Is exclusive games good or bad?

[Flame]

Anyone that legitimately thinks this is a reason for owning one system over any other is a moron... like the early adopters that backed XB0ne from day one purely because they were "team Xbox" last gen.
Fuck that.
You buy the system that has the games you want to play.

I was "team Xbox" last gen, but I was wise enough to not buy one as soon as they released their next system... in fact, the first console I bought when this gen kicked off was a PS3! Yep, a PS3 - so I could play the system exclusives I missed on it last gen.
Then after letting this current gen find it's feet, the next system I bought was a Wii U, because it had developed a ton of exclusives that I wanted to play. Eventually I got a PS4 Pro too for the same reasons.

Don't fanboy one company over another. Go with the games.

That also raises the argument if Nintendo was not a hardware company and did software for other platforms. we will have more choice of stuff.

can you imagine virtual console on your mobile phone?

 

[SG854]

Anyone that legitimately thinks this is a reason for owning one system over any other is a moron... like the early adopters that backed XB0ne from day one purely because they were "team Xbox" last gen.
Fuck that.
You buy the system that has the games you want to play.

I was "team Xbox" last gen, but I was wise enough to not buy one as soon as they released their next system... in fact, the first console I bought when this gen kicked off was a PS3! Yep, a PS3 - so I could play the system exclusives I missed on it last gen.
Then after letting this current gen find it's feet, the next system I bought was a Wii U, because it had developed a ton of exclusives that I wanted to play. Eventually I got a PS4 Pro too for the same reasons.

Don't fanboy one company over another. Go with the games.

But what if one company has games people like. Can people fanboy/fangirl then?

That also raises the argument if Nintendo was not a hardware company and did software for other platforms. we will have more choice of stuff.

can you imagine virtual console on your mobile phone?

We wouldn’t have gotten the DS, WII, or Switch

 

[Flame]

But what if one company has games I like, can I fan boy then?


We wouldn’t have gotten the DS, WII, or Switch

>Wii

oh noes. not the wii. would somebody think of the children !

 

[SG854]

>Wii

oh noes. not the wii

And Wii U. A console for Wii the casuals and for U the gamer.

 

[leon315]

Bad. Until 60fps is standard on console, everything should have a pc version as well.

consoles are far from the standard of 60fps, almost 90% of AAA games run like 30fps which often goes even down to 25fps. meanwhile same game on pc with faster CPU, GPU they can be run even at 144 or 240fps(Overwatch, Warframe CSgo)

 

[Taleweaver]

With great art you need limitations. There's a strong argument to be made for quality increasing as a result of just focusing on one platform.

That's...totally not what the saying is about. It's creativity that increases with limitation, not quality. And then still: the limitation should be on the artistic element, not the technological one (if creativity is used in the technological field, it's never in favor of the end users).
I'd also remind you that the platform-specific part of creating a game is ever shrinking. Are you seriously arguing that quality increases when someone DOESN'T push unity's "compile for <console X>" button?

 

[FAST6191]

I have long argued for the DVD model.

Get all the companies together to design a fixed format with requirements for it. Have anybody that buys in the ability to make one (I would like open source but who am I kidding), maybe with fancy extras like surround sound or whatever and leave others to do basic stuff.
You can still charge devs a cut, for dev kits or whatever.

Some say it drives innovation -- computer game development budgets rival what we typically see in film and TV and are able to be made on contemporarily available hardware these days, with thousands of new people being trained every year in the tools and techniques. Neither of those other types of entertainment seem to have a particular problem making cool stuff (they might make a lot of repetitive dross but they still get out the good stuff all the time).
To that end I would have to ponder instead of driving it if it stifles it by virtue of splitting a potential audience. I also have to note innovation is not a synonym for good.

Also I would wonder how many would change their tune if we stripped emulation and second hand games (not going to happen so a bit of an odd what if, however for many it is not really an option).

 

[AdamFX990]

That's...totally not what the saying is about. It's creativity that increases with limitation, not quality. And then still: the limitation should be on the artistic element, not the technological one (if creativity is used in the technological field, it's never in favor of the end users).
I'd also remind you that the platform-specific part of creating a game is ever shrinking. Are you seriously arguing that quality increases when someone DOESN'T push unity's "compile for <console X>" button?

It's never that simple. You have developers, QAs and possibly BAs trying to implement what PMs ask for. Each platform has technical limitations to cater for. BAs and PMs rarely understand that concept. QAs work in then increased for each platform targeted. If a game is focused solely on PS4 for example, your whole QA team is dedicated to testing on PS4. If you bring in more systems, you have to perform TEs (Test Executions) on each platform. Granted, you probably only need to write test cases once. But there could still be differences that require different test cases to be implemented for different platforms.

As for development work, you are completely disregarding platform-specific APIs and OSes. For example, the Xbox 360 supported XNA as a framework for developing games in Visual Studio using C#. Stuff built in XNA wouldn't compile for PS3, as much of the code it depends on from the OS wasn't there (a slight oversimplification but you get the idea). The CPU architecture for both systems is mostly the same, but that doesn't mean games written for one are easily compiled for the other.

Interestingly, with the latest generation of consoles. its the other way around. PS4 supports XNA through mono and uses the BSD kernel. The XBone, despite XNA being Microsoft's creation, doesn't support XNA in any form.

It has admittedly been a while since I've used Unity, but I guarantee there are limitations to compiling for each platform. Targeting just one additional platform is a huge amount to take on, unless the game is incredibly simple. But even then, there's still all the QA work to consider.

TLDR: Targeting one platform for a game unifies the team towards a common goal and prevents neutering of ideas due to the limitations of that platform. The result being the potential for a game that can be as good as it can possibly for that system, rather than a compromise that works on multiple systems. The later may still be achieved but is far less likely than in the case of the former.

 

[Song of storms]

Exclusives good. EA bad. Like share and subscribe for more content.

 

[HaloEliteLegend]

Well, an exclusive game is necessarily disadvantageous to you, the consumer, as it requires you to have that hardware. There are some things you might gain from exclusivity. Better hardware optimization, perhaps, or hardware-specific features/gimmicks, like gyro controls. Ultimately it benefits platform holders most as it moves hardware. Though, also consider that many exclusive titles might not exist at all if not for platform holders funding them. Personally, I'm neutral towards exclusives, they are what they are.