When you're the No. 1 HD console, do games matter? We discuss in a PlayStation Conversation!
MS turned casual after their first few years of aggressive hc-campaigning paid off and got the hc-audience to take the plunge. No need to pay them attention anymore outside the usual 2-3 franchises. It's all about timed exclusivity and Kinect so no wonder thy are losing exclusives. Gotta say well played MS. Well played.
if ms only invested the same money on new awesome ip's instead of kinect then man wouldnt it be awesome !
does this count as MS losing an exclusive? I mean its not like they owned it or anything. To me an exclusive is something the is held dear to the parent company to the point that no possible way would it end up anywhere else unless pried from their cold dead fingers. Sonic is a good example of that. As sega died from the console market and so their software had no other choice but to whore him out to other platforms. The term "exclusive" has been so overly used that it has almost lost all its meaning. Especially how we can add an addendum to it to reflect something different. ex: console exclusive, timed exclusive, etc. The only real "exclusives" are those that the parent company makes themselves (1st party) or they have divisions within the company that make them (2nd party) but when it comes to the 3rd parties....it's fair game. Some pay high premiums to get the good (MS) or they pay to keep the goods (Sony).
Ignorence again. MS published the first ME but never owned the IP. And MS holds just as many exlusives that do well just like Sony, but being so blind and a child to one system of course you won't see that. Now I know, I know. You'll probably use the same tired and boring rant of "back in 2006-07" that you always do but I think it's time for some new material don't you think?
And here we have ben grimm of all people rushing to save MS. As usual you feel the need to do it. This is the very same ben grimm who is always crying for "teh proof" about things that went on in 2006-2007. That ship has sailed my friend. All you get right now from all those old bookmarks from 6 years back is "this page is no longer available" and such. Too bad for you the proof is nowhere to be found anymore. You can however even today go to MC and confirm the thing that made me block you. I cannot fathom the idea why someone would have so much energy about these things and cannot go to MC and confirm the amount of "only games above 90 in MC are AAA"-games for each platform and even then call someone an idiot. You can filter games by release year (atleast used to) you know? But here we are again ignoring the past and being a smartass to the veteran users. That's sure to get you somewhere in life. WOW a disagree after 1 minute? That's fast even for you ben.
This post shows a certain level of IGNORANCE, there you go, that's how you actually spell that word. If you look at the numbers, Microsoft does not have as many exclusives as Sony. Calling someone a child doesn't instill any confidence in your case, either. Look at Microsoft's E3 presentation, and that will tell you what direction they are heading with the 360, and possibly with their next generation platform.
My bad, ignorance, you are right I spelled it wrong. I also spelled exclusives wrong, but you didn't catch that one ;) And god forgive and help me for I have posted a list on N4G. *gets down on one knee and kisses the cross* Ryse Fable Journey Gears of War: Judgement Halo 4 Dust Elysian Tale Haunt Star Wars Steel Batallion Bloogforge Diabolical Pitch Hybrid Trials Evolution Alan Wake American Nightmare Sine Mora Dead Light Mark of the Ninja Forza Horizon Kinect Rush Fable: Heroes Wreckateer Some PC/360 games: Witcher 2 FEZ Minecraft Dungeon Fighter Live I'm sure I missed a few and yes I know, a lot of people will come in here and say "but those are Kinect titles and Kinect is bad!" or "those are xbl titles so those don't count" But to say that MS doesn't have the numbers is IGNORANCE. And this proves that MS does have the games as someone pointed out below MS is no longer interested in. Both sides of the wall have great games and they BOTH shouldn't be downplayed. Edit: When I say both sides I mean Sony and MS...even Nintendo.
"PlayStation Conversation: Why Does the 360 Lose Exclusives?" Simply because Microsoft doesn't care about exclusives. They are more worried about timed DLC and timed exclusives.
Defending MS? No my son, just pointing out how clearly wrong you are since every chance you get you try and slam MS with false accusations and clear hatred. Funny how you think I’m a 360 fanboy. I could have sworn I was a Nintendo fanboy. I have already explained to you many times the idiocy in your whole AAA argument but you are so dense and ignorant that you just keep saying "back in 2007-08" over and over again. Seriously you must have gotten your feelings hurt pretty bad back then. I even provided links (that still work by the way) from this very site to you that proved you wrong. But then when the proof was against you like a true coward you ran, hid and blocked me. I love how you refer to yourself as a veteran user. Being a veteran user doesn't make you any smarter or wiser, obviously. Get your head out of the past, remove this chip on your shoulder against people who are not even on this site anymore. And I didn't disagree with you so stop giving yourself credit.
MSFT knows the balance between multi plats and exclusives, they know what gamers can afford. Maximizing 1st and 3rd party game sales and market share, only possible with strong 3rd party success is the most important goal to MSFT. Pumping out a bunch of fluff exclusives risking flooding the xbox market with shovelware/fluffware would put them at risk killing their plan. MSFT's plan worked, they have PS2-ish relationships with devs. I can see MSFT mixing it up more later next gen if they can take the Wii u after taking PS3 this gen. Sony depended on exclusives even more so with Nintendo to the point of failing most the industry(outside of casuals and nintendo 1st party) MSFT stuck to the PS2-ish strategy. At this point wasting money on studios is a waste for MSFT(saturated industry in any given year, bad economy, ps2 plan worked but It's the end of gen. MSFT does not know what standing 720 will be in next gen so buying studios would be foolish and closing then like Sony is now would be bad)
Well now a days, consoles aren't bought solely for gaming hence why Microsoft has done well. Plus they keep catering to the casual too. But Sony is doing fine and as long as they keep making hard hitting games they will always have support from the gamers consumer. Yea there last but people make it seem like if Microsoft is demolishing them like the ps2 did to the xbox.
personally i just think both EA & BioWare are trying to get back in the good graces of mass effect fans after the whole ME3 ending situation. An they're starting off with bringing Mass Effect 1 to PlayStation. though it would make alot of sense to put the Mass Effect trilogy out on the wii u instead of just putting ME3 out separately.
It really doesn't matter anymore. There will be less of them in the coming generation anyway. MS's plan of a certain amount of exclusives backed by strong 3rd party really worked for them. I see no reason to change that. I'm satisfied because I really don't care who a game is published by. if the game is good the game is good.
how can their be less if Sony has so many 1st party studios??? sure there will be less 3rd party exclusives, but what matters most is 1st party games when it comes to exclusives. MS doesnt make games so they are sorta screwed like that
@Belking It worked to a degree for MS but so did the year head start and lower price point. Those initiatives gave MS an 8 million plus unit lead over PS3 for several years. The issue is that as PS3's list of 1st party exclusives grew and lower price point coupled with all of the offerings from PS+ the gap started to shrink. While there have been a ton of doom and gloom PS posts the reality that these authors intentionally neglect is that shrinking a gap of 8 million to under 2 million in a matter of years with the above mentioned issue is beyond impressive. Here is why when each of the HD consoles is between 66 and 68 million units sold 8 million is a huge portion of the market share that is lost. With each of the current HD consoles going neck and neck on a global scale the reality is that the exclusives in PS3's favor are what has allowed it to outsell the 360 on a weekly global basis for over two years (minus US Holidays). I'm not talking vastly outselling but enough to have closed the gap by over 6 million units. Last piece that I want to add is that the 6 million unit gap was closed in 2 1/2 years since the slim launched by that math by the end of next year if trends continue PS3 will have moved ahead of the 360 on a global level (not NA). So as the video ignorantly puts foward do exclusives matter...the truth is and always will be yes they do. Games like Halo and Gears are what built the 360's install base but have not grown it. It's that same logic of constant new IP's from Sony that have continued to grow it's install base. Hope this helps to clear things up.
dreamcast had a head start and lower price point, dead in 1 year. Fact is sony went from dominating in first to fighting to TRY and get second. MS and nintendo have done alot better then last gen. Clearly you think going from 1st with ps1/ps2 to fighting not to be last with ps3 that still has more exclusives means their strategy is working? Upon reading your post HAHAHAHHAHAHAHA. "in a matter of years" ahahahhaha. Almost catching up to second place in a matter of 6 years isnt exactly selling that great and shows that the strategy isnt working. Im sure if sony sacrificed some exclusives they could have gotten an exclusive GTA or something and then they would be in 2nd place maybe(you think this means they are special or something to be in 2nd right).
most games are multi plat these days, that's a good thing. look at the top selling games on PS3, PS3 owners are not playing the exclusives. so much talk on console wars but we're playing mostly the same games.
Because they aren't in this to push gaming. They're in this solely for the money. Of course Nintendo and Sony are in this for the money too (it is a business), but their decisions seem to be based more around gamers and gaming, not market share and sales. They all have gimmicks, but when you look at the games, Sony seems to be the most indie/creative friendly ecosystem, Nintendo the most hardware savvy, game centric ecosystem. It boils down to preference and I'm simply sharing mine. For me, the exclusives on the Xbox don't pull me to that system or its community. Sony and Nintendo do.
It is cleaver what Microsoft has done by releasing before the PS3 and what they say is true that with the rise of online when people transfer over to the next system they are more likely to stick with the service they have friends and subscriptions too.....I am glad of Sonys approach when it comes to games this generation. I like the diversity.
MICROSOFT has been very quiet.... mmmm VERY intriguing
when does cod and assassins creed sell 2to1 on xbox360? ohh.. is he talking about us only? or world wide?
at disagrees.. so you want to put some numbers on them?. because i dont se any of those multiplat games selling 2to1 on xbox360
Obviously everyone is in it for the money. But Sony and Nintendo are in it for the gamers. MS entered the game industry not for the gamers but to use them as a base to what they are really trying to accomplish. And it's rearing it's ugly head as we speak.
I'm not really aware of Microsoft losing too many exclusives. Mass Effect would probably still be exclusive if Bioware didn't sell itself to EA. All Bioware games on the original Xbox were exclusive. You cant really blame EA for trying to milk every red cent out of their investment, but its not like Microsoft Xbox 360 owners didn't have the game 5 years before it appeared on another console. I liked how Microsoft worked this generation, lots of new IP's and exclusives to kick off the generation, get great third party support, and put out your AAA blockbuster titles. When the core market topped out, Microsoft got the casual and family market as well. To be really successful you need to walk the line with all types of gamer's. Had Mass Effect been as big as Gears Of War, who knows if they would have lost it? Microsoft has a lot of money and that does a lot of talking. Guess I'll get back to gaming.
Interesting point regarding the 360 aiming more towards being the central media hub in your living room, it's a smart move on their part and a welcome move but it all really depends on where you live in the world on how this is paying off, In the UK the 360 doesn't offer much that the Ps3 doesn't and visa versa, excuse my ignorance my knowledge on what has happened over the last year or two, if things have changed a lot. The 360 has Sky app which is a great deal for them and i believe ESPN as well but other than that i can't think of anything it offers that the competition don't. Services such as LoveFilm and Netflix are available on the PS3 along with programs such as BBC iPlayer and 4od. The thing that sways it back to Sony court is BluRay, the standalone players aren't that expensive here so it could be argued that it isn't needed, but at a one off cost it's more viable than a standalone device. What Microsoft really needs to do is include some of these services in the Gold subscription, to charge for the ability to access apps that require an additional fee is a bad move, with these kinds of services being offered on rival entertainment hardware, such as the iPhone/iPad/iPet, your charging people money where there is a decent alternative for free. If they can push these services onto the Silver package then they have the chance to really nail that market. I do worry they will forget the gamers along the way as much as they don't really have to rely on exclusives, they have to remember where they started, to turn it into an entertainment hub they will be beaten by hardware providers such as Apple in the long run.
It has nothing to do about making games for casuals. Its smart. Keep an exclusive for many years, by that time almost all people who have wanted to buy mass effect have bought it. Or if they do they'll buy used at this point. Now MS has a chance to make more money off of it while not lose any people due to console exclusivity. It's just smart business, plain and simple.
360 didnt lose exclusives.. It has a whole bunch of kinect games! smdh.. Im so glad i canceled xblg.. They dont deserve a damn cent of my money & i wont be buying a 720 either.. Bioware & Bethesda were the only reason i bought an xbox... Now that sony gets games from em too, xbox is completely useless to me.. Especially since i have a PC.. Im prolly going to sell my xbox & use the money for a wii u in the future.. Nintendo offers much more than MS & Sony owns em in every way minus UI
It is the nature of the business that is all. It is the same as when the Playstation brand this gen has lost most of their 3rd party exclusives. No longer are the GTA, Final Fantasy, DMC, MGS, Silent Hill games tied to Playstation anymore. This gen the cost of developing games have risen dramatically that 3rd party studios are moving towards multiplatform to cover the cost of game development.
If anything, the loss of 3rd-party exclusives hurt Sony more than it hurt Microsoft. People no longer see much incentive to buy a Sony console over a Microsoft now that most of the high-profile 3rd-party PS exclusives of past generations have gone multiplatform, and the rival consoles on the market are $50 to $100 cheaper.
Hey guys it was my first time wacthing your videos. Im sorry for calling ya virgins. Because the way both of you acted, and looked. In your last video. you did'nt have to go all goth, or be all serious. Be you. Take care,and God bless.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.