Gaming Microsoft buys Zenimax (parent company of Bethesda, ID software, Arkane studios, Machine games and Tango gameworks)

afrocentricity

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
21,839
Guys why so angry, let our love of gaming unite us.
Pent up rage, frustration? You've been poking them for months. I get it...

PS fans two days ago:
Xbox has no exclusives. Who wants an Xbox

PS fans today:
FECK xbox, They should allow all their owned IPs on PS
Given that we don't know if these games (and everyone is only talking about Bethesda games here) will be exclusive, are you hoping that they are?
 

Bojan11

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
30,221
Only one raging over here is @afrocentricity because MS took his Bethesda games away from him...

I will still play the latest Bethesda games. No need for me to be worried or uncertain what’s going to happen in the future.
 

afrocentricity

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
21,839
Only one raging over here is @afrocentricity because MS took his Bethesda games away from him...

I will still play the latest Bethesda games. No need for me to be worried or uncertain what’s going to happen in the future.
fecking hell you're so weird....
 

Igor Drefljak

Definitely Russian
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
6,190
Location
The Wastelands
Given that we don't know if these games (and everyone is only talking about Bethesda games here) will be exclusive, are you hoping that they are?
I'm gonna say yes, I hope they are
I'm on PC these days so I honestly don't care, but I do find it funny for the last month or so, all we've heard is. Xbox has no games.
Now all of a sudden, it seems a crime that Xbox have some

Plus, I'm a massive Fallout fan, so maybe with some pushiness and extra money, they may make games quicker with the extra money they may have
 

Bojan11

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
30,221
fecking hell you're so weird....
You need to add a few more full stops because I’m not sure MS will listen to your tears with just four at the end.
 

Igor Drefljak

Definitely Russian
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
6,190
Location
The Wastelands

“Gaming is about entertainment and community and diversion and learning new stories and new perspectives,” he said. “I find it completely counter to what gaming is about to say that part of that is to lock people away from being able to experience those games. Or to force someone to buy my specific device on the day that I want them to go buy it, in order to partake in what gaming is about. Gaming is bigger than any one device…”


Yeah, ok Phil.
So what if Phil goes to the table and says.

We've got the new Elder Scrolls. We will let you have the game if you let us have TLoU 1,2 and the next one?

Fair trade, no?
 

afrocentricity

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
21,839
So what if Phil goes to the table and says.

We've got the new Elder Scrolls. We will let you have the game if you let us have TLoU 1,2 and the next one?

Fair trade, no?
I don't actually care about exclusives I just want to play good games, preferably for cheap expenditure...
 

Bojan11

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
30,221

“Gaming is about entertainment and community and diversion and learning new stories and new perspectives,” he said. “I find it completely counter to what gaming is about to say that part of that is to lock people away from being able to experience those games. Or to force someone to buy my specific device on the day that I want them to go buy it, in order to partake in what gaming is about. Gaming is bigger than any one device…”


Yeah, ok Phil.
I think it went over your head a few times as @Alock1 explained to you countless times.

Gamepass is available on PC, Xbox and Android phones. They looking to add it on IOS soon. Then after that Smart TVs and browsers.

Now get your fingers out and count how many devices that is? Don’t use the Essien calculator because that’s more than one device...
 

Organic Potatoes

Full Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2013
Messages
12,868
Location
85R722RR+F5
Supports
Colorado Rapids
And I also want that to be honest. I think we all do.
But we cannot slate xbox for doing this, considering PS fanboys for years show off about it.
I don’t care because Bethesda has been going downhill, but it seems the feeling is things like The Elder Scrolls sort of transcends the usual barriers because it has been a part of the global gaming consciousness.

So it is completely understandable some would react that way, even if they’re wrong.
 

esmufc07

Cried while watching Titanic
Scout
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
40,165
And I also want that to be honest. I think we all do.
But we cannot slate xbox for doing this, considering PS fanboys for years show off about it.
I think most have acknowledged that it’s a good move from MS’s perspective and that for some of us it will lead us to buying the console at some point in the future? Do I wish they were staying multiplat? Of course.
 

afrocentricity

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
21,839
I'll be playing all of the good games that I want to play, just like this Gen. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy. @Bojan11

It's shit when whoever does it, Sony, Microsoft, Epic, etc. @Igor Drefljak

You won't see me celebrating it
 

Igor Drefljak

Definitely Russian
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
6,190
Location
The Wastelands
I'll be playing all of the good games that I want to play, just like this Gen. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy. @Bojan11

It's shit when whoever does it, Sony, Microsoft, Epic, etc. @Igor Drefljak

You won't see me celebrating it
To be fair, I hope part of the reason for this deal to happen is to try and negotiate with Sony somewhat.
That way Phil gets his wish of all games on all platforms.

Right now I can play 95% of games on the PC so I'm happy enough, but I wouldn't mind playing the odd Sony one, so that would be nice
 

Mr Pigeon

baldy fatty bum bum
Scout
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
14,643
Location
Staging a 'coo' against my enemies in Fife
I really want another Fallout game by Obsidian now... I bet they would even get time to finish it. If Microsoft are going to keep these games on PC then even better.

Folks - this is good news. All that needs to happen now is EA explode and Bioware get to make a proper game again. Unless it's exclusive on the iPhone or some shit.
 

Bojan11

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
30,221
I'll be playing all of the good games that I want to play, just like this Gen. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy. @Bojan11

It's shit when whoever does it, Sony, Microsoft, Epic, etc. @Igor Drefljak

You won't see me celebrating it
You got a PC. Why you worrying for?

Like I said earlier in the thread, I rather MS have bought them than Amazon or Google. Imagine them making Stadia only games. Yuck.

This is a great move for MS because it means they will push forward exclusives and so will Sony. Nintendo will do their own great things. Competition is good because if MS do well I guarantee that £70 rrp from Sony for first party games will not last long.
 

Mr Pigeon

baldy fatty bum bum
Scout
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
14,643
Location
Staging a 'coo' against my enemies in Fife
To be fair, I hope part of the reason for this deal to happen is to try and negotiate with Sony somewhat.
That way Phil gets his wish of all games on all platforms.

Right now I can play 95% of games on the PC so I'm happy enough, but I wouldn't mind playing the odd Sony one, so that would be nice
Microsoft can make a killing with their Game Pass if it came to PlayStation, similar to how Sony could make a killing with their PS Plus Collection on Xbox and PC. If you look at how MS, Android and even Apple are making their services compatible with one another (looking mainly at how Office 365, Google Classroom and Apple Classrooms work together, aren't competing anymore with third parties like Nearpod) it shows that most of these companies see the potential in sharing services. I remember when it seemed insane to imagine using Chrome on an iPad and yet there it is on the main page of the Apple Store.

We're starting to see us edging closer to parity with things like crossplay. But I guess it really depends on the hardware sales next gen. If Sony have a clear lead like this gen then it might be appealing to both parties. If Microsoft took a big lead then they might still be interested because it's some extra cash. If things were neck and neck then Sony might be dicks about it, hide in their silo, and try to buy Bungie to try and take the lead.
 

Stemmy

Full Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,147
Location
Dublin
People gleefully gloating that another set of gamers now won't be able to play a game on their platform of choice that they otherwise would have really need to have a look at themselves.

Exclusives almost exclusively suck for the consumer and benefit the platform holder.

And Sony can feck off with their timed exclusive shenanigans they seem to love pulling lately.
 

Bojan11

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
30,221

On top of this, publishers and developers struggle to predict what consumers will want. The audience has fickle tastes. And even when a studio is working on something with proven appeal, like a military shooter, they must compete against ingrained properties often from teams with even bigger budgets.

This leads to escalating investment costs as studios try to compete. Is your game not as pretty as Red Dead and not as big as Assassin’s Creed? Well, that sounds like a game I can wait to play until it’s on sale.
The especially tough thing for publishers is that even if they launch a high-quality game to good reviews, it’s often not enough to pull an audience away from their chosen live-service games. More players are returning to evergreen hits like Fortnite, Rainbow Six: Siege, and Warframe repeatedly for months and years at a time.

In that environment, it often seems like only the most prestige single-player narrative-driven games breakout from the crowd.
Bethesda ran into all of the problems I listed above.

It tried to compete with high-budget single-player experiences. At E3 2017, the company even had an initiative called #saveplayer1 about ensuring the future of solo games. That led to games like a Dishonored 2 expansion, The Evil Within 2, and Wolfenstein 2: The New Colossus. But none of those games were huge financial successes, even if they all are beloved by their fans and received positive reviews.
The publisher also tried its own store with the Bethesda Launcher on PC, only to witness EA soften its position toward running the EA Origin store. It also saw companies like Ubisoft and EA try their own subscription services. Bethesda knows how expensive and challenging it would be to get those programs off the ground. And in the end, Steam and Xbox Game Pass are probably still going to win in the end.
This deal ensures that the people and teams that make up Bethesda have a chance to remain together. The alternative under an independent ZeniMax Media was likely closures, layoffs, and fewer games. And I guess that’s the good news for fans. This deal will get you more games.

Ultimately, I view Microsoft’s Bethesda acquisition as an enabling move. It is purchasing eight new studios to empower them to keep making games. This is distinct from prohibitive moves where a company pays a publisher a fee to keep a game off of a competing platform.

It’s hard to say that the deal is good for the game industry, though. But for now, it’s probably better for the people making games at Bethesda.
 

Alock1

Wears XXXL shirts and can't type ellipses
Joined
Nov 30, 2011
Messages
14,169
People gleefully gloating that another set of gamers now won't be able to play a game on their platform of choice that they otherwise would have really need to have a look at themselves.

Exclusives almost exclusively suck for the consumer and benefit the platform holder.

And Sony can feck off with their timed exclusive shenanigans they seem to love pulling lately.
Nobody here has gloated gleefully

I like exclusives, because I think that they tend to be of higher quality and often produce some of the best games. Without that exclusive element, many fantastic games wouldn't have been made, ones that were builtly solely to help prop up a platform and sell a system.

Timed exclusive or whatever would have been made anyway, so I don't like them as such. But I also don't think it's a huge issue - nobody is out of pocket, you just can't buy a game without entering a particular ecosystem first. In the near future, that won't matter as much as they are looking to become platform-agnostic and it's about the subscription.

The only thing that really annoys me is when you pay the same price for the same product on two platforms, and one platform has more features, or extra content.
 

Alock1

Wears XXXL shirts and can't type ellipses
Joined
Nov 30, 2011
Messages
14,169
There’s been a little gloating from the Xbox minority faction.
Maybe minor in response to 'no games' memes but not really to be honest, and obviously it's all tongue in cheek on here.
 

Turnip

likes to be spanked with games consoles
Joined
Jun 27, 2014
Messages
1,747
Location
Beckham's right nipple
How? Games pass has ea play aswell so the likes of fifa and madden etc on there which are super casual. It just means more games open to a wide audience. Or parents go get the 20 pound a month xbox and their kids have unlimited games for 2 years that's a great deal no for anyone.
True, but do you know anyone whith the EA thing? Or do they all just buy fifa every year like my mates?
 

afrocentricity

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
21,839
Nobody here has gloated gleefully

I like exclusives, because I think that they tend to be of higher quality and often produce some of the best games. Without that exclusive element, many fantastic games wouldn't have been made, ones that were builtly solely to help prop up a platform and sell a system.

Timed exclusive or whatever would have been made anyway, so I don't like them as such. But I also don't think it's a huge issue - nobody is out of pocket, you just can't buy a game without entering a particular ecosystem first. In the near future, that won't matter as much as they are looking to become platform-agnostic and it's about the subscription.

The only thing that really annoys me is when you pay the same price for the same product on two platforms, and one platform has more features, or extra content.
Had a little think about this, how is permanent exclusivity not objectively worse than timed exclusivity or exclusive features (from Sony, MS, whoever)?
 

pratyush_utd

Full Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2017
Messages
1,964
I wanted Microsoft to offer something new in terms of their first party lineup. This is one way of increasing first party games but not necessarily what i thought Microsoft will do this gen. I am interested in Starfield ( big Mass effect fan so this was the game that i was looking forward) while only FPS that i loved was DOOM, so yeah going with PS might not suffice this time.

Question is should I order both right now and burn my money or wait few years and then buy PC or Xbox to play those games (assuming i have PS already)? Both PS and Xbox are 700$ here, so its a lot of money in one go for gaming console.
 

Alock1

Wears XXXL shirts and can't type ellipses
Joined
Nov 30, 2011
Messages
14,169
Had a little think about this, how is permanent exclusivity not objectively worse than timed exclusivity or exclusive features (from Sony, MS, whoever)?
It's not like you are paying money to get a worse or later experience. And usually if it's wholly exclusive then it's often likely the game wouldn't have been made if not for the exclusivity, and is often better for it.

Timed or content are literally just taking money and still then trying to sell to everybody - having cake and eating too type of thing.
 

Stemmy

Full Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,147
Location
Dublin
It's not like you are paying money to get a worse or later experience. And usually if it's wholly exclusive then it's often likely the game wouldn't have been made if not for the exclusivity, and is often better for it.
I don't buy that really. Studios being owned by a platform holder and the exclusivity might have an small impact on how games are made but its one of a myriad of reasons why particular games are made or not.

You think if Naughty Dog was a multiplatform studio they wouldn't pump out a new Last of us or Uncharted? or they never would in the first place if they were not exclusive?
 

Ainu

Full Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2008
Messages
7,679
Location
Antwerp, Belgium
Had a little think about this, how is permanent exclusivity not objectively worse than timed exclusivity or exclusive features (from Sony, MS, whoever)?
Do you mean exclusivity from third party studios or in general? Because I'd certainly say first party studios lead to technically superior games due to their exclusive focus on a single environment, and I see that as a good thing. Getting exclusivity from third party studios though, in any shape or form, is another matter. I don't see any positives there.

I don't buy that really. Studios being owned by a platform holder and the exclusivity might have an small impact on how games are made but its one of a myriad of reasons why particular games are made or not.

You think if Naughty Dog was a multiplatform studio they wouldn't pump out a new Last of us or Uncharted? or they never would in the first place if they were not exclusive?
The quality would be noticeably lower, that's a given.
 

afrocentricity

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
21,839
Do you mean exclusivity from third party studios or in general? Because I'd certainly say first party studios lead to technically superior games due to their exclusive focus on a single environment, and I see that as a good thing. Getting exclusivity from third party studios though, in any shape or form, is another matter. I don't see any positives there.
Permanent exclusivity means a group of people never get access.

Timed exclusivity means a group of people have to wait.

Exclusive features means that as group get access to an altered product, sometimes inferior.

Your point about 1st party is valid, but I'm just talking about exclusivity as a concept. I haven't had to think about it for a while because, XBox hAz nO gAmeZ... I do recall being mildly peeved about Titanfall and Tombraider. I'm sure a lot of XBox fans were also mildly peeved about Spiderman and Streetfighter too.

Based on comments in here though I don't wanna hear any bitching from anyone about exclusives again, most don't seem to mind and some are for it.

It's not like you are paying money to get a worse or later experience. And usually if it's wholly exclusive then it's often likely the game wouldn't have been made if not for the exclusivity, and is often better for it.

Timed or content are literally just taking money and still then trying to sell to everybody - having cake and eating too type of thing.
However I feel about both on a case by case basis, in general, I don't see how getting access to something late or partially, is worse than never getting access.
 

Siorac

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
17,672
Location
16th century
I like exclusives, because I think that they tend to be of higher quality and often produce some of the best games.
That's one hell of a statement, and quite easy to find examples to the contrary. For every Bloodborne there's an Order 1886.

I don't think exclusivity has any impact on a game's quality. I take your point that sometimes it's the only way to secure financing for a game so maybe there could be a faint argument that there are more games out in the world thanks to exclusivity deals. But higher quality? I don't think so.
 

Massive Spanner

Thinks Geoff Shreeves has one
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
16,159
Location
Tool shed
That's one hell of a statement, and quite easy to find examples to the contrary. For every Bloodborne there's an Order 1886.

I don't think exclusivity has any impact on a game's quality. I take your point that sometimes it's the only way to secure financing for a game so maybe there could be a faint argument that there are more games out in the world thanks to exclusivity deals. But higher quality? I don't think so.
I think the point is that if you look at the best games of the generation, a disproportionate amount of them tend to be exclusives, whether they be from Ninty or Sony studios. Obviously they have a fair few misfires but it's a much lower percentage then multi-platform games.
 

Alock1

Wears XXXL shirts and can't type ellipses
Joined
Nov 30, 2011
Messages
14,169
I think the point is that if you look at the best games of the generation, a disproportionate amount of them tend to be exclusives, whether they be from Ninty or Sony studios. Obviously they have a fair few misfires but it's a much lower percentage then multi-platform games.
This
 

Bosws87

Full Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2015
Messages
579
Instead of arguing over a pointless exclusive argument which no one knows the answer too, my biggest worry with the big titles is i don't think the next elder scrolls or fallout will actually be that great.

They got away with the last releases because of the timing, granted Skyrim and Oblivion were great for the time they were released, Fallout 3 absolutely fantastic i love that game (lets pretend fallout 4 never existed abysmal)

I think with the polish expected of top triple A games, engines, graphics and storyline fleshed out quests etc. There is absolutely no guarantee the next series of games will be any good at all. I'm not 100% confident they will produce anything close to what morrowind, skyrim and oblivion were considered.

Doom on the other hand is only getting better what a great engine and game they have, runs and looks fantastic at 4k on PC.
 

Siorac

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
17,672
Location
16th century
I think the point is that if you look at the best games of the generation, a disproportionate amount of them tend to be exclusives, whether they be from Ninty or Sony studios. Obviously they have a fair few misfires but it's a much lower percentage then multi-platform games.
Nintendo is Nintendo, we should probably leave them out of the discussion, they're a separate thing really. They have a completely different profile than Xbox and PlayStation, and let's face it, this thread barely even mentioned them because we all know it's about PS vs Xbox.

Here's the highest-scoring games of the 2010s on Metacritic: https://www.metacritic.com/feature/best-videogames-of-the-decade-2010s

In the top 20, the only non-Nintendo exclusives are the Last of Us games and God of War. And then there's quite a lot of multiplatform titles, such as Portal 2, Mass Effect 2, the Red Dead Redemption games, Skyrim, Bioshock Infinite, Batman: Arkham City, Divinity: Original Sin 2. Even Minecraft is available on three different operating systems so it's sort of multiplatform. Then there are games like Undertale, Metal Gear Solid V, Overwatch, Doom 2016, Rocket League or the Witcher 3 that are out of the top 20 on this list but all have been hugely successful, critically acclaimed titles. Or From Software with the Dark Souls series and Sekiro. There are also tons of smaller gems that are multiplatform, such as Hollow Knight or the Untitled Goose Game.

I don't see evidence that games that are released for both PS and Xbox are somehow inferior, overall, to exclusives. I'm not even convinced about the percentage argument. Most of the PS4 exclusives, for example, are completely forgettable, just look at the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:PlayStation_4-only_games.
 

Massive Spanner

Thinks Geoff Shreeves has one
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
16,159
Location
Tool shed
Nintendo is Nintendo, we should probably leave them out of the discussion, they're a separate thing really. They have a completely different profile than Xbox and PlayStation, and let's face it, this thread barely even mentioned them because we all know it's about PS vs Xbox.

Here's the highest-scoring games of the 2010s on Metacritic: https://www.metacritic.com/feature/best-videogames-of-the-decade-2010s

In the top 20, the only non-Nintendo exclusives are the Last of Us games and God of War. And then there's quite a lot of multiplatform titles, such as Portal 2, Mass Effect 2, the Red Dead Redemption games, Skyrim, Bioshock Infinite, Batman: Arkham City, Divinity: Original Sin 2. Even Minecraft is available on three different operating systems so it's sort of multiplatform. Then there are games like Undertale, Metal Gear Solid V, Overwatch, Doom 2016, Rocket League or the Witcher 3 that are out of the top 20 on this list but all have been hugely successful, critically acclaimed titles. Or From Software with the Dark Souls series and Sekiro. There are also tons of smaller gems that are multiplatform, such as Hollow Knight or the Untitled Goose Game.

I don't see evidence that games that are released for both PS and Xbox are somehow inferior, overall, to exclusives. I'm not even convinced about the percentage argument. Most of the PS4 exclusives, for example, are completely forgettable, just look at the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:PlayStation_4-only_games.
Why would we leave Nintendo out? I don't see the difference between the Switch and PS4 in that they both have their exclusives that help ship the console as well as most other 3rd party titles (Switch a little less so).

To be clear, I wasn't at all suggesting the bolded part, maybe Alock was, but not me. A good number of my favourite games of this generation have been multi-platform, all I am saying is that there is a disproportionate amount of quality exclusives to multi-platform games. I'm not sure how it can even be argued when you consider that PS4 and Switch sales were largely so strong because of their quality exclusives.

Also maybe we differ but I wouldn't say most of that list is forgettable? it also doesn't have the exclusive that Sony made available on PC at the very end of the generation (Horizon, Death Stranding). I count a good 10-12 games in there that I really enjoyed. I imagine if there was a list of all non exclusive games from the same period there would be a hell of a lot more forgettable ones.

From my own perspective anyway if I was to do a top.. say 15 or 20 games of the last generation, I'd say a good half of them would be exclusives.
 

Siorac

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
17,672
Location
16th century
Why would we leave Nintendo out? I don't see the difference between the Switch and PS4 in that they both have their exclusives that help ship the console as well as most other 3rd party titles (Switch a little less so).

To be clear, I wasn't at all suggesting the bolded part, maybe Alock was, but not me. A good number of my favourite games of this generation have been multi-platform, all I am saying is that there is a disproportionate amount of quality exclusives to multi-platform games. I'm not sure how it can even be argued when you consider that PS4 and Switch sales were largely so strong because of their quality exclusives.

Also maybe we differ but I wouldn't say most of that list is forgettable? it also doesn't have the exclusive that Sony made available on PC at the very end of the generation (Horizon, Death Stranding). I count a good 10-12 games in there that I really enjoyed. I imagine if there was a list of all non exclusive games from the same period there would be a hell of a lot more forgettable ones.

From my own perspective anyway if I was to do a top.. say 15 or 20 games of the last generation, I'd say a good half of them would be exclusives.
But this is why I tried to find some halfway objective way of listing them. If I listed my top 20 from the last X years - say, since the release of the PS4 -, the only exclusives featuring would be Bloodborne and Horizon: Zero Dawn. I didn't play God of War and Death Stranding, I have zero interest in Spiderman games... and then what else is there? Oh yeah, Last of Us, which is more of an interactive movie than a game anyway, and it's a zombie thing so again, no interest. Ultimately, our rankings of these things are hugely influenced by what we actually play. Obviously. If you have a console and nothing else, you're likely to play a disproportionate amount of exclusives. If you have a console and a PC, you're far more likely to play more multiplatform games than exclusives.

I'd say there are far more quality multiplatform games than exclusives. I listed quite a lot of them, I could list more, and it's not really possible to come up with a similar number of great exclusives. And the best exclusive games really aren't any better than the best multiplatform games. The only argument I can see is that exclusives, as they are often directly backed by the hardware manufacturer, have more financial resources than your average indie game, and are thus more polished and so on. But 1) indie games with a modest budget can still turn out to be fantastic, 2) there are plenty of big hitters in the industry who make AAA games with huge budgets anyway.

Oh, and I'd leave Nintendo out because the type of games they go for is radically different than the PS/Xbox market. They always did their own thing. If their games are good - they surely must be though they hold no appeal for me but their success speaks for itself - then it's not because they're exclusive, it's because they're an experienced game developer company with huge resources and a well-established base. Their games wouldn't suffer one bit if, say, they contracted a couple of companies to port them to other platforms, too. They just don't do it because they want to push their own hardware, too.

Exclusivity is all about sales, all about revenue and profit. Let's not start pretending that it's somehow consumer-friendly because it increases the quality of the games we have. It doesn't. An exclusive can be quality and can be shite. A multiplatform game can be quality and it can be shite. Marketing execs would love it if we actually believed that locking games to a single platform makes them better when in reality, it's simply anti-consumer. I very much hope it won't be a thing in the future.
 

Massive Spanner

Thinks Geoff Shreeves has one
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
16,159
Location
Tool shed
But this is why I tried to find some halfway objective way of listing them. If I listed my top 20 from the last X years - say, since the release of the PS4 -, the only exclusives featuring would be Bloodborne and Horizon: Zero Dawn. I didn't play God of War and Death Stranding, I have zero interest in Spiderman games... and then what else is there? Oh yeah, Last of Us, which is more of an interactive movie than a game anyway, and it's a zombie thing so again, no interest. Ultimately, our rankings of these things are hugely influenced by what we actually play. Obviously. If you have a console and nothing else, you're likely to play a disproportionate amount of exclusives. If you have a console and a PC, you're far more likely to play more multiplatform games than exclusives.

I'd say there are far more quality multiplatform games than exclusives. I listed quite a lot of them, I could list more, and it's not really possible to come up with a similar number of great exclusives. And the best exclusive games really aren't any better than the best multiplatform games. The only argument I can see is that exclusives, as they are often directly backed by the hardware manufacturer, have more financial resources than your average indie game, and are thus more polished and so on. But 1) indie games with a modest budget can still turn out to be fantastic, 2) there are plenty of big hitters in the industry who make AAA games with huge budgets anyway.

Oh, and I'd leave Nintendo out because the type of games they go for is radically different than the PS/Xbox market. They always did their own thing. If their games are good - they surely must be though they hold no appeal for me but their success speaks for itself - then it's not because they're exclusive, it's because they're an experienced game developer company with huge resources and a well-established base. Their games wouldn't suffer one bit if, say, they contracted a couple of companies to port them to other platforms, too. They just don't do it because they want to push their own hardware, too.

Exclusivity is all about sales, all about revenue and profit. Let's not start pretending that it's somehow consumer-friendly because it increases the quality of the games we have. It doesn't. An exclusive can be quality and can be shite. A multiplatform game can be quality and it can be shite. Marketing execs would love it if we actually believed that locking games to a single platform makes them better when in reality, it's simply anti-consumer. I very much hope it won't be a thing in the future.
I totally disagree with just about everything you've said there but.. each to their own.

Again, I am not arguing that there are more quality non exclusives than exclusives. I am arguing that there is a disproportionate amount of quality exclusives to non exclusives.
 

evil_geko

Full Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
2,754
But this is why I tried to find some halfway objective way of listing them. If I listed my top 20 from the last X years - say, since the release of the PS4 -, the only exclusives featuring would be Bloodborne and Horizon: Zero Dawn. I didn't play God of War and Death Stranding, I have zero interest in Spiderman games... and then what else is there? Oh yeah, Last of Us, which is more of an interactive movie than a game anyway, and it's a zombie thing so again, no interest. Ultimately, our rankings of these things are hugely influenced by what we actually play. Obviously. If you have a console and nothing else, you're likely to play a disproportionate amount of exclusives. If you have a console and a PC, you're far more likely to play more multiplatform games than exclusives.

I'd say there are far more quality multiplatform games than exclusives. I listed quite a lot of them, I could list more, and it's not really possible to come up with a similar number of great exclusives. And the best exclusive games really aren't any better than the best multiplatform games. The only argument I can see is that exclusives, as they are often directly backed by the hardware manufacturer, have more financial resources than your average indie game, and are thus more polished and so on. But 1) indie games with a modest budget can still turn out to be fantastic, 2) there are plenty of big hitters in the industry who make AAA games with huge budgets anyway.

Oh, and I'd leave Nintendo out because the type of games they go for is radically different than the PS/Xbox market. They always did their own thing. If their games are good - they surely must be though they hold no appeal for me but their success speaks for itself - then it's not because they're exclusive, it's because they're an experienced game developer company with huge resources and a well-established base. Their games wouldn't suffer one bit if, say, they contracted a couple of companies to port them to other platforms, too. They just don't do it because they want to push their own hardware, too.

Exclusivity is all about sales, all about revenue and profit. Let's not start pretending that it's somehow consumer-friendly because it increases the quality of the games we have. It doesn't. An exclusive can be quality and can be shite. A multiplatform game can be quality and it can be shite. Marketing execs would love it if we actually believed that locking games to a single platform makes them better when in reality, it's simply anti-consumer. I very much hope it won't be a thing in the future.
Pretty much agree there, some people can't seem to comprehend that the Playstation exclusives are not everyone's cup of tea. I also couldn't care more about Spiderman game that PS players are holding in some godly status.

Saying exclusivity makes games better is as biased statement as can be. The only thing better about that is game's stability and performance because it is being developed for one system only. But game's quality overall? Nah.