Spiderman Exclusivity lack-of-fallout thread *spawn

[Shifty Geezer]

I would think that would hurt Microsoft more than Sony at this point in the game...

How many IPs can actually move hardware? Because I'm sure Spiderman exclusivity costs Sony more money in earnings than it'd gain in buyers of Sony consoles for access to Spiderman games. And that's probably true of nigh every exclusive that misses out on 40+% of the market by being exclusive. It's only really having a significant catalogue of exclusives that'll make people buy it outright, and one has to wonder what the costs and returns of that are really like.

Is that an argument for Sony to go multiplat?

 

[Shortbread]

How many IPs can actually move hardware? Because I'm sure Spiderman exclusivity costs Sony more money in earnings than it'd gain in buyers of Sony consoles for access to Spiderman games. And that's probably true of nigh every exclusive that misses out on 40+% of the market by being exclusive. It's only really having a significant catalogue of exclusives that'll make people buy it outright, and one has to wonder what the costs and returns of that are really like.

Is that an argument for Sony to go multiplat?

The comment was made reflective of the current generation, not future endeavors. Hence, MS removing Minecraft from PS4 would hurt them more than Sony.

As for IPs that actually move or push hardware sales, there are some that moved major numbers (PS4 Arkham Knight Bundle (+250k), PS4 Destiny Bundle (+500k), etc...), so a Spider-Man bundle could do numbers, especially on one platform.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

As for IPs that actually move or push hardware sales, there are some that moved major numbers (PS4 Arkham Knight Bundle (+250k), PS4 Destiny Bundle (+500k), etc...), so a Spider-Man bundle could do numbers, especially on one platform.

You could bundle a multiplat. eg. If Arkham Knight had been PS4 exclusive, how many millions of units lost sales would on PC and XB would there have been? Would the gains in market share from console sales really be worth it?

 

[Shortbread]

You could bundle a multiplat. eg. If Arkham Knight had been PS4 exclusive, how many millions of units lost sales would on PC and XB would there have been?

Personally, I can't say either way. If the Pub/Dev feels being exclusive to one platform is the better option than many, then they must have their reasons on doing so. If Disney/Marvel felt it was in their best interest of negotiating with Sony on such a deal, then I say, "That's business and nothing personal".

When gamers understand this, the less emotional attachment to one camp (console) would grow the industry up - for the good.

Honestly, I laughed at all the PS4 'fanboys' crying over the XB1 Tomb Raiders exclusivity. Just buy the F-ING XB1 if you want it!!!

Would the gains in market share from console sales really be worth it?

Depends on what side of the fence you're on. From Sony's perspective, more than likely they would gain more bundle sales from those fans (loyalist / diehard) who really want a Spider-Man game. Similar to me purchasing an XB1S when Gears of War 4 arrives. The market as a whole isn't going to suffer from a few exclusives being on Sony, or Microsoft.

IMHO, I believe some gamers confuse exclusivity as being unattainable, which isn't true. Unfair maybe, unattainable, no. If you like something, you buy it.

 

[Deleted member 7537]

Well i think the difference, if there is one, is that square announced TR would be multiplatform and later MS bought the exclusivity. Also there are way more PS4 users, so there we were a lot more people getting mad.

 

[Shortbread]

Well i think the difference, if there is one, is that square announced TR would be multiplatform and later MS bought the exclusivity. Also there are way more PS4 users, so there we were a lot more people getting mad.

Let's say Microsoft purchases the Grand Theft Auto IP (or Rockstar and all it IPs)... as a gamer, I would say Oh, that means I need to purchase an XBOX system or wait for the Win-Store PC edition. Problem solved...

The problem is, we have a bunch of gamers that refuse to look at a different platform "just because of some odd loyalty or some other nonsense". Personally, I loved Sony brand TV's for years, until I gave Samsung and LG sets a try, and I can say without a doubt, both make great products. Point being, gamers as a whole need to mature with the industry, or get left behind on some nonsense.

 

[chris1515]

You could bundle a multiplat. eg. If Arkham Knight had been PS4 exclusive, how many millions of units lost sales would on PC and XB would there have been? Would the gains in market share from console sales really be worth it?

How many IPs can actually move hardware? Because I'm sure Spiderman exclusivity costs Sony more money in earnings than it'd gain in buyers of Sony consoles for access to Spiderman games. And that's probably true of nigh every exclusive that misses out on 40+% of the market by being exclusive. It's only really having a significant catalogue of exclusives that'll make people buy it outright, and one has to wonder what the costs and returns of that are really like.

Is that an argument for Sony to go multiplat?

If they give the licence to Sony the gains are huge for Disney/Marvel on the movie side and much more important than on the gaming side. For Sony they think a good Spiderman game can sold some PS4 hardware and do huge number for an exclusive game.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The problem is, we have a bunch of gamers that refuse to look at a different platform "just because of some odd loyalty or some other nonsense".

Not being able to afford another $300-400 console to run software capable of playing on ones existing console. Poor people, or people with sense enough to make economic purchases instead of just throw money around at overpriced options, should just try harder...

 

[Shortbread]

Not being able to afford another $300-400 console to run software capable of playing on ones existing console. Poor people, or people with sense enough to make economic purchases instead of just throw money around at overpriced options, should just try harder...

Like everthing else in life!?

I'm tired of gamers complaining about how poor they are. If you’re that poor why are you purchasing consoles in the first place? Gaming consoles aren't toys... it's actually a hobby that requires a certain income level on enjoying. The ones that usually complain the loudest, are somehow magically (miraculously) spending hundreds of dollars on gaming accessories and additional systems for other rooms within the house.

I'm not trying to be a dick... but "saying I'm poor" is bullshit. I'm not the richest man either... but I work hard on getting the things that I need or want. Complaining about a video game not being on a certain system is stupid and very immature. I'm sorry, life requires work, not complaining over nonsense.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I'm not trying to be a dick... but "saying I'm poor" is bullshit. I'm not the richest man either... but I work hard on getting the things that I need or want.

Right. And then someone says, "hey, you've worked hard for two months to get that $400 console right? Want this game on it? It'll run just fine, but tough shit, now you have to work at getting another box that does exactly the same job just Because." So now you have to choose between that annual holiday or buying a redundant second console.

It's like having to buy one DVD/BRD player to watch Disney films and another for Warner. Or buying one set of golf clubs for one course, and needing another set to play on another course. Or having to buy one TV to watch ESPN and another to watch Netflix. It's moronic. Even if a billionaire, I'd be pissed at having to buy a second box to play software that's being artificially restricted. It's also bad for the environment, burning twice as many manufacturing resources to achieve no advantage.

Yes, it's business, but it's not something we should be happy about or comfortable with. If we could get it to change, people like you buying two boxes could be $400 better off and able to do more with you money. Surely that's a Good Thing?? Or are you saying you'd rather keep everything as it is?

 

[Shortbread]

Right. And then someone says, "hey, you've worked hard for two months to get that $400 console right? Want this game on it? It'll run just fine, but tough shit, now you have to work at getting another box that does exactly the same job just Because." So now you have to choose between that annual holiday or buying a redundant second console.

It's like having to buy one DVD/BRD player to watch Disney films and another for Warner. Or buying one set of golf clubs for one course, and needing another set to play on another course. Or having to buy one TV to watch ESPN and another to watch Netflix. It's moronic. Even if a billionaire, I'd be pissed at having to buy a second box to play software that's being artificially restricted. It's also bad for the environment, burning twice as many manufacturing resources to achieve no advantage.

Yes, it's business, but it's not something we should be happy about or comfortable with. If we could get it to change, people like you buying two boxes could be $400 better off and able to do more with you money. Surely that's a Good Thing?? Or are you saying you'd rather keep everything as it is?

What I'm saying: it's pointless on complaining about business tactics (the legal ones) that helps the company bottom-line for growth and reaching others (potential customers) outside their usual norm (comfort zone). When Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo make these exclusive deals, it's to ensure their respective products are looked at - as the choice to go. It's up to the consumer on making the wisest choice or work a little harder on ensuring their gaming needs/wants are met.

I'm not trying to take an elitist attitude, I just believe life requires work, not complaints. Yes the videogame industry needs certain changes, but arguing over (Sony/MS/Nintendo) obtaining exclusive IPs isn't one of them, IMHO.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I just believe life requires work, not complaints.

Life requires both. If we never complained, our lives would be nigh slave labour. Industrial Revolution commoners with the view "can't complain, that's life" would have led to us working 12+ hour shifts and getting paid peanuts. Heck, at the root of all human progress is a desire for things to be better, which has an intrinsic complaint about the status quo even when never voiced (and then work to make changes).

Bought exclusives is one of the easier things to complain about, because there's no difficult philosophical questions over right or wrong. Objectively, it's plain stupid to build and buy two products to do the same job; it's a situation not repeated anywhere else; and there's no material reason for it. There used to be a reason for software to be tied to a platform but that's becoming less and less true. Get rid of the dumb exclusive purchasing and the console companies would have to compete on the core experience of the hardware instead. You know, adding much asked for OS features and improving network infrastructure, instead of securing IP.

 

[London Geezer]

Like everthing else in life!?

I'm tired of gamers complaining about how poor they are. If you’re that poor why are you purchasing consoles in the first place? Gaming consoles aren't toys... it's actually a hobby that requires a certain income level on enjoying. The ones that usually complain the loudest, are somehow magically (miraculously) spending hundreds of dollars on gaming accessories and additional systems for other rooms within the house.

I'm not trying to be a dick... but "saying I'm poor" is bullshit. I'm not the richest man either... but I work hard on getting the things that I need or want. Complaining about a video game not being on a certain system is stupid and very immature. I'm sorry, life requires work, not complaining over nonsense.

Wait. You're saying that the only option is owning either zero consoles or all consoles? That having one console isn't right? How absurd.

 

[Shortbread]

Wait. You're saying that the only option is owning either zero consoles or all consoles? That having one console isn't right? How absurd.

I really don't know how you jumped to that conclusion. You have a choice to either purchase "A" or "B" console or work a little bit harder on owning both. If this concept is unacceptable... then I'm living on the wrong planet. Because the planet that I live on, planet Earth, most services and products work that way. Why is this concept so hard to understand with some gamers?

 

[bunge]

Life requires both. If we never complained, our lives would be nigh slave labour. Industrial Revolution commoners with the view "can't complain, that's life" would have led to us working 12+ hour shifts and getting paid peanuts. Heck, at the root of all human progress is a desire for things to be better, which has an intrinsic complaint about the status quo even when never voiced (and then work to make changes).

 

[DuckThor Evil]

Securing exclusive content to your box/ecosystem should be one of the top priorities of any company. Couple of different ways of doing it and they all bring value to their customers and reason to actually buy that box. Having only first party exclusives is risky and too expensive, so they try to do it in other ways too. Never had a problem with it.

 

[Scott_Arm]

If we're going to start chastising exclusive games for making unaffordable for poor people, I can tell you right now that a $300 PS4/X1 is already massively unaffordable for a huge portion of the world, especially when you add the cost of a 1080p tv. Console gaming is a luxury of the wealthy. So don't cry to hard that you can't play Spiderman on your X1. We're not talking about human rights. We're talking about video games. It's not a social issue. Unfortunately gaming costs money, and @Shortbread is right. There are ways to play (play at a friends place, borrow, rent, buy). If you are in a position to be gaming at all, you can probably figure out a way to play the game, even if it costs a bit of money.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

No-one's saying it should be freebies for a social cause. The complainers are saying it's stupid to add signficant additional cost of entry when that's completely unnecessary. I've pointed out it's bad for the environment. I've pointed out that no other hobbies require you to buy two sets of hardware to do the same thing based on when/where you play. I've pointed out that even if you can comfortably afford a second console, that's still $300 you could have spent elsewhere that you technically needn't have spent, and other software mediums gravitate towards open standards without expensive hardware entry costs.

But the counterargument is always, "that's just the way it is. Stop complaining!" without a single objective argument or opposing counterpoint to the above!

 

[Nesh]

I really don't know how you jumped to that conclusion. You have a choice to either purchase "A" or "B" console or work a little bit harder on owning both. If this concept is unacceptable... then I'm living on the wrong planet. Because the planet that I live on, planet Earth, most services and products work that way. Why is this concept so hard to understand with some gamers?

Why on earth should we work harder and make things more complicated needlessly instead of making life simpler and comfortable?
I dont care how most services and products work. MOST doesnt define "right". In many cases MOST can define whats actually wrong on planet Earth

 

[London Geezer]

I really don't know how you jumped to that conclusion. You have a choice to either purchase "A" or "B" console or work a little bit harder on owning both. If this concept is unacceptable... then I'm living on the wrong planet. Because the planet that I live on, planet Earth, most services and products work that way. Why is this concept so hard to understand with some gamers?

Sorry, it just sounded like you were saying that gamers should complain about exclusives and that they should just get both platforms or none at all. I was drunk.