Master Chief Wants to Debut on the PS3 | Why That’s Not A Bad Idea
What I am saying is this – it is okay to have a few exclusives for the survival of a console – but what about the rest? PGR, MGS, Halo, Gran Turismo, Gears of War and what countless others. Does the list have to be so long?
Is it okay for some games like Gears of War to be Xbox 360 only while PS3 gamers are left out in the cold? What about the fact that Metal Gear Solid 4 is only for the PS3? Why not on the Xbox 360 or the Wii?
Now, this might sound absurd, but I am against such practices by publishers and developers. Yes, you heard me right – I want to see Gears of War on PS3 and MGS4 on the 360. Makes your blood boil to think about it, doesn’t it?
While I know that such exclusives are essential for the survival of consoles in th is next-generation console wars and gives bragging rights, but does it really make sense from the consumer point of view? Wouldn’t it be much better if you could simply choose that favourite game of yours on a system that you actually have? Afterall, who doesn’t love to have choices? I sure do.
I know this idea is far-fetched. It just doesn’t make sense from the developer’s point of view (it’s actually determined by the publisher, but more on that later). Trying to make the same game on various platforms is time consuming as well as costly. But look at it this way – by developing for various platforms you get access to a mass market and greater sales numbers.
Now, as I mentioned before, the fault does not go to the developers alone. It is the first party publishers with loads of cash to burn, who snag up such exclusives So, Microsoft, instead of wasting so much cash, why not make Xbox Live free? And you Mr.Sony, just cut the damn price to reasonable levels and then we’ll start talking. Instead of duking it out with exclusive games, why not take the heat to the systems.
Make your consoles more affordable (PS3), reliable (Xbox 360), next-gen ready (Wii) and what not. Once gamers understand that they are getting the most bang for their buck, they will obviously choose that system.
Microsoft execs must be flinching at the idea of making Halo 3 available on the PS3. And Xbox fans might have just grabbed their torches and pitchforks to protest in streets. But I am not suggesting that (read: I own a 360 and not a PS3) – I also want to see MGS and other PlayStation exclusives on the 360 – not only the other way around. What I am saying is this – it is okay to have a few exclusives for the survival of a console – but what about the rest? PGR, MGS, Halo, Gran Turismo, Gears of War and what countless others. Does the list have to be so long?
In this day and age, with the same horsepower and features, it is only the number of exclusives that saves a console from the brink of extinction. No doubt about that. But don’t make me suffer the dilemma of having to choose between the PS3 and the X360, while missing out on games released exclusively for the other platforms. I will leave you to draw out your own conclusions, but I for one, love to have choices and want to see this practice come to an end.
Love it or hate it? Vote for this article on Digg or other social bookmark site to spread the word.
Flame our message board with your thoughts or subscribe to the Gamers World Bangladesh Blog Feed/Newsletter to get even more one-of-a-kind opinions.
RELATED ARTICLES:
Halo 3 Rumor Control | What Microsoft Didn’t Want You to Know
PC Phobia – Is the PC dead as a gaming platform?
PC Gaming is Doomed | Why That’s A Bad Idea
Oct 14th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
I want to FU*KING KILL YOU
are you insane? what would be the point of buying diffrent consoles if all the same games where on them all? If ALL exclusives where on ALL consoles WII would be the winning console.
You are a tard, forreal go kill yourself.
Oct 28th, 2007 at 11:16 am
Another “gamer” having his views on how to do business. First, you lose all credibility when you say that Sony should again drop price. I mean, you sound like you’re gonna be satisfied only when they start giving the console away… Maybe it’s time you stop repeating the same line that has been said since november ’06 about ps3 price…
And then, as a consumer, it’s not always a good thing to take your desires for realities… Like Capwn said, what would be the point of owning a console or another is every game what available for each console? Fanboysim would be even worse over the net if every console had the same games. Those kids are already arguing about petty stuff, they’d have even pettier stuff to argue about (like frame rate, graphical effects and the like instead of things like “Halo owns Killzone, noob!”) if they could all play the same games on different machines…
And since it seems to make so much sense on the business standpoint, why not ask everyone to feed on corn or potatoes since it’ll make so much sense on a business point: less resources spend growing other stuff, a solution that would, without a doubt, be more economically efficient?
Feb 27th, 2008 at 7:57 am
@ Young Capwn
FYI, Wii is the winning console. What I tried to say is that there should be exclusives, since it’s essential for the survival of a console. But wouldn’t it be great if you could play Gran Turismo on the 360?
Feb 27th, 2008 at 8:00 am
@ kaspario
Well that’s what blogs are for, isn’t it? Different perspectives and views are what make the blogging world so exciting.
Sony just dropped their price. And that’s why the PS3 outsold the 360 for the first time. Just like I said to Young Capwn, there should be exclusives, since it’s essential for the survival of a console. But wouldn’t it be great if you could play Gran Turismo on the 360? I mean that not all games should be console exclusives.
Dec 2nd, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Hm. I think i like the exclusive stuff where each console where it is because honestly halo just dont fit the ps3 brand. neither does gears of war. but metal gears solid 4 does. and i dont think it fits the 360. Sorta like the PS is the home of jrpgs. or should be. For some reason.. ( its prlly because thruout ps 1 and ps 2 this was mostly the case ) that rings rite. And 360 is the home of all shooters.. hence gears of war and halo. Ofcourse each have their own attempt to change the image of their console.. like 360’s Lost Odyssey and PS’s KZ brand. So console owners are really getting all the genres theyd like to taste on their individual console. Besides exclusive rivalry is good for the gaming industry. otherwise we wouldnt see halo reach trying to 1 up KZ 2 which stands as the best looking console shooter to date.. hell plays the same too. 😀 .. IMO i like it how it is.
Dec 2nd, 2009 at 2:01 pm
@ James
The 360 has always catered to a more mature hardcore shooter audience. The PS3 is family centric, at least IMO it is.
Dec 3rd, 2009 at 10:13 pm
family centric? how? its got just as many hardcore games.. the only family centric console this gen is wii. its for kids and girls and old folks.. dont bash on the ps3 coz it simply ” does everything” like play bluray movies .. has the option to browse net.. bla bla bla.. that makes it more than just a game console.. but it is still at core a hardcore gaming console.. the exclusives are proof of that. resistance fall of man and resistance 2 arent really family games..
Dec 4th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
@ James
I’m not talking about the PS3, PS2, 360, Wii or any console in general. I’m talking about the overall brand perception. Nintendo has always been kid centric, PlayStation has been family centric while Xbox caters to college kids spewing F-bombs and fragging. 😀 😎
Jan 6th, 2010 at 1:41 pm
I’d have to agree and dis-agree.
Exclusives are what makes the industry strive. It seems far-fetched, but it’s essentially the same as movie studios. If one studio had the ability to make anything we’d have no Bourne vs. Bond, Star Trek vs. Star Wars or even Pixar vs. Dreamworks. Everyone wants the cash flow and will push to be better than the next guy (of course, this leans more toward first/second party exclusives rather than 3rd party fare).
Yes, it would be nice for more cross platform games but, honestly, when did we ever have an even ground EVER. Even SNES/Genesis had differences is gameplay (Aladin).
Also, XBOX 360 is for hardcore shooters, sports and racing. This is why it’s #1 among the college group (that’s what they want). Wii is social and family oriented (party games, kids games, fitness games). PS3 is the most even ground IMO. I for one like that it’s not flooded with the same thing 40x over. I find it more…general in terms of taste IMO.
And for the record, I own PS3 and Wii. Most of my friends have 360’s
Jan 6th, 2010 at 2:24 pm
@Jeff
Well said my friend. I wrote this article a long time ago (2007). And yes, I totally agree that 360 is aimed at 21 something college students while the PS3 user base is more evenly spread out.
But, I commented on another site: I think exclusives are what defines a console for what it is. Words about Sony bring images of God of War, MGS and UC to mind while 360 is all bout Gears of War, Halo,etc. etc. Your article is interesting in that it points out that without the games, the hardware is nothing. Now that I come to think of it, I wouldn’t have bought the 360/PS3 (I have bought) if it wasn’t for their particular games. But what IF one console had all the games? That in my opinion would spell disaster for the games industry, since there would be no competition. And as we all know, competition breeds innovation which translates into new game IPs.
May 7th, 2010 at 8:51 pm
Please contact me if you are interested to work with us for gameing business or like to work as a online game developer.
Best regards
MI
Email: [email protected]