If you have been on N4G for more than five minutes you would realise there is a constant war that has been brewing since the dawn of time. This war has really amplified with the release of two new systems coming sometime in November. I keep seeing N4G users and gaming journalists compare the PS4 launch titles with the Xbox One launch titles and which one you should get. Except this comparison has one fundamental flaw. It ignores the third party (non-exclusive) games.
I am an advocate for exclusives selling systems. We usually see articles about how the days of the exclusive games are over because of the rise of Call of Duty and other such third party games, which has never made any real sense to me. For example you buy X system over another because X has, in your eyes, better exclusive games or content.
But at launch things are vastly different as exclusives retail games are usually in the minority. Each exclusive retail game isn’t just competing against their equal on the other side of the fence. They are also competing with the third party game. For example Ryse/Dead Island/Forza isn’t just competing with Killzone/Knack/Drive Club. Each game is competing against Ghosts, Battlefield 4, Black Flag……. What I have noticed is that users and journalists compare (for argument sake) Dead Island and Knack or Killzone and Ryse and use that comparison as a reason why you should go for X system over Y. That isn’t entirely a true comparison as you should add the third party element into that comparison
Launch systems are not cheap. The PS4, here in the UK, cost £349 which then goes up to £400 with a game. The Xbox One is even more expensive with it costing £429 (comes with FIFA for the pre-order bundle) or another game for over £470. This is not cheap and this cost affects game sales across the board. There isn’t going to be a huge amount of people are able or want to buy more than one game at launch. Games are not cheap. The big three know this and are showing their understanding by their big push for indie developers. Indie games are relatively cheap and can be very important for a launch. When you have completed or bored of X game which you just shelled out £400+ just so you can play it right now, another game at £50 seems/and is a bit steep. Indie developers (and to an extent F2P) provide an alternative option to a consumer that is less taxing to their wallets. Yet I rarely see this indie impact being discussed here on N4G. Sony’s indie focused conference, at Gamescom, was often poo-poohed and seen as a weakness, yet it should be seen as a strength. They gave a reason to people to choose a PS4 version over an Xbox One version of a third party game. They were basically saying you can by X game from Y company but buy our version as you can also buy Z games without feeling the pinch.
It is annoying to see people compare two systems saying X has a better line up than Y when in fact that doesn’t really matter as the more anticipated games are third party (i.e. on both systems). What both Microsoft and Sony have done is create a small but broad range of titles just to fill in the gaps that are left by the third party. Knack is the more child friendly platform game, Forza is the more sim style racing game, Killzone is the sci-fi shooter and Ryse is the hack and slash. These games don’t appeal on a mass market scale (more of a case can be made for Killzone because it is an FPS). At the end of the day system buyers are more likely to get Battlefield, Call of Duty, Watchdog and Assassin’s Creed than any other first party game because these games have more mass market appeal.
So how do people choice a system/which version to buy when the exclusives are just filling the gaps? It is fundamentally down to a couple of things; cost, past history, value for money and services (which also is involved in value for money). The vast majority of people will look at these factors in deciding which version of a third party game to get. It isn’t really about what or how many retail exclusive are available at launch (that does come into a play but in a much smaller way than publications and users think). It boils down to value for money (both short and long term).
Thoughts are much appreciated.
WTMG's Leo Faria: "The Switch version of Sticky Business is less of a game, and more of a very clunky and shallow creative tool with not a lot to entice players for long. The progression system is silly, the gameplay loop lacks any kind of excitemente, and the controls and interface are embarassingly bad, never taking advantage of the Switch’s touchscreen, or even giving us the bare minimum of a completely cursor-based interface. There’s just no sense of accomplishment while playing it. It’s just downright frustrating. If you really want to play Sticky Business, and come up with your sticker empire of sorts (hey, I’m not judging), just stick to the PC version."
We were expecting problems with mod support, but there are a lot of other issues.
This is why you get the GOG version on gog you can select the version of the game to download.
On pc fallout 4 fallout new vegas and skyrim are all broken on steam because they all got the same "next gen" update.
Skyrim dec 2023
https://www.pcgamer.com/sky...
Can not find new vegas but anyone that modded it knows the script extender there was also broken
Not accidental, they want modders to stop modding their older games to force them to mod Shitfield.
There doing the same on starfield with a mods store and blocking mods
There goal is like blizzard and what they did with fallout 76 you make mods they can sell and you become a slave.
On skyrim they have "trusted" mod devs now basically a badge that lets your mod on the store you get a crumb of the sale when someone buys it.
lol to the disagrees, the last Skyrim update broke mods too. They've been trying to kill mods to monetize them in creation club for years, it's not a stretch that they purposely put out patches just to break free mods.
The disagrees are from people who have common sense. They aren't trying to kill mods. Most mods for any game will break with a new update because they rely on files/code that have been changed. This isn't new. Even with Bethesda this would happen way before the creation club. Mod support is literally one of the things that got Bethesda to where they are, and they're one of the only devs that releases comprehensive mod tools for each of their games.
Over 14 GBs and doesn't change much at all? What? Taking up that much drive space for a pathetic 'remastering' is shameful.
Par for Bethesda.
LOL people are actually expecting massive improvements or something? From Bethesda?? the same people who released Skyrim multiple times and the all look like shit? THAT Bethesda? are people for real?
The ps5 version doesn't change a ton but from my small playtime it's enough to make me want to replay it just to have it running at 60.
A side note to this my PS4 version no longer boots after it's "update" so I guess that's what it feels like to own a Bethesda game on PC
As of right now, there are no monopolies in the games industry, and for the sake of the medium as a whole, they never should either.
And yet the biggest tech companies in America are essentially that. They buy up all the small comps only to kill them off and steal what they have, and if they can't buy em they bleed them to death.
Eventually they’ll realize the value is with the employee not the company. Buying an IP means nothing if the people who contributed are let go. They’ll get it one day.
tech is different because they buy threats and then kill them. Twitter bought Vine and did nothing with it. Despite people seemingly liking it. Could've had tiktok a decade before bytedance. go figure.
They buy IPs not talent. That's why these buyouts never work and the IPs die. Right now it's too expensive to develop games - but I expect that to shift maybe as AI tools can make it easier. The best games have been indie games for awhile as big developers fuck their ips to death with "games as a service" -
The two major games for each system (Titanfall and Second Son) aren't even at launch.
And surprisingly, both companies haven't revealed what their A-team is working on, Naughty Dog/SSM/Media Molecule, and Black Tusk still haven't shown what their working on.
Im w8ing till Infamous:SS comes out to get a PS4. Till then theres a lot of current gen games I want to play this year and next year.
My thoughts?
I guess focus tends solely to be set on console exclusives due to them being what typically sets two consoles apart (in the past at least) 3rd party titles aren't usually much of a decisive factor in console choices due to them being out on either console anyway, indie games on the other hand are a brand new factor to be taken into consideration, with both Sony and MS taking a different approach to how they handle indie games it'll be interesting to see how much of an impact it they actually make.
But honestly, when all is said and done, it really comes down to which company you happen to be a fan of (as per usual) as many gamers are willing to pass up interesting exclusives due to them being only available on the competitions platform, and with indie games often not even being taken into consideration during a console purchase, I'm really not sure how much impact indie games will make when it comes console sales.
I agree. You come for the exclusives, and you stay for the promise of the company in delivering further exclusives. You enjoy the multiplatform games and indies along the way. If there are exclusives on another console, and you have the disposable income, you pick up the other and play those exclusives. At the end of the day, there will always be console allegiances due to favoring one's exclusives over the other. That doesn't diminish the other console's quality, IMO, it just attempts to validate your purchase and your individual experience.
1) a launch line-up never really determines the fate of the system. they are usually bought solely by the hardcore crowd. many could be loyal fans but very few will buy either a ps4 or xbone based on its current line-ups alone.
2) exclusives do matter to a degree. they define a system. why many sony fans are arguing about the line-up on the xbone is m$ has a history of slowly pulling back on game support during the later years. so they see the ps4 as a long term investment. that's a fair point. however each generation is different. m$ pulled out of the original xbox just after 4 years. it was a sinking ship financially. on paper it was a better product but the ps2 had the market which means it had the games people wanted and earlier. the x360 on the other hand was a huge leap forward for m$. they got japan on there side with mainstream support like tekken, virtua fighter and final fantasy. tehy tried to moneyhat titles like lost oddyssey but japan is a unique market who seem very xenophobic when it comes to gaming. needless to say they got developers to support the xbox with key titles, which is huge over the original. the x360 also created parity with most 3rd party titles. that is why the ps3 had a hard time controlling the market like they did with the ps2. most software sold are not exclusives, its those multi-plat games.
3) an uphill battle m$ faces with the xbone is pricing and proving kinect is finally warranted. this is where the launch may hurt m$ since it will take time to prove the value in kinect.
4) sony knows the indie scene is where innovation leads. its far less risky taking chances on smaller projects. m$ will become aggressive in that market too and they will both try and get some sort of exclusive deals. sony already has a pub fund which means they will help them financially and in return require exclusivity either fully or timed. one big title is the witness which is a timed exclusive on the ps4. m$ has changed its indie policies and have leveled the playing field so it will be interesting to see what happens.
5) m$ is not afraid of spending money. they will moneyhat games but they should really try and get the ip. titanfall is getting the most hype out of every game announced. m$ will try and get a partnership to lock it down and keep it from coming to the ps4. who knows if they will succeed but they should really be trying to secure the ip. i think any non-1st party game should be playable on as many systems but this is how they all do business. capcom confirmed dead rising 3 will remain a xbone game. thats what m$ needs to confirm with its audience, that the xbone is not going to become like the x360 with timed exclusives. those are only short term gains. owning the rights to these ip's holds more long term gains. but nobody knows how successful any of these new ip's will be. so its a risk either way.
so far the ps4 has the upper hand in many categories but ironically enough it isn't the games. which is why sony fanboys are reluctant to talk about games and will concentrate there efforts on everything outside of the games right now. fanboys are always shifting the goalposts to serve there own interests.
as for which version to buy? i think when it comes to online gaming m$ will still lead the pack. they have more investment in that area. sony has said that is why they are now charging for online play with the ps4. they want to use that money to expand and improve the playststion network. however the ps4 could show the system is more powerful with multi-plat games. i doubt it will be that big of a gap and in reality how much does that really matter? it didn't seem to help the original xbox much and it didn't seem to matter that the ps3 was more powerful. besides, if you really care about that youd be playing them on the pc if you can.