Dolphin, the GameCube and Wii emulator - Forums

Im not saying that im against multiplats completely im saying i am against taking already released exclusives and making them multiplat or hyping a game as an exclusive then making it multiplat but in the process potentially nerfing both versions of the game.

yeah..... that's marketing bro, and everything is legal in it...

@ugoo

But the mass effect series was already multi-platform to begin with. Both the original and 2 were released on the 360 and pc. Making it a pc or 360 exclusive would improve the game for that platform but adding a PS3 version isn't going to degrade the quality since it will basically be the 360 version running on the ps3 (since the 360 and ps3 are similar in function and specs, the main differences between them are the blu-ray drive and the cell cpu). Also if you looked at the config files of the original and me2 they both have sections for the ps3 so they were clearly planning to launch it on the ps3 as well but their contract with microsoft prevented them.

I think the more appropriate thing to say is that the 360 is losing exclusives and exclusives are needed to sell a system. It doesn't help the 360's cause when it's "exclusive" titles are going multi-platform, same thing with formerly exclusive PC titles that are now suddenly going multi-platform. What's next to go multi-platform, if Halo and a few other titles go multi-platform (unlikely) then there would be no reason to buy an Xbox 360. The Xbox 360 doesn't have many exclusives left especially with most of them going multi-platform.

I'm all for everyone experiencing the games, but a console also needs plenty of decent exclusives to sell the hardware.

:Edit: True, Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 were also released for PC, but Microsoft likely made a deal with them to also release the games on PC (Windows), Halo and Gears of War could also be considered multi-platform but a PS3/Wii version will likely never be developed or released.

Quote:The Xbox 360 doesn't have many exclusives left especially with most of them going multi-platform.

Still more than the PS3 believe it or not. Although we have to modify the definition of exclusives since most 360 "exclusives" are also on the pc-windows platform and in my opinion should not be called an exclusive but everyone else does.

Quote:I'm all for everyone experiencing the games, but a console also needs plenty of decent exclusives to sell the hardware.

Yeah but it's more profitable for the developers to go multi-platform now that porting has become so easy.

Um, how does it affect anybody, anywhere in a bad way if a game is coming out for a new console? EA makes money and people don't have to buy an Xbox to play this if they already only have a PS3 and their PC isn't good enough. Its a win-win, chill out man.
(and, knowing the internet, EA probably got so many complaints, threat letters and mailbombs that it was either release ME 2 on PS3, or go under the witness protection program)

I don't have a problem with it, I thought I already made that clear did I not? Consoles do need good exclusives and a lot of them to move units, this doesn't do either the Xbox or PC any justice when most "exclusives" end up on another system, how many announced PS3 exclusives have ended up on Xbox 360 and PS3, compared to Xbox 360 and PC exclusives?

I'm all for everyone experiencing the game, but the hardware is just not going to sell well if there isn't enough decent exclusives and there is not a lot of choices left with the Xbox 360 now as far as exclusives are concerned. If it's going to be a multi-platform game, then announce it as multi-platform from the beginning and none of these alleged "exclusives" to go multi-platform later.

I can say only one thing.....

.....well honestly I tend to find that most games that are published by EA are great (although once again since EA is a publisher they have nothing to do with development). The only games that EA actually makes are the battlefield games since they bought dice, and they kick ass.

As a guy who used to buy almost every console out there, back when it was still Nintendo VS Sega VS 3DO (lol!), and then suddenly living in a world where you really have to spend money wisely and only pick one console if that's your main form of entertainment, I'd say I do not like the idea of relying on console exclusives just to make one console better than the other.

Let's say you're just the average guy who can only support one's gaming habits on one game console. What if an exclusive game came out for the other console, and that game is really really good and looks fun, and as a gamer you just want to play it as well? Well you can't. You either go to a friend's house who has the other console to play it if he ever buys it, or you just watch videos of the game on youtube or justintv just to satisfy your interest in the game. You can save up cash to buy the other console, but then again, are you really willing to let go of $300 just to be able to play another $60 game which you'll probably get bored of in a few weeks or months?

Of course, every game company has a right to create exclusive games. Just look at Mario and Sonic, they were the flagship bearers for Nintendo and Sega respectively. Both characters represented their console's abilities very well in their games. Mario was about having fun in a carefree and cute world full of funny and pleasant environments and enemies, while Sonic was all about being "cool" and "rad", blazing through levels designed to make you feel like you're a moving roller coaster animal. It was very easy to decide as a gamer which side you were going to take because you just picked which character you related to the most. The good thing about this was no matter if you chose Nintendo or Sega during their SNES VS Genesis years, you still got to play every other interesting game that came out because going multi-platform was the norm.

I still remember that old issue when Nintendo refused to put blood in their SNES version of Mortal Kombat, while Genesis has no qualms giving gratitious blood, even providing gamers the "D,U,L,L,A,R,D" code to give the maximum effect of Mortal Kombat on the Genesis. Still, even though games had differences due to following the company's image (Nintendo's supposed to be family friendly), as a gamer, you were still able to play Mortal Kombat on the SNES, you were not completely locked out of the experience, especially since a few Game Genie codes (a device used to cheat on both SNES and Genesis) remedied the no red blood problem of the SNES.

Then came the new consoles, the Xbox 360 and PS3. I remember I already wanted the Xbox 360 at the start because of what I read about it. I also found out that it had an exclusive game to it called "Dead Rising", and coincidentally I'm a zombie lover! Then it hit me, what would happen if for some reason, my first choice was the PS3, and this Dead Rising game was only for the Xbox 360? That's the time when I realized that for single console owners, console exclusives wouldn't be great at all. Just imagine, what if your choice of game console had this one great game exclusive, and then all of a sudden, the other console kept churning out their own great console exclusives that you want to play, but your system has stopped creating their own console exclusives? You're stuck with 1 vs their many.

So as much as possible, in my personal choice, I'd rather have the common multi-platform games instead of having exclusives. We already have the DLC system set up for this, and they're already doing it. Having game console extras is fine in my opinion, just like how the PS3 version of Batman: Arkham Asylum had Joker as a playable extra. It didn't block out the Xbox 360 and PC gamers from enjoying the game normally, it only gave the PS3 owners a little something to cheer about.

I believe that the greatness of a console should not mainly depend on what "exclusives" it gets, but on the actual performance of the system itself when it runs games. It should let the gamer immerse him/herself as much as possible into whatever game is being played, without being distracted by technical details.