REJOICE! For Xbox360 will see FFXIII!

[Wolf Kanno]

No, my post wasn't exclusively directed to you Croyles.

I was just giving my two cents on the industry and what I feel the loss of exclusives is really doing to Sony. But lack of competition? Hello, this is what first and second party developers are for! :rolleyes2 MS has Bungie and Rare (suckers) Sony has the Ico team as well as the teams that brought us Legend of Dragoon and Arc the Lad, and lets face it, the only thing Nintendo has going for its non-handheld console is its first party developers. The ones that have kept them afloat for three console generations right now.

The system specs are also different so I feel some companies can be commissioned to build games specifically for the system. Especially since the last few generations have made making AAA titles cost million of dollars. Exclusiveness to a system is not going to earn these third party developers back their money, its better for them to either go multi-platform to earn back their income or the console companies need to start making better incentives to stay exclusive. I really feel Sony shot themselves in the foot with the PS3 and due to its slow start, more developers are jumping ship instead of foolishly placing all their eggs in one basket.

Granted, Sony has always done well because they had a better library of third party developers than the other two consoles but I feel they easily forget this and instead of building a system to the specs of the developers that was both powerful and economical; they instead tried to promote their own technology and boasted how powerful it is. The #1 complaint against Sony in the last generation was that the PS2 was difficult to program for; and in this generation, it seems its even worse. I'm not saying Sony is doomed but I can't give them pity cause they should have paid more attention to the warnings. We've known for awhile that SE's White Engine was being designed to applicable outside of the PS3 specs. Sony needs to make amends to the third party developers if they want to regain their dominance.

Overall, I feel third party exclusives are bad for third party developers unless they magically chose right and picked the console the fickle market decided to praise this generation. I mean, for crying out loud, Square and Enix joined forces because both were suffering financially (Square more than Enix) and so they could combine their forces to cut back on production costs. The last console generation saw many mergers and the main reason was because of production costs. Obviously, I feel a new deal must be made between third party developers and console companies on how to fix this problem and I see major third party developers like SE and Capcom going multi-platform as a good sign to get all parties at the bargaining table.

Exclusives are good for the console not for the developers unless you have a damn good PR group that can convince people that your game is going to be the end all be all of existence...

[Vyk]

Nobody moaned like this whenever Sony acquired a previously exclusive game :[ Which is why I know its just irrational fears and a touch of fanboyism

Well to be honest you don't hear of Sony acquiring many exclusives as of late. They only lose them.......to Microsoft. And the difference between Sony acquiring exclusives and Microsoft acquiring exclusives is that Microsoft in most cases bribes the developers while Sony are just given them. Sony efforts are focused on their first party developers which is good because the games won't be able to appear on any other platform and gives the PS3 more of an identity.

And I'm pretty sure I showed my dissatisfaction when Bioshock was coming to PS3 as that was a defining game for the 360 and the best reason to own one.

I'm gonna give everone the benefit of the doubt that says this stuff. Since in all likelihood it actually is true. But to be totally honest I'd like to know for sure if its actually whats happening. And I'd like to know for sure that Sony has never done the same thing in the past o_o

[Ouch!]

The problem with your argument, Kanno, is that you don't seem to be arguing the same point as those on the perceived other side. I'll admit that exclusives are more beneficial to the companies producing the consoles than to the developers making the games, but that doesn't change the fact that exclusives are important to the market.

Exclusives create differentiation between the consoles. To be perfectly honest, some third party developers are going to have to provide exclusives whether they like it or not. First party developers are too few to produce enough games to create solid differentiation between the consoles. Whether you care or not, you have to recognize that despite their technological differences, the 360 and PS3 are becoming more and more indistinguishable in terms of software. If the software isn't any different, the hardware stops mattering.

Consoles rely on exclusives to define their product. The market relies on competing consoles. My problem with the Xbox 360 isn't that they're taking exclusives, it's that they're taking every exclusive they can get their hands on, and it's destroying any meaningful differentiation between the Xbox 360 and the PS3.

Monopolies, the eventuality presented by a market which features no differentiation between products, are bad for the economy. There's a reason why they're illegal. Monopolies can make more money by producing below efficiency. This is bad for the market. This is bad for the consoles. This is bad for the developers. This is bad for the consumers.

I don't see Final Fantasy XIII as the worst loss ever, but it's a continuing trend that is unfortunate. No. It's not Final Fantasy XIII that worries me. It's Grand Theft Auto IV, Assassins Creed, Virtua Fighter 5, Beautiful Katamari, and Final Fantasy XIII that worry me. All games consumers were originally led to believe would be PS3 exclusives which have jumped ship in varying forms. While I don't think that this is the end of gaming as we know it, I think it's definitely proof that the industry is heading down the wrong path.

Also, not saying Sony is completely innocent. I don't like seeing Bioshock or Eternal Sonata going to the PS3 either (I'm more annoyed about Bioshock than Eternal Sonata, to be honest), but let's just face the fact that the Xbox 360 isn't getting as hurt by this as Sony is.

Further, before anybody accuses me of being a PS3 fanboy, I'd like to throw it out there that I have all three systems (and both major handhelds) of this generation. I play my Xbox 360 more regularly than any of the other consoles and this still pisses me off.

Edit: The only reason Nintendo seems to manage to stay out of this problem is because their hardware is so vastly different from the PS3 and Xbox 360 that they maintain differentiation that way. To be honest, I don't see Nintendo surviving forever on the novelty of the Wii. Sure, they're doing the best of the three right now, but I don't see their console as one with any particular longevity. I think that the Wii shows that differentiation through hardware is a temporary solution. If the rumor that Microsoft is developing a Wiimote-clone turns out to be true, I think we're going to have an even bigger problem on our hand.

[Chewy]

Why the hell do peeps get wound up when games are released for other consoles? it does my head in damn fanboys
I wish console exclusives where history.....
Apart from Wii, thats sh*t is messed up fool

[Wolf Kanno]

I feel Microsoft seems to be getting better deals out of this because they were farther behind than Sony when it came to high profile exclusives. Looking back, MS had the Halo franchise, Bioware games, Team Ninja and Fable to make them feel different. Sony had, GTA, FF, DQ, DMC, MGS, VF (which they bought from Sega when it got divvied up by the consoles) to only name a few... Sony had more to lose and MS had more to gain. I blame Sony on making an impractical machine for developers and not willing to keep them happy to stay loyal. I'm certain MS may have written a few big checks but I also don't believe it was hard for them to convince these developers to lose exclusivity.

Personally, I don't see how this is the third parties fault when Sony and MS both decided to build simply bigger and better versions of previous systems. The consoles themselves have been very close to each other (spec-wise) for years. Both companies have devoted themselves to just having slightly better graphics and sound quality instead of building their systems to offer something more than on the surface. I feel the only thing MS has over Sony is that their system is not difficult to program for so porting over games is cheap and offers a better market share for them. I'm sorry some people learned that developers do not share the same misguided level of loyalty to the Big 3 that fanboys do. Yes, when it comes down to it, the game industry has always been about money; just like the movie industry. Welcome to the shallowness that is the entertainment industry.

I Honestly believe MS will suffer as well and I agree that losing all exclusives will hurt the industry overall. Its just that I've been seeing this trend starting back in the last generation and I feel that the old model of exclusives needs to be remade by all parties so no one gets screwed. I see this loss of third party exclusives as a lesson that will help the industry. I don't believe its a permanent trend like some feel it is but rather as the beginning of a revolution in the gaming business model. Granted, we may not see any real changes until the end of the current generation, in fact, we may not see a complete resolution until the next generation.

I do agree that Nintendo is going about the Wii all wrong. They have an opportunity to change the industry but I feel they missed the point. The Wii offered alot of opportunities but its being squandered by making nothing but games that suit the casual market. I see Nintendo's "casual gamer market" falling apart once the majority gets tired of the novelty. Its a shame Nintendo can't see that most people see the Wii as nothing more than the "flavor of the week".

[Roto13]

I'm sorry FFXIII isn't exclusive anymore

Now that's just a lie. :P

[Vyk]

Sorry as an apology to people getting bent. Not actual sorrow :]

[Croyles]

Wait, this is a FFXIII thread? Wow you wouldnt know it from looking at post after 100. Well this is always the sign of a good discussion

[Ouch!]

Personally, I don't see how this is the third parties fault when Sony and MS both decided to build simply bigger and better versions of previous systems.

This in particular struck me about your post, so I'll respond to this. While I can't truly begrudge the third party developers the decision to make more money (I'm not unaware that video games are a business, thank you very much), constantly pushing their games for multiplatform release (specifically the big titles that help create console identity) is a decision based entirely on the short term. Good business models examine the long run, but multiplatform release do not do this. It's a way to make immediate money now without examining long term effects. They're backing on a solution appearing without actually trying to work towards it themselves.

Personally, I don't see this as the ruin of gaming. It's unfortunate that third party developers don't seem to want to release big titles for only one console, but it's not nails in the coffin.

To be honest, I expect to see more first party developers appearing. Nintendo has already made this transition. They started it back when Sony appeared and stole their steam. Now that Microsoft is taking Sony's limelight, I expect them to do the same. It may not be in their business plan to pay for exclusives but rather "earn" them, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them to start supporting companies so that they develop exclusively. This whole situation could be remedied by more first party developers, really. The only problem right now is that there aren't very many of them.

Why the hell do peeps get wound up when games are released for other consoles?:choc: it does my head in damn fanboys:choc2:
I wish console exclusives where history.....:(
Apart from Wii, thats sh*t is messed up fool:D

Maybe if you took the time to read the thread before criticizing people for being console fanboys, you'd know the answer to your own silly questions. =D

[Hyperion4444]

Sorry, but I'm not following you there with your exclusivity.

you claim that the PS3 had slow sales????
Did you even read an article about thoses sales???
The Xbox 360 sold 6.5 million units in it's first year.
The PS3 sold 12.85 million units in it's first year.
That is despite having 200$ more than the Xbox 360, and even with the Xbox 360 having half the price of the PS3 in Europe, the PS3 is domminating in Europe.

Oh yeah, on the official site, it says that S-E suffered a lost of 28 million dollars .... just read the article.
No released PS3 game, there's still a huge unpayed investment here.
2 actually.

DMC4 sold 233,500 unit on the PS2 and 295,000 on the Xbox 360.
Except DMC 1-3 sold over 2,000,000 with just the PS3, 700,000 unit average per games.
I truly believe theses numbers would be much higher given it would have stayed exclusif, because who of us actually tried the game just because it was exclusif?... and looked kick ass.

In Final Fantasy's case, they are self sufficient in sales.

[Dragonsoul]

All this waiting for Final Fantasy XIII has turned me from super excitement to super sadness. I'm very excited about the game, but since I've waited for a long time already and am going to wait for a long time in the future, I feel sad about this!

The second most anticipated game for me is Starcraft 2 or Final Fantasy Versus XIII, I wish I was more anticipated for those. Starcraft 2 will be out in the Spring next year though.

[Skyblade]

Exclusives create differentiation between the consoles. To be perfectly honest, some third party developers are going to have to provide exclusives whether they like it or not. First party developers are too few to produce enough games to create solid differentiation between the consoles. Whether you care or not, you have to recognize that despite their technological differences, the 360 and PS3 are becoming more and more indistinguishable in terms of software. If the software isn't any different, the hardware stops mattering.

Wrong. If the software is identical, the hardware is all that matters. When people chose between DVD and VHS, it wasn't the content that drove them to choose DVD. Similarly, when selecting HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, it wasn't the movies that came out that made the final choice. It was the quality, capability, and availibility of the hardware. Console exclusives do provide differentiation among the consoles, but they also serve as a crutch that hinders the consoles. If a company relies on their exclusive content to draw their bidders, they lose an incentive to do anything else to differentiate their system.

If both the PS3 and the X-Box 360 did have identical software, then it would be the merits of the system that defined them. It wouldn't be a simple matter of "oh, this system has the FF franchise, so I'll get it". Gamers would be drawn to the system which was most cost-efficient, ran best, or had some other advantage. Losing the exclusives means that both Sony and Microsoft will have to work harder to make something unique. Something that will draw gamers more than simple name-recognition, and therefore give game developers a reason to keep their games exclusive to one console. Money offered for a game or not, if it doesn't sell on the new system, game developers wouldn't make it for that system.

Losing exclusivity will force companies to build a better console. Not just the one with the best hardware, but the one that balances capability, cost, reliability, and a hundred other factors into the ideal package. That's what free market is all about. Each company must strive to produce the best product they can, and the one that produces the best product wins. I, for one, am all for it.

[Hyperion4444]

I do agree that people will go for what is best like in the HD-BD war.
But what made the HD-DVD to loose it's battle against the BD is because of the lack of support, both in player and disc.
Most of the compagnies signed pure exclusivity with the BD.
The tech didn't really mattered because they had close to equal capacities.
The BD had more sold units.

In the console war however, it's a different story.
Most people would believe that the Xbox 360 has close the same technology as the PS3, that isn't true at all, you'd know if you owned one. Trust me.
When you look at the games that were started on both system and then multi-platformed to the other, there's a huge difference.
Just take DMC4 and Conan.
DMC4 may be one of the best looking action games up to date along with HS (Much better graphics) and NGS, and there's NO VIDEO ON THE PS3 VERSION BUT MADE ENTIRELY LIVE BY THE CONSOLE.
and then in Conan's case, well, my PS2 games all beat thoses bad graphics.

The PS3 has better tech in both HW & SW.

[Skyblade]

In the console war however, it's a different story.
Most people would believe that the Xbox 360 has close the same technology as the PS3, that isn't true at all, you'd know if you owned one. Trust me.
When you look at the games that were started on both system and then multi-platformed to the other, there's a huge difference.
Just take DMC4 and Conan.
DMC4 may be one of the best looking action games up to date along with HS (Much better graphics) and NGS, and there's NO VIDEO ON THE PS3 VERSION BUT MADE ENTIRELY LIVE BY THE CONSOLE.
and then in Conan's case, well, my PS2 games all beat thoses bad graphics.

The PS3 has better tech in both HW & SW.

Actually, from what I've seen, people know that the X-Box 360 isn't as good as the PS3, they just think that the hardware and software improvements of the PS3 is not worth the additional cost. And I agree. And, since games cost more to develop for it than they do for the 360, gaming companies don't like it much either.

[Ouch!]

Exclusives create differentiation between the consoles. To be perfectly honest, some third party developers are going to have to provide exclusives whether they like it or not. First party developers are too few to produce enough games to create solid differentiation between the consoles. Whether you care or not, you have to recognize that despite their technological differences, the 360 and PS3 are becoming more and more indistinguishable in terms of software. If the software isn't any different, the hardware stops mattering.

Wrong. If the software is identical, the hardware is all that matters. When people chose between DVD and VHS, it wasn't the content that drove them to choose DVD. Similarly, when selecting HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, it wasn't the movies that came out that made the final choice. It was the quality, capability, and availibility of the hardware. Console exclusives do provide differentiation among the consoles, but they also serve as a crutch that hinders the consoles. If a company relies on their exclusive content to draw their bidders, they lose an incentive to do anything else to differentiate their system.

If both the PS3 and the X-Box 360 did have identical software, then it would be the merits of the system that defined them. It wouldn't be a simple matter of "oh, this system has the FF franchise, so I'll get it". Gamers would be drawn to the system which was most cost-efficient, ran best, or had some other advantage. Losing the exclusives means that both Sony and Microsoft will have to work harder to make something unique. Something that will draw gamers more than simple name-recognition, and therefore give game developers a reason to keep their games exclusive to one console. Money offered for a game or not, if it doesn't sell on the new system, game developers wouldn't make it for that system.

Losing exclusivity will force companies to build a better console. Not just the one with the best hardware, but the one that balances capability, cost, reliability, and a hundred other factors into the ideal package. That's what free market is all about. Each company must strive to produce the best product they can, and the one that produces the best product wins. I, for one, am all for it.

I disagree, but I'm not so full of myself to tell you that you're just plain wrong.

As you concede, the Xbox 360 is an inferior machine to the PS3. Due to this fault, multi-platform releases must be tailored to work on the Xbox 360. Games are, as a result, made below maximum specs for the PS3. I'll grant that the PS3 is more difficult to develop for, and that is a point against it, but the fact remains that its version of multi-platform games suffer more than the 360 due to this. I heard reports that games like Madden '09 were running at a lower frame rate on the PS3 because of such issues.

You might argue that this is solely because the PS3 is more difficult to develop, but I think it's evidence that a market geared towards multi-platform releases leads in the opposite direction you propose. You say this would encourage developers to make better consoles. I think it encourages the developers to make consoles with the bare minimum to remain in the competition. Sure, we would continue to see advancement in the industry, but nothing any more significant than we already have.

Hardware would become no more important than it already is. The thing is, more often than not, it's exclusive titles that really show off a console's capabilities. It's never any of EA's slew of sports titles that help give a console its identity. It may run better on some systems than others, but if one console is ever better than the others, it's a moot point because the title will get watered down to make a multi-platform release easier on the developer.

The problem with hardware as a defining point is that hardware is only as good as the software that utilizes it. That ATI graphics card isn't too terribly fantastic if the only thing you're running on it is a dusty copy of Doom. Exclusive titles are more likely to push a console's limitations and utilize it's full capabilities than a multi-platform release. See my point?