Its been a heated debate since the start of this generation and the issue really needs covering. Whenever a big game has crossed to Xbox 360 or PS3 the media and forums alike have been shocked and stunned at the news. On one end you have the argument that more people get to play it. On the other you have accusations of *insert system name here* holding back said game. But what is the real truth behind all this? Is it really because of that? Is it selfishness playing a part from people who wanted the game to themselves? Is it a form of self entitlement taking over the body of the person who wanted the game? Do we really have anything to gain by having the game exclusive? Or are people just saying all this to make themselves feel better? Personally I believe its entitlement. And this is where it needs to end.
Whenever multiplatform projects are in development, they are built to the strengths and weaknesses of all consoles. Make no mistake, I'm as upset that Metal Gear Rising is multiplat as any of you. But its not the PS2 era anymore. Games simply cost too much to make now. In fact the more I think about it the more it makes sense. By restricting it to one console you are limiting your customer base and missing out on more potential sales to make more money to fund bigger projects and better games. So why bother doing it? If the company has a contract when thats expired you can send it in other directions and make more money from it then. The only exclusives we have now are the first party ones. The ones made by Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo. There is too much to lose outside to ignore the others.
Which brings us to the big question of this article. Why is it no platforms were announced? The answer should be pretty obvious. 9 times out of 10 no platforms were announced because the company is under strict NDA because its on a platform they simply can't talk about. Whats the platform in question? Wii U. Why is it more likely to be Wii U? Because rumours of Rockstar having Wii U development kits did the rounds from the start and have come up from multiple sources. All credible I might add.
A lot of people stand back and say its not on Wii U because they think its the same Nintendo but if you have been watching their movements the past few years you know it isn't. They have changed. They want their core fanbase back. Why can't GTA V be on Wii U? A LOT of crazier stuff has happened this gen. If I would go back in time and tell you games Microsoft published got on PS3 anyway and that Final Fantasy and MGS were going to Xbox 360, you'd have laughed it up. What if I told you Darth Vader was on Soul Calibur IV? I bet you'd laugh that up too wouldn't you?
The fact that Rockstar failed to mention what platforms the system is on only makes the rumours seem more credible. Otherwise they would have just said 360 and PS3. I'm not going to deny Nintendo owners GTA V. Thats selfish of me. If they want it get it. More power to you guys. I hereby decree that no matter what platform something ends up on its only for the best of gamers. Third party exclusives are dying and they are only going to become more dead next generation. Consoles are gimping each other. Its true limited disc space on 360 held data off but the PS3 has less RAM so you need to consider that in your argument. Besides all that disc space is not the sole reason stuff gets cut from a game. Mostly its time constraints. Mark my words: Grand Theft Auto V will be on Wii U. It won't be exclusive. But it will be on there. Using Wii as 'proof' isn't right. That had Manhunt 2 and besides that a new system is a new start for Nintendo. Care to prove me wrong?