This is a very Era thing in recent months. It is starting to be thrown out any time someone finds that a company has done a thing that isn't completely centred around their own personal wants.
eh Mario Odyssey?Xenoblade Chronicles 2?People are putting way too much stock into this
It's cool the PS5 will have PS5 exclusives, but people seem to forget early console exclusives tend to suck
PS4 had what, Knack, Infamous, Killzone?
Were any of the early PS3 Sony exclusives great?
XB1 had Ryse, so another classic there
I could be wrong but unless Sony can buck a decade long trend I'm pretty sure the PS5 exclusives from the first year will be among the weakest of the systems exclusives
Even Nintendo haven't started off with a 10/10 exclusive since what, Mario 64?. The Wii launched with a GCN game and the Switch with a Wii U game, so cross gen
I can see why people are disappointed the new Xbox won't have early exclusives, but history would indicate that's not going to be a massive loss, all things considered
Yeah those are good, fair enough, but they also didn't launch with the system, they came 6 months later
the source isn't exactly well known for insightful articles.
I mean sure, it's not pro-consumer but a lot of things aren't. Charging for a online gaming isn't 'pro-consumer' for example, and while people are okay not to like it, it's a completely fair thing to do.
This whole thing got started because Xbox Series X launch games will also be playable on Xbox One. They're still console-exclusive to Xbox but people are worried about the games being "held back" by the previous gen machine.
Your last paragraph is exactly why push square doesn't mind writing these articles. It's entirely possible for people to be ok with this timeframe....and not anything longer. It's ok to have nuance.The anti-consuner complaints were always laughably misplaced and ridiculous. It's like some people are new to technological and product developments, cycles or advancements, correlating support cut off points, along with the very nature of the relevant business models.
What I find especially amusing is why some are or were seemingly championing only this arbitrary cut off point of 1-2 years of (first party) cross gen games in support of past gen consumers. Why not 4 years of cross gen support? Or 6? Why support cut off generations at all?
First post nails it as usual.