The Death of Exclusives, Part 3

Motion controls, raw power, or deep pockets--which x-factor will win the console war? Find out inside.

Remember a few years ago when Capcom decided to make all future Resident Evil titles exclusive to the Nintendo Gamecube? Then do you remember how Resident Evil: Outbreak was released on the Playstation 2, and the story changed to "Oh, we meant just the main entries in the series, like Resident Evil 4. " And then do you remember how Resident Evil 4 showed up on the PS2 a few months after debuting as an "exclusive" on the Gamecube? Unless you were a total brand-loyal fanatic, you probably shrugged and said "Eh, at least I get to play it" (unless you were an exclusive Xbox owner, in which case you may have said a few things not fit for print here). You know who didn't shrug? Nintendo (who probably burned a Capcom-shaped voodoo doll), Sony (who probably threw a party), and Microsoft (who burned Capcom, Nintendo, and Sony-shaped voodoo dolls). Non-exclusive titles are good news for consumers and developers, because it gives more people the opportunity to buy and play those games, while first-parties feel the sting.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Bhai4008d ago

As the article discusses the x-factors...

Nintendo Wii's x-factor = Innovation & Creativity

Sony Playstation 3's x-factor = Raw Power & Features(HDD+Blu-Ray etc.)

Microsoft Xbox360's x-factor = Bill Gate's Check Book

The type and quality of 1st-party offerings from 360 in the whole 1 and a half year is the clear advoate of the above statement. MS don't know making games, they are just good business-software devs. Don't miss the read !

QuackPot4008d ago (Edited 4008d ago )

xbox 360 has great exclusives....

ps3 has great exclusives....

But we're all the poorer with the whole idea of 'EXCLUSIVES.' Unless we buy them all, we miss out on great games on THE OTHERS if we just buy one console.

Being a Linux fanboy, I'm really pi$$ed that I have to buy a xbox 360 to play Halo 3, Forza 2, GeoW, Mass Effect etc, I don't want to contribute to Micro$$$oft securing another monopoly in the gaming industry as it has with Winblow$$$.

So, c'mon, multiplatform everything so that we'll finally get the one true console winner. It'll be better for our pockets and enjoyment of gaming; and the end of ignorant Fanboys who judge a consoles merits on exclusives.

Note Bene:

I didn't identify which fanboys or mention which console would win the war. But it would be obvious to determine the winner if ALL games were ported - using the full potential of each system - to all consoles. There's one clear winner if there were no exclusives.

kewlkat0074008d ago (Edited 4008d ago )

1."But we're all the poorer with the whole idea of 'EXCLUSIVES.'"

-Now really what kind of PRICES would you think we all would be paying if there was only one CONSOLE that all games would come out for? I would hope that you see having 3 consoles give you more of a choice and better competition with prices.

2."Being a Linux fanboy, I'm really pi$$ed that I have to buy a xbox 360 to play Halo 3, Forza 2, GeoW, Mass Effect etc, I don't want to contribute to Micro$$$oft securing another monopoly in the gaming industry as it has with Winblow$$$."

-Now imagine if there was only one CONSOLE maker, wouldn't that make them a MONOPOLY, which you, so hate for Microsoft for being(in the OS market). You have Linux and MAC OS as options but still think MS is a Monopoly? The truth is nobody has been able to shake MS off the top of the OS chain.

I love multi-platforming. It gives me a chance to buy for whatever console I may have. Since I'm a gamer I will eventually own all consoles. I just wish the first party titles really shine, since the concensis is, by loyal fanboys, Multi-platforming titles will never truly take advantage of the consoles strengths, for which I disagree.

First Party titles is why you should purchase whatever console anyways.
I mean where will you ever get to play Mario, or Halo, and God of war.
That's right you have to purchase that console of choice.

IMO, fist party developers are the ones that should be breaking their backs to tap into the console's strengths. The problem is there are better and great third-party titles that are out there, so we want them to be the best on whatever console we may choose but them Developers wanna get paid.

With the rising cost of production, multi-platforming is bigger then ever, since the profitability is there for them.

QuackPot4007d ago (Edited 4007d ago )

Micro$oft has a virtual monopoly with Winblow$. Now what did they do with it? Hmmmmmmm?

* Anti-competition suits in Europe & US
* OEM/Vendor lockin forcing PC buyers to also pay for Winblows preinstalled - which is also why Vi$ta will eventually succeed.
* An insecure & unstable OS - costing M$$ in downed systems or s/w, h/w fixes to counter - because M$ didn't get off their monopolistic ar$es to build a more unix-like system - eg Linux & Mac Os X. Because of their dominance we had to accept what they dictated to us even though they could have made winblows more stable, secure over 15 years ago.
* misleading customers of the TCO when migrating to Linux as well as massive discounting to maintain vendor lockin.
* etc

Sony had a virtual monopoly with Ps1 & 2. What did they do with it? Hmmmmm?

* ?
* ?
* ?

Oh, that's right, a lot of happy buyers/gamers.

Games and consoles are still expensive today - with COMPETITION - as they were when Sony dominated the market. We're no worst off back then as we are now. Again, it's what you do with that monopoly.

Now Micro$oft's in the game console market. I'm sure they love competiton - Not. They seem to be spending alot of their monopolistic $$$ on getting exclusives and taking necessary losses to achieve their goal. I wonder what they're up to? Go figure!

And least we forget: Sony was recently voted the most trusted brand. I wonder where Micro$oft ranked?

It definitely wasn't in the top 10. Hmmmmmmmmmmm?

Shaka2K64008d ago

Sony has the third largest party in the world, this whole articule is bogus.

bootsielon4008d ago

For consumers since they get a third rate product. Furthermore, it can't be good if it was originally announced as an exclusive, and then it went multiplatform. For example, if you bought a console for an announced exclusive, then you might have chosen to wait if it ended up multiplatform. Then again, as this generation has shown, don't rush into getting a console: 1. It might be extremely defective 2. Your exclusives might be flying away or 3. The novelty might wear off and you'll realize you bought a last-gen console for a premium.

Covenant4008d ago

Why? Because games cost a LOT more to make this gen (esp. 360 and PS3) and the best way to recoup one's investment is to offer it to as many people as possible.

Hence, DMC4, VF5, Tekken 6, coming to 360. Guitar Hero and Resident Evil going multi-platform.

The possibility of MGS4 and FFXIII coming to 360.

I'm sure there are many other games that will lose their exclusivity for one console and cross over to others. (Along those lines, I am still surprised that Ace Combat 6 will be 360-only. Same with Splinter Cell: Conviction).

Console loyalty is one thing. Deep pockets and profitability are another. Expect the latter to be the rule of the day.