• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Forum moderator applications are now open! Click here for details.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

What do you think about game exclusivity?

Chreed

Weirdo is lurking
4
Posts
5
Years
Yeah so I want to know the idea of you guys about this topic (Game Exclusivity). You can be an Xbox gamer, PS4 gamer, Switch and so on. What do you think? is it good or bad?

I kinda like the idea on how companies make games exclusive for their own consoles so they can show originality and it is mostly the common thing that people buy their product for example I play on the PS4 I'm a die hard fan of Sony so when I've heard about the new Zelda game for switch and Halo for the Xbox One I literally bought the consoles just for those games. this is just my thought about this topic

Now it's your turn to share your Ideas...
 

malanaphii

i'm about to monologue, son
197
Posts
6
Years
  • Age 22
  • Seen Feb 17, 2023
i mean, i get that a lot of games are on specific consoles and i understand why but that doesn't mean i wouldn't prefer everything to be on every console so i don't have to buy a new console if i really want to play a particular game
 

pkmin3033

Guest
0
Posts
I can't believe I am saying this, but...just get a gaming PC if exclusivity bothers you. Problem solved.

But anyways. I don't mind exclusivity as much as I used to, because Microsoft is dead in the water with the Xbone and I'm happy enough owning both Nintendo and Sony consoles, so honestly it doesn't affect me. I used to agonise over which console to get because they all had such good exclusives that I wanted to try, but I was short on funds back then and there was more competition back in those days....it wasn't just Sony vs Nintendo, anyway.

As cool as it would be to have everything on a single platform, I suppose having games exclusive to specific platforms helps promote competition to an extent - I don't care what Nintendo say, they are in direct competitionby virtue of being in the same industry, and that is that; if they think otherwise they're delusional - and really, there's significantly less profit in it.

Take out exclusivity and I guarantee that the industry would get worse, because to make up the money that they'd lose out on by not selling systems, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo would all resort to microtransactions, and DLC, moreso than they do now. You'd be looking at paywalls far worse than the Pokeball Plus in all probability.

Consoles make money, and games sell consoles. If the games weren't exclusive to that platform then they'd sell less, the company makes less money, so the company resorts to other tactics to make more money, tactics which probably would not be in the best interest of the consumer. They rarely are, after all.

Exclusivity annoys the hell out of me when the games are part of a series that are spread out across multiple systems though, especially when they're story-focused titles. I'm looking at you, Kingdom Hearts. Prior to the collections on the PS4 - which, by the way, are sub-par considering a few of the games are lazy cutscene movies/visual novels and not actual games like they were on their original platform - this series was absolutely awful for it, with games being spread out across...what, five different platforms? GBA, PSP, DS, 3DS, PS2. Yeah. Stuff like this irritates my immensely because it makes it impossible to get a complete experience. Mass Effect had a similar problem for the longest time because Microsoft kept a death grip on the first game.

But the exclusivity problem is very quickly being eliminated by the rise of PC gaming, to the point that it's only first-party exclusives that remain, and those are system sellers, so that makes sense. There are far larger problems with the gaming industry that need to be resolved than this...
 

Phyrrhic

It's not very effective...
115
Posts
6
Years
I struggle with exclusivity.

I game on a PC, so "exclusivity" only affects me by forcing me to download the ever growing lists of game launchers. It is extremely frustrating to have different friends lists, interfaces, etc with each unique launcher.

I struggle with the notion that one launcher (i.e. Steam) should be the standard, as this is monopolistic, however the often cited "competition" that other launchers bring is similarly invalid. Having a game on a single platform is inherently noncompetitive, it forces us consumers to purchase from a singular location, with no choice as to which vendor we will support, and therefore ensures that each launcher does not have to contend with another lowering prices or offering better services which lure customers away. More launchers only serves to fracture the community, and allows companies to monopolize a single product. I believe that games should simply be purchased as an application and downloaded locally, much like on disk games of the past. Rather than linking social experiences and game libraries to the same platform, these systems act as separate entities, thus allowing consumers to choose a service platform which suits them best.

Games first, "launcher" second.
 

Desert Stream~

Holy Kipper!
3,269
Posts
8
Years
  • Age 33
  • Seen Aug 20, 2023
Kinda annoying I suppose, but in the current market it's incredibly important to keep the video game economy stable.
Glad to see more multiplat games though, it could lead to a market shift where they're not that needed.
 

Arsenic

[div=font-size: 18px; font-family: 'Kaushan script
3,201
Posts
12
Years
I personally don't like it, and applaud Msoft's steps towards opening their exclusive library up to more systems.

Let me put it this way, if one movies theater chain had exclusive rights to show the new Marvel movies, people would be major upsetti. Now you add on a required moviegoing pass that's a couple hundred dollars to each chain, and a lot of people are going to have toes stepped on.

In my perfect world, all games would be playable on all systems, and multiplayer between all as well (This idea is worthy of another topic). Either consoles would compete by offering the better experience for games (with none of this forcing exclusive dlc with a gun to devs' heads BS) or there'll be less consoles.

An extreme position but much more consumer minded. Plus you get the economic benefit of what, doubling the number of people who can buy those games?
 

TY

Guest
0
Posts
I'm kinda indifferent on the matter, back when I played on console I got annoyed at the fact Halo was Xbox exclusive when i had a Playstation so I could never enjoy those games till VERY late when I could afford my own. Then when I completed Halo it just sits there generating dust.

PC isn't safe from this nonsense either with 10 billion different launchers and stores and stuff. It's getting to a point where I waste more space on launchers than on actual games.

Exclusivity isn't great but on the other hand if it wasn't there people would not end up buying certain consoles, which is in the end where the real focus lies, a big fat stack of dosh
 
1
Posts
5
Years
  • Age 23
  • Seen Jul 10, 2023
As the end consumer, I'd love to have the option to play any game on any system, but I can certainly understand the game exclusives. It's fine at the end of the day. There's not enough time in the world to play all the games anyway. haha
 
Back
Top