Ben-DutkaThe battle continues to rage concerning exclusive titles versus multiplatform; while many see the obvious advantages of a developer focusing entirely on one piece of hardware, others complain that such an approach requires hardcore gamers to pay extra dollars for multiple systems.
And that's part of the reason people say things like, gamers want an end to exclusives , which is a sensible statement in and of itself, but doesn't take into account various factors. For instance, right off the bat, I always find it amusing how many Xbox fans (who have never owned a PS3 and have only seen its exclusives in advertisements) seem to believe that everything on the PS3 can be done on the 360. This, in the wake of multiple developers stating a hundred times over that game franchises like Uncharted absolutely could not be done on any platform besides the PS3. Perhaps the MS fans just think the developers are lying.
It all could go multi, theoretically; Uncharted , God of War , Gran Turismo , Heavy Rain , Killzone , LittleBigPlanet , etc. could all be on the 360. But they'd all have to be changed significantly; most wouldn't even be able to function as straight ports; designers would have to rebuild to accommodate for the – let's face it – lesser hardware. Or even if you don't agree that it's "lesser," it's certainly a very different architecture, which is exactly why many of the best games of the generation are exclusive. Gears of War is great but if it had to be remade to fit into the PS3's architecture, would it be as good? Maybe not. Then again, if any game was made primarily for the more powerful machine, it should definitely benefit. But that's a different subject.
The bottom line is that developers will always complain about how different the PS3 and 360 are from a technical standpoint. Therefore, if exclusives disappear, the maximum level of possible quality will fall. It's inevitable. If we continue to force even the most talented game makers to jam their game onto two extraordinarily different pieces of hardware – despite their growing ease with them – we'll never reach the potential of an exclusive. When a developer can throw all its weight, effort and resources into focusing entirely on one architecture, the best results are possible. But until that day comes, exclusives will continue to be the cream of the crop.
And as for PS3 exclusives vs. 360 exclusives… Please. That's not really still an argument, is it? I mean, Uncharted 3 on the 360? Naughty Dog is currently snickering behind their sleeves.
It's only an argument with blind 360 loyalists, Ben. Only those who've never played uncharted 2 first hand, played online for free or ignored multiple disc changes in a game would think the PS3 is still the lesser console.
If it weren't for these god damn hackers, Sony would've done something marvelous by turning what was the most hated console system into the most desirable one. Even Xbots can't ignore that!!!
I think there are several great multi-platform titles out there, but, one has to wonder what a game like Elder Scrolls V would be like if it didn't have the constraints of DVD's and lack of HDD.
It's why I am slowly becoming a PS3 exclusive purchaser only.
I've only bought Killzone 3,Motorstorm and Yakuza 4 this year till now and next is Infamous 2.
other 99 % of the PS3 owners buy mostly Multiplatform games.
Last edited by Kiryu on 5/10/2011 11:24:30 AM
Woooah hold on, people actually have to swap discs on long games on the 360?
I though that was just hideo Kojima making a joke in MGS4, i didnt think that would still happen in THIS gen!
Exclusives don't matter if you don't have a PS3, cuz then you don't get any.
LOL! True dat!
Alan Wake you mofos! Alan Wake!!
Oh wait, we didn't buy that either.
@Alienage
lol, you just reminded me of a conversation with a friend of mine. Your joke is much less of a joke in his case! lol
He literally told me about how awesome Alan Wake was and how it's another example of a great 360 exclusive. I asked him if he beat it yet, and he said he hadn't tried it yet, but heard it was good. lol
Are you serious Underdog? Lol
Speaking of Alan Wake, Remedy has just announced a new game, though they're not calling it AW2. Possibility of multiplatform this time?
Alan Wake 2 evidence surfaces: http://www.titanreviews.com/#/alan-wake-2-evidence-surfaces/4551265285
@Lawless
If they're smart…and not constrained by contract.
"gamers want an end to exclusives"
If my precious games's exclusivity on my Ps3 ended, I will quit gaming all together. Reason why is because I bought a Playstation 3 solely because of it's rich exclusives and diversity. I love my Metal Gear Solid 4, I love my Gran Turismo 5, I love my Killzone, I love all my exclusives. I picked Playstation 3 because A) it's clearly the best of the two consoles B) I've owned a Playstation since '00 C) it has the best exclusives and a lot of diversity. Sure, some exclusives went over to the 360 like Meal Gear Solid Rising (witch I hate by he way) but in my opinion it isn't like a true Metal Gear title because the level of "stealth" decreased. I just hope exclusivity wont go away? or fade away. May Playsation continue to show it's true potential with such companies like Naughty Dog, Guerilla Games, Polyphoni Digital, and other companies. Theres no reason to make a game multi-platform unless you want more money.
Killa
"but in my opinion it isn't like a true Metal Gear title because the level of "stealth" decreased."
I think you should wait untill the game is released & you've played it to completion before making assumptions!
Kojima-san would not let a game with MGS attached to it go gold unless it was perfect.
I have faith in kojima production even if kojima himself is not at the helm!
Last edited by Lord carlos on 5/10/2011 10:32:31 AM
@lord carlos agreed! Everything that kojima develops or produces turns to gold! Havnt been let down yet.
I seriously hope you're exaggerating Killa Tequilla. Anyone who quits gaming is a fool in my books.
From my understanding Kojima has very little do with rising, and is letting his team develop it themselves. That's my understanding of the situation. And if that's the case then we can't possibly expect Kojima greatness.
Whoa, strong fanboy post. Come on, their are alot of multiplat games that are better than alot of exclusives. I didn't buy my PS3 for exclusives, I bought it for GTAIV and MGS4, the exclusive thing was a bonus I wasn't aware of until later after my purchase.
You can call me a fanboy or whatever you want, all I know is you can't play GT5, MGS4, Kz3 or Uc2 on Xbox and many more.
"Whoa, strong fanboy post."
This is hilarious coming from the likes of you.
Even if the hardware was equal,sony's 1st party studios outnumber MS & Ninty by a good amount!!
Sony would use that advantage to suck the life out of the competition.
Its dog eat dog in the world of big corporations.
Yes…but…it doesn't work that way.
People – well, certain people and companies (OnLive comes to mind) are regularly heard to talk like this. The trouble is that this has been tried before, and it was a total failure.
PC games. The PC is supposedly a single hardware platform, except of course you have multiple CPU options from low performance to stupidly high performance – it has been this way since the 90's. the old PC standards of EGA, VGA and then SuperVGA have fallen away completely. They were at one point a standard which everyone adhered to. Since the 90's though we've increasingly seen GPUs and graphics card manufacturers taking multiple directions with multiple chipsets ranging from basic performance that's barely better than the integrated video on a commodity PC, to multi-card, multi-GPU solutions that cost as much as a decent PC on their own.
As all of that technology lurches forward in fits and spurts you get games that come along and require DirectX 9 or DirectX 10, and soon enough even DirectX 11. Some require GPUs and graphics cards with specific features and amounts of memory. The end result is that the supposed single platform is actually fragmented into 1000's of versions many of which can't play the latest games. Hence the constant upgrade cycle to keep up with Windows and game developers on PCs.
Seriously though, if there was a single hardware platform and there were three console makers making consoles to that platform. How would they differentiate their product from the others? This was the same issue that faced PC makers at about the time local bus video arrived in the PC architecture. PC makers used the local bus for faster video hardware and faster HDD controllers. Ultimately that local bus was replaced by PCI and again there was a wave of PCs that made use of the newer technology to differentiate from the more basic PCs offered by others.
If Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony all were making consoles on a single platform, how would each encourage customers to buy their console – if they're all the same? Perhaps Microsoft would give their one more memory, Sony might boost CPU performance, or put in a different optical drive, Nintendo might add some kid of control innovation. Perhaps to encourage people to buy their specific console, first part games from each console maker would use these additional features exclusively…oh, wait, exclusive…
Competition amoung console makers inevitably will lead to exclusive hardware features to differentiate and compete. First party games may use those extra features to give consumers a reason to buy their console. As soon as that happens, the 'standard' platform is doomed to failure because the standard is broken.
For such a standard to work it has to be fixed and policed and there has to be binding agreements with all console makers not to add extra features. All of that is simply a way of describing a brake on innovation and development of newer, better platforms.
The closest we have to this 'ideal' of a single platform may be something like PlayStation Suite, since ti's a completely virtual environment that works on multiple hardware platforms. But, no one should be under the impression that a game written to run in PlayStation Suite will look or perform better than a native game on a given platform. It won't. Rather like no one expects a Java game that will run in any browser on any platform to look as good as a game coded specifically for PCs and modern GPUs.
I hate all of this single platform nonsense. It simply doesn't work. the differences between hardware platforms and the exclusive games are what have driven some, if not all, of the best games and experiences this generation. the variety of hardware and targeted development has led to more creativity and innovation rather than less.
Those wanting a single platform have a vested interest – financially – in that single platform.
Last edited by TheHighlander on 5/10/2011 10:32:07 AM
It will never happen. A standard platform stops innovation and encourages conformity. While only needing 1 console would be nice and perhaps cheaper, we the gamers would miss out on so many imaginative and new experiences that only an exclusive can deliver.
I just don't see it happening, it never has in gaming, and in Computing in general, the PC demonstrates it's not possible. MSX failed because it lacked innovation compared to the rest of the market, and Java never really delivered on it's promises either.
It's like cloud based gaming. that will never happen either for the same reasons, and the horrid latency inherent in the internet that will *always* make controls laggy.
I don't think Uncharted 3 would work on the 360 for plenty of reasons. One is, it's not shooter oriented; its platforming orientated. We all know the 360 crowd are much like their PC brothers, and tend to go for shooter games. Second, If their was a PS3 dictionary, then the definition of uncharted would be 'The best the PS3 can offer'.
Think about it, ND have made the game perform at the best of PS3's abilitys, e.g SPU's. SPU's can do post-processing effects like bloom, blur, etc. Which are movie-like effects, which is what ND aim for. The 360 would have to do the post-effects on the graphics chip, thus ND having to make concessions in other areas. I almost think ND decided for the utmost-cinematic approach because of this. Well that's what I think anyway.
Uncharted 3 is gunna be bad for the gaming community like Uncharted 2 was…once you play it, you come expect this kinda quality to be in every game, and get sorely dissapointed. :[
"Uncharted 3 is gunna be bad for the gaming community like Uncharted 2 was…once you play it, you come expect this kinda quality to be in every game, and get sorely dissapointed"
I wholeheartedly concur!
I generally think exclusives are a good thing, especially this generation (ps3 wise anyway) and personally think the rich catalogue of exclusives on ps3 compared with its competitors will really help in sales over the next 1-3 years.
I mean Sony has invested a lot into its 1st party studios and i just couldn't see great games like uncharted, heavy rain or god of war 3 being how amazing they are now, if they were made on all platforms.
I agree, I haven't seen anything that I like on the other side of the pond. Every game I love playing is mostly exclusives on PS3.
Once in awhile I'll play a Multiplatform game.
That's right.well said ben.
But i think even if Hardware is equal Exclusives matter look at the PS2.
But
Sony new about the future.
Guess what nintendo and xbox now are trying to catch up with 25gb game disc and more power but people will always buy the PS3 cause it's cheaper and already has groundbreaking Exclusives.
Last edited by Kiryu on 5/10/2011 10:54:30 AM
HI:
I agree with you. The problem here is WHY don't we support those exclusive tittles?
I have LAIR, Resistance: Fall of Man, Resistance 2 (it's CRAP), Heavenly Sword (Beautiful Game), Genji, Folklore, F1 championship Edition (by far, the BEST game EVER about F1), LittleBIGPlanet 1 and 2, Killzone 2 and Gran Turismo 5. Demon's Souls never, NEVER it's been where I live and other exclusives like MLB either.
I think I'm doing my part supporting exclusive games. So, I want ALL the resources and quality the PS3 can offer.
What I don't understand is, WHY people support $60 dollar games in multiplatforms that don't deserve it?
Red 5.
Last edited by Red 5 on 5/10/2011 11:07:51 AM
its not that ps3 owners arent supporting ps3 exclusives, its more about how diverse these exclusives are. we have a lot more choices genre wise that its not focused on just one or two games like the 360. all customers on that system just flocks into halo and gears while the ps3 has alot. my ps3 collection is at least half exclusive but different genres.
sports champions, mgs4, killzone 2 and 3, resistance 1 and 2, littlebigplanet 1 and 2, infamous, valkyria chronicles, warhawk, ratchet tools of destruction and crack in time, yakuza 3 and 4, uncharted 1 and 2, sly cooper collection, heavenly sword, gt5, socom confrontation and 4, mag, 3d dot game heroes, modnation racers, heavy rain, white knight chronicles, demons souls, god of war collection and 3, ridge racer 7, ninja gaiden sigma 1 and 2, star ocean last hope international, naruto ultimate ninja storm, dynasty warriors gundam 1, gundam crossfire, haze (yes i bought it, its not as bad as people make it out to be). the rest of my game collection are your typical big name rpgs, batman, call of duties, medal of honors, etc.
just looking at that list just show how varied ps3 exclusives are. there really is something for everyone.
Exclusives are REALLY important to diehard fans ONLY. But how anyone can imply that games like Bioshock, Portal 2, Red Dead Redemption, Dragon Age, Mass Effect 2, Street Fighter 4, and LA Noire cannot stand toe to toe with any exclusive is a mystery. This notion to diminish the talent of devs for the sake of hardware is pure hogwash, in my opinion.
And as for PS3 exclusive vs. Xbox 360 exclusives, well, in an intelligent debate, they both have great exclusives that are on an even level at this point in time( year's end will change this possibly). Let's not confuse this with preference, like, "Killzone is better than Halo because I like it more" because it is impossible to argue opinion. Like arguing why you like green and I like red.
BUT, if you look at the libraries objectively and with no Metacritic in tow, BOTH are fantastic and each has their strengths. The Wii is in it's own fantastic little world, but they also have a great exclusives list. Benefit of most of your games, good or terrible, being exclusive, I suppose.
Last edited by PorkChopGamer on 5/10/2011 11:02:38 AM
Question is do u really need a 360?
You just described why I have a PS3. All those games you just listed can be played on the PS3 PLUS all the great exclusives not found on the 360.
I don't care for HALO, Gears or Fable, so to me the Xbox has nothing.
Kiryu, I love my 360. I don't "need" it but there's a crap load of reasons why I play it. Between it's great lineup of exclusives and spectrum of better optimized multiplats I find a lot to value.
XROSS GAME CHATZ, KIRYU! lol
The answer is: it depends on the individual. I know people that are very happy and content just owning a DS.
My problem with this whole thing is that people think their love should be universal. I am personally guilty of this. In my mind, I can't understand why someone would limit themselves to one console or someone would not love Uncharted, so I voice that opinion.
Truth is, this world is made up of billions of people and there are millions of gamers, each with there own likes and dislikes. It's not up to me to question why they don't play what I play.
It's not as black and white as "I like it, so you have to." or "I hate it and you're dumb for liking it."
I'll look at the exclusive libraries objectively.
And there's no way on God's green earth that Gears, Halo and Alan Wake is on the same level as Uncharted, God of War, Heavy Rain, Gran Turismo, LittleBigPlanet, Killzone, etc.
I'm sorry, but that's not even subjective. The PS3 exclusive library is vastly superior. I have the 360 for a reason but with about one exclusive a year I really need it for…it gathers lots of dust.
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 5/10/2011 11:22:54 AM
Like I said, I cannot argue opinion. I believe differently. I know people who do the same for their PS3s and only use it for the few exclusives that appeal to them. Both libraries are ALOT deeper than the cream of the crop titles. that's where they begin to even out, in my opinion.
Last edited by PorkChopGamer on 5/10/2011 11:33:09 AM
and these people you know (and basing your opinion on) make up what percentage of the ps3 owners?
Exclusives are the reason why I bought a PS3 a little over a year ago. I was able to get GoW3, Killzone 2, and inFamous all at once. Then moved onto the Uncharted series. I was playing "catch-up" with all exclusives I didn't get a chance to play while owning a 360. There were simply too many games on the PS3 that I was missing out on.
At the same time I'm not going to completely dismiss an entire catalog of games by trading in my Xbox 360, because I wanted to play those games- and because I think the future is brighter for the PS3. My favorite series for the past 10 years- Halo-is a reason enough for me to own a 360. I've logged in DAYS (not hours, people) of playing Halo 3 and Halo Reach on Xbox Live. Toss in a few other exclusives that I enjoy, my prefernce for the 360 controller (especially in FPS/TPS games) and Xbox Live over PSN, and I'm more than content owning both systems.
I only own a PS3 because I can't justify owning both systems for a couple good games. Id love to have gears, halo, even Alan wake in my collection. But on top of those titles add a few more, I just can't see that worthy of spendning a couple hundred on another system for, which I could buy games I don't own for the PS3. Plus between the two all my multiplat games would still be bought for my PS3.
I don't care much for LIVE, I don't own the system but I have played around in the market place, and I get that LIVE offers a few extra functions. But PSN offers everything I need which we all know about so I won't explain all the great content. And I honestly don't need cross game chat. I Think it's such a worthless function when I have my phone next to me. Not to mention I don't need someone screaming in my ear about a quest in said game, while I'm trying to issue commands to my team in a game of MAG.
On top of that the quality of the PS3 exclusives raise the bar for eachother while the competition is lagging far behind. Their is no question at all the quality of Uncharted 2 compared to Gears. Gears is a good game both of them are, but uncharted 2 is phenomenal in all aspects of gaming and that's the difference between PS3 exclusives and other games. The amount of all around quality. But again I'm not some rabid fan boy. I think the 360 is a good machine for what it is. And as I said there are games I'd love to own and play. But all in all it's just not worth it to me when every year I'm getting games that get better and better upon the next, rather than good games that have hit a wall from a technical stand point.
Last edited by bigrailer19 on 5/10/2011 3:02:48 PM
You're comment that 360 exclusives are "on an even level" with PS3 exclusives is what I take issue with, PorkChop. From every possible standpoint – technically, artistically, innovation-wise, etc. – that's just dead flat WRONG.
That isn't an opinion.
Some of the PS3 Exclusives are a league of their own.
Being a multiplat owner, I value exclusives most because I know devs made their stuff with only one architecture in mind. Now in this environment with the 360 being the more flexible hardware the gulf of quality between a multiplat and an exclusive isn't so large. Where the the gulf of quality between Black Ops and KZ3 is fairly large. So for Ps3 I'm usually most excited for it's exclusives because I know devs have to dig deep to bring us the goods with effects and content that we won't see on any other console.
I would say similar power different technology, then it would be ok….but i doubt microsoft would put the effort…since playstation has been around for so long, they kinda know what people want.
@Ben or any other journalist on this site,
Are you gonna get rid of the scroll bar?
*please* lol
Last edited by gangan19 on 5/10/2011 11:26:29 AM
Ok if games liek Uncharted suposedly cant be done on the 360 because PS3w is obviously the more powerfuyl console (thus why uncharted can be done on it but ot the 360) then why is it that supposedly the game that ARE multiplat run better on the 360 than the ps3? I mean if the ps3 is more powerful and can run games like uncharted should it be the PS# that runs multiplat games better than teh 360 and not the other way around?
IT DEPENDS ON THE DEVELOPERS WHO MAKE THE GAME.
It completely depends on the developer and game, as Kiryu said.
To elaborate, let's use Bayonetta as an example. Clearly cleaner on the 360.
Let's now look at a game like FFXIII. OBVIOUSLY better on the PS3.
See, both systems have completely different infrastructure. The -ONLY- way a game can be equal on both is if developers deliberately make it for both. If you do a direct port, the stronger version will be the one with the original design in mind.
It's not like you create a game on the 360 and then the PS3 isn't strong enough for it. That's not the issue at all. The issue is that the game was not designed to use the infrastructure the PS3 uses to draw it's power from.
A game like Uncharted 2 or 3 cannot be done on the 360 because it responsibly uses the PS3 in the ways it was designed to be used. The 360 cannot match it's storage capacity on disk, nor can it distribute computing abilities across the processing units the way the PS3 is designed to.
In the end, both systems can deliver high quality games, but the PS3 is extremely complex. The problem with multiplats is that either you must oversimplify the PS3 game to fit the 360, or the 360 games don't get re-designed to use the ps3 properly.
Don't forget, the 360 relies on a GPU for graphical computing. It's easy to design for since it's specifically engineered to compute graphical data. The PS3, on the other hand, does not use a GPU and relies on an SPU. While it isn't as fluid or easy to design for, it does provide an opportunity for more complex mathematics, and therefore, seemingly more power. The downside, of course, is it's complexity.
EDIT: To add, it's because of those vast differences between platforms that allows exclusives to be so much better than multi-plats. When devs can focus on one system and pull out it's full potential, instead of having to think about making it work on all platforms, you get a true quality product. That's why people love exclusives.
Last edited by Underdog15 on 5/10/2011 12:42:19 PM
Because too many multiplat developers build the game around the 360's GPU and just port the game over to the PS3 with little optimization and with out touching the PS3's core power, The Cell Processor. Only when developers actually use the PS3's Cell does the game turn out equal or better on the PS3. Castlevania Lords of Shadow and Vanquish are two good examples.
Ha, Underdog beat me to it. But yea, also what he said. In addition, you can't compare multiplats to gauge which system is more powerful for these reasons. You just have to look at exclusives. Then it becomes obvious which is better. While there are nice looking games on the 360 there is nothing in that library that even comes close to Uncharted, God of War, Killzone, GT5 etc. There just isn't. Anything the 360 has can be done on the PS3 but not the other way around.
Last edited by Jawknee on 5/10/2011 12:51:10 PM