Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Next-Gen Console Exclusives Explored 101

Posted by Zonk
from the who-is-going-where dept.
SeventhStar writes "Siliconera has an article with a long list of exclusive titles broken down by next-gen console. The Playstation 3 only has a few exclusive games at the moment; 29 are third-party, with 12 are made by Sony. Meanwhile Microsoft has 48 Xbox 360 exclusive games, with 23 of them are developed internally. However it looks like the real winner for exclusive games is the Wii. There are 39 titles only for the Wii and even ported games are going to play differently. When you adjust the amount of exclusive games on the Xbox 360 for its one year head start, the Wii has more original games coming out for it. Since console exclusives help determine which console to purchase is the Wii in a good spot?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Next-Gen Console Exclusives Explored

Comments Filter:
  • Novel concept (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mr. Samuel (950418) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @05:36PM (#16492609)
    Why don't we wait and see how many of these games are good, and then make our decisions?
  • Of course (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Stormwatch (703920) <rodrigogirao.hotmail@com> on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @05:36PM (#16492619) Homepage
    Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Donkey Kong, Starfox, Pokémon, the list goes on and on... like them or not, Nintendo has the strongest first-party lineup.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @06:05PM (#16493021)
    Wow! I can finally buy happiness!

    I mean, time and again companies show my how happy other people are using their products, but I never seem to get the same happiness they portray. What could be wrong with me, or perhaps I'm not getting the same product that they were happy to own. Do these companies switch their products on me, selling me one that doesn't make people happy, while showing off the ones that do?

    But this one, I believe it's real. I trust that when Nintendo shows me that people who use their product are happy, it has to be true. I'll be happy for sure, this time.

    I mean, what else could make them that happy? They couldn't possibly be that happy about the money they,re getting paid to look happy, since we all know money doesn't make people happy. The Wii will do it, oh yes. Just look at them, happy as can be. I so want to be happy like that. I so want to get a Wii.

    I'm so pwned by marketing.
  • by BKX (5066) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @06:10PM (#16493095) Journal
    Mario has been whored out into every possible genre that you can think of.

    Exactly. Mario has been used in completely different ways with different storylines throught out his life (you know what I mean by his life). Mario is really a brand. Everytime he appears, it's in a new game with a different story and new style of gameplay. EA Sports games on the other hand are the same game with better graphics and updated rosters. Other than that the differences are incremental and unoriginal.

    You can't say that Mario games are unoriginal just because they used the same set of characters over again. That'd be like saying Shakespear was unoriginal for writing with the Latin alphabet.
  • by OmegaBlac (752432) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @06:11PM (#16493101)
    These people honestly look like they are just having fun.
    Just like the people in those "I have congenital herpes" commercials I bet. Of course reality may not match what you see in videos or ads. Marketing droids would have multiple orgasm daily if all consumers thought exactly like you about promotional videos and the products they are trying to sell.
  • Re:Of course (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Fozzyuw (950608) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @06:23PM (#16493253)

    Exactly, when you want to talk 'exclusive', you cannot get very far without talking about franchise names. Afterall, what does Sony have? I was going to say Crash Bandicot [wikipedia.org] but a quick search shows he wasn't 'exclusive'. The only 2 franchises I can think of for Sony is Twisted Metal and the Everquest games (Champions of Norath, etc).

    However, with that said, franchise games won't 'sell' millions of consoles. Just look at the Gamecube. I bought that over the PS2 due to primarly Zelda and Metroid. The GameCube was not as strong as Nintendo would have hoped. And even if a game is labeled as 'exclusive' (unless franchise 1st party like Mario), it doesn't mean it won't migrate to a different platform in the future.

    Afterall, at one point I recall the Resident Evil series was going to be 'exclusive' to the GameCube. Well, they got REZero and RE4, then RE4 was ported to the PS2. In the end, 'exclusivity' is just as strong as the entity that owns the license rights. The license can be sold to another person to allow that game to be created on another platform.

    So, yes, exclusives helps (how many people bought an N64 just to play GoldenEye?), but it's truely title availability that matters. As a GameCube owner, it was more than frustrating seeing games come out for the XBox and PS2 but not the GameCube (due to whatever technical limits the GC had verses cost of converting the title). I now purchased a PS2 about a month ago and I'm catching up on all the great titles I missed (Kingdom Hearts, God of War, GTO, Final Fantasy, Guitar Hero, DDR, etc., etc.)

    Cheers,
    Fozzy

  • by earthbound kid (859282) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @07:10PM (#16493913) Homepage
    If a console has the highest number of exclusive titles, but 90% of them suck, then it doesn't matter.

    Um, Playstation much? I mean, I know 1996 was a looong time ago, but to remember how crappy 90% of PS1 games were compared to N64 games, you don't have to think back that far, you can just go to the games section of any pawn shop or thrift store and see rack after rack of games that quite obviously suck so hard you wonder how on earth they were ever produced.

    The fact is that in every generation, the machine with the most games wins, period. So near as I can tell, it does not matter much if those games are good or bad. Look at the Game Boy: it bested competitor after competitor on the strength of its library and its battery life, vastly inferior graphics be damned. Similarly, the DS is beating the PSP not just because it has a crazy stylus, but also because the PSP has very few games.

    If you want to predict the sales of a console, what matters most is the number of games published for it, nothing else.
  • Re:You're right... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @07:51PM (#16494461)
    Because once you hit 13, a game isn't fun if you're not killing hookers.
  • by justchris (802302) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @09:05PM (#16495183) Homepage
    "It isn't. Untitled projects cannot be counted because they don't exist."

    Wrong.

    Those titles are straight from the publishers themselves. Many of those games like the Naughty Dog title we already have released media from.

    Would you like a list of titles that have names, video footage, even gameplay footage that never saw the light of day? Do I need even mention Duke Nukem Forever? A game can cease to exist at any point, and the fact remains that until it has a name, the chances of it being vaporware are much higher. To be honest, a name is no more proof of existence than video footage is, but we have to draw the line somewhere. "Also, that list is every single announced game for the PS3, not just games scheduled between release and March 2007. "

    Wrong.

    All the non-exclusive PS3 titles were trimmed.

    ...okay, let me rephrase that. That is every single announced exclusive game for the PS3. Although, there is no way to verify that each of the untitled games is exclusive, since several of those companies have announced untitled games for the 360 & Wii as well, in the same genre's. What proof do we have those aren't the same games?

    Regardless, the fact remains the scope of the article was for a specific time period, and that list exceeds that time period. If you're going to go with that list, even including the untitled games, then you have to reasonably do the same for the other 2 ssytems, so you can't really compare that list to the list given by TFA, because you're not utilizing the same restrictions under which the article was operating.

  • by MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) on Wednesday October 18, 2006 @11:00PM (#16496287)
    "Funny that people complain about EA and their sports games being unoriginal, but Nintendo has a tendancy to use the same characters with a slightly different plot and no one criticizes them for a lack of innovation in games."

    I love when this argument comes up. Heh.

    Compare SMB 1, 2, and 3 to Sonic 1, 2, and 3. Superficially they're very similar, but play-wise, you have to totally re-adjust to play any of those three games. Try playing Mario 3 then go back to Mario 1. Ouch. The original Sonic trilogy felt like a few expansion levels were added. Blah blah blah.

    You're confusing the terms sequel and franchise. You cannot do that if you wish to understand what has made Nintendo consistently successful over the years.
  • Re:Of course (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rtechie (244489) on Thursday October 19, 2006 @08:04AM (#16499533)
    Exactly, when you want to talk 'exclusive', you cannot get very far without talking about franchise names. Afterall, what does Sony have?

    Who modded this up?

    Ever heard of Final Fantasy? Or Metal Gear Solid? Or Grand Theft Auto? And yeah, even though MGS2 was ported to the XBOX, as were the GTA games, they had long periods of exclusivity on the PS2. And that helped the PS2 a lot. The PS2 beat the XBOX mainly because it had a LOT more games, just like the PS1 vs. N64. With such a huge library the PS2 offered "something for everyone", look at the success of the relatively bizarre Katamari Damacy and Guitar Hero.

Nothing ever becomes real until it is experienced. - John Keats

Working...