Timed Exclusives - What's your take on that

[sibarraz]

Timed Exclusives are fine by me, if developers don't want to spends lots of resources on a game, or receive funding to finish the game at the cost of being exclusive, I think that is fine.

What I think that is terrible is launching exclusive content, those things could fragment communities, this was awful last gen when sony was getting exclusive fighters for cross tekken and mk9 which were worthless since they were not tournament legal. Or destiny launching content on xbox only after the second game was released,

 

[IIFloodyII]

Them just not being open about it is all that annoys me about them really, whether they be misleading like MS or silent like Sony, just say if it's timed or not, don't even have to say for how long. I'm not going to buy your system for a game that might be exclusive.

Also, being charged the same months/years later too, though that less so as I'm very unlikely to buy a late release day 1.

 

[Playsage]

im ok if a company decides to fund a game (especially one that probably wouldn't have happened) and then make it exclusive for a year. I think a feature like RE7 VR is dumb af, Exclusive DLC is stupid regardless with the only one as an exception is like when Shovel knight had a battletoads stage on xbox (now on pc) and a god of war stage on PS4.

Click to shrink...

Why?
Several people would tell you that this is the best way to experience the game for them.

Unless you are talking about it being esclusive to PS VR specifically, and that's a whole new can of worms to open

 

[LoyalPhoenix]

Why?
Several people would tell you that this is the best way to experience the game for them.

Unless you are talking about it being esclusive to PS VR specifically, and that's a whole new can of worms to open

Click to shrink...

sorry i meant that it being exclusive to PSVR for a year was dumb, i totally think its probably the best way to experience it although 20mins in and i said fuck that and just played it on my tv instead.

 

[Alexandros]

It's a problem that will always exist because no one is paying to market on the PC.

Click to shrink...

Yeah I agree and I'm fine with that. The absence of a sugar daddy is one of PC gaming's big advantages in my opinion. It means we get a few games later but it also means that no single company can impose its will upon the platform.

This isn't always the case. Sometimes, timed exclusivity helps get the game made in the first place - a 3rd party comes to a platform holder with a game proposal & the platform holder likes it, but not enough to fund it fully for full exclusivity. They pay a smaller amount (either directly in development funding or with marketing funds) and in exchange, the game is exclusive to their platform for a period of time.

Click to shrink...

I wouldn't put that in the same category. Relying on the financial support of the console manufacturer to get the game made is different to developing a multiplatform game and then accepting a moneyhat to delay or not talk about one of the versions.

 

[Deleted member 10675]

Anyone wants to make a thread about this?

http://www.dsogaming.com/news/nier-automata-originally-meant-pc-exclusive-title/

Remind that the game still hasn't been patched.

 

[Chairmanchuck (另一个我)]

Megaton Rainfall VR is timed exclusive for PSVR.

 

[FromAshesRise]

It's important to note - like it really can't be overstressed here - that assuming that a steam page being "up" for a year doesn't mean the PC port was done a year prior to the steam release. It's honestly colossal bullshit to make that assumption.

 

[janusff]

Timed exclusives imposed by publishers is a shit business practice. And should be called out and criticized over.

Timed exclusives by indie developers cause they have limited resources to port their games elsewhere is fine.

 

[maximumzero]

I'm pretty indifferent to the whole practice. If a game doesn't release on the platform I own, I'm not gonna flip out. If it releases later on down the line, I'll probably then pick it up.

 

[Mifec]

It's important to note - like it really can't be overstressed here - that assuming that a steam page being "up" for a year doesn't mean the PC port was done a year prior to the steam release. It's honestly colossal bullshit to make that assumption.

Click to shrink...

Depends on the game. For FFX/2 it was the case. For Nioh it was not. You can see every update the devs make there.

 

[Durante]

It's important to note - like it really can't be overstressed here - that assuming that a steam page being "up" for a year doesn't mean the PC port was done a year prior to the steam release. It's honestly colossal bullshit to make that assumption.

Click to shrink...

I don't think you understand the basis for the deductions made in the case of some games.

SteamDB allows you to track every depot update, and in the case of some of these timed exclusives work on them was completely finished long before the PC release.

 

[Deleted member 2340]

If it's not full on exclusive or console exclusive it's a waste of money.

 

[0xe0x]

after today, I think it's fine.

 

[bob100]

after today, I think it's fine.

Click to shrink...

You've just bumped a thread over 4.5 years old

 

[Mukrab]

Trash. Except when it's microsoft because then it means game pass day one which means free games for me. If they weren't on game pass then also trash because you're taking something away from someone without giving any benefit to your customers at all. Same goes for sony, if they start releasing stuff on PC on a subscription service it's a-okay for me.

 

[monketron]

Trash. Except when it's microsoft because then it means game pass day one which means free games for me. If they weren't on game pass then also trash because you're taking something away from someone without giving any benefit to your customers at all. Same goes for sony, if they start releasing stuff on PC on a subscription service it's a-okay for me.

Click to shrink...

What even is this.

 

[Mukrab]

What even is this.

Click to shrink...

In short: If it results in free games for me then great, if not it's pointless and a waste of money.

 

[Mathieran]

I like the 3-6 month deals that help fund the games but don't lock them to one platform permanently or for a huge amount of time.

 

[Jade1962]

It's ok depending if I like the platform holder at the time.

 

[Beef Supreme]

I have never liked them. Period. I won't even buy the game until it comes out on the other console just out of spite.

 

[TaySan]

Doesn't bother me as someone that tends to own all platforms + PC. Worst comes to shove I will just wait for the game to come to my preferred platform.

 

[LanceX2]

no FF 7 on xbox still

 

[Lengualo]

Console wars are ultimately harmful and exclusives push us down that road.

I believe in games being as accessible as possible and don't like tying to specific platform vendors - which ultimately serves two ends.

One, that end consumers have to buy multiple platforms to enjoy content, and second that platform vendors don't have to rely so much on their hardware than what exclusives they can get to flog their console.

As an end user I don't want a Playstation, XBox, Nintendo, a gaming PC and a decent smartphone or tablet. I don't need all that, and its harmful to the environment - the carbon footprints on tech manufacture are substantial and companies really need to get more aware and take this seriously. But exclusives are designed to encourage me have to purchase all that.

Therefore, I'd prefer games to be multi-platform provided studios can afford to do so.

 

[Transistor]

Let's not bump ancient threads