Why do some people hate Exclusives in gaming?

BabyTyrant

Est. Contributor
Messages
2,892
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
Do people not realize the Reason a lot of games are exclusive is due to

1. The studio being 1st party

Or

2. Studio needs funding, gets it from Company A (Sony, Xbox, Nintendo, etc) in exchange for Exclusivity (Limited time, could be 2-3 years for a Popular game)

In the 2nd case, at least eventually the game would land on other Platforms, even possibly on all Platforms that can handle it (rather than just PC)

It always seems to be dedicated Xbox Fanboys that hate exclusives, maybe because their own choice of Console has had a lot less of them for an entire console generation.

I remember the 360 and PS3 days when it seemed to be almost 1:1 for exclusives, 360 had their own exclusives as did the PS3

And I don't seem to recall the same level of Outrage back then

But now it kinda seems like people will just Hate on and "Review Bomb" games for being on a different platform than their choice.

And don't get me wrong, Xbox makes good consoles and GamePass is great these days

But, why the need for such hate over which console games land on?
 

Cottontail

Silly wabbit!
Est. Contributor
Messages
6,930
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Diaper Lover
  3. Babyfur
  4. Diaperfur
  5. Sissy
  6. Little
You might be overcomplicating this. :) By definition, “exclusive” means that something or somebody is excluded. If you’re excluded, what’s to like about it?

The reasons for exclusives aren’t important and can be summarized as “business stuff.” When you’re a consumer who can’t get something you want, none of that matters.
 
Last edited:

BabyTyrant

Est. Contributor
Messages
2,892
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
Cottontail said:
You might be overcomplicating this. :) By definition, “exclusive” means that something or somebody is excluded. If you’re excluded, what’s to like about it?

The reasons for exclusives aren’t important and can be summarized as “business stuff.” When you’re a consumer who can’t get something you want, none of that matters.
Every gaming company has their "Mascot" IPs that typically NEVER land anywhere else

People only get excluded if they don't have the Consoles that play certain games they wanted to play.

Solution? Buy another console

I can understand not wanting to, or not feeling it's worth it, but really at that point it's kinda the Consumers fault

The "Mascot" IP games + exclusive deals are what helps to drive people to buy certain consoles over others; which yes is great for Business
 

Cottontail

Silly wabbit!
Est. Contributor
Messages
6,930
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Diaper Lover
  3. Babyfur
  4. Diaperfur
  5. Sissy
  6. Little
BabyTyrant said:
Solution? Buy another console
...Which is probably why you’re seeing more frustration now than in the past. The economics of the “own every console” solution have never been worse than they are with this latest generation of hardware, and ongoing supply issues exacerbate matters.
 
Last edited:

Anemone

Est. Contributor
Messages
805
Age
34
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Sissy
  3. Little
  4. Other
It is an anti-consumer practice.

No one objects to a company selling their own IP on their own platform but for third party developers to purposefully make their games less accessible is essentially objectionable.
 

BabyTyrant

Est. Contributor
Messages
2,892
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
Cottontail said:
...Which is probably why you’re seeing more frustration now than in the past. The economics of the “own every console” solution have never been worse than they are with this latest generation of hardware, and ongoing supply issues exacerbate matters.
But at the same time the level of outrage seems a bit much; especially given Exclusives have pretty much been a "Legacy" thing since gaming console companies have had to compete with other game companies
 

Anemone

Est. Contributor
Messages
805
Age
34
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Sissy
  3. Little
  4. Other
BabyTyrant said:
The "Mascot" IP games + exclusive deals are what helps to drive people to buy certain consoles over others; which yes is great for Business
Great for business is not the same as good for consumers.
 

BabyTyrant

Est. Contributor
Messages
2,892
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
Anemone said:
It is an anti-consumer practice.

No one objects to a company selling their own IP on their own platform but for third party developers to purposefully make their games less accessible is essentially objectionable.

Those companies chose to take money from certain other companies (like if they take a $5M budget from Sony) idk if they really don't have other options or they just like that option the most

But so long as Games have to be funded, it's gonna be a thing that Companies like Sony will pay a Developer in order to Fund a game in exchange for Exclusivity
 

Cottontail

Silly wabbit!
Est. Contributor
Messages
6,930
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Diaper Lover
  3. Babyfur
  4. Diaperfur
  5. Sissy
  6. Little
BabyTyrant said:
But so long as Games have to be funded, it's gonna be a thing that Companies like Sony will pay a Developer in order to Fund a game in exchange for Exclusivity
Yeah. But again, "business stuff." There's no value in that for the consumer. It's all just part of the money grab. Imagine if Apple was given huge tax breaks in exchange for requiring consumers to provide proof of US residency in order to purchase the latest iPhone during its first year of availability. Would you say, "Well, just move to the US!" I mean yeah, that's a "solution," but its obviously onerous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anemone

Anemone

Est. Contributor
Messages
805
Age
34
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Sissy
  3. Little
  4. Other
BabyTyrant said:
Those companies chose to take money from certain other companies (like if they take a $5M budget from Sony) idk if they really don't have other options or they just like that option the most

But so long as Games have to be funded, it's gonna be a thing that Companies like Sony will pay a Developer in order to Fund a game in exchange for Exclusivity
It's an appealing option for a developer but it comes at a cost to the customer.

Also it disincentivises a focus on a quality product as income is in part guaranteed and pressure to release according to an external schedule rather than when development is at the right stage is much increased.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cottontail

Mfluder

Est. Contributor
Messages
178
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
First party games can be exclusives - nobody expects to play Halo on PS5.
But when Sony or Microsoft pressure a studio to do this for no good reason other than to hurt the competitor console, it's anticompetitive and hurts the consumer.
The purpose of consoles is to make gaming accessible to everyone, not just those who can fiddle with DMAs, IRQs, and complicated PC hardware specifics. The big guys have lost sight of that when I have to have 5 consoles to play the games I like, AND have to re-buy them on later consoles?
 
Last edited:

kratox

Est. Contributor
Messages
991
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Babyfur
Personally the way I look at it is this.

If the company took their actual hard earned cash, work, and time to create a game they have every right to keep it exclusive.

WHY?

because it forces competition in the market to release a better game, which in turn keeps Quality of games up.

BUT...

This isn't what has been happening. Instead of competing, companies are just buying out the resources so the other guy can't do anything.

Companies have been "bribing" games into being exclusives under the false premise of "Funding". Thing is from a publishers point of view FREE MONEY, but it's super anti consumer. That combined with the fact that a good portion of gamers are impatient and feel powerless let's this stuff run rampant.

‐------
All we have to do to fix it is stop pre-ordering and buying games.

The complaints are meaningless to a company, when they have your money, to them it just reads "its not that big of a deal".

-‐------
Side note: I'm sorry but I refuse to pay $300-$500 for a console that is not only worse than my pc, but has less freedoms just for like 2 games. It makes no finicial sense. (Before you get salt keep reading im not against you)

Personally with things flipping to digital being their form of revenue and less on the console it doesn't make much sense now to keep things that locked down.

When people are only buying a console for a specific game, that just shows to me the game is more important and they should just release on all systems. It's part of why you see this stupid 1-2 year cycle release for pc. Not to mention the fan Boys double dip which makes publishers keep it in 1-2 year cycles.

Also the whole pc vs Xbox vs playstation is stupid.

We should have had cross-platform from the start, consoles shouldn't pay for online, name changes, etc. Consoles deserve to exist for less tech savvy folk and cheap side of things, but they are abusing that fact and personally I don't like it. I want all consoles to have the same freedoms as pc while keeping the same ease of use and cost.

We really should be united, half of the issues we suffer would go away instantly but the pettiness of people prevents that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ShippoFox
Top