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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - console + PC games are NOT exclusive

shio on 03 October 2009
nofingershaha said:
MAFKKA said:
ironman said:
MAFKKA said:
ironman said:
dsister44 said:
So LBP and Gran Turismo are no longer exclusives?

not according to MAFKKA's logic.

So am i right or wrong?

 

You are wrong. If one were to use your flawed logic, then dsister would be correct. In which case, very few games would actually be exclusive.

You can argue that a game that is exclusive to 360 and PC is a MS exclusive, that is the point I am trying to make here. I really don't know how I can spell it out any clearer than that.

 

@Shio, how nice of you to show up...but what I was saying is refering to games that are also made for the 360, Since it can only be run on a Windows platform, It is a MS exclusive.

But a game that is PS3/PC shatters that logic. How can PS3/PC be MS exclusive? It can not, since there's no such thing as MS exclusive. Its a made up word when all else failed. You cant add a definition to an absolute word when talking specific areas of use. If you want to name it something else thats fine. But the word exclusive can not be used when divided. You can call it 360/PC Only game.

And stop nitpicking, you've ignord lke 7 posts of facts. You just answer the things you see fit, because they help your case. The same thing with your made up words and definitions and false facts. Just end it already.

You haven't considered that most pc games now are being forced to utilize the Microsoft license Games for Windows. Not to mention more games are now utilizing Windows Live (also being forced by Microsoft). If Microsoft is getting royalties from pc releases, it is still Microsoft exclusives.

At the least it may not be exclusives to us as consumers but it is exclusive to Microsoft as a business.

That is complete BS right there. 99.9% of PC games are NOT using GFW brand, and I'm surprised how anyone thinks that. What you just said certainly shows that you almost nothing of PC gaming.

AND MICROSOFT DOESN'T GET ANYTHING FROM PC DEVELOPERS!!!! PC devs don't give a crap about MS, and don't pay a dime to MS.



http://i48.tinypic.com/120qaon.jpg
Around the Network
Maelstrome on 03 October 2009

seeing as i know people that play MULTIPLATFORM 360/pc games on linux systems. i can tell you that they dont need to run on windows.



dsister44 on 03 October 2009
shio said:
nofingershaha said:

You haven't considered that most pc games now are being forced to utilize the Microsoft license Games for Windows. Not to mention more games are now utilizing Windows Live (also being forced by Microsoft). If Microsoft is getting royalties from pc releases, it is still Microsoft exclusives.

At the least it may not be exclusives to us as consumers but it is exclusive to Microsoft as a business.

That is complete BS right there. 99.9% of PC games are NOT using GFW brand, and I'm surprised how anyone thinks that. What you just said certainly shows that you almost nothing of PC gaming.

AND MICROSOFT DOESN'T GET ANYTHING FROM PC DEVELOPERS!!!! PC devs don't give a crap about MS, and don't pay a dime to MS.

Yeah

I have 47 pc games and only three of them use it( and two of them are Microsoft 1st party)

The only reason that developers would be forced to use "Games for Windows Live" would be if Microsoft was their publisher



ironman on 03 October 2009
shio said:
nofingershaha said:
MAFKKA said:
ironman said:
MAFKKA said:
ironman said:
dsister44 said:
So LBP and Gran Turismo are no longer exclusives?

not according to MAFKKA's logic.

So am i right or wrong?

 

You are wrong. If one were to use your flawed logic, then dsister would be correct. In which case, very few games would actually be exclusive.

You can argue that a game that is exclusive to 360 and PC is a MS exclusive, that is the point I am trying to make here. I really don't know how I can spell it out any clearer than that.

 

@Shio, how nice of you to show up...but what I was saying is refering to games that are also made for the 360, Since it can only be run on a Windows platform, It is a MS exclusive.

But a game that is PS3/PC shatters that logic. How can PS3/PC be MS exclusive? It can not, since there's no such thing as MS exclusive. Its a made up word when all else failed. You cant add a definition to an absolute word when talking specific areas of use. If you want to name it something else thats fine. But the word exclusive can not be used when divided. You can call it 360/PC Only game.

And stop nitpicking, you've ignord lke 7 posts of facts. You just answer the things you see fit, because they help your case. The same thing with your made up words and definitions and false facts. Just end it already.

You haven't considered that most pc games now are being forced to utilize the Microsoft license Games for Windows. Not to mention more games are now utilizing Windows Live (also being forced by Microsoft). If Microsoft is getting royalties from pc releases, it is still Microsoft exclusives.

At the least it may not be exclusives to us as consumers but it is exclusive to Microsoft as a business.

That is complete BS right there. 99.9% of PC games are NOT using GFW brand, and I'm surprised how anyone thinks that. What you just said certainly shows that you almost nothing of PC gaming.

AND MICROSOFT DOESN'T GET ANYTHING FROM PC DEVELOPERS!!!! PC devs don't give a crap about MS, and don't pay a dime to MS.

No, but the ports from 360s are. Those are the ones that are relevant to this discussion.

@maelstrom, it is kinda hit and miss with freeware to run games on Linux, even so, the games were created for a windows, and the Linux software emulates parts of the windows system. Which is why I didn't bother with that aspect. (btw, I am running wine in Ubuntu studio, so I know about it)

 



Past Avatar picture!!!

Don't forget your helmet there, Master Chief!

MAFKKA on 03 October 2009
ironman said:
MAFKKA said:
nofingershaha said:
MAFKKA said:
ironman said:
MAFKKA said:
ironman said:
dsister44 said:
So LBP and Gran Turismo are no longer exclusives?

not according to MAFKKA's logic.

So am i right or wrong?

 

You are wrong. If one were to use your flawed logic, then dsister would be correct. In which case, very few games would actually be exclusive.

You can argue that a game that is exclusive to 360 and PC is a MS exclusive, that is the point I am trying to make here. I really don't know how I can spell it out any clearer than that.

 

@Shio, how nice of you to show up...but what I was saying is refering to games that are also made for the 360, Since it can only be run on a Windows platform, It is a MS exclusive.

But a game that is PS3/PC shatters that logic. How can PS3/PC be MS exclusive? It can not, since there's no such thing as MS exclusive. Its a made up word when all else failed. You cant add a definition to an absolute word when talking specific areas of use. If you want to name it something else thats fine. But the word exclusive can not be used when divided. You can call it 360/PC Only game.

And stop nitpicking, you've ignord lke 7 posts of facts. You just answer the things you see fit, because they help your case. The same thing with your made up words and definitions and false facts. Just end it already.

You haven't considered that most pc games now are being forced to utilize the Microsoft license Games for Windows. Not to mention more games are now utilizing Windows Live (also being forced by Microsoft). If Microsoft is getting royalties from pc releases, it is still Microsoft exclusives.

At the least it may not be exclusives to us as consumers but it is exclusive to Microsoft as a business.

But since "most" is not synonym for "all". You can't say that its exclusive, which is a total word. An absolute word. Exclusive can not be ONLY in some cases and Multiple in others.

Ah ye old symantecs argument, you must be getting despirate. Anyway, I used "most" to cover my ass. See, while I am pretty sure that all games that are on both the PC and the 360 must be run in a MS environment, there could be one or two that do not. Anyway, those would be anomolies, all the rest are still exclusive.

 

Edit: A few fun definitions by my man Webster

Game Console - n.

"and electric device for playing VIDEO GAMES, requiring a connection to a television."

Computor - n.

"A device that computes, especially a programmable electronic machine that performs high-speed mathematical or logical operations or that assembles, stores, correlates, or otherwise processes information."

So you see, I can play your game!!! According to these definitions, a computer is by nature, NOT a console.


So.. proven wrong with GFW. So we can drop that.

And second. I agree. But i've never claimed it to be a console? So i dont see your point when we're talking about whether or not something can be called exclusive, when its devided, multiple and shared.



Around the Network
MAFKKA on 03 October 2009
ironman said:
shio said:
nofingershaha said:
MAFKKA said:
ironman said:
MAFKKA said:
ironman said:
dsister44 said:
So LBP and Gran Turismo are no longer exclusives?

not according to MAFKKA's logic.

So am i right or wrong?

 

You are wrong. If one were to use your flawed logic, then dsister would be correct. In which case, very few games would actually be exclusive.

You can argue that a game that is exclusive to 360 and PC is a MS exclusive, that is the point I am trying to make here. I really don't know how I can spell it out any clearer than that.

 

@Shio, how nice of you to show up...but what I was saying is refering to games that are also made for the 360, Since it can only be run on a Windows platform, It is a MS exclusive.

But a game that is PS3/PC shatters that logic. How can PS3/PC be MS exclusive? It can not, since there's no such thing as MS exclusive. Its a made up word when all else failed. You cant add a definition to an absolute word when talking specific areas of use. If you want to name it something else thats fine. But the word exclusive can not be used when divided. You can call it 360/PC Only game.

And stop nitpicking, you've ignord lke 7 posts of facts. You just answer the things you see fit, because they help your case. The same thing with your made up words and definitions and false facts. Just end it already.

You haven't considered that most pc games now are being forced to utilize the Microsoft license Games for Windows. Not to mention more games are now utilizing Windows Live (also being forced by Microsoft). If Microsoft is getting royalties from pc releases, it is still Microsoft exclusives.

At the least it may not be exclusives to us as consumers but it is exclusive to Microsoft as a business.

That is complete BS right there. 99.9% of PC games are NOT using GFW brand, and I'm surprised how anyone thinks that. What you just said certainly shows that you almost nothing of PC gaming.

AND MICROSOFT DOESN'T GET ANYTHING FROM PC DEVELOPERS!!!! PC devs don't give a crap about MS, and don't pay a dime to MS.

No, but the ports from 360s are. Those are the ones that are relevant to this discussion.

 

But if we exclude 99.9% of the games just to make the word exclusive valid, it kinda loses its purpose dosent it? Not all PC/360 games are GFW. Assassins creed for example, if im not mistaken.

So here we go again. Theres too many exceptions and maybes for your logic to work.

 



ironman on 03 October 2009
MAFKKA said:
ironman said:
MAFKKA said:

But since "most" is not synonym for "all". You can't say that its exclusive, which is a total word. An absolute word. Exclusive can not be ONLY in some cases and Multiple in others.

Ah ye old symantecs argument, you must be getting despirate. Anyway, I used "most" to cover my ass. See, while I am pretty sure that all games that are on both the PC and the 360 must be run in a MS environment, there could be one or two that do not. Anyway, those would be anomolies, all the rest are still exclusive.

 

Edit: A few fun definitions by my man Webster

Game Console - n.

"and electric device for playing VIDEO GAMES, requiring a connection to a television."

Computor - n.

"A device that computes, especially a programmable electronic machine that performs high-speed mathematical or logical operations or that assembles, stores, correlates, or otherwise processes information."

So you see, I can play your game!!! According to these definitions, a computer is by nature, NOT a console.


So.. proven wrong with GFW. So we can drop that.

And second. I agree. But i've never claimed it to be a console? So i dont see your point when we're talking about whether or not something can be called exclusive, when its devided, multiple and shared.

I hope you mean YOU were proven wrong with GFW because all the games that are on both the PC and the console ARE GFW as far as I know.  And yes, you did claim it was basically a console to try and prove your point that PC games were not exclusive. None of the PC/360 games are divided multiplied or shared outside of the MS platform...not intentionally. I mean, if you really want to go down the lynux rout, then I guess the PS1&1, the Xbox, and the Gamecube all have absolutely NO exclusives since a person can hack a 360 or PS3 to play games from all those consoles.



Past Avatar picture!!!

Don't forget your helmet there, Master Chief!

MAFKKA on 04 October 2009

aaaah... but we've been over this before.

1) Splinter Cell Conviction, Black college football, dark days, raiden 4, shadow run etc.. are all not apart of GFW. So i am right. So there we go again, you're logic is full of exceptions.

2) What is a platform? You've stated that it can be hardware aswell as software, right? A PC operating system and NXE, was your example. Right? And since Win7 and NXE are two different platforms, a game released on both of them would be what? MULTIPLATFORM! Which is the opposite of exclusive. So if a game qualifies as multiplatform, it can not be exclusive. Its contradicting.



ironman on 04 October 2009
MAFKKA said:

aaaah... but we've been over this before.

1) Splinter Cell Conviction, Black college football, dark days, raiden 4, shadow run etc.. are all not apart of GFW. So i am right. So there we go again, you're logic is full of exceptions.

2) What is a platform? You've stated that it can be hardware aswell as software, right? A PC operating system and NXE, was your example. Right? And since Win7 and NXE are two different platforms, a game released on both of them would be what? MULTIPLATFORM! Which is the opposite of exclusive. So if a game qualifies as multiplatform, it can not be exclusive. Its contradicting.

1. As I said before I'm sure there are a few exceptions...but can those games you listed be played on a mac? if not, then yes, they are still exclusives.

2. I think you would have gotten it when I said MICROSOFT PLATFORM. There can be no discussion about what I meant there because it was blatently obvious. Win7 and NXE are MICROSOFT PLATFORMS...incase you havn't noticed, i have been saying from the beginning that the MS platform is anything that is MS software.



Past Avatar picture!!!

Don't forget your helmet there, Master Chief!

Onyxmeth on 04 October 2009

This thread spiraling towards oblivion shows the traditional definitions of exclusivity don't really fit or matter the same to all individuals. Think about how games are both intellectual and physical property. While both exist simultaneously in the same product, one half can be exclusive while the other half is multiplatform. Here's a quick questionaire. Answer me which games you folks think are exclusive and which are multiplatform.

 



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.