Support NeoGAF

[deeptech]

The fact that it may feel more inviting is obviously a psychological trick. It seems more rare and more valuable if it's only on PS3 or Switch 2 or whatever. I owned every PS console for example but dear I never felt special for being able to play SotC or BB, GT, etc only on these consoles, in fact it always felt limiting and kinda sucked. I think in the end exclusivity is kinda childish, but ofc back then it meant alot, it sold millions of consoles, I doubt PS2 would be as popular if XBOX had the same games.

 

[StereoVsn]

I think during P1/Saturn through X360/PS3 generations, exclusivity from 1st party games generally brought more focus coupled with better knowledge of hardware which showed in some of the better games on the platforms.

Now starting with fairly generic hardware for Xbone/PS4 , there is not much point in that. There aren't really more esoteric features that will drive performance. Even Switch/Switch 2 at the end are fairly well understood mobile platform CPUs with well documented Nvidia chip.

There is really no benefit to exclusivity except for the business side.

Personally I think that Sony (Xbox hardware is done as a mass market device) is making a mistake for long term health of their platform, but I am glad that I can still play their games in the future without buying anymore PS hardware.

 

[Ridicululzz]

One thing for sure is that it's better for my wallet.

 

[The_Mike]

If a game needs to be exclusive to have value, then the game were worthless to begin with.

Gating a game doesn't make the game better. Never.

 

[Denton]

People who long for the days when they had to buy multiple redundant boxes if they wanted to play all games will never not be funny.

It's like longing for the days when Universal made movies for Sony VCRs while Paramount made movies only for Panasonic VCRs.

Oh wait, that didn't happen, because it would be fucking stupid.

 

[Soodanim]

I think ultimately this comes down to favouring the supplier or the consumer.

It gets slightly more complex when you add in things like the strengthening of a brand thanks to exclusives, and there are those that have brand loyalty and feel like they're part of something so exclusives for their system are fine, but it doesn't the fact that most consumers would ideally like to buy the games they want on the platform of their choosing. And you have people like me that were not going to buy a PS4 just for Bloodborne, so there is a side where sales are lost from not being multi-platform.

Personally I think timed exclusives are a compromise that appease most sides. The original wave of sales is the primary one, and then you have a secondary market that can also cause a resurgence in original platform sales if there's good exposure from the port.

 

[Robb]

Gating a game doesn't make the game better. Never.

You don't think Cyberpunk 2077 would've avoided its train-wreck launch had it only been developed with Ps5 (one SKU) in mind, for example? Instead of Windows, XBO, XBS, PS4, PS5, MacOs..

 

[Team Skoda]

Exclusivity is bullshit. Why lock software to a specific piece of hardware? What if that hardware sucks and is unpleasant to play with? This is all viable what with how current platforms are; all 4 of them.

Back in the day, there was a reason to get a game on, say, DS. A hardware experience that was unique and made a game feel special. Now, it's all about portability, which is sad and pathetic. The focus is all on, can we get this game running on this small slab, and that's it. Intuitive game design based on hardware is all but lost. Therefore, currently, exclusivity is pointless.

 

[Loomy]

Yet, at the same time it feels like exclusivity itself, and not being available anywhere else, gives game more value, and make it more worthwhile to play.

You're feeling the same thing people who have country club memberships feel about people who golf on municipal courses.

I don't know exactly why it is, but seems to me that the quality of first party has decreased since Sony and Microsoft started going multiplat. Has nothing to do with it being special because the games used to be on one platform. Just that the games are not as good. I attributed it to lack of focus previously but that may not be it. Not sure.....but it is something I've noticed in retrospect.

With how long dev cycles are, no game out today has had its quality negatively affected by this.

This all started in February of 2024 with Microsoft announcing HiFi Rush and Sea of Thieves coming to PS5. Nothing's been affected by this in the last 18 months.

 

[The_Mike]

You don't think Cyberpunk 2077 would've avoided its train-wreck launch had it only been developed with Ps5 (one SKU) in mind, for example? Instead of Windows, XBO, XBS, PS4, PS5, MacOs..

I mean, by that logic, then ANY game would benefit being exclusive to PC, as the game had infinite resources.

 

[bad guy]

I remember last gen when people were buying 2 almost identical low spec jaguar CPU systems (xbone and ps4) to play all console exclusives. Just seemed stupid to me to not get one high spec system instead. Waste of resources, fick exclusives

 

[Robb]

I mean, by that logic, then ANY game would benefit being exclusive to PC, as the game had infinite resources.

Yeah, it probably would.

 

[lifa-cobex]

Years back yes.

When console systems were their own architecture then absolutely. Getting a game dedicated to run on a system in the most efficient way.
Ala PS3/ 360 days.

These days it doesn't really matter.
They all run like shit on release anyways....

 

[mèx]

I care neither about closed hardware platforms nor about exclusive games. The faster we move on from that, the better.

 

[Braag]

If you want to get the feeling like you've accomplished something special, there are a lot of opportunities which life provides you, playing a game that is gated behind a single platform isn't really one of them.

 

[Gameplay Gods Bless]

I don't know exactly why it is, but seems to me that the quality of first party has decreased since Sony and Microsoft started going multiplat. Has nothing to do with it being special because the games used to be on one platform. Just that the games are not as good. I attributed it to lack of focus previously but that may not be it. Not sure.....but it is something I've noticed in retrospect.

Nah MS games are better now in the multiplat era than they have been the last 15 years. Indiana Jones, Doom TDA, Grounded, Forza Horizon 5, Age of Empires 4, Flight Sim. MS is doing great.

 

[T4keD0wN]

 

[Labadal]

It gives less incentive to buy a console. That's the main thing.

 

[The_Mike]

It gives less incentive to buy a console. That's the main thing.

And that is a bad thing why?

 

[Topher]

You're feeling the same thing people who have country club memberships feel about people who golf on municipal courses.


With how long dev cycles are, no game out today has had its quality negatively affected by this.

This all started in February of 2024 with Microsoft announcing HiFi Rush and Sea of Thieves coming to PS5. Nothing's been affected by this in the last 18 months.

Games are multiplat being on PC, not just other consoles.

 

[vaibhavpisal]

You don't think Cyberpunk 2077 would've avoided its train-wreck launch had it only been developed with Ps5 (one SKU) in mind, for example? Instead of Windows, XBO, XBS, PS4, PS5, MacOs..

No.

Cyberpunk team was gutted and a new director was brought in to make it a cohesive game. Multiple platforms wasn't the issue.

If old team was capable of delivering, they would have delayed the game and gotten out much better. They were simply over their head with asset streaming and rpg mechanics etc.

 

[Loomy]

Games are multiplat being on PC, not just other consoles.

I think it's just a perception thing instead of an actual drop in quality. Aside from Helldivers, none of the Playstation games released on PC so far were developed with the console version simultaneously. Either Nixxes came in after the fact or the studio ported it afterwards, so it's definitely not a split focus problem.

 

[Gameplay Gods Bless]

Imho it used to make sense when consoles had exotic hardware that required unique approaches to utilize like Xbox 360 I believe had shaders (or something, idr) a couple years before PC. Or the PS2's VU's and EE or PS3 having Blu Ray drives. There were use cases where making a game exclusive to one piece of hardware absolutely made sense to me but it is totally different now. Modern consoles are basically just low range PC's and there are no unique hardware components to take advantage of anymore.

The whole point of having exotic hardware was to give users a mid-high range PC experience for a fraction of the cost and the 360/PS3 were the last consoles to really use that approach (and take the associated risks and losses). But damn man they all got lazy and greedy and just started slopping low-end PC components into a box and slapped PS_ and Xbox_ on them and called it a day.

Xbox 360 had unified shaders months before PC yea, pretty big deal tech there.

 

[cireza]

A game being exclusive makes it better only in the minds of fragile console warriors. Exclusivity sucks, and most of the best games are both third party and multiplatform.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

What complete and utter crock. The game play and quality gives it value. not the platform it is on. That is just your fanboyism shouting to the world.

This.

Exclusivity only really matters for platform-holders when there is direct competition.

 

[Labadal]

And that is a bad thing why?

It's not bad. I won't get the next generation console, and stick to PC.
From my perspective, they can do what they want.

 

[Robb]

No.

Cyberpunk team was gutted and a new director was brought in to make it a cohesive game. Multiple platforms wasn't the issue.

If old team was capable of delivering, they would have delayed the game and gotten out much better. They were simply over their head with asset streaming and rpg mechanics etc.

Maybe, it's all speculative I guess.

From what I recall the last-gen versions of the game were the absolute worst of the bunch and I think they would've faced a lot less criticism bout the games quality at launch had they scrapped them to focus more on the other versions.

The discrepancy in quality between versions was huge.

 

[ecosse_011172]

As someone with both console and PC- I just feel like the soul of gaming is dying.

Yeah, games on PC are objectively better if they are ported right and you have the modern hardware, but there was something awesome about Halo/Gears/Forza being on Xbox, while God of War/Horizon/Ratchet and Clank/Final Fantasy being on PS.

Now I look at consoles like "meh." There used to be an identity associated with them, but with this multi-platform strategy, it just doesn't feel the same anymore.

This is a good post, the identity is clearly affected, apart from Nintendo, of course.

 

[vaibhavpisal]

Maybe, it's all speculative I guess.

From what I recall the last-gen versions of the game were the absolute worst of the bunch and I think they would've faced a lot less criticism bout the games quality at launch had they scrapped them to focus more on the other versions.

The discrepancy in quality between versions was huge.

Yes they were the worst. But it was broken on all systems.

People playing on pc could still enjoy it to some extent, doesn't mean it was ideal.

AI was busted, streaming was buggy, and was generally unfinished. That was fixed later.

 

[SpokkX]

As someone with both console and PC- I just feel like the soul of gaming is dying.

Yeah, games on PC are objectively better if they are ported right and you have the modern hardware, but there was something awesome about Halo/Gears/Forza being on Xbox, while God of War/Horizon/Ratchet and Clank/Final Fantasy being on PS.

Now I look at consoles like "meh." There used to be an identity associated with them, but with this multi-platform strategy, it just doesn't feel the same anymore.

I agree with this

Xbox and Playstation have lost their identity and dont feel special anymore. Exclusives defined their previous machines

Pc has replaced both Xbox and PS for me. Just knowing a can play death stranding 2 on a 5080 soon made me skip it for example. I much prefer to have everything in one library - Steam

Nintendo however - as special as ever. Cant live without their hardwarw still. 100% because exclusives

 

[intheinbetween]

This thread smells like nostalgia instead of reality

 

[DAHGAMING]

As someone with both console and PC- I just feel like the soul of gaming is dying.

Yeah, games on PC are objectively better if they are ported right and you have the modern hardware, but there was something awesome about Halo/Gears/Forza being on Xbox, while God of War/Horizon/Ratchet and Clank/Final Fantasy being on PS.

Now I look at consoles like "meh." There used to be an identity associated with them, but with this multi-platform strategy, it just doesn't feel the same anymore.

I feel the same way. I am lucky that I have always had a half decent PC and any console I want from about 2001 and each place I played had a unique gaming experiance to it. PS2 with its collection of exclusive games, Xbox with its own, along with alot of game that were PC only. I would game online with a group and sometimes we were on Xbox live Halo 2, FIFA, other times it would be SOCOM on PS2, Killzone on PS3, other times we would be on PC mouse and keyboard Counter Strike or Guild Wars.

I guess its overall good we can play most stuff anywhere and use whatever control method we like but there was a unique experiance to each place you played, I guess just a different era and im glad I got to experiance it and its up to us to accept the way things are going now.

I think next gen I will be going PC only though especialy if windows is being streamlined to have a gaming/console like mode as sometimes I like that easy living room experiance when my wifes about and wants to game with me or watch.

 

[Holammer]

Who the hell growing up in the 90s or 2000s has a "strong allegiance" to a video game brand???? Yikes.

I present Robert 'Bob' Chipman, the patron saint of console exclusives & eugenics.

 

[BennyBlanco]

Vanillaware to PC gamers:

PC gamers to Vanillaware:

 

[R3TRO]

Yet, at the same time it feels like exclusivity itself, and not being available anywhere else, gives game more value, and make it more worthwhile to play.

What in tarnation...

 

[IDKFA]

Someone recently made a thread whether we would like for Sega to make a new hardware - while on one hand I don't think that would be a good idea, I still voted yes, because I think it would make the gaming scene in general more interesting, especially if Sega decided not to put their future titles anywhere else.

Which is why this would never happen. Sega are a successful third party publisher now. Pulling support from other platforms to try and recreate their success in the 90s with a risky home console would be stupid.

 

[BlackTron]

Is it still the case? PlayStation had a good run from the late PS3 days to the PS4, but their exclusives have been incredibly lackluster as of late and certainly not any better than other good to great third-party games.

I said that you know to pay attention, not that you know they are better. Playstation titles are no longer exclusive either, so there's that.

 

[Brakum]

A game isnt better because it's on less platforms and that's all that matters so no.

And in some instances it makes the game be less valuable. Multiplayer games for instance. The more people play a multiplayer game, the better. Aka a multiplayer game that's only on one plattform is less valuable

 

[HerjansEagleFeeder]

No

 

[Gaiff]

I said that you know to pay attention, not that you know they are better. Playstation titles are no longer exclusive either, so there's that.

You said they kept them motivated to make games exceptional. Astro Bot aside, I don't think Sony has made one exceptional game in a long time.

 

[BlackTron]

You said they kept them motivated to make games exceptional. Astro Bot aside, I don't think Sony has made one exceptional game in a long time.

So their only exceptional game is their only exclusive one? I'm not seeing the conflict.

 

[Durin]

Yet, at the same time it feels like exclusivity itself, and not being available anywhere else, gives game more value, and make it more worthwhile to play.

It's fake value though, playing to the worst tendencies of platform shills/warriors, and really only can bring actual value to the platform holder. Why we're seeing them go away is because exclusives matter less as budgets scale, and the cost/benefit of porting to other platforms outweighs it.

Nintendo gave up the hardware war, so their games can be made cheaper keeping that cost/benefit in a place that makes it work for them. That said, Sony's still been selling millions of boxes in the last year despite porting, so they didn't magically bleed out their audience...because normies don't care like fanboys do.

 

[Shifty1897]

I'm just here to play great games as cheaply as possible, that means exclusives are a problem.

 

[T-800]

Nah except pc only

 

[dragonyeuw]

Generally the economics of AAA gaming no longer support exclusivity, and I've long wanted a new player in the console game but the economics don't really support that either. I think a big part of why I've moved mostly to PC, asides from the open platform benefits, I feel like I can better avoid the console market politics and just better focus on gaming. None of the current console makers are all that appealing to me anymore, at least not compared to what they used to be and what they produced.

 

[Humdinger]

Yes, there is something to be said for exclusives, but it's not that it makes games better. It's that exclusivity is the basis for a console's success (or at least one important base). You need something to make people choose your console over the other guy's, and exclusives help do that. Once people are drawn into your ecosystem, you then make 30% off everything they buy.

However, there is less need to maintain exclusivity today, because there is less need to make the argument that "Our platform is better than the other guy's." The other guy has lost the console war. He is not a competitor any longer, and there is no one in sight to take his place. So with an effective monopoly (at least at the high-end), Sony has less need to maintain exclusivity.

 

[twilo99]

Yeah, you're absolutely right. And for the best exclusives, you can often tell they put in a lot more love, care, optimization and resources into making the game special - so that people would choose that platform for gaming. That's what's getting lost now more and more often.

Yeah, these games do feel more special more often than not. Your made an investment. You wouldn't buy a whole console if it wasn't for these special, exclusive games.

Placebo

 

[Signalis]

As someone with both console and PC- I just feel like the soul of gaming is dying.

Yeah, games on PC are objectively better if they are ported right and you have the modern hardware, but there was something awesome about Halo/Gears/Forza being on Xbox, while God of War/Horizon/Ratchet and Clank/Final Fantasy being on PS.

Now I look at consoles like "meh." There used to be an identity associated with them, but with this multi-platform strategy, it just doesn't feel the same anymore.

Games aren't made by people who love making games/playing games anymore. Things have gone backwards when gaming became "popular". I'd rather go back to the days of being called a nerd.

 

[NovaSe7en]

Walled gardens have been historically bad for consumers, but gamers support this practice against their own interests.

Exclusivity is good for the company who holds the rights. It does not benefit you. It only puts game preservation at risk (wanna play Infamous or Resistance but don't have a working PS3? Go fuck yourself. Sincerely, Sony) and gives publishers an opportunity to nickel and dime you for resolution/framerate bumps (wanna play in 4k/60fps on Switch 2? That'll be $10/per game. Sincerely, Nintendo).

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

Exclusivity as an idea changed over time.

For decades, gaming just isn't compatible between hardware. For example when the Robocop, Jurassic Park or Terminator IP owners want to make videogames, they will release separate games on different machines. They would all be called the same names, but the games are different. Sure, having arcade ports is a thing, but then unless you own a NeoGeo the ports are way inferior.

Part of the "Power argument" in Console wars, is how well certain arcade titles could be ported better from one to another.

Sometime in the last 30 years, the consoles become similar enough that you can port the same game to run on all the machines. Basically until multiplat games existed, Exclusives are the norm. It was so normal that PlayStation 1 was basically known only for 3rd party titles. Because even though it was all 3rd party there was no other machine at the time that could run the same games.

As of now the console wars have ended. it might start up again later, but right now there is peace. And Sony is making decisions like you would when there is no console war going on. Remember when France and UK were at literal war for centuries? At some point they stopped killing each other. People who lived in the war times would have felt strange that UK and France are actually trading now. But that is the weird thing about the peace period. Priority changes.