A few examples in the first page https://www.resetera.com/threads/exclusives-suck-unless-developed-with-a-specific-hardware-limitation-use-case-in-mind.164348/
That's what happened multiple times. Posts here on Era, twitter, etc.
What a ridiculous, insulting straw man. You should be ashamed of yourself for making assumptions about my income that are completely untrue just because I disagreed with an argument that makes no sense and pointed out that you can't compare a recurring payment of $10 a month to a one-time purchase of $400. Clearly many people who are not wealthy feel the value proposition of a one-time $400 purchase is worth it for the ability to play years and years of exclusive games, not to mention the fact that most people do not buy these consoles at full price.
Any developer who worked on AAA games(only talking about budget and scale here) should be able to make a comment on this.
It doesn't help that now that stream of thought has now left this tiny place and is now floating around. No disrespect to the author but the Matt Booty/Kotaku threads about cross-gen/not cross-gen really didn't need more exposure.
Ah, gotcha. You just mean a general insight into the premise. I thought you meant more of like, someone reporting their specific experience of developing a game for Series X and being mandated to use Xbox One as a baseline rather than just discussing the concept.
Death threats and meltdowns are never ok.
True. Well said.
Well, because people in the other thread were downplaying the extent to which nextgen games would be held back by the xbox one. Some used the pc with its unlimited hardware combinations to make the case that it's not a big deal.Why? It's not that there is any doubt about it. Games like Dead Rising 3 and Ryse Son of Rome weren't possible on 360 back in the days. Spider-Man's speed has been limited due to HDD limitations. The Nemesis system in Shadow of Mordor needed to be altered on last gen. Guerilla tried to implement flying mounts in Horizon Zero Dawn, but the CPU and HDD bandwith were just not there. Novigrad in The Witcher 3 has been designed to reduce drawing distances, so PS4 and Xbox One could handle it.
There are countless examples and the difference next gen will be a lot bigger because of the storage being WAY faster.
Excellent article, Sammy. Every significant console known to man has had exclusives either at launch and most definitely within their first two years. Funny how this decades old tradition only became "anti-consumer" in the minds of some once Microsoft revealed XSX will not have any exclusives.
one and done
This.But they don't quote or link to any sources. Push Square is a Sony focused outlet so any soapbox articles like this (literally published as "Soapbox:" aren't holding anyones feet to the fire without actually referencing anything other than a few disaffected posters on forums like this and Twitter.
That they made a whole article out of this is ridiculous.
I have a feeling Demon's Souls remake, if it is even real, is gonna be only on Ps5
Imagine if the film industry was like this
Anti-consumer violates the rights of consumers, usually when they are forced to agree to contracts which come with the purchased or used product. Other example would be faulty products which limit the lifespan of said product.
This is a nonsense comparison.
I think the console isn't worth it if it doesn't have exclusive games. For example there is no way i'd buy a Switch if that content was available elsewhere.Imagine if the film industry was like this
"You have to buy the Sony BDPS1700 Bluray player to watch Avengers: Endgame and the LG BPM350 Bluray player to watch Frozen 2, and people cheer this on as being good for consumers"
Obviously this isn't a 1:1 situation, the industry is a little different in how development works, but the thing is is that you're saying that a console isn't worth it if it doesn't have exclusive games.Wouldn't you want the console to sell itself on its own hardware? Like imagine if all games were multiplat; you'd choose what platform to play on based on what has the best hardware for the best price most suited to you, wouldn't you? Wouldn't it be better for hardware to sell itself on its own merits?
It would seem the vast majority of gamers polled think that exclusive ip on a new platform is ok so the semantic argument isn't necessary.
Sony first party being exclusive to their current system being called anti-consumer is one thing, while third party bought exclusives and timed exclusives being called anti-consumer is another.
So why are there so many Sony fans on this forum getting upset that so few think this is anti-consumer (it’s not). Everything about this cross gen stuff has been so absurd.
We are ok with this because hardwares in the past were so different between generations and we didn't have scalable games. Now that all consoles are basically PCs with different specs, it does not make sense to lock ALL games to new hardware versions only. I can see this happening after some years, and with only games the push the hardware limits. For all the other games it's just a business oriented anti-consumer decision.