Why are more and more former exclusives not exclusive anymore?

[Misuteri]

I mean, in some cases an IP is something they want to keep, just like Microsoft keeps Halo stuff. Nintendo in particular is very, VERY protective of it's IPs in particular.

I know you know this but...

Without their IP and the lifetime of work from Shigeru Miyamoto Nintendo really isn’t much of a company. They blew the chance to be THE technology company in people’s living rooms. Part of that mistake was that they ticked off Sony into making the SNES CD-ROM into the PlayStation. That mistake they never recovered from.

Without people buying whatever new hardware for the new Zelda & Metroid Nintendo really does have nothing. They are more dependent on 40 year old franchises than any company in the world. That includes Disney.

[Steelcryo]

The obvious answer is money, once you've had it exclusive for a while, your potential market has mostly already bought it, so you've not got many new people left to sell to. Ending the exclusive once that market has done its job just makes sense as you get a load more potential new customers.

But it also has a second effect, you introduce a lot more people who may not have otherwise played it to your IP. Making them more likely to buy a sequel, which consequently, if it's also an exclusive, may drive more people to buy the console who were previously unlikely to buy it. So it's a double win.

[Echeyakee]

Well, for MS it's at least not too complicated. Ideally they want you to buy games on xbox, as that makes them more money, but when they tried to push the PC is for work and xbox is for gaming rhetoric, but it did not go over too well. And then steam scared them a bit with steam OS, so they decided not to antagonize users of their de facto monopolized system in to trying a less convenient, but potentially more friendly option. But then their windows store and games for windows live services flopped, so now they are stuck in this weird position, where they rather keep the goodwill and make some money vs risking making less money and creating room for competition.

For sony, I think, it's a more pragmatic approach. They don't have a big stake in PC gaming, and they use their exclusives to move early adopter and initial sales of hardware, so that they can sell more software later. Once the titles served their purpose, there is no reason not to get some more money out of releases on PC. As long as they are not facilitating or validating xbox sales, it's a sound decision.

[Tech614]

But exclusives are anti-consumer, it's probably one of the best examples of anti-consumerism

I can't even. I hope this is sarcasm because if not you either 1) don't know the definition of the terms you're using or 2) don't understand why exclusives exist. One or the other is completely wrong in your brain, use google and fix it.

But this is beyond bringing actual consumerism into the discussion, gamers in general say anything is anti consumer when they don't like it. They have made the term a mockery in any gaming discussion.

[Egomaniac]

With the recent rumour of Horizon Zero Dawn coming to PC that got me thinking, why are less games staying exclusive?

Now, I'm not one of those console warfanboys, even if I do enjoy exclusives, but I don't understand how giving up releases is a good business tactic.

Console manufacturers want you to buy their console, so they want to have experiences you can only experience on THEIR platform. "You want to play the newest Zelda? Great, but you will have to buy it on our console, else no luck!".

While I'm not adamant about exclusives, I still like them. I like to know that "that" console has X set of games, while another has another set. It makes it feel less generic. If not for exclusives, why would I buy one of the consoles? Then they are just standard media machines with no unique features.

Time-locked exclusives are the new thing now. Game is locked to a specific platform for X. After X, game can move to alternative platforms. Usually, by the time that happens, that game isn't really pushing console sales anymore anyway. For Horizon Zero Dawn....the game is already a few years old now. It's not doing anyone any good to keep that game locked down anymore. By releasing to PC...the game gets to enjoy something of a second life. The developers get to make a bit more money. And more people get to enjoy the game. It's of no real loss to Sony and it's a benefit for everyone else involved.

This isn't just Console to Console or Console to PC either. It can also take the form of PC to PC. Epic likes to lock games into 1 year exclusivity deals to give themselves an edge over Steam.

[Lurker1]

I think only nintendo is really truely exclusive anymore.

[Zantos]

Simple, ROMS. You can play anything on a PC now a days. Version exclusive to an Xbox? Watch someone get a rom up and working for the PC. They probably saw just how popular it was and decided to get in on that and sell the games and get extra cash flow.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Simple, ROMS. You can play anything on a PC now a days. Version exclusive to an Xbox? Watch someone get a rom up and working for the PC. They probably saw just how popular it was and decided to get in on that and sell the games and get extra cash flow.

Until companies decide to get tougher on romwebsites.

[zephid]

Because being available on more platforms = more money.

[Zantos]

Until companies decide to get tougher on romwebsites.

Its like music. You can get tougher, but never stop it. So the next best thing is to try to beat it.

[Vash The Stampede]

With the recent rumour of Horizon Zero Dawn coming to PC that got me thinking, why are less games staying exclusive?

To put it bluntly, the PC gaming market grew more profitable. Like I've said before, the PC market has roughly 1/3 of game sales, while the PS4 has like 40% of game sales. The rest is what the dead Xbox console has. There's also going to be a PS4 emulator eventually, just as there was a PS1, PS2, and a PS3 emulator. Better to port your games to PC and make some money than let it be pirated through emulation.

Now, I'm not one of those console warfanboys, even if I do enjoy exclusives, but I don't understand how giving up releases is a good business tactic.

Considering this is nearly a 3 year old game, any value Sony gained from this game is gone. They will simply make more money by porting it to PC, just as Microsoft does with their exclusives.

Console manufacturers want you to buy their console, so they want to have experiences you can only experience on THEIR platform. "You want to play the newest Zelda? Great, but you will have to buy it on our console, else no luck!".

Don't tell console manufacturers about emulators like Cemu and Yuzu. Games are about as exclusive as the air you breath. Port the games to PC makes good economic sense, especially if you want to avoid a growing gaming community who sees emulation as a legitimate tool.

While I'm not adamant about exclusives, I still like them. I like to know that "that" console has X set of games, while another has another set. It makes it feel less generic.

I grew up on a Sega Genesis with a Sega CD and 32X, and I still hate the idea of exclusives. You want to play Sonic CD then you need to buy a Sega CD, which has obviously long been ported to every platform Sega could imagine. Exclusives are an anti-consumer practice that doesn't benefit you at all, other than supporting your decision to buy a PS4. Imagine if everyone needed to own a Sega CD to play Sonic CD? That would be great for people like me who own the game and hardware, but horrible for those who just want to experience the game.

If not for exclusives, why would I buy one of the consoles? Then they are just standard media machines with no unique features.

You buy the console for the hardware and the features it has. If the hardware does nothing more than play games, then that's a problem you should take up with the console manufacturer. Remember, both the PS4 and Xbox One are using x86 hardware, so why are they just able to play games? My PC can play games, and run Windows or Linux, so why not these consoles? Something to think about next time when you gladly buy console exclusives. Someone actually got Linux running on the PS4 and ran Portal through Steam.

[Miyagie]

Because PCs have always been, and will always be better that consoles, from the hardware point of view, to the amount of games available and in general almost limitless possibilities.

Consoles are just creating artificial demand thanks to those 'exclusives'. But as gamers evolve mentally and outgrow the need to buy a console every couple of years just to stay relevant, console sales are droping.


Game developers simply recognize this trend and act accordingly

Isnt this grafic inflated by the Wii?
The Wii was the consol for everyone and since we dont have that atm the overall games sold are less.

[Tech614]

Isnt this grafic inflated by the Wii?
The Wii was the consol for everyone and since we dont have that atm the overall games sold are less.

Wii isn't even what's inflating it that bad tbh, it's the fact it's trying to list handhelds with traditional home consoles and that market has collapsed in the post PSP/DS and now Smartphone world. Not to mention I doubt the credibility of the numbers since MS hasn't released Xbox One numbers since 2014 and this graphic is claiming it knows them, probably using data from some bunk source like chartz.

[Daedius]

Exclusive generally means for that System, initially. Doesn't mean forever... plenty of console locked franchises though.

[Witchblade77]

I'm guessing when they made ps now playable on PC and started adding more newer games to it, their subscription numbers went up, so they figured.. hey... more money with bigger audience!.

not to mention consoles typically compete against each other, competing against pc just doesn't seem to yeild the same results, because the differences are to vast. but hitting that pc market while STILL keeping it exclusive to YOUR console? oh yeah. that works well, so.. there you have it. xbox have been doing this for a few years now. since they are doubling down on it, it seems to be working for them well, so sony is just catching up.

most people who prefer pc will NOT buy a console. some will. most wont. but they will buy games for their pc. money talks.

edited to add. I've been waiting for spyro reiginted to go on a low enough sale on ps4... and then it released on pc, and humble bundle had it and... I'm so glad I'm playing it on pc, dudes. controllers are nice and all for couch gaming, but i feel so much more IN control when playing with a keyboard. i've been able to platform to places I could never manage with controller when I was playing an original.

[xenogear3]

Only Nintendo has the ego and is very stubborn.
Nintendo really has only two IPs, Mario and Zelda.
Just like JRPGs, both genres are out of favorite.

Sony and Microsoft's exclusive are nothing special.
People don't buy a console because of them.
Why not port to other consoles?

[Jindujun]

Only Nintendo has the ego and is very stubborn.
Nintendo really has only two IPs, Mario and Zelda.
Just like JRPGs, both genres are out of favorite.

That is the dumbest thing i've ever heard in a long time...
What about Pokemon? Animal Crossing? Smash Bros? Mario Kart? those are frequent releases that sell tons upon tons of games.

That whole "Nintendo doesnt have any big IP apart from mario and zelda" is so odd seeing as Pokemon and Smash bros outsells Zelda every single time. Not to mention Mario Kart

[Rennadrel]

Microsoft in particular has seen the value in supporting the PC industry as a gaming platform. The Xbox invariably has struggled this generation, so having their games available on the PC does not only increase sales, but exposure to their IPs. It also helps offset the cost of development to make a game for more than one platform.

- - - Updated - - -

Only Nintendo has the ego and is very stubborn.
Nintendo really has only two IPs, Mario and Zelda.
Just like JRPGs, both genres are out of favorite.

Sony and Microsoft's exclusive are nothing special.
People don't buy a console because of them.
Why not port to other consoles?

If you are going to pull garbage arguments out of your ass, at least do some research first. As of September 2019, Super Mario Odyssey has sold 15.38 million copies. That's a lot for a game that apparently isn't popular and exists on one platform. Funnily enough, that's almost 1/3 of the total number of units that have been moved of the Nintendo Switch system. Pretty large install base for a game that isn't popular. Meanwhile Splatoon 2 sold over 9 million, Pokemon Sword and Shield broke 6 million in just a few months and became the fastest selling Switch game, surpassing Super Smash Bros Ultimate, which has sold 15.71 million copies since release and is the best selling fighting game of all time. But yeah, I guess Nintendo "doesn't have any IPs aside from Mario and Zelda"

[Tech614]

Only Nintendo has the ego and is very stubborn.
Nintendo really has only two IPs, Mario and Zelda.
Just like JRPGs, both genres are out of favorite.

Since the 2 latest Mario and Zelda games are at a combined well over 30 million sold lmfao @ out of favor. Not to mention how wrong you are. Nintendo is publishing over 10 games a year, claiming they're all mario or zelda is beyond laughable.

[Egomaniac]

Only Nintendo has the ego and is very stubborn.
Nintendo really has only two IPs, Mario and Zelda.
Just like JRPGs, both genres are out of favorite.

Sony and Microsoft's exclusive are nothing special.
People don't buy a console because of them.
Why not port to other consoles?

That's a funny thing to hear from someone who's username is a Playstation exclusive title.