History Has Proven That Getting Upset Over Exclusive First-Party Games Is A Non-Issue

During Sony's E3 press conference when it was unveiled via a trailer that Insomniac Games was making...

[Hardiman]

I love exclusive games. Devs only having to worry about working with one system and trying to make it the very best it can for said system.

[legionsoup]

Agreed - to add to that, if you have and support all the systems, you can get any exclusive you want.

[Eonjay]

Im not convinced that exclusives really matter unless they have enough public appeal to really grab attention. I feel this way because there are really too many games out there to be worried about what you can't play.

[Whirlwind_Fanfare_08]

Same. Anybody that thinks exclusives are bad just need to stop playing games. -___-

Edit: LOL at the disagrees.

[trooper_]

I love exclusives too.

[starchild]

I have the same outlook on this subject that I've had for years. Exclusives are good for the platform holders, but are not really good for gamers in general. I think our industry will eventually evolve beyond exclusives, but it may take a long time.

Imagine if we had to buy a particular brand of Blu-ray player to watch certain movies. Or a particular brand of phone or MP3 player just to listen to certain favorite songs. It would be terrible. But that's basically what we have to deal with in the gaming industry.

[badz149]

"Imagine if we had to buy a particular brand of Blu-ray player to watch certain movies."

We did until last gen. Remember BD vs HD DVD? Remember when BD almost won early and a certain party hand out a couple hundred mil dollars to Paramount and Dreamworks to prolong the war? Luckily Warner did what was right for the consumer several months later to end the war for good.

But stop trying to move the goalpost regarding exclusives already! It was just last year when the Xbox camp sang in unity "biggest lineup of Xbox history" and "console with the best exclusives"! And now suddenly exclusives "...are not really good for gamers in general"?! Right after the Xbone is becoming a multiplat only console, now it all changed for you guys!

Exclusives matter! Deal with it!

[starchild]

"Luckily Warner did what was right for the consumer several months later to end the war for good."

Well, at least you recognize that the exclusives situation wasn't good for consumers. The companies themselves want exclusives to help drive people to their platforms, but exclusives really don't benefit consumers as a whole.

"But stop trying to move the goalpost regarding exclusives already! It was just last year when the Xbox camp sang in unity "biggest lineup of Xbox history" and "console with the best exclusives"!

I don't even own an Xbox of any kind. I have no dog in this fight. I'm mainly concerned with taking principled positions on issues. I've never once said anything about the Xbox having the best exclusives or the best lineup in history. I challenge you to find any comment where I have said such a thing.

I see all the fanboy camps flip-flopping depending on different talking points and what their preferred platform is strong in at the moment.

But I've had the same view about this for years and I can dig up comments of mine proving that to be the case.

[SpaceRanger]

I remember a certain fanbase last gen that thought only call of duty and other dude bro games mattered and that exclusives didn't. It really happened all last gen, and especially toward the end going into this gen.

Then all of a sudden that same fanbase now says exclusives matter. Lol? They've always mattered and there's only two systems that have pushed for them since the early 90s. Having a few exclusives coming out during the last three months of each year is nothing close to the competition.

Can't wait for all of the successful indie devs (being heavily supported this gen by the leading company) to make big budget exclusive games! That's how devs like NaughtyDog, who lead this gen in all gameplay aspects, were formed.

Edit: grammatical error

[Kingthrash360]

Lol then in the beginning of this gen, including this exact time last year"some fan base" BOASTED on how it has the "best exclusives ", "most holiday exclusives ", and" best exclusive line up EVER"...now it's exclusives don't matter...

In truth..as far as selling ANYTHING AGAINST COMPETITION YOU GOTTA HAVE SOMETHING THE COMPETITION DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SUCCESSFUL. Period.
No matter if it's gameing, food, movies, soda, orange juice...whatever. if you have competition that sales the same medium you have to have something for to draw customers to your product. In this case of consoles, you have 3rd party games which mostly come to all consoles so in order to sell your console via 3rd party games companies were making deals to have exclusive dlc...or dlc on their console first.
Exclusives are more important than that especially 1st party, becuse you don't have to pay extra for exclusive or timed content. ..you have a automatic draw to your console and don't have to pay extra for exclusive dlc....nor do you have to lose sales to the other platforms.....console or not....so it's very important.
I'm still baffled about MS leaving exclusives out and still think to sell consoles....that's just one reason alot of people (including myself) think MS is on its way out of console gaming and want to go full pc. Why launch a new console at a disadvantage? I know many don't want to build a pc....but still you are losing potential sales by having your major draw, drawing sales somewhere else instead of toward sellING your console.

[Majister-Ludi]

Only a fool would think they were on the way out of the console market lol.

[starchild]

"as far as selling ANYTHING AGAINST COMPETITION YOU GOTTA HAVE SOMETHING THE COMPETITION DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SUCCESSFUL."

You said it yourself, you have to have something the competition doesn't have. The PS4 is the Xbox One's main competition and it doesn't have those games so it really doesn't matter much if those games are available on PC. The fact they aren't available on the competitors console means they are exclusive in the console space which is where it really matters. Features and other aspects of the experience also differentiate the platforms.

[Kingthrash360]

Only a fool would think they'll stay just to lose money on hardware every generation.
Above
.....lol Ya see that's where you are wrong.....pc is now it's main competition.
Not only do they just share 3rd party games, they share 1st party games as well. That's why the ps4 is no longer the xbox's main competition.
You'll see when any 1st party game comes and digital foundry compares pc vs xbox/scorpio.
If they would have kept their exclusives they would be in great shape but since it's gunna go head up against pc with games like halo and gears it's not a great thing. We've never seen halo get comparisons to any other platform.
PC is a competitor in gaming, and Xbox just left competition on equal grounds going against the ps4....bUT now you are gunna see games running much better on the competition. ...complete with mods and stuff.
Smh...but ok guess we'll ignore that fact.

[starchild]

That makes no sense, Kingthrash360. How is the Xbox now competing with the PC more than with the PS4? Xbox has always shared a lot of exclusives with PC. Console gamers aren't going to suddenly switch to PC in mass just because the rest of Microsoft's exclusives are available on PC too.

The PC has always been a strong platform with a lot of benefits, but many people still chose to game on consoles. I don't see that changing to any radical degree.

Playstation consoles will continue to be the main competitors to Xbox consoles.

[Kingthrash360]

Last time the Xbox sold more than playstation was when halo released.
That in itself should spell it out quite clear.
The fact that halo, your biggest system seller will be available and better on another platform should tell you why sharing it with pc isn't a great idea for selling consoles.
Halo is a system seller. Always has been.
Now it's a system(s) seller. It will sell PC as well as xbox.....who is competing with who?
You telling me we gunna count pc and Xbox sales together????
Because if not then pc will be it's biggest competition.
If yes then the Xbox is a pc. No matter how you flip it you can't call what MS is doing productive for the xbox. It's productive for pc tho. Very much so.
Pc gains legendary games like halo and Xbox gains what??? Less sales?? They aren't even getting pc library of games. Smh how don't people see the obvious?
The Xbox is now a device to sell windows. That's it. It's numbers count as windows sales, windows don't count as xbox sales. Windows, being a pc thing, is of more value and they want to boast windows number using xbox even though windows is in a minimum state on xbox....MS is using former xbox exclusive games to sell windows.
This is full on fact. Buy for some reason yall areally not worried for xbox. Lol but I'm the troll because I see whats happening. Seems like only the true game fans want the Xbox to sell....and get called troll for it smdh.

Tell me....how will this help sell xbox? Just tell me that. Dont just disagree....tell me HOW WILL THIS HELP SELL XBOX CONSOLES?

[rainslacker]

Exclusives give companies something substantial to market specifically to their system. It's always been this way. No one exclusive game probably matters that much, outside the rare "system sellers", but when put in combination with the entire selection of exclusives, they most certainly help to form a perception of that particular console's game line up that will differentiate it from the competition. If a company has a good variety of high profile exclusives, and a nice mix of games that appeal to a broad audience, the perception on the larger consumer market is that it has more to offer...even if half the games don't appeal to them, because it's easy to see what is actually unique about that console....and that will almost invariably be the games selection.

Multi-plats do sell systems as well, and in those cases, people just go wherever they feel is best, and for those, neither company can really market them to the point where they are a defining feature on their own. That's why they go for the DLC stuff, because people who are into those games, are going to want that content as soon as possible, and not wait it out.

Bottom line....people buy consoles primarily for games. Not features....except in some cases...not power....not brand....but games. All other factors are ancillary, and have an effect, but a game will draw someone to buy a console faster than any other factor out there....and the more exclusives a console has, and the more variety they have in those exclusives....the more people are going to be attracted to it.

Who cares what a certain fan base said before? Games sell systems.

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

"Everything on a case-by-case basis." That's my motto.

For some third party games, it might not be a good idea due to upsetting a lot of fans.
I imagine Battlefield going exclusive for a game or two would leave a lot of people put out.
However, in cases like Bayonetta 2, where there were good reasons for it to happen and enough support was offered to make the game a reality in the first place, it's a different story.

I feel, however, that the ones most likely to be upset by third party games receiving some exclusive action, are those that are either too broke to afford a second console, or let loyalty to, or hatred against, any certain console prevent them from showing support towards the games, which are what should matter most, through purchasing the console they appear on.

Now, the first type, who are too broke, I can sympathize with.
But the second, are the ones most likely to let their emotions turn them towards port begging, which you can see happening whenever someone cries for Nintendo to drop consoles.

And port beggars, lately, due to the idiocy of many of their arguments, get me more ruffled than any cat who's ever had its tail stepped on..

[hades07]

@ Wonderfulmonkeyman - I would like to add a third group "too busy to play all of the awesome exclusives". All of my friends own an Xbox one mainly for multiplayer. I own two xbox ones, depending on where I am too in my home and where the wife is I can still play. I would love to have a PS4 as well but my Xbox one backlog alone is enough. I may do what I did last generation. I waited a few years, picked up a PS3 for cheap with Uncharted 1,2, 3; God of War 3 and Ascension, The Last of US, and some others. Took a year away from my x360 and played all the PS3 games I missed out on.

[Darkfist_Flames]

thats what i did with x360

[OB1Biker]

Yea I certainly agree that not everyone has time and money to play all the games they d like to. Only on my consoles and handhelds I can't play everything I'd like to and honestly it's would be a waste of money for me to get a different eco system in addition simple as that. I feel it's the same thing for many gamers. They go for their preferred platform and get more games to choose from than they could manage.

[rainslacker]

I don't buy the too broke thing. That may be the case for some, perhaps even many, but not everyone is willing to just plop down a substantial amount of money just to play one game. As an example(which doesn't actually reflect me or my spending habits), I might be the biggest fan of Bayonetta there ever was, but doesn't mean I want to spend $300 on a system, and another $60 on the game to play it. However, Bayonetta doesn't fall into my category of practices I don't like. If a system doesn't have much else to interest me beyond that one game, then I see no reason to expend the money, despite it not even making a dent in my bank account. Even if I can play multi-plat games on it, it's still a redundant purchase, because I can also play those on whatever system does have the exclusives that would interest me.

Being prudent with one's purchases does not make one go broke...and in fact, is how one ends up not being broke in the first place.

As far as the loyalty part, in some cases I feel this may be true. But it would depend on the exclusive itself. if it's a game that has either been exclusive to one system for a while now not being available, or multi-plat for a while not being available anymore, I feel it's perfectly justifiable to be upset. Not in cases like Bayonetta where it's the best the dev could get to even make the game, but in every other instance I feel people are perfectly justified in their disdain. I like less the people who are on the end to receive the game saying it's no big deal, or trying to find some sort of hypocrisy in the fan base to excuse it and make it acceptable even lower on my respect meter.

The only time I take offense to exclusive 3rd party games, is when they're done as a way for console makers to market their system by denying a game to another system. Whether this is timed or perpetual. And I don't care for them regardless of if they're on my system of choice, or even a game I have no interest in at all. All other exclusives based on other factors are OK with me.

[-Foxtrot]

Really just depends what game it is

If Gears of War wasn't bought by Microsoft and it was going to be a timed exclusive to the PS4 then I wouldn't like that....it's a Microsoft thing, always has been

Same when it's the other way round like when Tomb Raider was a timed Microsoft exclusive

Obviously Sony has more of an advantage since they have more franchises more assoicated with the PS brand but it's just a thing.

For me Tomb Raider, GTA, Final Fantasy, Resident Evil, Kingdom Hearts and so on need to be played on a PS

Where when you have something like a timed exclusive Dead Rising 4...it's fine because it's always been more of an Xbox thing.

[darthv72]

Timed exclusive is not the same as full exclusive. At least with timed, the game eventually comes out and usually improved (worth the wait is subjective). The only time where Tomb Raider was exclusive was for the 2nd and 3rd games out of the 11 in the whole series. And the 2nd was almost non exclusive to begin with.

Certain games people associate with certain systems. It usually is what they first played on and grew up with.

[jb227]

I personally see timed exclusives as far worse than full ones. Full exclusives are developed hand in hand w/ their console partners, they are games that wouldn't have existed in that form w/o that console's involvement. Timed exclusives are games that are already created, somewhere in the 11th hour a console just throws a lot of money at them in order to get bragging rights. Timed exclusive deals don't create anything, they just play a game of "keep away" from the other platform's fan base in order to strong arm them into purchasing a console they may not otherwise desire. There are obviously exceptions to the rule, mainly in the form of indies that are forced to focus in on 1 or 2 platforms because they don't have the funds to go fully multi, but by & large timed exclusives are just anti consumer practices in my eyes.

Regardless of where a franchise may find its main fan base, when a game is coming along & the console's funds for timed exclusivity only results in lining the pockets of the publisher w/ a quick buck, there really is nothing decent about it really. I'm personally glad that RotTR sold poorly relative to the last installment & I'm hoping it doesn't do well on the PS4 when it releases, if for no other reason than to dissuade platforms from this quick fix mentality. Consoles should be funneling their funds towards creating wares, whether through 1st or 3rd parties, not stealing existing games from other platforms.

Timed practices also seem to push console brass to lie to potential consumers. In order for their timed deals to be worthwhile, you've got guys like Spencer & Greenberg actively trying to confuse & mislead consumers, first they tried to market it as a full exclusive in a shady manner before being forced into admitting that they didn't own the title...then Spencer went on to equate the game to Ryse or DR3, two games that obviously didn't and wouldn't hit other platforms aside from PC. This was an obvious attempt to try to trick gamers into thinking RotTR would never hit PS4, and it was shameful....he was essentially using his core fanbase to spread misinformation because his hands were tied & he couldn't spread that misinformation himself. One of the main reasons I dislike the dude as a head of Xbox. He also said during that time that he "wasn't a fan of timed deals" & that he didn't want to do them personally, yet we turn around and have DR4, another scenario where gamers were left in the dark for a few days before Capcom came out and insinuated, again w/o fully clarifying that that game would be timed.

[OB1Biker]

The worst is the 'artistic blur'.
I don't mind too much exclusives when everything is Crystal clear from the reveal, so to speak.

[freshslicepizza]

@jb227

why do you refuse to comment about timed dlc and games like destiny that sony partnered with? you are either for timed exclusive deals or you are not, you can't just pick and choose because you don't like some guy. and another game, no mans land was supposed to hit other platforms besides ps4 and pc until sony came in and decided to be the publisher. now we have no idea if it will ever come to the xbox or nx. so why is that ok?

it's becoming disingenuous on your part how you continually hold sony to a different set of standards just because you prefer their consoles.

and i agree with darth72, timed exclusives are only temporary. getting deals on place to restrict others from playing forever is not really in the best interest of gamers. so start acting like a consumer and not a brand warrior.

you also debated time and again how the xbox is losing its appeal because microsoft is also supporting the pc yet you refused to buy tomb raider for the pc and are upset it was timed exclusive to the xbox and delayed for the ps4 for a year. you keep contradicting yourself all because you are not supportive of anything mcirosoft does.

[Kallisti]

If the first Gears of War was a timed exclusive and did come out on the ps3, you wouldn't be thinking of it that way. It's only because Gears of War is an established Microsoft IP with 4 games now that you see it like that.

[SmokingMonkey]

I think it's a huge issue.

I will go wherever Naughty Dog/Guerilla/MediaMolecule/etc . goes.

[TheOptimist]

I personally appreciate exclusives and I think that Insomniac will do a great job with the game. My only issue is that (Being a PC gamer, I have unjustly ranted on this as well), Spiderman comes in the top 10 most popular characters ever in almost any poll taken. Agreed PS4 has a very large fanbase, 40 mn to be approximately exact, but it does not mean the whole PS4 crowd are spiderman fans and will buy the game. Yes maybe people will jump to PS4 for the spiderman game, but that is not a definite amount, it may be large, it may be small, depending on how the game is. It's a good business model, but a character loved by billions should not be limited to the hands of millions. Well this is my opinion, and you are free to disagree because this is the internet, but well I framed it as best as I could.

[rainslacker]

As far as SM goes, I think that started from the outset to be an exclusive title. Sony likely pushed the move what with all the dealings for the Marvel Universe movies and such, but at the same time, they are funding it, and have apparently been part of the production since the beginning.

I understand why some may be upset though, because SM is a well known franchise that doesn't sit mostly on one platform in terms of gaming. While it's had exclusive releases in the way distant past, we haven't come to expect that in a while. At the same time though, no one could go in to purchase any system with the expectation of even getting a spiderman game this gen, so I don't feel that people are being shafted in the way some other exclusive deals have played out.

Ultimately, this was kind of a decision from Marvel to push the gaming franchise forward by giving it to a company that will have a vested interest in making it the best it can be. It's hard to say how a 3rd party entity might do that with a multi-plat release, and with all honesty, I doubt Activision did much to make Marvel think it would be the best thing for the series going forward.

Disney itself is being more invested in the Star Wars franchise to try and make sure it holds to some level of quality, and given the more profitable nature of the franchise, they have more clout over it than they would over SM, which has been hit or miss for quite a while now.

Then you have something like Batman, where WB owns the rights, and they control their own publishing, so they also have more interest in making it a compelling franchise in gaming.

SM just wasn't at that point anymore IMO, and Marvel did what they felt would be best, by giving it to a company which has a vested interest in SM being successful because of Sony's own interest in the Spider-Man movies, and Sony's own long term reputation of quality. Granted, money likely had a large part to help persuade them, but as a SM fan myself, I feel it was a good choice. Might not be when I play the game, but Insomniac makes good games, so I'm not upset they are making the game, or that Sony has been given the chance to make it a compelling franchise for gaming again.

[DragonDDark]

Why don't they start saving up for a ps4? By the time the Neo releases, it will be even cheaper.

400?

[TheOptimist]

Dude not all people can go out and spend 400 bucks for one game.

[Sharius]

people seriously cry because first party game is exclusive? really? that remind my of bayonetta 2 fiasco

[Whirlwind_Fanfare_08]

I'm on Twitter a lot, you won't believe how soooooooo many ppl on @insomiacgames Twitter page asking for this game to be on Xbox One & PC because they don't want to buy a PS4 to play it, along with @Guerilla Horizon:Zero Dawn. They even signing a petition to ask Sony to release them on Xbox One & PC. They tried it with BloodBorne and it failed, same will be with these 2 games i named!

[NovaCrys12]

Just like when they wanted me to buy an X1 last holiday season for one game (ROTR). Hahaha. Yeah riiiiiight! Lol

[DragonDDark]

You're comparing a timed exclusive to a full exclusive. @Nova

[rainslacker]

I really think most people don't understand the deal that was made, and that's why they implore the devs themselves to release it elsewhere. Obviously, people don't realize that Guerilla is a 1st party studio.

And really, I don't expect everyone to understand all the differences, or even recognize that there are publishers, or that developers are a separate thing. I mean, I'm sure there are people who don't know that EA isn't an actual developer in the traditional sense.

1st party games have never gone to a 2nd platform...well until MS did it I guess. 2nd party could go to PC sometimes, but that was pretty rare. There are a lot of different ways a game can be produced and published, and unfortunately, even if they had millions of signatures, it still wouldn't mean anything.

Oh well. I guess it's good people want to buy the game. With these kinds of exclusives, they more often than not just have to make a choice how much they want to play it.

[Sharius]

lol, i knid of understand in insomiac case, since they sometime make game for other system rather than sony, but for Guerilla case, it's literally have "sony" word write straight on everyone in that studio face, and ppl still cry because thier game to be exclusive? how idiot

[Jayszen]

Sony purchased the rights to Spider-Man from Marvel at a time when Marvel was in financial difficulties. Marvel sold rights for some of their biggest characters like X-Men and FF to 20th Century Fox and Spider-Man to Sony. This is why we have not seen any movies for these super-heroes from Marvel Studios but rather from Fox and Sony respectively. It is only recently that Sony and Disney came to an agreement so that Spidey could be part of the current Marvel film universe and these negotiations must have included rights for new games. It is, therefore, not surprising that Spider-Man will be an exclusive for the PS4 given that Sony has the rights to the character. It would be poor business sense for Sony not to take advantage of these rights to sell more consoles.

Marvel and Disney obviously trust Sony to ensure that Insomniac will deliver a game that will most likely be successful in terms of both gameplay and sales.

[B0bo]

My opinion is that companies that are into these 'exclusives' will slowly die and i will give you just one example. I played zelda ocarina of time with the aid of some emulator. I just wanted to see what was the hype about zelda . I liked the game because it was hard but the graphics were really awfull.how many would have payed to play the game then? Well more than 0 for sure(0 meaning nr of players that don't pwn the respective console but have a pc) how many will pay to play that game now? Probably 0 even if you get the console free Anyway the ideea is that co,mpetition, sales are vvvery important. At some point these companies won't have the money to invest in good exclusives because of poorer sales or they will make bullshit games or just abandon some projects because they are not making enough profit. Answer this? Why do you think they made dark souls 2 and 3? Because of very good sales of dark souls 1. Why did they make bloodbourne?because console backers were jealous of dark souls success. So some games or companies will slowly die or get eaten by the bigger fish because of this exclusives.

[DragonDDark]

You're dreaming if you think Nintendo or Playstation will die now.

They are doing even better now than ever.

[B0bo]

What i am saying is they could have made a lot more money with more games. Only no lifers would pay for old games 50 or 60€ now if they had the oportunity to play them now considering lots of better alternatives exist now. Example : would i have payed to play demon souls on pc after i played dark souls , yes. Would i pay now? No.

[PSN_ZeroOnyx]

I would love to replay Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask again. In fact I'm buying the NES Mini just to play 30 year old games with outdated graphics and mono sound lol.

[B0bo]

Wow. I suggest going to youtube and search gameplay dark souls 3 or witcher 3 cause i don't think you know games like these exist.

[PSN_ZeroOnyx]

I'm not into Dark Souls and own Witcher 3. Each gen has amazing games for it's time period. 30 years from now you will look back at those games with found nostalgia and some kid who was not apart of this gen will poke fun at you for liking "garbage".

The point is, just bc old games don't meet today's entitled gamers standards does not make them less enjoyable. Heck, the NES Mini has games from a period when Nintendo actually cared enough about quality they had an official Nintendo quality seal of approval. Games worked 1 and were fun for time period.

[B0bo]

What i am trying to say is that making some games exclusives greatly decreases profit and lower profits mean lower quality of future sequels or even death of some beloved games. Imagine zelda beeing sold like the witcher 3 did. Imagine zelda with whitcher like graphics.

[USMC_POLICE]

It's times or exclusive DLC for 3rd party games that pisses me off, like the division or BF4.

[Darkfist_Flames]

the only people who complained about spiderman being exclusive are the same ones who praised rise of the tomb raider for xbox, but unlike tomb raider, spiderman is being published by sony and they are the ones who picked Insomniac to make the game.

[ScorpiusX]

I was upset as hell , even bent out of shape about this Iconic IP being a one platform exclusive so now am over it .
Will do like I always have when a select game is not on my platform .
Simply rent the system and the game so as not to miss out playing it.

[DragonDDark]

Why not buy the system and stop being a fanboy? Brand loyalty is ridiculous

[ScorpiusX]

I rather not
Cause they chose to go that route and I chose to go my route, beside am helping contribute to the longevity of stores like Rent king , Aarons , Rent-A-Center .

[GrubsterBeater]

@Scorpius

You want to contribute to the longevity of places like Rent-a-center?!

They aren't small town Mom and Pop businesses. What are you talking about? That was the biggest load I have ever heard. I don't know if you are lying or just finding any excuse to not say I'm a fanboy and will never buy a Playstation.

Please help me to understand, I am so confused about this.

[rainslacker]

MS is welcome to go snag up, produce, and publish their own iconic IP if they so desire. Sure people will be upset about it, but eventually reality will set in. I'd rather they be proactive like that instead of just spending a butt load of money to keep a multi-plat game off another system, because in those cases, they don't do much to make a game better, but if they snag up a well known IP, produce it, and publish it, they have more vested interest in making it a quality game.

You can still rent systems? Seems like it'd just be cheaper to buy one in the long run.

[ScorpiusX]

Yes they still rent them , it short term and cheaper .
Personally would love for MS to stop all BS timed deal periods , rather they buy than fund and watch them go else where

[BlaqMagiq1]

Of course it's a non-issue. People think because there are Spider-Man fans on Xbox they're entitled to the game. Listen if you want to play the game get it on PS4. But apparently that is a hard concept for people to understand.

[ScorpiusX]

See if this had been any shit IP created within the industry of gaming no big deal go to who ever writes the bigger check . The thing here is that its spiderman an IP that was around before any console and has a massive comic following and until recently had gamer of all platforms playing the games. Sadly this deal is forcing people to buy another platform just to play a game and that seem foul . Like I stated earlier they are going to do what they want to do for themselves as will I .

[BlaqMagiq1]

If Spider-Man fans that game EXCLUSIVELY on Xbox really care about this game they will buy a PS4. Exclusives have been around for years and this is no different just because it's Spider-Man. If you really want to play this game then get yourself a PS4. If not then move on. Complaining will change nothing. Seeing it being exclusive and in the hands of Insomniac means it will get the love and passion it deserves. Something that a Spider-Man game has been missing for YEARS. I can't wait to play this amazing game on PS4.

And let's be real. Knowing you, if this was exclusive to Xbox you know damn well you would be saying the same thing I am right now.

[DivineAssault]

Im upset i see spiderman slinging webs without pressing the shooters lol.. That always bugged me as a kid when i had the genesis game

[Sora78]

Exclusives offer an identity to the brand. Like Mario for Nintendo, Kratos to Sony and... Master Chief for Xbox