I hope it isn't. Not a fan of independent studios/publishers making exclusives. It starts tying its brand with the platform holder and such a relationship might not be healthy for the industry.
Persona 6 rumour (PS5 exclusive?)
- Thread starter iAMJeffy
- Start date
By your logic no console should have any exclusives then, 1P or 3P.
The truth is you're being an ideologue that isn't rooted in realism. Exclusives are in fact healthy; they enable better optimization efforts by targeting a smaller range of platforms, encourage more robust marketing efforts, and (can) help formulate a positive culture around the product that hosts the exclusive content, as well as encourage more forms of fair competition, which generally means better games for customers.
An industry without exclusives would be so homogenized it'd border on boredom.
It's not just about Japan; it's about the global market. The thing is about how these moves do over time; Sega/Atlus has a strategic partnership with the Azure division and that's largely what has enabled so many of their games to go into Game Pass lately, or these marketing deals that normally would've gone to PlayStation. It's about Microsoft leveraging backend things among other divisions to tie 3P closer to them in working partnerships, and push Sony further out from having those same partnerships.
Controlling things BTS through backend-centric partnerships, trickling that down to the front-end (Xbox, Game Pass and gamers), and gradually squeezing Sony out of opportunities to leverage their platform advantage to maximize revenue with 3P partners. Any difference from losses of revenue on specific games, MS has no problem paying that to 3P whom they form these close dynamic partnerships with.
"Spend Sony out of business" is a long-term play for MS, just like the astroturfing stuff. And it's not just planned through acquisitions, but also moves like weakening partnership status between Sony and some of their traditionally strongest 3P partners. It's like MS are trying to become the new best friend; no one honestly has two best friends, there's always just the one. Microsoft wants to be "that one".
Last edited:
PlayStation undoing is that they don't seem to value none of these "small" differentials. They take their current success for granted. PS4 wasn't built on CoD, Fortnite and Marvel games alone.
All their games releasing on PC, previously exclusive Japanese games now releasing on Xbox, their former partners now getting close to MS, no presence in the portable market, MS buying entire publishers going unanswered, all that stuff adds up and when the momentum turns it's going to turn fast.
Every console manufacturer has slipped at some point, the next time PlayStation does it is over because they won't have anything to fallback to.
All their games releasing on PC, previously exclusive Japanese games now releasing on Xbox, their former partners now getting close to MS, no presence in the portable market, MS buying entire publishers going unanswered, all that stuff adds up and when the momentum turns it's going to turn fast.
Every console manufacturer has slipped at some point, the next time PlayStation does it is over because they won't have anything to fallback to.
Well the discussion was kicked off regarding the japanese market not global.
And there is so much what ifs in your posts.
Last edited:
How does that follow from my logic? I specifically mentioned independent studios/ publishers. 1st party exclusives are the platform holder's investment they can do what they want with the game.
I'd want exclusives born out of unique features from the consoles/platform, e.g., All PSVR games are PlayStation exclusive. That brings true diversity rather than just paying a developer to prevent their game from appearing on another platform.
They don't pay to prevent their game from appearing on another platform. That's a weird way to look at it. Do you think Kena or Stray would be as good and successful without Playstation marketing and development help? Indies come out every week. They would be forgotten real fast.
Stuff like FF16 is also extremely expensive and risky for Square. They saved on marketing and development because of Sony. Nintendo also get tons of Square exclusives.
Dragon Quest and Mario RPG later this year.
Most of the time, exclusivity benefits the platform holder way more than it does the independent developer hence it's safe to assume the developer is due some sort of compensation for going exclusive. For indies, stuff like ID@Xbox is more effective than a marketing deal that requires exclusivity.
Elden Ring was an even riskier game to make yet From Software marketed it well and did not require an exclusivity deal. Alienating PC and Xbox customers does more harm to your company that the short-term gain of Sony's marketing/development support.
Last edited:
I don't hang around any Xbox shills, we just see what's going on for ourselves
Lol there was nothing risky about Elden Ring, another souls game and George RR Martin's name associated with it. It was bound to do good....
It's only alienating when it's not on Xbox. Keep that same energy for Starfield, Hifi Rush, Ark 2, Stalker 2 and Hellblade 2 that were all multiplatform games that were made exclusive.
I agree with you on that point, it will be very damaging for all these games to be Xbox exclusive. A death sentence even.
'Alienating' Xbox is a great strategy. The audience don't buy games and you get more support from PlayStation owners.
"Nothing risky about Elden ring"? New IP and the Souls games weren't as bankable as the very established Final Fantasy brand.
No, it's not. Xbox owners buy video games. Currently, the majority of Microsoft's gaming revenue comes from the cut they get in sales of video games. Alienating them doesn't equal support from PS owners. Such a move gets support from rabid PS console warriors who are a very tiny(almost insignificant) portion of the market.
Xbox owners do not buy games. PS owners buy multiplats at 6-8x the rate, and squeezing Xbox out would likely be made up by the additional quality bump you could give the game by focusing on one version. There's no point in releasing an Xbox sku unless they're paying you for a GP release.
Why wouldn't I keep the same energy with Xbox? Those multiplatform games shouldn't go exclusive. You should keep the same energy with Playstation when multiplatform games go exclusive.
Where is the revenue MS is getting coming from if Xbox owners don't buy games?
At this point you have to imagine it's from their 3rd party publishing arm i.e. other platforms. Minecraft, Bethesda on PlayStation, PC for all their releases.
From this article, it states that annual revenue from PC is around 1B, I'd imagine it's even less from PS. Keep in mind Xbox's annual revenue is about 15-16B. I highly doubt your 3rd-party publishing arm theory.
You imagine incorrectly if Bethesda sales on PS are anything to go by. Xbox is the smallest individual platform for Minecraft, which is the single largest game Microsoft owns. Switch, mobile, PC and PlayStation all generate more revenue for that title, and Xbox keeps 70+% of revenues there, so need to sell more than 2x fewer copies/items to make more money there than on Xbox native third party titles.
Face it. Xbox is a better third party publisher than a platform.
Their revenue growth is all through acquisitions of third party content.