Competing for Users: Game Exclusives & Platform Factors

Shortbread

Shortbread

Island Hopper
Legend
How should consoles manufactures differentiate their IPs/wares from each other? Personally, I always felt it was first-part games, followed by 2nd-3rd party exclusives, then lastly, hardware specific features (e.g., 4K disc playback, etc.). It seems there is some weird backlash against certain games like Spider-Man ending up on one platform. Some believe certain characters (e.g., Spider-Man, Superman, Batman, etc..) or beloved game series (e.g., Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, Tomb Raider, Resident Evil, Call of Duty, etc.) should never be on one platform. That certain gamers shouldn’t be left-out because of their gaming platform choice.

Do single platform holders have a point?

How can console manufactures like Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo even compete without exclusives? Is it purely through OS features… gaming services… hardware specifications? I mean; when was the last-time you heard Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo crow about how good their OS features are winning over users?

As I stated before, for me, one of the [purchasing] factors is exclusives titles… no matter the development party relationship.
 
 
BRiT said:
Relevant related threads:

Importance of Power - https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/importance-of-being-the-most-powerful-console-spawn.60886/
Importance of Console Exclusives - https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/console-exclusives-significance-and-impact-spinoff.60347/
Price Point and Marketing - https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/...onsole-price-point-and-marketing-spawn.60836/
First Party Strategy - https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/sony-and-microsoft-first-party-strategy.60344/
Subscription Gaming Service - https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/xbox-game-pass-unlimited-access-to-more-than-100-games-xgp.59930/
Click to expand...

With all this in mind. Are all these factors important to you - at purchase? Just a few? Do you feel single platform holders have a point about certain games being exclusive to another platform? Or, is everything fair game for manufactures on getting consumers to purchase their wares?
 
All of those things have an impact on my purchasing decision. Some weighted higher than others. This is likely different for each individual to a varying degree.

I feel that single platform owners being left out of exclusive content on a different platform is what it is. I don't really see a valid point being to be made from a single platform holder. It sucks they're not getting the game, but if they aren't funding the development of it then they don't get a say. And that's fair. In a competitive market place things like that will happen and while it kind of sucks I don't see how it's unfair.
 
for me its only the exclusives that matter. But surprisingly, for other people it also could be about brand loyalty. Even more surprising, piracy on previous generation affects the future generation.

for example in indonesia, it was all about nintendo and its pirated games, then comes PS1, SEGA, etc. But only PS1 have super cheap pirated games that even elementary schoolers can buy with their pocket money, PS1 becme the leader.

Then PS2 came and pirated to hell, just like PS1.
Nintendo only came back to popularity after NDS got pirate flashcart with microSD support.

PS3 and Xbox 360 came, and despite x360 can play pirated games for cheap, its not popular. People still plays PS2, my friends also doesnt like xbox as its a microsoft product and it doesnt have games that they like, like JRPG (depite X1 actually do have nice JRPG like tales of vesperia, Lost Odyssey, etc... even playstation icon like Ace Combat 6).

when PS3 got pirated to hell, whoa. Its selling like hotcakes.

Then come PS4 and X1, both have no piracy for years, and PS4 is much more popular. Despite both have no real support from Microsotft Indonesia and Sony Indonesia for years (grey imports product, no ads, etc).

Heck, Sony released PS4 officially when PSVR got released or when they have the special 25th anniversary or something (the grey PS4 with square triangle circle x decals)
 
Shortbread said:
With all this in mind. Are all these factors important to you - at purchase? Just a few? Do you feel single platform holders have a point about certain games being exclusive to another platform? Or, is everything fair game for manufactures on getting consumers to purchase their wares?
Click to expand...
If that list of threads continues to grow larger and larger, platform holders are doing the right thing.
They are listening to their users and trying to innovate in areas that matter to the consumer outside of just the games.

The thing with just being a single strategy only company is that there could very well be a disruptive change in the industry at any time, and committing all your resources to older strategies could take a lot of time to right the ship. These platform holders should be looking at what each other are doing and constantly making moves in the next arena to improve the experience. If they aren't, they will die out. Luckily it hasn't been that way. You could add mobile, and VR threads to that list as well.
 
Shortbread said:
How should consoles manufactures differentiate their IPs/wares from each other? Personally, I always felt it was first-part games, followed by 2nd-3rd party exclusives, then lastly, hardware specific features (e.g., 4K disc playback, etc.). It seems there is some weird backlash against certain games like Spider-Man ending up on one platform. Some believe certain characters (e.g., Spider-Man, Superman, Batman, etc..) or beloved game series (e.g., Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, Tomb Raider, Resident Evil, Call of Duty, etc.) should never be on one platform. That certain gamers shouldn’t be left-out because of their gaming platform choice.

Do single platform holders have a point?

How can console manufactures like Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo even compete without exclusives? Is it purely through OS features… gaming services… hardware specifications? I mean; when was the last-time you heard Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo crow about how good their OS features are winning over users?

As I stated before, for me, one of the [purchasing] factors is exclusives titles… no matter the development party relationship.
Click to expand...

I agree with your list. I do have complete brand loyalty, but that's because I know what to expect from the brand.

As for complaints about Spiderman, I thought Sony owned the Spiderman franchise? Just sounds bitter, a bit like when Xbox had Tomb Raider.

In the end there's no feature (I can imagine) that would make me switch sides. Having said that I generally get all consoles so...
 
goonergaz said:
As for complaints about Spiderman, I thought Sony owned the Spiderman franchise?
Click to expand...

Sony own the film rights. I believe everything else lies with Marvel. Probably why the game is branded Marvel's Spider-Man.
 
DrJay24 said:
But Sony worked with Marvel to share the movie rights and probably gained the game rights in the bargain.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting this? I've read nothing to suggest Sony have surrendered the rights to Spider-Man in film, nor Marvel have surrendered the rights to all other media. Bearing mind Disney own Marvel and love money, the prospect of Disney giving up the rights to their most valuable superhero IP in video games seems extremely unlikely unless the entire Disney and Marvel board were high on cocaine.

The arrangement was revealed a few years back.
 
So we have Sony to thank (blame) for Tom Holland and the direction of the new Spidey?

As for game rights though, if Sony don't have a say and its entirely a Marvel creation, why is it platform exclusive?
 
Sony Pictures had/has the movie rights and game rights before and after SpiderMan Homecoming. Marvel wanted to integrate Spiderman into MCU for the Civil War and Infinity War storylines. They needed permission from Sony Pictures to do so.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider-Man:_Homecoming

In February 2015, Marvel Studios and Sony reached a deal to share the character rights of Spider-Man, integrating the character into the established MCU.

Following the November 2014 hacking of Sony's computers, emails between Sony Pictures Entertainment Co-Chairman Amy Pascal and president Doug Belgrad were released, stating that Sony wanted Marvel Studios to produce a new trilogy of Spider-Man films while Sony retained "creative control, marketing and distribution". Discussions between Sony and Marvel broke down, and Sony planned to proceed with its own slate of Spider-Man films.[89] However, in February 2015, Sony Pictures and Marvel Studios announced that they would release a new Spider-Man film, with Kevin Feige and Pascal producing (the latter through her company Pascal Pictures).[90][91] The character would first appear in an earlier Marvel Cinematic Universe film,[90] later revealed to be Captain America: Civil War.[92] Marvel Studios would explore opportunities to integrate MCU characters into future Spider-Man films, which Sony Pictures would continue to finance, distribute, and have final creative control over.[90] Both studios have the ability to terminate the agreement at any point, and no money was exchanged with the deal. However, a small adjustment was made to a 2011 deal that gave Marvel full control of Spider-Man's merchandising rights, in exchange for a one-time payment of $175 million to Sony and paying up to $35 million for each future Spider-Man film rather than receiving their previous 5% of a Spider-Man film's revenue—Marvel could now reduce their $35 million payment if the co-produced film grossed more than $750 million.[93] Lone Star Funds also co-financed the film with Sony, via its LSC Film Corporation deal,[94] covering 25% of the $175 million budget,[95] while Columbia Pictures officially served as co-producer with Marvel Studios.[96] Sony also paid Marvel Studios an undisclosed producer fee.[97]
 
Shifty Geezer said:
So we have Sony to thank (blame) for Tom Holland and the direction of the new Spidey?

As for game rights though, if Sony don't have a say and its entirely a Marvel creation, why is it platform exclusive?
Click to expand...
Marvel was looking for a partner to make a big story-based Marvel game, and who better to partner with than Sony when it comes to story-based games? MARVEL approached Sony, who then approached Insomniac.

https://www.resetera.com/posts/10834857/
So the story is 1000% true

Sony FP has the best pipeline and support system in the business to create big story-based games. Some people don’t realize all of the support a publisher can give a developer, and that’s true of every major publisher for every major game.

Marvel approached Sony, wanting them to do one of their characters right with a big first-party story game. They wanted to work with one of the developers Sony FP works with frequently, and even mentioned us by name to Sony as a developer who they felt particularly fit.

Sony approached us, we were interested (obv!), and they told us Marvel wanted us to pick which hero we most wanted to play with. We picked Spider-Man (obv!).


All real, all how it happened, no ties to any other deal or circumstance.
Click to expand...
So it could have been any Marvel character. Insomniac chose Spider-Man.

Creative director Bryan Intihar has also gone on record for saying that he owes everything to Playstation, and that this project wouldn't exist if it weren't for them.

I believe it was also Capcom who approached Sony for Street Fighter, except for different reasons. They needed financial support for the game to even be made. But everyone is making Sony look like the bad guy in both situations.
 
Last edited:
Wow. That's a value-add to the first party exclusive library none of us thought of! ;) I suppose this is a taster of things to come and Marvel will see about getting Marvel adventures cross-plat. Also, gamers can't complain about Sony securing exclusive rights on this; they were approached due to their track record, so earned the rights for an epic Marvel exclusive.
 
Everyone has different driving factors. What keeps me on the x1x (mind you I barely play these days) is the convenience of game pass and having UHD player built in. The other important factor is the shared controller option on the Xbox. For small kids being able to play the game without passing the controller back n forth is a real game changer.

If I had time for games like in the past, I'd certainly pick the PS4 this generation for it having great exclusives but since most of my play time is with my son or just messing around for an hour or so at best, the X1X is just a better platform for my needs.

Most of what I do now is sim racing on the PC which is pure heaven.
 
RobertR1 said:
Everyone has different driving factors. What keeps me on the x1x (mind you I barely play these days) is the convenience of game pass and having UHD player built in. The other important factor is the shared controller option on the Xbox. For small kids being able to play the game without passing the controller back n forth is a real game changer.

If I had time for games like in the past, I'd certainly pick the PS4 this generation for it having great exclusives but since most of my play time is with my son or just messing around for an hour or so at best, the X1X is just a better platform for my needs.

Most of what I do now is sim racing on the PC which is pure heaven.
Click to expand...

What do you mean with shared controller and no need to pass. Controller ?

Is it the kinect ability to assign a profile based on face ID,, so no need to pass controller ?
 
djskribbles said:
Marvel was looking for a partner to make a big story-based Marvel game, and who better to partner with than Sony when it comes to story-based games? MARVEL approached Sony, who then approached Insomniac.

https://www.resetera.com/posts/10834857/

So it could have been any Marvel character. Insomniac chose Spider-Man.

Creative director Bryan Intihar has also gone on record for saying that he owes everything to Playstation, and that this project wouldn't exist if it weren't for them.

I believe it was also Capcom who approached Sony for Street Fighter, except for different reasons. They needed financial support for the game to even be made. But everyone is making Sony look like the bad guy in both situations.
Click to expand...
Wow, this sounds like the 2018 version of Disney's Alladin on Sega Mega Drive. I hope it's a sign of yet more great things to come.
 
orangpelupa said:
What do you mean with shared controller and no need to pass. Controller ?

Is it the kinect ability to assign a profile based on face ID,, so no need to pass controller ?
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with Kinect. You can have two controllers that are both active for gameplay so let's say my son is doing the gas and brake on his controller while I'm doing the steering on my controller, simultaneously. The feature is seriously impressive and available in every game including the backwards compatible stuff!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Cyan
Maybe Microsoft should create a Windows console a la Steam Deck but with many more options, when mobility gaming is one of their priorities-Activision
Replies
15
Views
2K
eastmen
E
S
NPD January 2022
Replies
1
Views
1K
Deleted member 11852
D
Shortbread
Third Party Software Exclusivity Practices
7 8 9
Replies
169
Views
16K
BillSpencer
B
D
Video Game Console Cooling - A Hot Topic (pun kind of intended).
Replies
14
Views
3K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
M
Apple is an existential threat to the PC
69 70 71
Replies
1K
Views
387K
MfA
M
Back
Top