Are exclusives anti consumer?
Are exclusives anti consumer?
No
kill yourself pedophile
No Sonybro, you can't use that excuse
No pcbro, sorry that valve doesnt give a shit about you anymore?
No Nintenbro, but since you don't have any you don't have a say in the matter
No Xboxbro, you have to share with Pcbro
>every company wants or can program their game for every platform
no
...
No, being ugly is anti consumer you ugly fuck
No, because people want exclusives.
Only if it's [platform I don't own] exclusive
Yeah, for all platforms
Yeah. Duh.
_ ____ __ FUCK ____ ____!
If it is because the platform holder has paid for its development?
No.
If a studio was paid after its development to make a multiplat exclusive instead?
Yes.
Sony funded and co-developed Bloodborne
Nintendo funded and probably co-developed Bayonetta 2
These are fine
Titanfall was money hatted to be Xbone exclusive
Games like Destiny/CoD getting exclusive treatment because of Sony making deals
These are shit
>finally played Bloodborne years late on my brother's PS4
>I got bored of it long before I finished it
Dark Souls 2 and 3 killed any enjoyment I could have had
Is competition anti-consumer?
This is the only correct answer
Of course exclusives are good for consumers because it's easier for developers to optimize the games for only one platform.
That's a shame.
Playing Bloodborne after the shitshow of DS2 was an amazing breath of fresh air.
Depends. Is it a given that if a game runs well on one console that it will run well on the next? If making a game exclusive to one console gives the team more resources to make that game a better experience on said console performance and feature-wise then I'd say exclusives are pro-consumer.
Corporations are anti-consumer.
Consumers are anti-consumer.
They promote console hardware.
Which promotes the company that makes the hardware to make games for that hardware.
Which promotes other companies to do the same to compete with them.
So no, they are not anti consumer.
KEK
Idort here. I demand you to delete this.