Poll: We need more exclusive titles

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

More people being able to play a game is never a bad thing. It trumps exclusivity.

 

[krazykidd]

There are a lot of gamers that are against exclusives. They say it divides the community, it punishes you for not choosing a particular console and it is bad for our wallets.

I don't agree and I will tell you why.

I know you can't survive without third-party support, but I think companies should strive to develop better exclusives in order to raise the standard for gaming.

Back then, each platform had a defining characteristic, had a personality: pc was the home of adventure games, FPS's and offered complex games, the dreamcast combined good graphics with old-school flavoured gameplay, it had many fun multiplayer games and that Pick Up & Play mentality that we all love; the ps2 was the holy grail for jrpg fans and had unique franchises(gta,gow,mgs,gt,etc...).

I own these three platforms and love them equally- I still play my ps2 and my dreamcast on a regular basis- and each offered a distinct and unique experience. The competitions was healthy for the industry, it was all about making good games- system sellers-.

Nowadays it is all about the graphics, about making all-in-one consoles.
Sony and m$ think that their consoles are going to replace the personal computer.
That why they offer the beefed up graphics, that why they are more expensive and offer, essentially, the same games(FPS'S). The market is flooded with post-apocalyptic fps's and fantasy rpg's.

Consoles shouldn't be competing directly against pc's, because they will always be a couple of steps ahead in terms of hardware. Do you guys really want our consoles to cost 800/900$ in future generations just to be able to play cod:mw8 in 3d?

There's basically no difference between current platforms, ps3 and the 360 have the same games, pc just gets crappy ports- no one wants to take advantage of the extra power to make ambitious titles-, we are getting only one flavour and to be honest i'm starting to get sick of it.

If Nintendo doesn't stop with the gimmicks and step up their game(pun intended) I don't think the industry is going to change.

Wait.... Back then for you is dreamcast and ps2?... Really?

OT: No i disagree , i think every game should be released on every console ( except maybe the wii due to motion contolles). We should band gamers together rather than divide them .

What i think needs to happen is , sony / microsoft and nintendo need to band together and make one console . This will result in everyone one having the same console and being on even ground with each other . They would sell a record breaking number of consoles ( meaning they would all make more money even if the cash is split 3-ways) because almost every household will have at least 1 of said super console . And game would be available to everyone , gaining more sales because everyone could play it .

The down side is that the console will cost about 600$ on release ( hey it's a super console ) and game probably 100$ new on release ( because since they all banded together well the have the monopoly of the market so if you want to play video games you habe to give them your wallet.

But all in all i think it would be good for business ( moneywize) and good for the consumers ( content wize).

 

[CrimsonBlaze]

Frankly, exclusives are often better than those mainstream titles that are accessible to every console in existence. Here are some examples:

PS3: Uncharted, inFamous, Disgaea (upon release), Metal Gear Solid

XBOX 360: Halo, Gears of War

PSP: KH:BBS, Prinny

 

[segataDC]

you are just making the asumption the everyone likes the same genres and will buy all the consoles at launch.

Want i'm trying to say is that consoles should have more exclusives, especially different genres, to give us a wider variety of genres.

Imagine the wii being the home for GOOD platformers, jrpgs, quirky and fun games and highly stylized.
That will cover a couple of niche markets and would give nintendo profit and more variety to us, gamers.

They should leave the "gritty realism" for M$ and PS3.
Also, as some of you have been saying there a certain genres (rts,fps,wrpg) that work better on the pc.

Each console should offer a different flavour, cover a different demographic. That would be better for us.

For example: you don't like shooters? then you could buy the wii and still get good games. You like complex simulation? then you should buy pc exclusives that utilize it's power and offer the experience you want.

 

[theguitarhero6]

I've got an Xbox 360 as opposed to the PS3 for of slew reasons, (not funna go into THAT debate) mainly because of the larger game library. I wouldn't mind, however, being able to play Resistance or the Killzones. It pretty much sucks being excited for a game on another console that I'll never be able to purchase. That's why I dislike exclusives. I'll take God of War 3 on Xbox 360 if it means PS3 owners can play Halo.

 

[segataDC]

It would greatly help the industry if the 2 middle ground consoles decided to actually pick a direction and move rather than just sit around and have problems with everything. Developing an all-in-one controller and programming language is a fruitless effort, as gaming should be all about radical differences and niche appeals. The average gamer isn't going to play games of every genre so why do we feel compelled to make gamers buy systems that fit the "jack of all trades, master of none" archetype and then make them buy another one to appease the arbitrary requirement of hardware-equivalent-yet-incompatible coding?

The Wii may be underpowered, already obsolete and loaded with 3rd party shovelware, but it specialized in a field and went with it, and that made it the dominant console of the generation. People wanted an easy to access machine that ran simple games and offered a new way to experience the medium, and that's what it did. The 360 and PS3 only have exclusives because of arbitrary limitations enacted by corporations, and that is the main thing keeping the hobby from growing, absurd entry fees caused by arbitrary software limitations.

Just look back when SEGA and Nintendo were fighting it out. The SNES did some things well and some things not so well. Platformers, top-down shooters and JRPGs excelled, whereas things like FPS's, WRPG's, RTS's, sports games, flight sims, realistic brawlers and multiplayer games rarely worked well, but if you were only interested in those, then the SNES just wasn't for you, the other systems had you covered. Every genre had a console of preference that matched its needs. What about now?

The 360 and PS3 seem content to try to appeal to the the motion control market, the FPS market, the W and JRPG markets, the RTS market, the MMO market, the multiplayer market, the racing markets, the sports market, the hack n slash market and many others, and they simply cannot feasibly do it.

What we end up with is joysticks that are sluggish for shooters, motion controllers that are more gimmick than innovative, RPGs based on hard to navigate menus, controls too slow for RTS, online capability too finicky and restrictive for solid multiplayer, one or two button hack n slashers, simplified sports titles and overall a strong feeling of uniformity. The industry needs to spread out and divide up the ground so we can stop tripping over each other.

absolutely agree with you.