That's not what happening, but thanks for trying.Imagine calling exclusive games, made by the console company (in this case SIE) itself.... anti-consumer. Hilarious.
That's not what happening, but thanks for trying.Imagine calling exclusive games, made by the console company (in this case SIE) itself.... anti-consumer. Hilarious.
A few examples in the first page https://www.resetera.com/threads/ex...-hardware-limitation-use-case-in-mind.164348/
I think this whole narrative was pushed by trolls and somehow gained traction. It's ridiculous.
That's what happened multiple times. Posts here on Era, twitter, etc.
Yep.I think this whole narrative was pushed by trolls and somehow gained traction. It's ridiculous.
Believe me, you wouldn't be that surprised if you would know them.Why people looks mad at this article ? It's just one opinion more...
edit: I can not believe some people wants to bann the site just for posting some opinion article lol
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.People operating in the real world take nuanced views on the value of things based on their price. The only people to whom it is useful to frame the argument as a black & white 'principle' are those who are so wealthy that the actual price is meaningless.
Any developer who worked on AAA games(only talking about budget and scale here) should be able to make a comment on this.It only applies to first party. Third party studios still can, and will, make games that can only be played on Series X and PS5. It may be an issue for Microsoft first party, but they're not gonna come out and attack their own company's policy.
That's what happened multiple times. Posts here on Era, twitter, etc.
Yep.
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.Any developer who worked on AAA games(only talking about budget and scale here) should be able to make a comment on this.
being annoyed because you can buy at your favorite store is ok i guess, while death threats and meltdowns aren't.
True. Well said.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.
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.
Man, people get dumber and dumber as the years go by. Ridiculous article.
one and doneFunding games and making them exclusives is not anti-consumer.
Moneyhatting 3rd party games is.
Hahaha the way they try to say that by ditching ps4 is pro-consumer is hillarious. Id expect nothing less from them.
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.
Lol this was my thought.It's PushSquare. The biggest surprise is that they are still not banned on Era.
I have a feeling Demon's Souls remake, if it is even real, is gonna be only on Ps5It's not pro-consumer, that's for sure. However, if we get bigger games with better graphics as a consequence, I'm ok with this.
Exception: Demon's Souls remake. This needs to be on the PS4.
Imagine if the film industry was like thisIf anything I find it anti consumer to invalidate the purchase of a console by not creating exclusive content.
It is more anti-consumer than EGS exclusives. Whether or not that bar is set in the "not anti-consumer" side of things is up to you.
Funding games and making them exclusives is not anti-consumer.
Moneyhatting 3rd party games is.
Using unique and exclusive ip / content to entice people to your platform and service varies.
Netflix - Outstanding
Amazon - Excellent
HBO - Epic
Sony - Anti Consumer
The term anti consumer have been extremely misused as of late.
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
"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?
This is a nonsense comparison.
Amazon doesn't lock content to the new version of their Fire Stick or just new Fire TV models.
Let's compare it to other hardware oriented products. Does Apple lock their apps to only new Iphone models?
Nobody is actually saying this. The article has no sources.Are people really saying that Next Gen Exclusives were anti-consumer?
Really?
Wow.
Yes. Even better it could be a stellar launch title too.If it exists, BluePoint is making it. And I believe it's already confirmed that their project is PS5-only.
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.This thread seems odd cause I've seen plenty of people complain that any and all exclusive stuff was anti-consumer both on ERA and beyond. But people acting like that totally isn't a thing.
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.
Funding games and making them exclusives is not anti-consumer.
Moneyhatting 3rd party games is.
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.