that has worked for MS is bundling a game with XB1, only games that have been able to keep a less than 2:1 ratio with PS4 are titles like Assassin's Creed unity and Fallout 4.



Azzanation on 23 August 2018
BoseDK said:

I don't think "effective" is the word I'd use, every multiple sells anywhere from 2-5 times more on PS4. That marketing clearly isn't working.

The only thing that has worked for MS is bundling a game with XB1, only games that have been able to keep a less than 2:1 ratio with PS4 are titles like Assassin's Creed unity and Fallout 4.

Umm probably because the PS4 user base is more than twice the size of Xbox this gen. "Playing the best version on Xbox" has help the X eclipse the Pro judging off the launch numbers.