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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - The Death of Platform Exclusive Software

Conina said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

You need a phone, but you do not need a phone costing $500 and up. I have a $30 POS ZTE branded phone that does 90% of what those $500 to $1000 phones do.

Did you get the $30 phone in combination with your phone contract?

If yes, how much does that cost per month and how many months are you bound to that contract? I'm pretty sure, a lot of the hardware costs are hidden in the monthly payments.

I don't have a contract. My monthly phone bill is $27 a month.



Around the Network
freebs2 said:
curl-6 said:

I wouldn't be able to play the games I want on the platform I want though, if exclusives weren't there to build the userbase of my preferred platform to the point of it being worth supporting.

It's a bit like the chicken and egg problem...what made you choose your current platform of choice? The hardware features or its exclusive game library, or both? If you hypothesize a game market without exlcusives you can just leave one variable out of the equation, in other words regadless of what console you choose you could still potentially play any Nintendo, Sony or MS games on it. Your choice would be based just on hardware features: your favourite form factor, your favourite controller, your favourite online service, the most suitable price point, etc.

If a console, in that specific scenario, doen't get enough traction to get software support, the reason must be because its features are unappealing to the market. In that scenario, even if you 'bet on the wrong horse', the cost of switching to another console would be lower, since you don't lose access to any exclusive title.

Now, consider the same console (with the same unappealing hardware features) in the current market. Thanks to exclusives it could expand the userbase in a way that wouldn't be possible otherwise. This means players are accepting to buy a console with sub-optimal features in order to gain access to its exclusive library...I don't see this as a gain from the consumer perspective.

PS and Xbox tend not to have features like motion controls that I really enjoy on Switch.

For example I would rather play my shooters at a lower resolution on Switch with gyro aiming than with better graphics on PS/Xbox.

If Nintendo didn't have exclusives, it probably wouldn't have sold well enough to get games like Doom 2016 or Eternal, and I wouldn't have been able to play them the way I prefer.



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

curl-6 said:
freebs2 said:

It's a bit like the chicken and egg problem...what made you choose your current platform of choice? The hardware features or its exclusive game library, or both? If you hypothesize a game market without exlcusives you can just leave one variable out of the equation, in other words regadless of what console you choose you could still potentially play any Nintendo, Sony or MS games on it. Your choice would be based just on hardware features: your favourite form factor, your favourite controller, your favourite online service, the most suitable price point, etc.

If a console, in that specific scenario, doen't get enough traction to get software support, the reason must be because its features are unappealing to the market. In that scenario, even if you 'bet on the wrong horse', the cost of switching to another console would be lower, since you don't lose access to any exclusive title.

Now, consider the same console (with the same unappealing hardware features) in the current market. Thanks to exclusives it could expand the userbase in a way that wouldn't be possible otherwise. This means players are accepting to buy a console with sub-optimal features in order to gain access to its exclusive library...I don't see this as a gain from the consumer perspective.

PS and Xbox tend not to have features like motion controls that I really enjoy on Switch.

For example I would rather play my shooters at a lower resolution on Switch with gyro aiming than with better graphics on PS/Xbox.

If Nintendo didn't have exclusives, it probably wouldn't have sold well enough to get games like Doom 2016 or Eternal, and I wouldn't have been able to play them the way I prefer.

As an aside, I must say that gyro not being pushed more on the PS4 was really strange. Hopefully we see PS5 games explore it more



twintail said:
curl-6 said:

PS and Xbox tend not to have features like motion controls that I really enjoy on Switch.

For example I would rather play my shooters at a lower resolution on Switch with gyro aiming than with better graphics on PS/Xbox.

If Nintendo didn't have exclusives, it probably wouldn't have sold well enough to get games like Doom 2016 or Eternal, and I wouldn't have been able to play them the way I prefer.

As an aside, I must say that gyro not being pushed more on the PS4 was really strange. Hopefully we see PS5 games explore it more

Yeah it is bizarre that the controller even supports it but to my knowledge very few games utilize it and its certainly not a standard feature the way it is for Switch shooters. I do hope this changes with PS5 as it would make that system a lot more appealing to me.



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

curl-6 said:
freebs2 said:

It's a bit like the chicken and egg problem...what made you choose your current platform of choice? The hardware features or its exclusive game library, or both? If you hypothesize a game market without exlcusives you can just leave one variable out of the equation, in other words regadless of what console you choose you could still potentially play any Nintendo, Sony or MS games on it. Your choice would be based just on hardware features: your favourite form factor, your favourite controller, your favourite online service, the most suitable price point, etc.

If a console, in that specific scenario, doen't get enough traction to get software support, the reason must be because its features are unappealing to the market. In that scenario, even if you 'bet on the wrong horse', the cost of switching to another console would be lower, since you don't lose access to any exclusive title.

Now, consider the same console (with the same unappealing hardware features) in the current market. Thanks to exclusives it could expand the userbase in a way that wouldn't be possible otherwise. This means players are accepting to buy a console with sub-optimal features in order to gain access to its exclusive library...I don't see this as a gain from the consumer perspective.

PS and Xbox tend not to have features like motion controls that I really enjoy on Switch.

For example I would rather play my shooters at a lower resolution on Switch with gyro aiming than with better graphics on PS/Xbox.

If Nintendo didn't have exclusives, it probably wouldn't have sold well enough to get games like Doom 2016 or Eternal, and I wouldn't have been able to play them the way I prefer.

I agree FPS with gyro aiming are great. But the main problem with it is that unfortunatly is not a popular control method yet, I don't believe exclusives have much to do about it.

In fact the Switch success didn't automatically grant Doom to have gyro aiming...devs could have made the port without gyro support as well. It was their merit for making the extra mile and supporting it for those who like it.

On the opposite side if devs and consumers cared enough you could have gyro aiming for FPS games on any other platform as well, you just need a custom controller...just like we have arcade sticks for fighting games, steering wheels and pedals for racing games, joystics for flight simulators, etc.



Around the Network
freebs2 said:
curl-6 said:

PS and Xbox tend not to have features like motion controls that I really enjoy on Switch.

For example I would rather play my shooters at a lower resolution on Switch with gyro aiming than with better graphics on PS/Xbox.

If Nintendo didn't have exclusives, it probably wouldn't have sold well enough to get games like Doom 2016 or Eternal, and I wouldn't have been able to play them the way I prefer.

I agree FPS with gyro aiming are great. But the main problem with it is that unfortunatly is not a popular control method yet, I don't believe exclusives have much to do about it.

In fact the Switch success didn't automatically grant Doom to have gyro aiming...devs could have made the port without gyro support as well. It was their merit for making the extra mile and supporting it for those who like it.

On the opposite side if devs and consumers cared enough you could have gyro aiming for FPS games on any other platform as well, you just need a custom controller...just like we have arcade sticks for fighting games, steering wheels and pedals for racing games, joystics for flight simulators, etc.

See here's the thing though; I don't necessarily agree with what the market likes. I'd rather the platform I like be pushed to success in order for me to have more games to play on it, and exclusives are the main way of doing that.



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

IcaroRibeiro said:

Impossible in our current life. Unlike USA most Brazilians only started using internet thanks to mobile phones. Meaning some people doesn't know how to use SNS or even write emails without a smartphone. Mom herself often get lost browsing on PCs. 

Then you ask me, "ok but you can ignore smartphones and go to PC". I could... 3 or 4 years ago and believe me I did. However nowadays mobile apps are the main digital channel for us. Let's ignore using SNS and using streaming services I can easily replace (even though listening to music would be hard without one), here are things a mobile will provide me other devices won't:

- My digital documents are all on the phone (and it is much more practical and safe than carrying them with me)

- Information regarding my health assurance is all on the cell phone, the website sucks hard and I would be restricted if not at home. Same goes to control of credit card, energy and water bills

- Families, friends and coworkers mostly use mobile apps to chat. I remember when I've started college and for one year I was the only one without a smartphone, it was painful 

- Official state digital registrations are increasingly being made exclusively through apps, since everyone here has a cell phone but not everyone has a PC

- I use my mobile to confirm my identity and have access to my digital workspace 

- I use my mobile to manage my daily/weekly schedule, eating plan and my purchases on the go

Console games are a hobby, I can survive without one, but without a cellphone my life would be significantly less comfortable and practical. The sole reason I don't own a PS4 is because I was mugged two times in the last 4 years (this and the fact when I finally could save money I choose a Switch, but that's another story), hence I owned 3 different cellphones in the said 4 years instead of a PS4 and I don't regret it

Well maybe regret the fact I was mugged, but not my choice 

I have to say that reading this post weeks ago gave me some ideas for a little dystopia that I want to write.

And I'm not joking or trying to be funny here.



I have periods of social disconnection, it's a part of me that I need and keenly embrace. I'll still log in and read news and threads during those times, but I won't be (very) active on the site, so I apologize for any inconvenience that this may cause (late answers, bumps or the like).

Also...

Please, feel free to correct my English.