Does the Game Industry Rely Too Much on Multi-Platform Titles?

GenGAME writes: "There’ve been a lot of discussions about exclusive vs. multi-platform games lately. We had the surprise announcement of Bayonetta 2 last year, the Monster Hunter 4 Vita rumors last month, and now the news that Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor’s Edge and Rayman Legends are no longer Wii U exclusives.

"There have been a lot of hurt feelings over these games – either on the side of those who want them for their system, or in the case of Rayman on the side of those who have already invested real dollars in pursuing the original version, but now have to wait for a simultaneous multi-platform release.

"And what astounds me most is that this keeps happening, over and over and over. Why is it so hard to make a good old-fashioned exclusive these days?"

The story is too old to be commented.
Donnieboi1931d ago (Edited 1931d ago )

Maybe if your on 360. Ps3 relies on it's exclusives 1st, with 3rd parties as a bonus (signs a console manufacturer is actually TRYING to win-over customers). Wii U's first party games just havent arrived yet (though i'm sick of nintendo's oversaturation of old IP's).

Ps3 gamers never have to rely solely on multiplats. We have tons of varried exclusives and indie games for everybody.

saimcheeda1931d ago

Back when the console didnt have much exclusives it was dead last in sales, since Sony started releasing more exclusives, PS3 has had its time to shine!

StrongMan1931d ago

Bubbles to the both of you, you are both 100% correct. Sony and Nintendo don't have to rely on multi plats, only MS does. PS3's exclusives have catapulted them to second place trailing only the Wii. Because they have almost no exclusives MS is forced to buy "timed exclusive" DLC and demos. That says it all right there.

darthv721930d ago

to be fair, the majority of developers within the industry are 3rd party companies. Those companies can sign exclusive contracts to develop a game on a platform of their choice or choose to support as many as they wish.

MS designed the 360 with the 3rd party in mind. Essentially they wanted to make their console as much of a magnet for 3rd party support like they do their windows OS. If you build it...they will come.

Sony has their stable of 1st and 2nd parties, which they have been more forthcoming in supporting with the latest builds of their programming tools. This makes sense as why go to the trouble of teaching 3rd parties, that do not sign contractual agreements, the tricks of the trade for PS3 development? Sony has been known to fund development of a 3rd party title in exchange for exclusive rights to either distribute or possibly outright purchase that IP if it succeeds. (An old Nintendo trick from back in the days).

Nintendo got sued by many of the 3rd parties back in the early 90's due to contractual obligations that barred them from developing games for competing platforms. those studios won their freedom and since then we have been treated to the plethora of 3rd party companies making games for whatever they choose.

All 3 have their own agenda's when it comes to the sanctity of their platforms. They all will wine and dine the executives of a potential hit title for some sort of exclusive this or that if they feel it will benefit their platform.

MS is very upfront about the whole thing. they do so because its financially cheaper to pay for a title or partial release of a title than own the company that develops it.

Sony had stated they dont pay for exclusives which is BS. Oh they pay...for the company, release the game, take control of the IP, then cast the originating company aside and transfer development of any additional content to an in house division.

nintendo, well they care more about their own library more than anything else. They dont want to get sucked back into the old days i guess.

NegativeCreepWA1931d ago (Edited 1931d ago )

If it wasn't for third party the PS band wouldn't exist.

Godchild10201931d ago

You can say the same about 360. The only system(s) that could last without Multi platform titles are the Nintendo systems.

Ezz20131931d ago (Edited 1931d ago )

if it wasn't for ps brand (ps1/ps2 era)
most of those 3rd party studios wouldn't exist or being famous as they are now

who make RE/FF/GTA/DMC/MGS games etc famous ?!

hazelamy1930d ago

the PS band.
Tretton on Drums and Kaz on guitar and lead vocals.

NegativeCreepWA1930d ago

Godchild, I never said the 360 was any different.

Ezz, You got that backwards, those games made the Playstation brand what is today. Those studios were making games before Playstation existed and would of just developed for another console or PC.

lol haze, I was half awake this morning.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1930d ago
nukeitall1931d ago

I think most real gamers and NOT fanboys, don't really look at if it is an "exclusive" or not to consider a game.

The main criteria is, if it is good and if it would be enjoyable!

People keep yelling exclusives on top of their lungs, but there is a reason why Xbox 360 keeps selling like hot cakes. It's because, it's called experience.

That great experience can be from an exclusive game, or it can come from a multi-platform game that performs better on one platform with more features or easier to use.

People don't get that, and that's why Linux albeit capable of most of what Windows can do, offered for free still isn't taking the world by storm.

wishingW3L1931d ago (Edited 1931d ago )

Xbox is only selling like hotcakes in the US, on WW sales PS3 is always first (well, second after the 3DS). And the reason Linux hasn't taken off is because of Windows' monopoly. When you go to college to study computer programming they teach you on Windows and when you graduate and start looking for a job most companies use Windows because of this. Because like I said, it's a monopoly.

LightofDarkness1931d ago

Wishing: it's also because Linux isn't very enterprise friendly, not without a much larger amount of work getting things set up as opposed to Windows. Linux is more flexible, but that comes at a cost.

Try setting up access controls for a large organization in Linux in a reasonable time frame.

nukeitall1930d ago


That is not entirely correct, as Xbox 360 sells like hotcakes in UK as well. In fact, in Europe overall, MS and Sony is pretty much on par.

The gap is pretty much being made up by Japan, as MS is non-existant there.

"And the reason Linux hasn't taken off is because of Windows' monopoly. When you go to college to study computer programming they teach you on Windows and when you graduate and start looking for a job most companies use Windows because of this."

When I went to college for programming, we worked on Linux/Unix. Solaris to be more specific. My brother goes to a major university as well, and he uses plenty of Linux, in fact CentOS.

Even with a monopoly, Apple OSX is gaining marketshare so clearly somebody is able to fight the monopoly.

OmegaSlayer1931d ago

I'm a PS3 gamer and I love my exclusives but I think that st party exclusives are the only exclusives that should exists.

Every platform should have parity of treatment from 3rd party devs.
Games should be out on more platforms possible, including PC and MAC.
More platforms equates to more revenues and the money can be put into research and development of better games.

I totally oppose 3rd party exclusivity and I think it's bad for the industry.

legendoflex1930d ago (Edited 1930d ago )

I'm not talking about first-parties. I'm talking about third-parties.

Edit: Also, 360 exclusives objectively make up a bigger part of its best-seller catalog than PS3. Call of Duty actually dominates PS3's library of bests more than it does for 360 as well.

Top 20 for 360:
10 exclusives, 10 multiplat

Top 20 for PS3:
5 exclusives, 15 multiplat

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1930d ago
ApolloAdams1931d ago

Exclusives are silly in a business aspect. Why would you alienate so much of your market and only develop for one platform unless you are obviously owned by the company.

I think that third party games are better than first party games most of the time actualy besides a Halo or Uncharted, etc.

Ezz20131931d ago (Edited 1931d ago )

this is a very wrong comment
1/ if it wasn't for exclusives there wouldn't be any need for more than one system ..and most will go with pc here
which will only mean the death of consoles

2/if it wasn't for exclusives
we would never seen games that push the console to it limit and show it true power
like uncharted , god of war, the last of us, beyond, infamous,killzone,heavy rain, halo 4, gears 3.. etc

as for the rest of your comment it just your opinion
not a fact

ApolloAdams1931d ago

If there was no exclusives we would be in a more competitive perfect competition because there would be no differentiated products. Right now the game industry works in an oligopoly in which there are about four main firms who control most of the market. Without exclusives you would go to the system that was cheaper.

1. I thought console gamers were gamers because of convenience not because of exclusives. And the price of entry?

2. I can say some multiplatform games I think pushed the systems. Batman, AC III, Far Cry III, Witcher 2, Crysis 2, etc. Sure they could of been better if they focused on one system but those are pretty top notch.

Ezz20131931d ago

again i disagree

without exclusives
no one would buy ps3 or xbox360
what the point of buying a console when you know it doesn't have anything to define it ?!

every one would just buy pc and the console market will die
as for the games you are talking about
non of those games push the consoles to it limit
not even close
they just make a game on a console and port it to the other

i would never agree with this type of thinking because
gaming systems will always need what define it

Bordel_19001931d ago

If it hadn't been for exclusives I would not have a PS3, I run all the multi-platform titles on my PC.

Exclusives are the only thing that will drive me to buying a PS4.

Ashunderfire861931d ago

Yep!!! Does that answer your question?

Show all comments (24)