I Want More Exclusive Games- Here's Why

[LoganRuckman1]

This topic was inspired by ptdebate's posts in the "Microsoft Moneyhats Tomb Raider" thread. In that thread, he talks about how he thinks that more open source consoles, AKA, one console for all your gaming needs would be great. I have to disagree with him.

Personally, I think variety is the spice of life. Sure, there are some advantages of multiplatform games, like not having to buy a brand new console just to play a new game when you can play it on the console that you already own. However, I think gaming as a whole could benefit from more console exclusives. It would give people reasons to buy these consoles, and more importantly, would give each console their own identity. Too many multiplatform games makes consoles seem awfully generic, if you ask me.

Take the 16 Bit Era, for example. It's often cited as the greatest era in gaming history, and one of the reasons is that despite there being a lot of multiplatform games, each system had its own reason for owning it. The SNES excelled in slower paced games like Platformers, Puzzle Games, and RPGs. The Genesis was for people who wanted to play faster paced, action packed games as well as Sports Games. The Turbografx 16 was known for its amazing SHMUPS. And the Neo Geo was THE system to own for hardcore arcade fans, specifically Fighting Games.

All four of those systems were very different from each other. They each offered something different for gamers. Yes, maybe it was a pain in the ass for SNES owners to buy a Genesis for Action Games, or Genesis owners to buy an SNES for RPGs. But the fact is, all four of those systems had their own identity. They all stood out from the rest, and each one was UNIQUE.

That's not the case with this generation. Aside from price, I see no real reason to buy a PS4 over an Xbox One. Likewise, I see no real reason to buy an Xbox One over a PS4. They're just too samey for me. I'm sure my opinion will change in the future, and both will have amazing exclusives.

However, I do see a real reason to buy a Wii U over either system. What does the Wii U offer that the other consoles don't? Colorful, vibrant, fun for all ages games. I know not everyone is into those games, and that's perfectly fine, but the point is, the Wii U offers something that the others don't. It truly feels like a different system. The Xbone and PS4 seem like a case of "same system, different company" to me.

The Wii U, as it stands, is really the only system I'm interested in right now because of that. Yes, I am a Nintendo fanboy, but the fact that I'm literally only interested in buying one system (I already own a 3DS) is a very bad thing. Despite my love of Nintendo, I have never, in the history of me playing video games, ever wanted only the Nintendo system from their respective generations, even from the start. Despite wanting the Nintendo system the most, I have always also wanted Sony's and Microsoft's systems as well. Not so with this generation. This is literally the only generation in which I'm only interested in one console.

I tried to be optimistic. I tried not to be jaded. In fact, I often criticized the critics of this generation for being too jaded. Now, it seems like I'm in the same boat as them. As it stands, the Wii U is the only console that I really want. I could care less about the other two due to their sameness.

What do you think? Do you want more console exclusives, or do you think multiplatform games are the way to go?

[Vexer1]

Meh, I personally just don't think the Wii U's lineup looks that amazing, there's only a few games on there that really interest me at the moment, and I just can't see a reason to buy the most underpowered of the next-gen systems over an Xbox One or even a PS4.

I don't really care if the system "offers something others don't", that "something" doesn't necessarily appeal to everyone. I personally think Nintendo got a little too carried away with gimmicks in recent years(don't really care for the tablet-style controllers, I prefer more traditional controllers), if I ever do get a Wii U, it will be the last of the next-gen systems I buy.

[Rev1]

I can understand ptdebate's argument about having more multiplatform games but from a collector's standpoint I love console exclusives. The more games that solely came out for one console the more fun the console is to collect for. If every game was on the same console I feel like the games that came out would become more stale (which is a whole other argument, so I won't get into that). Also, there would be nothing to differentiate the consoles except their stats, which is boring.

[LoganRuckman1]

[QUOTE=Vexer]

Meh, I personally just don't think the Wii U's lineup looks that amazing, there's only a few games on there that really interest me at the moment, and I just can't see a reason to buy the most underpowered of the next-gen systems over an Xbox One or even a PS4.

I don't really care if the system "offers something others don't", that "something" doesn't necessarily appeal to everyone. I personally think Nintendo got a little too carried away with gimmicks in recent years(don't really care for the tablet-style controllers, I prefer more traditional controllers), if I ever do get a Wii U, it will be the last of the next-gen systems I buy.

[/QUOTE]

Like I said, not everyone is into what the Wii U is offering, and I'm perfectly fine with that. Just me personally, the Wii U offers something different, and is currently the only system I'm interested in.

[QUOTE=Rev]I can understand ptdebate's argument about having more multiplatform games but from a collector's standpoint I love console exclusives. The more games that solely came out for one console the more fun the console is to collect for. If every game was on the same console I feel like the games that came out would become more stale (which is a whole other argument, so I won't get into that). Also, there would be nothing to differentiate the consoles except their stats, which is boring.[/QUOTE]

I'd actually like to see you expand on this, if you don't mind.

[ActRaiser1]

Personally, I see the value in a one console for all approach.  Think of it like this, instead of paying $900 for two other consoles, that would buy you 15 brand new games at full price.

Instead you have to buy three consoles plus the exclusives on each one.  Seeing how there are three separate consoles, I'm all in favor of three separate, unique libraries for each of the consoles.

Mainly because then I wouldn't have to research which one is "best".  

It's funny but this gen is a bit like two generations ago only with the roles reversed from all the parties.

• Xbox most powerful
• Gamecube second
• PS2 last

This gen

• PS4 most powerful
• Xbox One second
• Wii U last

But, yeah, I agree bring on unique games for each of the consoles.  Else, there's no point in owning the weaker and weakest console of this generation.  

(Proud owner of the weakest and weaker consoles of this generation).  

[Sut1]

Is it just what we are accustomed to though ? We are used to system exclusives defining consoles so have we become institutionalised ?
Surely from a consumer standpoint if there was one system with Naughty Dog, Bungie, Nintendo, Activision, etc all focusing on developing for that one platform how could that be bad thing ?

Nintendo could still have motion control/tablet controls on their system and if Sony or Microsoft owners wanted they just buy the universal controllers and Nintendo games. The best seller would be who put the best package together.

The problem with my argument (yes I'm arguing with myself) is when it has happened before it has eventually failed. As Scotland stated generation one was same software lots (and lots) of different manufacturers some tried to offer something different, Coleco with their combat unit, Atari with Stunt Cycle, PC-50x family trying to uniform the madness but it resulted in the first market crash.

MSX and 3DO also attempted the one standard model but ultimately failed. Perhaps we (gamers) are like sport supporters, we like the affiliation with a chosen console, perhaps we enjoy 'console wars'. Choice doesn't come into it as you would still have choice with your games just like movies and games.

Logically it makes sense for one console standard, emotionally, instinctively tribal perhaps it doesn't.

[Segatarious1]

[QUOTE=ActRaiser]Personally, I see the value in a one console for all approach.  Think of it like this, instead of paying $900 for two other consoles, that would buy you 15 brand new games at full price.

Instead you have to buy three consoles plus the exclusives on each one.  Seeing how there are three separate consoles, I'm all in favor of three separate, unique libraries for each of the consoles.

Mainly because then I wouldn't have to research which one is "best".  

It's funny but this gen is a bit like two generations ago only with the roles reversed from all the parties.

• Xbox most powerful
• Gamecube second
• PS2 last

This gen

• PS4 most powerful
• Xbox One second
• Wii U last

But, yeah, I agree bring on unique games for each of the consoles.  Else, there's no point in owning the weaker and weakest console of this generation.  

(Proud owner of the weakest and weaker consoles of this generation).  [/QUOTE]

Actually that would be Xbox One, seeing how it is weaker and has been more expensive than PS4, and shares most of the same library. That is why you see MS paying for timed exclusives like Tomb Raider. Not a great strategy, but they have little choice, their first party development is lackluster, and Kinect 2.0 has already failed.

[Paul1231]

[QUOTE=Vexer]

Meh, I personally just don't think the Wii U's lineup looks that amazing, there's only a few games on there that really interest me at the moment, and I just can't see a reason to buy the most underpowered of the next-gen systems over an Xbox One or even a PS4.[/QUOTE]

(eyeroll) Really?  You REALLY have to play the "underpowered" card in this discussion?  The whole point of his post is that the Wii U offers a different gaming experience than the other two consoles, meaning games that can't be had on the other two.  With that in mind, why do minor console power differences matter in the least?  Do you really think Super Mario 3D World would just be an absolute revelation of graphical beauty if it were released on the PS4 compared to the Wii U edition?  Honestly, aren't we to the point where we can get through a multi-console discussion without delving into the 16-bit-era "my console has better graphics than yours" whining when there has never been a time in the history of gaming that it has mattered less than it does now?  That just feels like such a petty, cheap shot in the context of this discussion, let alone any of this generation...

[Vexer1]

It may not matter to you, but it does matter to a lot of other people, so I really don't see how it's a "cheap petty" shot in the least.

[Weekend_Warrior1]

Just wait till the PS4 and Xbox One hit their stride, the Wii U will be left in the dust.