Exclusive gaming is harming the industry – let's bring the gaming communities together

Carlos writes: "It’s a war that’s been raging on since the dawn of the console existence. In recent years it’s turned some parts of our global community so toxic that even Chernobyl feels like a safer place to be, and yet in an era capable of showcasing some of the finest works of art within its many games, the console which you play on is still a subject that’s enough to add the fuel to the fire behind hundreds and thousands of gamers, dividing opinion entirely.

But why?"

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Nyxus387d ago

Exclusive games are what gives each console its identity. What's the point of having multiple consoles if there are no more exclusives?

thisismyaccount387d ago (Edited 387d ago ) ... someone tell´em that u can get a ps4 for cheap these days.

Give us shenmue2, kotor, gaiden, pgr ... then we talk. Looks like the author had an epiphany of some kind.

uptownsoul386d ago (Edited 386d ago )

I get that this is an opinion by this particular author...But I'm sorry, this is like saying Michael Jordan should have been on EVERY team.

He can make a half-way legit argument for stopping timed exclusives (where the Sony or Microsoft simply pay to keep a game off the other's platform for a time), but fully developed (and/or paid for) games by the platform holder should go to a competing platform??? Then why would any of them own studios? They'd just be glorified SteamBoxes then.

Just my 2 cents: I can't help but notice this opinion article coming from an Xbox leaning site. And who knows, maybe its just coincidence that Xbox hasn't had much in the way of exclusives in 2017...

Godmars290386d ago

So say supporters of a brand that's been unable to create exclusives?

PeaSFor386d ago

"Exclusive gaming is harming the industry" -Xbox dedicated website

LMAO, go wonder why you never hear that coming from Playstation or Nintendo website........., do i really need to explain?

TheKingKratos386d ago (Edited 386d ago )

I was like *WTF* till i saw the website
Lol, this is getting sad now
let's cut the BS
The only damn reason to buy a console is exclusives it's what define consoles and what push the system to it's limit there is a reason that no game in the console market look close to Playstation exclusives on the PRO
if everything is playable on any system i would just stick to PC and never buy consoles
but i understand them though they choose the wrong system to support.

S2Killinit385d ago (Edited 385d ago )

An xbox website asking that everyone do away with exclusives so that we can be done with console gaming once and for all and we can all game on our PC steam machines under MS’s windows. MS would like that scenario.

spreadlove385d ago


Unable to create exclusives you say?

The best console exclusive racing game multiple times is still Forza. Can anyone beat Forza 7, let alone Forza Horizon 3?

InTheLab385d ago

I expect to see many more articles like this one now that the X is out.

Most powerful console begging for the competition's games. Or, instead of wasting money on this niche product, MS could have invested in their studios and tried to make their base console relevant again.

fr0sty385d ago

Even without the "it gives a console its identity" concept, if you remove exclusives, it waters down the games so they can all run on all consoles, no longer will you see devs pushing a console to its absolute limits, because they'd have to cater to the lowest common denominator and make the game able to run on all hardware.

You know a system's exclusive game is weak when their sites start calling for an end to exclusives...

strifeblade385d ago


or a supporter of a brand can use a better console.

indysurfn385d ago (Edited 385d ago )

I think the article writer did not think it through realistically. Say for instance there is no exclusives this generation. Xbox and Nintendo would have already lost by a landslide WAY worse than now. If there was no forza, gears of war uncharted horizon (etc x 100) and not Zelda, spattoon, mario, rabbids...mario cart (etc x 100) Then PS4 would have sould about 100 million already. SWITCH would not have been born....xb1 would have died before x1x, and Sony would have a monopoly without having a need for the ps4 pro. So because of exclusive splitting the market we have competition which keeps the prices COMPETITIVE.

yeahright2385d ago

Soon as I saw the headline I thought, "that sounds like something someone without a good deal of exclusives would say." Sure enough, xbox fan site.

mikeslemonade385d ago (Edited 385d ago )

It's the literally the exact opposite. Multiplats pretty much started the greed generation. The work less for money generation. It's like the foundation of "hmm how can I make more money? By double dipping I can". Plus the money they make not much comes back to us. There's less AAA games and less quality now.

thisismyaccount385d ago (Edited 385d ago )

In a perfect world, we all would be playing all the games on one platform ... while that "dream" might be a feasible endeavour for 1st party games only ... 3rd party literally depend on having their games on multiple devices (like fifa, madden etc.).

Remove these extra devices and their revenue plummets. To make up for it, that remaining (one platform with Sony, Nintendo and MS support) would have to sell in the 100mill. within the first few years ... to make up for that loss of not having sold an 2nd copy or 3rd on different platforms.

Are 70mill. (PS4) arleady enough to sustain that dream? Or do we need more, beyond the 100mill. playerbase so that EA and Co. make enough dough by only selling 1x copy instead of 3x? We can assume that Nintendo and Microsoft would have sold twice as many copies, if they had released their games for the PS2 as well, dont ya think?

I just dont know how big the playerbase has to be on one platform, to make up the loss of not having 2x add. platforms. Again the only console that could have probably done this, had to be the PS2, just by the sheer numbers of sales.

Babadook7385d ago

Pack it up Naughty Dog. Looks like your on all platforms now because of some “journalist“.

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 385d ago
uth11386d ago

And competition.
A lot of these exclusives were commissioned by the platform holder to give their console an edge. Without tbat, these games wouldnt go cross-platform, they'd never get made in the first place

385d ago
386d ago Replies(4)
Zero_Suit_Samus386d ago (Edited 386d ago )

“Exclusive gaming is harming the industry – let's bring the gaming communities together”


Lmao. Exclusives are what defines a console and gives reason for choosing one console over another. Sounds more like you’re jealous the competition are pumping out amazing exclusives while you have nothing in comparison.

_-EDMIX-_386d ago

I agree the other big issue is what this person is asking for it doesn't really make that much sense in regards to a business perspective I don't really understand exactly how they can ask for something but also completely ignore that the games they're talking about are owned by different companies.

I mean it's basically an empty bizarre wish.

scofios386d ago

Waw just because somebody console of choice has no exclusive games and is depending on third party and backwards games all exclusive games need to be banned , and wright an article about it. How pathetic can you be .

343_Guilty_Spark386d ago

Consoles would still have an identity through network community, Controller, interface, and ecosystem.

You’re telling me if you could play Forza, Halo, Mario, and Uncharted on the same box of your choosing you’d be angry because they aren’t exclusive to one box?

Cmv38386d ago

So companies wouldn't have the freedom to make their own games? That's dumb.

rainslacker386d ago

It's not about being angry or happy. I'd find it to be cool to be honest.

But the notion that exclusives are harming the industry is kind of dumb. All three console makers made their names based on their exclusives, and if they didn't have those exclusives, chances are, they wouldn't sell much hardware for all those other games to also sell on.

343_Guilty_Spark386d ago (Edited 386d ago )

Companies would have the freedom to make their own games.

Imagine an “Open Box” Console. A unified standard that Ninty, Sony, and Microsoft agreed on.

Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony, and all 3rd parties develop and publish toward this box.

Honestly wouldn’t be much different than a PC and I’m fine with a more dedicated gaming PC-Console box.

Only dumb because you’re short-sighted.

yellowgerbil386d ago

You are missing the point entirely. They are saying niche games (most of Sony's games that aren't 3rd person action games) would never get made because they can't sell enough to justify. Sony makes these, which yoshida has gone on record to say they lose them money, they make them because they round out their portfolio and bring in varied demographics. If Sony wasn't supporting their own system they'd be doing exactly what Microsoft is currently doing, chasing that gaas dollar.
We don't want Sony and Nintendo to follow ms' s lead, we're frustrated ms doesn't offer anything.

jwillj2k4386d ago

that’s the thing nobody from the Sony/Nintendo camps are complaining that they can’t play forza or halo. It’s always coming from Xbox owners who feel left out due to their inadequate supply of software.

Xbox owners want to level the playing field by bringing everyone down to their level. Step your content up game up instead of asking for our shit.

cooperdnizzle386d ago

Everybody would think it’s kinda of cool, but the main feature of a gaming console is games plain and simple. Controller design etc etc are just icing on the cake. But this might sound crazy, real gamers buy consoles for games first and foremost. In other words, first thing is first.

People would lose almost all incentive to buy one console over the other, and than people like me who support multiple consoles, would only have to buy one. This may seem good but eventually you will have only one console maker in the long run and then a Monopoly!! They should teach you this in Jr high, This. Is. Bad. You’ll end up with one lame ass console in the long run.

OB1Biker386d ago

This is basically populist talk. The reality is many of these games would never be made in the first place. Developing original content to sell their hardware is a good incentive. Even Phil said so

_-EDMIX-_386d ago (Edited 386d ago )

ok...what about the developers who can't afford to make a game on 5 different systems?

"Only dumb because you’re short-sighted."

Um...ok. Very ironic.

I don't understand, how would MS or Sony or Nintendo sell a box that isn't owned by either of the 3?

"Imagine an “Open Box” Console. A unified standard that Ninty, Sony, and Microsoft agreed on"

Ok...who is MAKING THE SYSTEM? You do understand that MONEY needs to be spent to make the damn system right?

Buddy, this is your hypothetical.

386d ago
trooper_385d ago (Edited 385d ago )

No it wouldn't.

All I see from this article is jealousy that the competition has the balls to pump out diverse games to demonstrate what their console can do. I applaud Sony and Nintendo for fighting for gamer wallets. What exactly is Microsoft doing? Offering an expensive console with no memorable exclusives?

I'll pass, thanks.

Nyxus385d ago

lol @ network.

I buy different systems for different game libraries. This is the main thing that makes them distinct from each other, and the only reason I even invest in multiple systems.

madforaday385d ago

You are also making it sound like Multi-platform games perform the same has exclusives. The best part of an exclusive is that the developers is solely putting their hearts into it and not worrying about 3 other platforms that they would need to put it on if it was multi-platform. The best games we get are usually exclusives games. Then you have Sony and Nintendo helping fund certain projects so those projects can actually be seen by gamers. People make it sound like it is so simple to just simply make a game, port it to different consoles/PC and market it. Do you think the developers who are first party are worrying about if they fund their next game? Not many small developers can do what Guerrilla Games did with Horizon Zero Dawn. They really had no assets, let alone developers for an RPG type game. They had to do a lot from scratch. That was a huge risk for them, let alone some small developer with no publisher.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 385d ago
rainslacker386d ago

Exclusive games don't harm the industry in any way. They may harm the sales of some games when it comes to timed exclusives(ROTTR), or one's brought to keep exclusive indefinately(titanfall), but ultimately, it doesn't actually affect the industry in a negative way. To date, I can't think of a single failure of an exclusive on these natures which has caused detrimental harm to the industry, and I can't think of any case where devs shut down because of it.

But when it comes to exclusives that are made by the console makers, it is in no way harmful to the industry. If anything, it helps the industry, because more money is being made, and more consoles sell because of it, thus giving a larger user base to sell games to.

When it comes to 3rd party exclusives, those aren't harmful, because those games are made based on where the games are likely to sell.

The only reason to get rid of exclusives would be if there was no motivation to sell hardware. Even then, in a console vs. PC market, we'd still likely see them.

Ultimately, the only way exclusives won't happen is if there is a singular spec for consoles, that all console makers adhere to. Such things have been attempted in the past, but fail miserably. In any case a singular console, even if multiple hardware makers support it, means that gaming becomes more of a monopoly, controlled by a select few. That is bad, and would be more harmful to the community than good. On top of that, it'd be harmful for the industry, as all publishers and developers would be all but forced to adhere to whatever the controllers wished. It'd be the same situation as you see in the PC market, where Windows holds such a dominance, that no other competitor can compete with any significant value, and the OS(or hardware in this case), become bastions of mediocrity where the creators of the hardware or OS dictate what the consumer will get....all while saying, "Hey, this is what you guys want".

neoandrew386d ago

The point is to play games, gamers would be really not interested in exclusivity if they could play sony games on ps4, xbox, pc, then i hardly see anyone would complain, what to complain there would be, that you can play great sony games on more platforms??? I dont think so, and they would also sell more of them.

Xx_Pistol_xX386d ago

-Exclusives fully utalize the hardware since the devs only have to concentrate on making the game on one hardware.
-Making exclusives means the devs don't have to spend as much time or money developing multiple versions of the game
- Exclusives give platforms identity.

Ceaser9857361386d ago

Exclusive gaming is harming the industry – let's bring the gaming communities together..

NOPE , then there will be no point... competition wont be there and devs and company wont push their talents ... Its like saying Rolando and Messi should play for every country..and every club.

outsider1624386d ago

I just want know one thing. Did moldy write this?

Many-hat5386d ago (Edited 386d ago )

Yep. Er, consoles don't need identities, they are just lumps of metal and electronics. What you actually mean imo, is that your console, is an extension of your identity. That's where this 'exclusivity' has it's foundations, I believe. Just like football and soccer teams,cars and whatever else. People like to align themselves with a group, It's what people do. That's not a judgement, just an observation. Smug people, like myself, who belong to a group who own all consoles and PC's and whatever, express this also. just like the author, only our identity is to identify with a group that owns all consoles. To answer the question. Are exclusives ruining the industry? Well, it doesn't help gamers, generally, because you are restricted to a limited number of excellent games, but of course, you don't want the games on another console anyway, do you?

Nyxus385d ago

No, what I mean is that the exclusive library is what mainly sets apart a certain console from the competition. If there are no more exclusives, there would be little point in having multiple consoles. There would still be some differences such as interface and controller, but those are pretty negligible and not really a compelling reason to buy multiple systems for.

FyBy386d ago

Exactly! Exclusives dont make war. People make (console) war.

trooper_385d ago


It's a stupid article. Exclusives show what the console is capable of and promotes diversity.

spreadlove385d ago (Edited 385d ago )

So you want the platform to withhold games so you can see an identity in your hardware?

Can you not see the flaw in that?

That is what I love about Steam, they don't try that BS and their second party games are timed exclusive and free to go to other platforms. The ludicrousness of people wanting the platform to withhold games is the most stupendous thing I have heard in a long time. Keep asking for exclusivity so you can be chained to their platform. That is exactly what they want.

Nyxus385d ago

It's not about 'witholding games', it's about creating these unique experiences for your platform, investing in studios and IPs, pushing the hardware, the console manufacturers are doing this to give players an incentive to buy their hardware, and it results in games like The Last of Us, Mario Odyssey, God of War, Zelda... in other words, many of the most beloved games.

spreadlove385d ago

The most beloved games are Call of Duty and the multiplats. They are sold and played the most every year!

I'm certain those "exclusive" games you hold so dear are perfectly creatable without being exclusive.

MrVux000385d ago (Edited 385d ago )

Ah the infamous terminology known as "withholding games" or more commonly known as "holding games hostage" usually among non-console users...hostage taking/or withholding would imply that one party is unjustly being held against their will by another... which is not the case.

I think that after 20 or so years it is evident why developers and their games remain exclusive to the publishers platforms and it is also evident that if those games weren't exclusives that we would have NOT experienced the same quality of those games as we did, both because of technical and financial reasons.

Nyxus385d ago

@ spreadlove: alright, go play Call of Duty then. What's the problem? Those games aren't exclusive.

spreadlove385d ago


after the many decades of gaming history, I'm pretty sure everyone can see that exclusives isn't what makes great game. Great games are done by great developers period.

joeorc385d ago (Edited 385d ago )

Really steam is your prime example?

Let's just get this out of the way, if it's so good for any platform to have steam on their box , why does Linux and Mac always get 2nd billing or any of the main support Microsoft Windows always gets the games first on steam. Other OS's are lucky if those OS's get the game at all.

This would be no different, if this part of the market turned up the same way.

If one box was the main box what Operating stystem would the main OS for this so called universal box be? That than Microsoft , Sony and Nintendo all alike make their games for?

Hmm? Linux, Nintendo's System OS, PlayStations System OS, Windows 10, Google Android OS, iOS or Mac OS?

Someone will be the default OS for that box and everyone else would get cut out, of the equation..we already seen this outcome in the PC market before..

The game console market does not need to end up the same way.

rainslacker385d ago

No one is withholding games, with maybe the exception of those timed or full exclusive deals.

Some devs/pubs just choose to only release on one console, because that's where their games sell. There's not point expending resources for niche games which traditionally don't sell well on a certain console.

You go where your audience is, it's as simple as that.

A unified hardware may make it so it's not an issue for devs, or even consumers, but that seems like it would bring it's own host of problems in the long term....mostly for the consumer, and potentially for the hardware makers, because it gives too much control to a single party or group controlling that hardware, and would make it really hard for competition to challenge a market if it becomes stagnant.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 385d ago
Docmortem385d ago

Well pointed out ... there is no natural reason for multiple consoles ... having closed systems makes gaming more expensive for everyone.

Cobra951385d ago

You realize that all consoles are closed systems, right? Even if there were only one, it would still be closed, and it would have a monopoly. Tell me that wouldn't make games worse and more expensive.

343_Guilty_Spark385d ago (Edited 385d ago )

What’s the identity of Roku or Amazon Fire or Apple TV?

They all have the same apps for Netflix, Hulu, Amazon which have have their own exclusive content but each box has its own ecosystem.

The user has a choice at every step.

Which box do I want?
What content do I want?

Console currently is;

If I want X game I have to buy X device. You have no choice.

bluefox755385d ago

It sounds convenient to have ever game available on one device, the problem with that is, exclusive games tend to be better games than multiplatform. Unless this is one hell of a coincidence, then doing away with exclusives would hurt the quality of these games. The best games I've played over the past year have been nearly all exclusives, this is despite exclusives being a relative minority in the total number of game releases. I'll take quality over convenience any day.

joeorc385d ago

Roku has its very own eco system,amazon use a fork of the Android OS, Apple TV is your really not making the case for what your wanting.

Just because they have their own system OS does not mean they are open..there is things on each of those boxes or smart sticks that are.not on the other smart box or smart sticks other companies.

spicelicka385d ago

I didn't read the article but this should not apply to exclusives games, only to exclusives deals. That's what's harming the industry.

RommyReigns385d ago (Edited 385d ago )

oh look it's 'thexboxhub', hey you anti gaming freedom website, welcome to my banned list!

LandoCalrissiano385d ago (Edited 385d ago )

What's the point of an apple computer if a windows pc does the same thing? Because it doesn't matter that they do the same thing. What's the worst thing that happens if playstation can play Mario kart? Everyone says that a lot of companies lose money or break even on consoles and that they make money from games. So what does it hurt to sell 50 million more copies because people can play Mario on other platforms? Sure it'll play best on Nintendo but they sales will be better and you'll reach a larger audience.

NeoGamer232385d ago (Edited 385d ago )

What is the point of being able to buy a receiver from many different vendors? Or a TV? Or shop at some stores and not others?

Content should not define the hardware. Customer service and quality of the hardware should.

There is no way I can justify spending $1,200 on a Switch, PS4 Pro, and Xbox One X just because Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft refuse to ship a few of their games on each of the devices. And I could buy way more games if I only bought one brand of console to play all those games.

rainslacker385d ago

A TV, receiver, or anything of that nature uses set standards to deliver a certain level of product to the consumer. For the most part, it is needed there, because it'd be a mess for the consumer, and content makers if it wasn't standardized. Just imagine if we had multiple broadcast specs to deal with when choosing a TV. We already do when it comes to digital cable, and it requires additional hardware.

But that's not really the same situation as gaming. Gaming is a varied and always changing technology that requires new hardware, and that hardware has lots of different routes to deliver the same kinds of content. But having different standards means that these different hardware makers, and even software makers, compete on a playing field in a market which is made up of lots of different delivery systems.

While it's an ideal to say that having a unified system would be great...and maybe it would be, it also leads to the the chance that the technology could stagnate, as there is no big desire for the hardware makers to keep competing for the buyers attention. A unified system runs too much of a risk to have a small group who controls the course of game development, and that's a bad thing. Just look at PC. Windows is the dominate system by a very wide margin, and is about as close to a monopoly as you can get without being one. While there is a ton of software on Windows, OS advances have been slow to come, and having a single company with that much control has held back gaming on PC because of how they release their tools for making games. MS own way of releasing DX practically forced it to never start being used right away. I don't see why it'd be any different in the console space.

NeoGamer232385d ago

So really what you did was prove my point. If the 3 console vendors standardized their hardware it would no longer be as much of a mess for the consumers. We could buy any game and it would work on any device and we could choose hardware based on hardware rather then based on which consoles have what games.

Now-a-days the consoles are based on stock PC type hardware. There is no magic in them. So, I find it difficult to believe they could not work to a spec.

And the gaming industry's innovation is born on making a different and innovative game. Not the hardware spec. If games stagnate they sell less, if they sell less the industry would invent new hardware to build innovative games upon. That said, there will be and is a certain amount of stagnation setting in. Moore's Law is coming to an end, so hardware isn't changing as much. But at the same time companies like Nintendo are taking advantage of that to deliver a different type of gaming platform.

Gwiz385d ago

The argument is to have all games to be available on all systems (this argument usually comes from people that prefer the PC platform)IMO it shouldn't even be a desire.All the platforms first party content is at least trying to maximise a system's capabilities.Third-party would rarely do that because they focus on multiple systems (unless you're Crytek but look at what happened to them) " I don't care I just want what benefits me and I don't care about a company's needs " are the people that do not understand how a cyclical evolution maintains to go upwards.

Mostly just blinded by their own needs,while ironically not seeing what is NEEDED.

R6ex385d ago

Don't have any consoles.

Nyxus385d ago

Or no games, even easier.

+ Show (21) more repliesLast reply 385d ago
PhoenixUp387d ago

This industry was built on exclusives.

Both exclusives and multiplats can co-exist without either making the other irrelevant.

Deep-throat386d ago

Exclusives are dying. They don't make big money as they used to.

ZehnDrachen386d ago

You mean.. Xbox exclusives are dying...

Sgt_Slaughter386d ago

Things that never will be true for $500