Over the last few days, game exclusivity has been the hot topic. We have seen Devil May Cry 4 go multi-platform after months of official press releases stating the opposite.
For me, platform exclusive games are the reason why I buy a console. I do not really look at the hardware specification as its relevant if the console has games that I want to play. Extra features are nice but I buy game consoles for games not card readers and weather information.
With this in mind, if there was only one console, would this negatively effect the standard of games produced and my overall gaming experience?
We all know that hardware manufacturers lose money when the console first goes on sale. It can be argued that a manufacturer never actually makes profit due to high development costs and as production costs reduce equally so does the retail price. As manufacturers injure a huge cost center, they have to make money from somewhere. Accessories obviously generate a large amount of profit as they are usually over priced and very rarely see reduced RRP within the consoles life cycle. Games are the key to offsetting the huge production and development costs.
Now consider if there was only one console. Development and production costs would be compensated by a huge user base which would allow the manufacturer to be profitable without having to develop games. Hardware development would probably move to incremental improvements rather than radical redesign as developers demanded greater hardware power.
Hardware competition would be removed as it negatively effects the people who actually shape the games industry; the game developers.
Game developers would not have to worry about changing console specs, porting games, understanding the platform, user bases. Developers who create great games will have their titled played by anyone that wants to instead of the consumer segment that bought a specific console. As a corollary, competition would heighten between developers as a greater importance would be placed on games as consumers gain superior choice.
As an example I will use the 2 major racing simulator franchises: Forza and Gran Turismo. Currently both games are not direct competitors as the vast majority of users can only choose one as they are restricted by their console choice. If they were both on one console, would they be better games than they currently are? Market forces dictate that they would. That is something that is difficult to imagine as both are great franchises but it is completely logical to assume that greater competition would lead to greater final products.
Superior games, in terms of quantity and quality, would not only give a better gaming experience but would also allow gaming to appeal to a wider audience as specific types of games will no longer be restricted to a single platform.
Could it be time to ask yourself, what would you prefer; choice of hardware or choice of games?
TSA writes: "It wouldn't be a classic Mario game if he didn't blindly follow the instructions of a letter or invitation. We play this Paper Mario remake."
They really put a lot of effort into making this a full on proper remake/remaster. So much more little details that one would have missed when playing the original GC version.
PSLS writes: I have traveled across the country using the Razer Kishi Ultra in airports and hotels for both PlayStation Remote Play and mobile gaming in general, and I am thoroughly impressed.
Stellar Blade might be the hot game right now, but we already got a better version of it more than half a year ago.
Stellar blade is currently higher than lies of p on metacritic with 40 more reviews. No shade on Lies of P but just pointing that out.
But i don't even know why compare them? Because both are souls type games?
Then you can just reuse this article all the time and say Elden Ring is "whatever new souls game" but good for every new souls game.
Stellar blade hate articles must be rolling with clicks...
I mean… it’s like saying we have a better NieR with Devil May Cry. Yea, there’s some similarities, but Lies is really hardcore in the sense of emulating a FromSoft game almost perfectly, where Stellar has some Souls-like elements, but I’d say it’s closer to Sekiro than say a Dark Souls game. This almost feels click-baitey
Listen here you, that's not how this is supposed to work. You choose a side and you defend it. None of this little "what if there's more than one good game out there" nonsense.
Oh geez...this is why journos suck...they can't even see differences between games.
Stellar blade is nothing like lies of P. Didn't these guys give stellar a bad score? Geez they really hate it. Stop the hate! Lol
monopoly
it would be a Disaster, similar to what happened to Wrestlemania(WWF)...talk about trash.
I'm more againgst certain Console makers strategy then the console itself.
Loyalist my @ss
In your example, you state that people are limited by their console choice when choosing between games.
However, the game drives console sales in it's own right. If I were to look at the features of both Gran Turismo and Forza Motorsport, I would be able to decide which had a feature set I preferred, and plan my console choice based on that information.
Another factor is fanbase. If I was a huge fan of Forza on XBox, but not thrilled with Gran Turismo, logic dictates that when I upgrade to a newer system, I buy the one that is most likely to have future iterations of that game.
finally, the games still compete with each other. The goal with exclusive games is to sell consoles rather than games. The game is only availiable on one console, so potential income is limited to the installed user base. They want attach rate, and the only way to add more potential sales is to potentially increase the market. This entails making the best product possible so as to draw attention away from the competing console. Any competing console bought is a lost potential sale, so Gran Turismo and Forza will both be more likely to innovate than if they were multiplatform, since multiplatform would guarantee some attach rate, or on a single system, since the odds are that people will be less reluctant to pick up both.
for!
look at it like this, PC gaming, isnt that major like console gaming for me. i own a good quality PC will play anything on the market, yet i brought an XBox 360. with competition MS Nintendo and Sony have to think of new ways to provide better and on going good services.
if there was only one console then yeh there wouldnt be any competition, and if theres no competition then would they have thought of things like, IPTV, XBoxLIVE Marketplace, PSN, Home. when the original PS was replaced by the PS2 there wasnt that much new about the PS2 except the DVD drive. nothing came out later except the ability to play online (and i didnt even try this with my PS2 as i brought one the year it came out without the Ethernet port)
Compitition is always good, they have to keep impressing us to buy there stuff, so compitition gives us better service.