Playing devil's advocate: In defense of exclusives.

Now before I go into this discussion I'll warn you I go through a lot of long winded and hypothetical arguments that I can't fully back. That's nothing different than the usual, but as you can tell by the title this will be a strange take on an issue and requires a lot more chatter and theories than usual. Despite that things are as usual with my facts or lack of them. I'm not a game developer, I'm not a publisher, I don't glue my eye balls to statistics or charts (though if there is a handy one I might bring it up anyways, but its not often and I don't put much faith at all in them), and I'm not exactly cracking scientific or mathematical stuff. I'm just a gamer, using some common sense, a big canvas of writing space, and some witty (but potentially wrong) thoughts based on a combination of opinion, experience, perspective, and thinking it through. Okay, proceeding...

Things are about to heat up

So rumors have been going on for a while that Fallout 4 is Xbox one exclusive. Is it true... probably not. Bethesda has an association with PC gaming. Their console ports are nice.... usually... but they are first for the PC community, and their games live on long lifespans in part thanks to being a modder heaven. Heck I'd even go as far as to say the games actually developed by Bethesda feel like they're making the gameplay decisions and open worlds that they have in part because they want to inspire a world of community imagination and modding. However guess who else has had a strong association with a certain platform? Insomniac who has been long associated with and love from Sony's side for nearly 20 years, and... oh hey, look their dream game is coming to the Xbox one and only the Xbox one! Yeah there are plenty of differences in these two cases, but the lesson to be learned is don't get caught up on certainty. The very team that developed a game that sparked my passion for gaming and my mainly sony focus would end up building their own passion project exclusively on the only platform I have 100% no entry in. If this can happen, I believe Bethesda probably can go exclusive to something if they really have the incentive. Also its a deviously good move for Microsoft to do. Face it, it will work and get sales up, even if you declare a grudge war against the publishers and make some steam boycott group to vent with because it works so well.

 I'm all for games being available to as much people as possible. Its nice for as many people as possible to get some great games, and exclusives for the most part really do screw that up and screw consumer. However what is it like for guys that are on that secret access club to enjoy those games excluding so many others? I dunno, I was too busy enjoying Killzone 2 to care that I was missing out on, or I might have been listening to all the guys praising how good Deus ex 1 is over its multi-platform sequel, or maybe I was enjoying how well focused and unique a game like Tearaway is. Oh wait, maybe I do know what its like to be in on exclusives, and honestly so should the majority of gamers who have been playing a decent library for at least 5 or so years. Some of these games are among our favorites and are legendary classics, or at the very least most of them are cult hits where some in quiet circles of the internet praise a game as a mark of unappreciated revolutionary status. So why don't we act like it and why do we fuss about the act of exclusives? Its easy to hate on exclusives, to suggest that they're a hazard on the industry from the corporate side of things, and to cry when a game looks so good but is out of our reach or not on our ideal platform. However I don't think we give them enough credit, nor are we willing to admit when we're actually wanting them or asking for them. Its kind of funny that part of the ongoing complaint with the Xbox one (or new consoles in general) is that it has "no games", but suddenly the internet is ready to raise pitchforks at the potentially painful news that just maybe the Xbox one has a choke hold on one of last generations biggest PC games. In similar news we just witnessed the Wii U launching up in sales by literally 666% within the UK alone when Mario Kart 8 was sent out. So I think its time I wrote an article on this. Exclusives have their own way of benefiting people, and even though it would in fact be better for everyone to share the fun there are undeniable benefits to having a game tethered to a single piece of hardware.

For starters, lets get the most obvious piece out of the way. Some of the guys who have actually been sharing some love to the idea of exclusives are of course the "PC master-race" guys. They've been constantly harping on how multi-platform games can deteriorate potential, lower the bar, lack features, or just release under buggy conditions all thanks to consoles. While they aren't right and its a sad side effect of scapegoating in the industry where blame of lazy development gets shifted instead to an inanimate machine, there is some truth is those statements and it applies to all sides of the gaming world. When you spread a game across many platforms (Up to the potential of 6 right now just including triple A games. More if you open up mobile markets and portables) you have to make either multiple engines, or a really scalable engine. This isn't bad in itself, and contrary to what they say some of the "best" looking PC games are multi-plat (Battlefield 4, Crysis 3, Metro: Last Light) however this is just the beginning. You then have to make sure the controls fit across multiple styles ranging from the Wii U's giant tablet controller, a traditional controller, and then a big keyboard coupled with scrolling and proper mouse sensitivity. Options must reflect each set as well. Then you have to do Trophies, two separate forms of achievements, then run servers across several different terms of services and hosting methods if you have any sense of online connectivity, and finally the distribution including the "going gold" stage of getting review copies out. In the end this all takes away time that could be used to further perfect each version, include good options (especially key for PC version and motion control functions), and this is all without counting the community itself. The community itself is split thanks to this, potential DLC, and even updates. If you buy a game like Killzone, Halo, or Primal Carnage you can enjoy each game knowing that the community shares the same servers, everyone on the forum has an account you can friend on the same system as the game, and that help is all there for you using the same controls scheme and bugs you face. There's a comforting sense of unity among you. Oh and those reviews... also unified on one platform, meaning you get a better grasp of bugs and optimization even though reviews are often lousy with that anyways.

The forums share in your suffering soldier

By contrast you just don't get that with a game like Call of Duty (and many others, but to keep with recent multiplayer FPS examples it fits best obviously). Its mostly considered an Xbox thing, but lets face it... the community still has its division, there are corners where PC community talks of good modding that was forgotten by most of the world, and its always a risky gamble to see the quality of each game as the optimization across all platforms is up for serious questioning. Ghosts was probably the best in the recent series as far as polish goes.... if you were playing on consoles, but then turn over to PC and it can't give you a proper FOV slider, runs horribly, sucks up more space than is necessary, lies about ram requirements, and wont even let gamers attempt to run the game if it detects anything slightly below its bloated system requirements. Some of these have since been fixed, but there was never any reason they needed to be in there to begin with. Average reviews of this game didn't scratch a damn thing about this, and it was up to Youtube critics and specialized journalist sites to point out just how garbage the port job was for fellow PC enthusiasts. Funny how that works, specialized seems to be the key word here and it was the PC specialists that debunk a faulty PC job. In similar fashion this is why I, as mostly a PlayStation gamer, keep a Specialized Playstation website like PS lifestyle among the top 3 journalist sites I visit. Much like with an exclusive itself, a site that is focused is straight to the point and connects with everyone on the same place and way so that it can deliver the most direct and on point experience.

Another good example of a sour multi-plat release would be the more recent game of Watchdogs. Watchdogs went head on for 6 platforms total, and while the consoles and PC could certainly handle more than it put out the fact is it didn't have any time to make any version as spectacular as it should be. PS3 has PS2 era stuff in it while games like AC and the newest GTA surpass it, PS4 looks nice but should have been able to handle the E3 2012 content, and even further could be said about the PC but instead the PC looks nearly on par with PS4 and handles far worse because they couldn't be bothered to sit down and take the time to optimize it right. Would exclusivity helped it? That's not certain and is only a guess, but I honestly don't think anyone properly believes it did its best and most are blaming it across not just consoles but the fact that it went for EVERY console and PC as around the same time. In a world where we have such fantastic games as shadow fall, and Infamous, I fail to believe that Watchdogs is the best it could have been under 1080p and at just 30fps. To set the record straight I'm not hating on the game for being everywhere. I'd rather take the lesser graphics and hope that many enjoy it, however it really is a show case to the darker side of this decision coupled with a team pushing the game too soon. I can start to see why the PC guys are so bitter and quick to blame consoles, even when that isn't a lone solution.

Furthermore I've been mostly talking from a developer team and player standpoint. The elephant in the room though is that this sort of thing helps your console and video card makers. Now for the most part, yes it is industry BS and it would be a more perfect ideal world if you could run up to any retailer, grab Mario, Halo, and Uncharted off the shelves and put it on your best gaming rig or your favorite console. However the truth is its a competitive thing to keep it dangling in front of you and to encourage you to buy it on their terms to some degree. You want Halo and to be the first guys to play on COD map packs? Be a good boy and stick with Xbox. Want the best of alien shooting from Resistance, or a blockbuster adventure with Uncharted? Well put down everything and grab a Playstation! Want those special hair physics on Tomb Raider, or to make the most of the already detailed world of Metro? I hope you have the right graphics card, because we're screwing over the other half of the PC customers by making a deal to have some settings only work with our brand! However mean this sounds, its a part of the competition, and I think it actually does do a bit of good here and there. Its all speculations and "what ifs" but when you look around its effective, works, and its what makes some of these games and companies that back them just what they are. Bungie was in some deep trouble before they ever got the chance to finish Halo, when Microsoft saved them and pulled them into a deal while their game transformed to become the massive hit its known as today. Likewise why do you think games like Killzone, Gears, and the upcoming Order game look so much better than a typical 3rd party game? They're not only exclusives and able to focus on one version as mentioned before, but I have no doubt that they're being pressured to represent the system at its strongest. Why would there be pressure to do this? Because its competing against other similar machines, and they're encouraged to show consumers which one is the better pick. Competition breeds a certain quality so that you're pressured to buy the better thing.

Ultimately this competition also breeds a sense of urgency, and desire. Why do you think the PS4 is doing much better than its competition? Its not only just because of current markets, and past fumbles from other guys, but its also because Sony built up a reputation of having more exclusives.

Nintendo has maintained their idea of old IPs and continues to get people with those expectations. Meanwhile Microsoft was mostly known for Halo, and Gears, and if you don't need either of those they didn't have much of a hook over you compared to Sony, Nintendo, or PC. This wasn't just some wild guess either, it was all over the internet. People weren't looking fondly at the shown games, and what few did were looking at Killer Instinct's interesting reboot, or Dead Rising 3. A few were looking into TitanFall, but everyone sighed with relief and turned to the PC side because it wasn't a true exclusive. Meanwhile even though Sony wasn't doing much better, there was a sense of trust in knowing they would go far with exclusives. Now the world is looking at Sunset overdrive with great ambition ever since it truly revealed its gameplay. Oh and let me take a quick break off of Xbox to bring up the mario kart 8 sales again: 666%!!! What more proof is there to show that these consoles sell in part from exclusives? Now in recent time Microsoft is starting to finally understand that and tease up to as much as 15 exclusives for Xbox one and these will likely be shown at E3. Honestly I'm jealous. I'm supposed to be. That's the point. Its supposed to make me get up, walk down to the store, and purchase this system so I have a choice to buy any of those 15 games that appeal to me.

Now with consoles causing and needing to invoke a sense of desire, this ultimately sounds demoralizing to the fact that we have consoles, and at first glance it kind of is. If things were just down to the graphic card wars, lets hypothetically say it stays around 50-50 (apple isn't much of a competitor on this, so that's why I'm strictly speaking on inner parts) and PC gaming itself feels unified as the ultimate and only gaming thing. Every game that existed, would run on PC. Now that sounds good, but then again we go all the way back to the beginning of the idea of why consoles exist to begin with. While its mostly about the exclusives right now, at some point consoles were entirely different and alternate machines with their own gigantic list of pros and cons. To some point those pros and cons still exists, but less apparent. However consoles have opened up way too many factors, and honestly if they never happened it could have had scary consequences. Gaming wouldn't have the same people, revenue, competition, or style as it does now. Actually I'd even go as far to say that maybe places like Steam and GOG wouldn't even exist. DRM was something that could be escaped thanks to consoles, but if there was no alternative DRM could do whatever the hell it wanted and people would know it as the only way to play games. You'd have some competition from a fraction of the market that just naturally didn't care, but that probably wouldn't be enough to kick off anything. With consoles people have an entire library, economy, and publishing style to turn away to and when those numbers pile up it becomes tempting to target them. Then a console version of some PC games is made without that DRM, and it sells better. How to you bring back DRM haters while also establishing a trust with developers that they'll have secure DRM-like sales? You build a better system, one like steam, where the threats and bullying of DRM are far less noticeable than ever before... and in addition you just make the general system something to desire. I truly do believe this wouldn't be the way it is now without consoles.

Aren't you forgetting something....

Now with all this being said I'd like to debunk my own stuff a bit. Like the title suggests, it was about playing "the devil's advocate" which means I don't totally support the argument I'm discussing. Remember what I said about PC elitists and fanboys using consoles as a scapegoat? Well I'd like to explain more about that... Obviously the consoles themselves aren't actively doing anything. If you want to complain about the lack of FOV, the optimization, the visual scale, the controls and mechanics, it all comes out from the publisher and developer made decisions and testing. The machines... they just sit there and you can run certain things on them. The same can be said at large. In an industry where some of the best looking PC games are considered again: Metro, Crysis 3, and Battlefield 4 I would think people would understand now that its about who's at the reigns, and how much they're willing to commit to their game (or what their publishers will let happen). So that whole talk on focus... I honestly believe while its easier on a team to make a more exclusive game, ultimately the right care can put them on amazing levels no matter what consoles they're made for. Ground Zeroes was made across old and new generation games, but upon playing just the PS3 version it blows away 90% games on that console. That's not to say effort will take games beyond their hardware on that hardware, but I believe they can certainly be stretched to large near max potential on each platform.

Heck to strike this issue more on the head, sometimes a focused game doesn't even live up to complete expectations. Most of Insomniacs games weren't even on par with the best 3rd party games and even when they caught up it was still lesser than the usual PS3 exclusives. Likewise the majority of games exclusively on steam right now don't use up much potential power and could easily fit on consoles or even handhelds. Some like Risk of Rain honestly don't even work well on keyboard. An exclusive wont always guarantee the max quality of the hardware. Honestly the most important thing overall is the dedication of the team to make a correct, well optimized, and high performance experience for all their customers. Its just that its a lot easier when all the work is done for one machine. Ultimately exclusives still suck, and its sad to see a good one pop up that locks out people that adore it. You can say whatever bitter things about a platform's library, but anyone with a decent love for gaming will envy some game on every platform and its not a good feeling.

Now what about the good value for the consumer where it feels like a game is unified? Well that can backfire to. Sure games like COD and Battlefield are split all over the place, with people bringing in xbox focused guides, some trying to be a vocal for the PSN community, the nintendo guys begging for more COD players and feeling left out, or the PC guys discussing its port while going on about completely foreign control schemes to everyone else. However the thing about those games that the list used earlier doesn't have.... Primal Carnage, Halo, and Killzone absolutely suck at publicity and public talk. Seriously. Halo is an exception back on 6th gen where it pretty much was the big thing with multiplayer shooters, but it got lucky there. Beyond that most exclusives just don't get blown up to be the front of discussion, and that really sucks when you're a huge enthusiast for the game. Sure you can run to the forums and chat with a tightly knit, well informed and unified community, but it kind of sucks when I can't talk to my xbox360 friends about how much of a masterpiece Killzone 2 is while they all talk to each other about how fantastic a Halo Reach match was. Likewise those big high selling multi-platform games are staying where they are on the top of every news site list for a good reason: Everyone knows them, many play them, and they're hugely marketed to just about anyone with one or two platforms of any kind above mobile while Killzone, Halo, and whatever awesome PC multiplayer indie game all sit in their own little corners quietly looking to scraps of players when their launch hype died down.

If fallout 4 really ends up going to Xbox.... I've got mixed feelings about it. Not straight up hatred and pain that many will rage about, but I will sympathize a bit with them for their loss. It belongs to the PC community first and foremost. Even if PC gets it and its only a "console exclusive" to the xbox it still sucks big time... and makes even less sense honestly (its not even a solid business move, its just wasting everyone's money). However assuming its a full exclusive I will also be congratulating big time xbox fans and hope they get an amazing game that does the best it can with the hardware, and they can enjoy their easy recognition to it as an xbox centric game. I'll be really pissed if this becomes a trend for Bethesda, as they're my favorite publisher aside from Sony. However its business, it happens, and contrary to what some say it does have its upsides. Just not enough upsides as sharing the enjoyment with as many as possible.

They look happier together