..And so should you.

Lately I've gotten to thinking about the future of the gaming landscape and where we are headed in terms of the games available for each system. It seems a little archaic in 2009 with all the advancements in technology to just produce games for either the Wii, Xbox 360, or PS3. I realize that thinking this way calls into question some of my favorite developers (Valve and Bungie to name a couple), but with the quality multiplatform games being released every year, would it really take that much more effort to code the game for another system?

To me there is absolutely no proof that developing a game for multiple platforms reduces the quality of that game. When you look at Borderlands, AC2, DA:Origins, GTA4, and many others, can you really tell me that the game would have been so much better if they had just chosen one system to code it for? I think that a quality developer wouldn't need to restrict themselves in order to establish a fanbase.

Using exclusive games as ammo to why your system is better may be all well and good, but at the end of the day have you actually thought about /why/ that game is exclusive? Even quality projects on the Wii have impressive enough graphics where you would think, with enough time and energy, certain "HD" games could make the transition without a huge loss in quality.

I'm sure I am going to get enough "lol, Uncharted 2 would look like ass on the 360, noob" comments,  but considering the massive amount of people playing video games on each system, it just seems like the big three spend  far too much money gaining exclusives that could be used on actually improving the quality of their respective units.

Just looking at prospective trends in both gaming and computing (I.E. Motion Control/Cloud Computing) it seems that in the future, there really will be little to no excuse as to why a game can't be made, in some capacity, on all three systems. Yes, you could argue to me  that loyalty is important to you, but honestly, that developers "loyalty" is really just a very fat paycheck. And I personally would rather that money be spent on quality of hardware (Less RRoD, Cross game chat, 720/1080P on a system made in 2007) than securing that my precious Halo resides on only one system.

So have I accidently taken a bite out of a cookie laced with cocaine  and am speaking crazy talk, or do I have some valid points? Discuss.

AC2 has tons of screen taring issues, so yes, it could have been made better by a team of the same size that was dedicated to a single piece of hardware.

Also, Nintendo doesn't spend money on gaining exclusives. They just make their own software for their own system. (edit: ok, let me rephrase that, they don't spend money directly, but I'm sure they cut some deals to exclusives like cheaper liscensing fees, or possibly free advertising)

Um, Uncharted 2 looks far better than all those games.... because it was only made on one platform, and nobody has really mastered the platform like them. Yes their job is made slightly easier, but who cares, I get a better game at the end of it, and from their point of view, it sells more consoles, because they are sony

No valid points.

MS buys exclusives, Sony for the most part makes their own while Nin preety much does it all them selfs. 

GTA4 was quite mediocre in my opinion, it could have been much much better.  A 360 ecxlusive GTA4 would ahve been a better game then the multi plat one. 

Okay but what is to say that if UC2 was ported to the 360, then it would decline such a massive amount of quality that it wouldn't be worth the extra 33 million possible buyers?

Or, conversely, if Gears of War was posted to the PS3, do you honestly think the games graphics would suffer to the point of lessening sales?

The game looks great because the developers are great, not because they are the gatekeepers of Cel computing.

So the games plot and content would have improved dramatically if it was exclusive. What makes you think this?

I also didn't realize that Sony paid their development teams in acorns and praise instead of cash. I'll have to inform Naughty Dog of this immediately.

Uncharted 2 is developed by Sony. To lose it as an exclusive would be to lose an advantage that the PS3 has over the 360. The same if Microsoft allowed Halo to be on PS3.

If there are no exclusives left, what's the point of having multiple consoles? Consoles would become like DVD players.

He didn't say anything about it improving in plot and content, so that's just plain wrong to place those words in his mouth. Seriously...

If UC2 was ported after the fact that it was released on PS3, it could possibly look just as good on 360. However, they wouldn't be focusing on 2 platforms at once, and instead we might see the X360 version 1 year later with a lot of effort put into it. If they were working on both at once using a multiplatform middleware solution (which is always a compromise) then they would have burned up any budget they had a lot faster (in other words more upfront investment needed). A late port has more money to work with as they already reaped profits from the original release.

I respect multiplat devs alot, devs like Insominac ( im sure i spelled it wrong) Valve, and IW and Treyarch.