140°

More Microsoft Exclusives Will Hurt Sony PS4

For several years now, all you hear from biased gamers, as well as so called journalists is how Microsoft needs more exclusive games. That Halo, Forza, and Gears are giving gamer's fatigue. At the same time we also don't hear how unsuccessful many exclusives games can be. Remember Sega? The leader in exclusive games for not only console gaming, but the long gone arcade era. What happened to them? They are no longer a console manufacturer. So Does having exclusive games really determine a consoles success? If so Microsoft should make more. In fact Microsoft making more exclusives hurt Sony's chances with the PS4 being successful. Thekingslayer.com goes over the whole notion, and biased push of exclusive games on Microsoft. Good & Bad...

Read Full Story >>
thekingslayer.com
NastyLeftHook04001d ago

thats like saying my honda civic with added 20hp will hurt a ferrari.

4001d ago
Hellsvacancy4001d ago (Edited 4001d ago )

Whats with the massive images?

Edit: After reading it its clear why theres large images, its because its written by an idiot

"This generation has been really good to them. Microsoft has taken the less is more, quality over quantity as a mantra to exclusive game development. Which is smart"

"Again, first party games let you set a standard for your platform, and Microsoft has set a standard for developing great first party titles"

Speechless

majiebeast4001d ago (Edited 4001d ago )

"You see Sony’s first party games account for only 10% of PS3 sales."

Pulling statistics out your butt?

If Sony doesnt make a profit on these games why would they make more?

You count Forza as successful when it has declined in sales by a million after 3.

You say Uncharted doesnt sell like COD neither does Gears of war but that you praise to high heavens.

This is your opinion not an article dont try to pass it off as such.

Root4001d ago

Basicaly in fanboy logic

Sony Exclusives - Low Sales = Bad

Microsoft Exclusives - Low Sales = Everything will be fine

DonFreezer4000d ago

So now everyone who doesn't bash Microsoft is a fanboy?

headblackman4001d ago

cod sales very high because its a multiplatform title. gears of war will always out sale drakes uncharted. not because its a better game, but because it has superior features, like multiplayer, hard and campaign co-op.

WeAreLegion4000d ago

Uncharted has multi-player...

Uncharted and Gears of War are incredibly close, sales-wise.

shivvy244000d ago

Both those games are close in sales , btw they are 2 different types of games when you think about it, gears is more of a blood/gore bro dude TPS while uncharted is more of an adventure/treasure hunting/hollywood TPS ! their both awesome games and close in sales

Snookies124001d ago (Edited 4001d ago )

More Microsoft exclusives will hurt Sony PS4. Hahaha, thank you for enlightening me. I never would have guessed exclusive games had that kind of power.

TheKingslayer4001d ago

Overall Microsoft has experienced better sales for their exclusive games than Sony. Sony is not in the best financial situation, and it seems like this next generation will again be about who will have exclusive content, as well as developers. Both Sony, and Microsoft are working hard at that. Microsoft has benefited more than Sony in this regard with the Xbox 360. That's not an opinion. We used Halo 3's first week sales as benchmark which factually broke entertainment records for sales.

This is indeed an article based on the larger conversation that has surrounded Microsoft about getting more exclusive games. No one's looked at from the point of view that the few they have are successful. Making more won't hurt them, but it would hurt the PS4 because it'll be games that will sway more gamers to the Next Xbox. You guys don't see truth in that?

majiebeast4001d ago

The only 1s that sell good are Halo,Forza,Gears and fable if you dont count Fable:Journey.

Here is a list of first party PS3 games that sold atleast 2 million copies.

-Heavy rain
-LBP,LBP2(1,2 sold more alone then the entire Viva Pinata franchise and nuts and bolts)
-Killzone 2,3
-Godofwar 3
-Infamous
-Resistance 1,2
-Uncharted 1,2,3
-R&C TOD
-GT5P,GT5
-Motorstorm

headblackman4000d ago

out of your list only 3 are sealers. the others are simply exclusives. and not that good of exclusives at that. check the sales before you start naming off stuff. don't get exclusive and popular sales item mixed up like you just did as does most PlayStation fans do. quality has always been better than quantity. Sony does game quantity and Microsoft does game quality. now do yourself a favor and take all of those 360 exclusives and compare the sales to all of the exclusives for ps3 sales numbers and you'll see that the ps3's exclusives can't compare.

shivvy244000d ago

@headblackman , just cause they dont sell lots doesnt mean their bad games, some of these are one of the best games this gen! you should give theses games a go :)

Chaostar4001d ago

Your opinion piece is completely one sided and your argument fundamentally illogical.

Less exclusives = good for Microsoft
More exclusives = good for Microsoft?

It's like you're incapable of seeing the situation from any other POV, you even label gamers who want more exclusives on the Xbox platform as "biased" right there in the description.

I'm afraid the only one coming off as biased here is you, it's more than obvious in your writing and confirmed in your comments here. If you want your site to be taken seriously as a source of gaming news and opinions you have to look at things with a much more objective mind, or at least come out and admit your bias so people can take it into account.

MrBeatdown4001d ago (Edited 4001d ago )

It sounds more like you're just cherry picking what to point out to suit the nonsensical opinion you've come up with.

Bringing up Sega is just flat out idiotic. They mismanaged their platforms for two generations. Exclusives can't save you if you fail at everything else. Hell, after a decade as a software-only company, Sega can't even get Sonic right. They've proven for the past decade they had no hope of sustaining a console with exclusives.

What's completely ignored is that the Saturn and Dreamcast went up against the PS1 and PS2. Two platforms that wiped the floor with everyone when it came to exclusives, and went on to become the two best selling consoles in history.

It's entirely nonsensical that you relate your opinion that Sega's exclusives were better than Nintendo's, to Sega's console business, which only came to an end after Sony had dominated the market with tons of exclusives for six or seven years.

What's even more ridiculous, is that after shooting down the importance of exclusives, you then talk up how MS having more exclusives will hurt Sony.

First half of the article... Better exclusives didn't help Sega!

Second half of the article... Better exclusives will help Microsoft!

As if that contradiction wasn't bad enough, you then talk about Microsoft and Sony as if MS's exclusives live up to some higher standard that Sony's don't. You back this up with nothing. No sales data comparisons. No Metacritic averages. Nothing, besides "ZOMG HALO sells so much!". You talk about overall quality and sales, without any evidence to support it.

To top it all off, you ignore all of MS's failures, as if their reliance on Halo, Gears, and Forza is a result of some incredibly high standard MS set for themselves, that will carry over into next-gen, to Sony's detriment.

You blatantly ignore the heap of recent mediocre Kinect games Microsoft has released, along with all their core-oriented commercial or critical flops, like Too Human, Ninja Blade, Crackdown, and Kingdom Under Fire.

You act like none of those exist, and that the Gears/Halo/Forza line-up is purely the result of MS's tireless pursuit of quality, and any addition to that line-up will be pure gold. The reality is that MS has seen just as many flops as any publisher, but with such weak first party support, they haven't had the development muscle to fill the gaps left when devs like Silicon Knights or RealTime Worlds went to do their own thing.

This isn't about some "larger conversation" as you put it. It seems like this is just your lousy attempt at validating a conclusion you want to be true.

Why o why4000d ago

Thank you sir.....I feel I need to say nothing more than 'this'

miyamoto4001d ago

Anyone who takes M$ bloated American PR grandstanding seriously as fact should do his homework, dig research that company's history and character more deeply. seek it out. its a thrilling great adventure and the truth will set you free.

http://ca.ign.com/articles/...

http://ca.ign.com/articles/...

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4000d ago
Show all comments (38)
70°

Disney Dreamlight Valley teases part two of paid expansion

Disney Dreamlight Valley devs have officially teased the second part of the paid expansion titled The Spark of Imagination.

70°

Best Stardew Valley Farm Names – 100 Funny, Nerdy, Cute Ideas and More

Starting out a new farm, but need help choosing a name? Check out this article for a 100 farm name ides for Stardew Valley.

190°

Bethesda Needs to Reduce the Gaps Between New Fallout and Elder Scrolls Releases

Waiting a decade for new instalments in franchises as massive as Fallout and Elder Scrolls feels like a waste.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
-Foxtrot12h ago

Microsoft have Obsidian but I feel it's Bethesda who just don't want to play ball as they've always said they want to do it themselves.

Once MS bought Zenimax in 2020 they should have put the Outer Worlds 2 on the back burner, allow Bethesda to finish off its own Space RPG with Starfield (despite totally different tone why have two in your first party portfolio with two developers who's gameplay is a tad similar) and got Obsidian for one of their projects to make a spiritual successor to New Vegas.

When the Elder Scrolls VI is finished Bethesda can then onto the main numbered Fallout 5 themselves.

The Outer Worlds 2 started development in 2019 so putting it on the back burner wouldn't have been the end of the world, they'd have always come back to it once Fallout was done and it would have been nicely spaced out from Starfields release once they had most likely stopped supporting it and all the expansions were released.

If they did this back in 2020 when they bought Zenimax and the game had a good, steady 4 - 5 years development, you might have seen it release in 2025.

We are literally going to be waiting until 2030 at the very earliest for Fallout 5 and all they seem bothered about is pushing Fallout 76.

RaidenBlack10h ago(Edited 10h ago)

Its not just only Todd not playing ball.
Obsidian have made a name for themselves in delivering stellar RPGs, but most famous once have always been sequels/spin-offs to borrowed IPs like KOTOR 2, Neverwinter Nights 2, Fallout: New Vegas, Stick of Truth etc.
Obsidian wants to invest more in their own original IPs like Outer Worlds or Pillars of Eternity with Avowed.
Similar to what Bluepoint & inXile wants to do or Kojima is doing (i.e not involving anymore in Konami's IPs).
So yea, even if New Vegas has the most votes from 3D Fallout fans, Obsidian just wants to do their own thing, like any aspiring dev studio and MS is likely currently respecting that.
But a future Fallout game from Obsidian will surely happen. Founder Feargus Urquhart has already stated an year ago that they're eager to make a new Fallout game with Bethesda, New Vegas 2 or otherwise. Urquhart was the director of the very first 1995's Fallout game after all.
And don't forget Brian Fargo and his studio inXile, as Brian Fargo was the director of Fallout's 1988 predecessor: Wasteland

KyRo7h ago(Edited 7h ago)

Obsidian should take over the FO IP. They're do far better with it than Bethesda who hasn't made a great game for almost 15 years

RaidenBlack1h ago(Edited 1h ago)

@KyRo
So, by 15 years, you mean Fallout 3 was the last great game Bethesda made?
You don't consider Skyrim a good game, which came out 13 years ago?
I'd consider Fallout 4 a pretty decent game as well. It's Story & RPG elements were a bit downgrade from New Vegas but the exploration and shooting on the other hand, were upgrades.
FO76 was disappointing and Starfield could've been better at launch I'll agree.

Duke196h ago(Edited 6h ago)

I disagree. Part of these games is the support for the mod community. If they move to releasing a "next game" every 2 or 3 years, the modding support plummets and the franchises turn into just another run of the mill RPG.

Make the games good enough to withstand the test of time, to keep people coming back to them and expanding on them with mod support.

--Onilink--4h ago(Edited 4h ago)

I dont think anyone is saying they need to come out every 2 years (not to mention almost no game is released that quickly anymore)

By the time Fallout 5 comes out, it will be more than 15 years since Fallout 4 came out (same with ES6 coming out 15 years after Skyrim). Even if you want to use F76 as the metric for the most recent release, that one came out in 2018. It will be a miracle if F5 comes out before 2030

The point is that for a studio that doesnt seem to operate with multiple teams doing several projects at once, that their projects normally take 4-5 years as a minimum, and that now they even added Starfield to the rotation, it becomes a 15+ years waiting period between releases for each series, which doesnt make sense. Imagine that Nintendo only released a mainline Mario or Zelda game every 15 years…

They either need to start developing more than 1 project at a time, let someone else take a crack at one of the IPs or significantly reduce their development times

Duke192h ago(Edited 2h ago)

Why should someone else take a crack at one of the IPs? Look at what happened to Final Fantasy as a recent example - there is pretty clear FF fatigue setting in because they are now pumping out titles in the franchise every few years. Pumping out more games faster doesn't always make a series better.

There are plenty of options to make new games, not just create more titles in the same universe at a faster pace.

-Foxtrot10m ago

"Why should someone else take a crack at one of the IPs"

He's literally just told you why

We're waiting like 15 years before a sequel comes out, it's insane

Skyrim came out in 2011, the next game is expected to come out in 2027 at the earliest so that's 16 years apart while Fallout 4 came out in 2015 and might not release until 2031, again 16 years.

We're fine with Bethesda trying new things and doing new IPs like Starfield but adding a new game to the cycle now means a bigger wait. Also Starfield didn't meet most peoples expectations, can you imagine waiting 15 years or so for a sequel and it's disappointing? It would feel even worse because you would have to wait another 15 years to see if they manage to come back from it.

They need to give it to another developer, we don't need main numbered titles but a spin off of Fallout and Elder Scrolls should be cycled in between the long gaps of the main releases.

Once again you are making out people want these games as quick as possible when all we want is a standard development time of at least 4 years or so rather than waiting 15.

mandf4h ago

Yeah I’m going to say it, who cares about the modding community when making a game? Half the time developers only tolerate modders because they fix there game for them.

Skuletor5h ago

Yeah, let's all advocate for smaller gaps between series' releases, then we'll probably get headlines about how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven. Let them cook.

SimpleSlave4h ago

"how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven" So every Bethesda game then? Got it.

Listen, I would agree if this was about From Software or something, but Bethesda?

🤣

C'mon now. What timeline are you from?

Skuletor2h ago

Think about it, they're already bug filled messes on their current schedule, can you imagine how much worse it would be if they rushed things?

-Foxtrot6m ago

@Skuletor

Who's saying to rush the releases? No one is saying that...

People just don't want to be waiting 15 years for a sequel, they aren't working on the game for that long, you do realise that right? The issue isn't coming down to them working on the game and us "rushing them", it's the fact they are working on other games like Starfield now meaning bigger gaps before they even get started on them.

I bet you any more Elder Scrolls VI only entered full development last year when Starfield was finished despite being announced in 2018.

Duke192h ago

I mean you aren't wrong. People are going to complain about anything

isarai4h ago

Hows about you focus on quality, just a thought 🤷‍♂️

Sciurus_vulgaris4h ago

Bethesda [or Microsoft] would have to reallocate internal and external studios towards fallout and elder scrolls titles. Bethesda has the issue of developing 2 big IPs that are large RPGs on rotation. If you want more Fallout and Elder Scrolls, development will have to be outsourced.

Show all comments (21)