Can exclusives save this generation?

  • 79 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Bigboi500
#1 Edited by Bigboi500 (35550 posts) -

With the downgrading of Watch Dogs, does this prove that whoring yourself out to every platform is a bad idea? Look at the difference in graphical quality between Watch Dogs and Infamous: Second Son, both on PS4. The difference is astounding.

Remember when exclusives were abundant a few gens ago?

Should developers focus on just one system with their games? Should they pick either SP or MP instead of mixing in both?

The answer seems pretty obvious to me.

Avatar image for 1PMrFister
#2 Posted by 1PMrFister (3134 posts) -

Because one multiplat looking worse than an exclusive game is enough to come to a conclusion about the entire industry.

Also, what exactly do you mean by exclusives "saving" this generation? Your OP never defines what's putting this generation in need of saving to begin with.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
#3 Edited by Jacanuk (8924 posts) -

@Bigboi500 said:

With the downgrading of Watch Dogs, does this prove that whoring yourself out to every platform is a bad idea? Look at the difference in graphical quality between Watch Dogs and Infamous: Second Son, both on PS4. The difference is astounding.

Remember when exclusives were abundant a few gens ago?

Should developers focus on just one system with their games? Should they pick either SP or MP instead of mixing in both?

The answer seems pretty obvious to me.

I dont know what you put into the cluster frag that is Watchdogs in terms of graphics, but what you have there is not anything more than a development team that has messed up and nothing to do with having it be on ps3/x360 as well as next gen and pc. you just need to take a look at Black Flag to see what a excellent development team can do in terms of keeping it good on old gens as well as next gen and pc.

Also exclusives are a thing of the past , which is actually good for the gaming community and industry, the devs/publishers doesn't have to rely on just one platform to earn them a profit.

Avatar image for Black_Knight_00
#4 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (20675 posts) -

Graphics mean close to nothing when judging a game.

Avatar image for Lhomity
#5 Posted by Lhomity (496 posts) -

Graphics? Watch Dogs looks amazing. All this 'downgrade' drama is just weird.

If it comes between making the game look 1% better, or play 1% better, I'll go with the latter every time.

Avatar image for Bigboi500
#6 Posted by Bigboi500 (35550 posts) -

By saving I mean sparing us all from multiplats at the level of the lowest common denominator. I'm sure most gamers want games that are developed with their specific system of choice in mind. Exclusives are usually the reason we pick them in the first place.

Avatar image for Kevlar101
#7 Posted by Kevlar101 (6316 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Graphics mean close to nothing when judging a game.

This.

Additionally, how far are we into this gen? Four, five months? God-darn-damn people....

Avatar image for Jacanuk
#8 Posted by Jacanuk (8924 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Graphics mean close to nothing when judging a game.

I agree with you there Black Knight but when they are as bad as they are in Watch Dogs it does matter.

Avatar image for Bigboi500
#9 Posted by Bigboi500 (35550 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Graphics mean close to nothing when judging a game.

I agree with you there Black Knight but when they are as bad as they are in Watch Dogs it does matter.

Exactly. I know for a fact that a lot of people bought, or are interested in getting a PS4 with this game in mind. It's a huge disappointment and let down to find the game looking so poor.

I'm like the last person in the world who would be considered a "graphics whore", but that shit doesn't even fly with me.

Avatar image for Lhomity
#10 Posted by Lhomity (496 posts) -

@Jacanuk: Watch Dogs = "Bad" graphics.

I'm speechless.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#11 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

Why are people bitching so hard about graphics and why are they zeroing in on Watch Dogs specifically ?

Avatar image for Bigboi500
#12 Edited by Bigboi500 (35550 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

Why are people bitching so hard about graphics and why are they zeroing in on Watch Dogs specifically ?

http://www.dsogaming.com/news/watch-dogs-will-feature-songs-from-alice-cooper-rise-against-public-enemy/

Avatar image for S0lidSnake
#13 Posted by S0lidSnake (29001 posts) -

No. they didnt save the wii u and they wont save this gen. Publishers getting their act together and gutting expensive multiplayer components and marketing costs is what will save this industry. BatmanAk is a step in the right direction. having 5skus in dev is pretty fucking stupid too.

Exclusives are definitely not going to be as frequent as they were last gen. MS has closed more studios than they have opened and Sony has no reason to invest in exclusives now that theyre on top. Nintendo is struggling with HD development as well. so far no game looks like that zelda demo. sad times.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#14 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@ Bigboi500

I don't understand.

Avatar image for Bigboi500
#15 Posted by Bigboi500 (35550 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@ Bigboi500

I don't understand.

It's PS4 footage in the video. It looks nothing like the vids we saw at E3 and afterwards last year. Stuff in the video looked on par with San Andreas. Imagine how good it would have looked had it been exclusive to this new gen. Instead we get the result of development stretched way too thin.

Avatar image for SaintsRowLA
#16 Posted by SaintsRowLA (331 posts) -

I think for the Xbox One's sake, yes exclusives are what will make the system attractive.

For the PS3, exclusives were the #1 reason to buy, because few people wanted the PS3 multi-plat games.

I think for this generation, the same can be said of the Xbox One.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#17 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@ Bigboi500

Why is this such a big deal and literally every game before release never looks the same afterwards. Just don't understand why

Avatar image for wiouds
#18 Posted by wiouds (6218 posts) -

Exclusive allow for the programmers to make software that use more of the hardware's power.

Avatar image for Ballroompirate
#19 Edited by Ballroompirate (25629 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Graphics mean close to nothing when judging a game.

Pretty much this

Also MS just needs to drop out of the race, it spreads out exclusives too much, I'd love to see Nintendo and Sony go at it again since they've always been competing each other since Sony came on the console scene.

Avatar image for S0lidSnake
#20 Posted by S0lidSnake (29001 posts) -

@Bigboi500 said:

It's PS4 footage in the video. It looks nothing like the vids we saw at E3 and afterwards last year. Stuff in the video looked on par with San Andreas. Imagine how good it would have looked had it been exclusive to this new gen. Instead we get the result of development stretched way too thin.

Dont waste your time with Lulu. He's trying to derail your thread. Anyone following the news the last couple of days would know what you meant and why the downgrade is a big deal.

Your thread is a good one that might just inspire some discussion, dont keep replying to him otherwise the thread will become about his ridiculous inability to understand simple things.

Avatar image for CarnageHeart
#21 Edited by CarnageHeart (18316 posts) -

@Bigboi500 said:

With the downgrading of Watch Dogs, does this prove that whoring yourself out to every platform is a bad idea? Look at the difference in graphical quality between Watch Dogs and Infamous: Second Son, both on PS4. The difference is astounding.

Remember when exclusives were abundant a few gens ago?

Should developers focus on just one system with their games? Should they pick either SP or MP instead of mixing in both?

The answer seems pretty obvious to me.

In terms of using hardware well, generally speaking, exclusive games>>>>multiplatform same gen games>>>>>multiplatform crossgen games. Realistically, the best one can hope for from most 3rd parties is multiplatform same gen games (nods towards the impressive looking Arkham Knight). PS3 and X360 SW sales are falling quickly, so I think that 2014 will be the last year we see a lot of crossgen games.

As for the SP or MP thing, I agree that it makes sense for developers to pick one. While some developers know they are going to sell tons of copies and thus can spent massive amounts of money and manpower building what is in essence two games, most aren't, so it makes sense for most developers to focus on one thing or the other.

Avatar image for ReddestSkies
#22 Edited by ReddestSkies (4087 posts) -

This "Nintendo is doing it better than the rest!" thread is very thinly veiled.

The problem isn't that Watch Dogs is multiplat. It's that it's crossgen.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#23 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@ ReddestSkies

But in reality, the real problem is Ubisoft being lazy...... And in Actuallity the the actual problem is gamers being morons. Who cares about graphics, seriously !

Ten Minutes after firing Up ToSH I didn't notice the jaggies anymore.

Avatar image for ReddestSkies
#24 Edited by ReddestSkies (4087 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu:

Well yeah, gamers are graphic whores. It's interesting how much of the Watch Dogs hype was coming from its graphics, and how nobody wants to play that game anymore now that we know it's not pretty.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#25 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@ ReddestSkies

Now that its not "Technically" Pretty.

I'm sure it will still be aesthitically pleasing.

Avatar image for Black_Knight_00
#26 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (20675 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Graphics mean close to nothing when judging a game.

I agree with you there Black Knight but when they are as bad as they are in Watch Dogs it does matter.

Why? Does the game play any worse if the graphics are not tip-top? Now frame rate, that would matter, but textures, resolution and polygon count... eh, those amount to almost nothing.

No one likes a great-looking game that plays like ass.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#27 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

^RYSE^

Avatar image for Jacanuk
#28 Posted by Jacanuk (8924 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@Jacanuk said:

@Black_Knight_00 said:

Graphics mean close to nothing when judging a game.

I agree with you there Black Knight but when they are as bad as they are in Watch Dogs it does matter.

Why? Does the game play any worse if the graphics are not tip-top? Now frame rate, that would matter, but textures, resolution and polygon count... eh, those amount to almost nothing.

No one likes a great-looking game that plays like ass.

Yes, the gameplay does become worse, since the bad graphics and low-res textures you see will become a huge nuisance and will ruin the full experience.

As i said i have never been a huge graphics whore and i have played a ton of older games all the way back from NES to the first and second playstation , but when i buy a next-gen game i also expect the game to have graphics to match, and when it turns out the textures, cars, people, scenery is so lowres that it resembles playstation 2 graphics, i get annoyed.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#29 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@ Jacanuk

But Watch Dogs Graphics don't resembe a PS2. Now shut up and Gamehard.

And no Graphics won't ruin the gameplay.

Avatar image for Black_Knight_00
#30 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (20675 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

Yes, the gameplay does become worse, since the bad graphics and low-res textures you see will become a huge nuisance and will ruin the full experience.

As i said i have never been a huge graphics whore and i have played a ton of older games all the way back from NES to the first and second playstation , but when i buy a next-gen game i also expect the game to have graphics to match, and when it turns out the textures, cars, people, scenery is so lowres that it resembles playstation 2 graphics, i get annoyed.

A huge nuisance to you, but there are millions of gamers who care little and less. Look, my point is: bad gameplay bothers everybody, but bad graphics are a relative issue. They don't make or break a game.

Avatar image for ReddestSkies
#31 Posted by ReddestSkies (4087 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu: Meh, I don't like its art style.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#32 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

LOL. Well..... I guess thats that.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
#33 Edited by Jacanuk (8924 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@Jacanuk said:

Yes, the gameplay does become worse, since the bad graphics and low-res textures you see will become a huge nuisance and will ruin the full experience.

As i said i have never been a huge graphics whore and i have played a ton of older games all the way back from NES to the first and second playstation , but when i buy a next-gen game i also expect the game to have graphics to match, and when it turns out the textures, cars, people, scenery is so lowres that it resembles playstation 2 graphics, i get annoyed.

A huge nuisance to you, but there are millions of gamers who care little and less. Look, my point is: bad gameplay bothers everybody, but bad graphics are a relative issue. They don't make or break a game.

Well, neither me or you can talk for anyone but ourselves. So lets just see what happens when its released, but i wont be surprised if it bombs.

Also graphics are relative but when the game is released on next-gen you expect the graphics to be next gen not old old-gen.

Anyways as mentioned all that counts are sales in the end, so lets see which side wins.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
#34 Edited by Jacanuk (8924 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@ Jacanuk

But Watch Dogs Graphics don't resembe a PS2. Now shut up and Gamehard.

And no Graphics won't ruin the gameplay.

well, matter of opinion and the gamespot preview of the gameplay has texture/character-res i haven't seen since the late ps2.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#35 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@ Jacanuk

Then you need to see an optomitrist ASAP.

Also its not a matter of oppinion, its a matter specificity. If it was a game where you needed crystal clear graphics and the game mechanic revolved around that like an Adventure game or something then I would agree, but it doesn't, you're just gona hope in a car shoot some stuff, sneak around, hack some stuff, update your status, etc. You don't need 4K for that, 6th Gen Graphics will do just fine. its not an oppinion, its fact. As for your overall experience of the game, now that is a matter of oppinion.

Seriously though, schedule an appointment for the optomitrist. You're eyes might be made by Nintendo.

Avatar image for Bigboi500
#36 Posted by Bigboi500 (35550 posts) -

@ReddestSkies said:

This "Nintendo is doing it better than the rest!" thread is very thinly veiled.

The problem isn't that Watch Dogs is multiplat. It's that it's crossgen.

This thread has absolutely nothing to do with Nintendo. I think the problem is that it's multiplat, crossgen and SP/MP. It's trying to be everything for everyone.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
#37 Posted by Jacanuk (8924 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@ Jacanuk

Then you need to see an optomitrist ASAP.

Also its not a matter of oppinion, its a matter specificity. If it was a game where you needed crystal clear graphics and the game mechanic revolved around that like an Adventure game or something then I would agree, but it doesn't, you're just gona hope in a car shoot some stuff, sneak around, hack some stuff, update your status, etc. You don't need 4K for that, 6th Gen Graphics will do just fine. its not an oppinion, its fact. As for your overall experience of the game, now that is a matter of oppinion.

Seriously though, schedule an appointment for the optomitrist. You're eyes might be made by Nintendo.

I could say something not very nice, but even that would be lost here.

So enjoy your trolling Lulu. i will just ignore you for the future as that is best.

But i will suggest you try to follow the huge outcry there is around these graphics, and then come back with a better response.

Avatar image for Black_Knight_00
#38 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (20675 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

Well, neither me or you can talk for anyone but ourselves. So lets just see what happens when its released, but i wont be surprised if it bombs.

Also graphics are relative but when the game is released on next-gen you expect the graphics to be next gen not old old-gen.

Anyways as mentioned all that counts are sales in the end, so lets see which side wins.

Nope, what counts is whether the game works or not, whether it's varied or repetitive, whether it's polished or buggy. Bonus points for good visuals, plot and production values. Sales don't mean a thing: Psychonauts and Shenmue 2 are among the 50 best games of the last 10 years and they sold nothing.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
#39 Posted by Jacanuk (8924 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@Jacanuk said:

Well, neither me or you can talk for anyone but ourselves. So lets just see what happens when its released, but i wont be surprised if it bombs.

Also graphics are relative but when the game is released on next-gen you expect the graphics to be next gen not old old-gen.

Anyways as mentioned all that counts are sales in the end, so lets see which side wins.

Nope, what counts FOR ME is whether the game works or not, whether it's varied or repetitive, whether it's polished or buggy. Bonus points for good visuals, plot and production values. Sales don't mean a thing FOR ME: Psychonauts and Shenmue 2 are among the 50 best games of the last 10 years "IN MY OPINION" and they sold nothing.

You forgot something in this post, so allow me to highlight it.

You can be sure that for some people the graphics matters and will be the reason why someone ends up with a next-gen console and for them a game that looks like crap will mean something. Also you can be 100% sure that for Ubisoft it matters if they have a commercial failure on their hands or not.

But hey its fine that you think the graphics in Watch Dogs is meaningless and that you will be playing the game anyways, that in the end is also really all that matters for you.

Me personally i will wait and see how bad it looks once its released and then decide, if it's terrible even on pc then i will pass on it.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#40 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@ Jacanuk

You're the one Spreading false exegerations about Watch Dogs, clearly you've got it in for the game, and you call me a troll ? Man Please !

Avatar image for Jacanuk
#41 Edited by Jacanuk (8924 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@ Jacanuk

You're the one Spreading false exegerations about Watch Dogs, clearly you've got it in for the game, and you call me a troll ? Man Please !

Are you serious because if you are i am just impressed that someone like you actually exists.

But honestly you are a waste of time. So have fun trolling.

Avatar image for udubdawgz1
#42 Posted by udUbdaWgz1 (633 posts) -

specs, graphics, "cinematic presentation", social media, multi media, connectivity, networking, "accessibility", "streamlining", gadgetry and exclusives won't save it. they are all going to be involved in those issues and be relative clones of each other, in general.

here's how to save the gaming industry:

consumers not buying unfinished products, no buying dlc within weeks of a new release (let alone, DAY ONE, dlc), no exclusive dlc, no on-disc dlc, cheaper dlc, no retail dlc, no season passes, no pay2playfree2play, no micro's, no required online verification and significantly cheaper digital AND physical prices (profit is fine-excessive greed is not.)

there's a quick list of why I will not support the console video game industry past my xbox 360.

notice I haven't even addressed the actual games themselves, which, have their own negative list.

stated simply, putting the consumer first.

Avatar image for Black_Knight_00
#43 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (20675 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

You forgot something in this post, so allow me to highlight it.

You can be sure that for some people the graphics matters and will be the reason why someone ends up with a next-gen console and for them a game that looks like crap will mean something. Also you can be 100% sure that for Ubisoft it matters if they have a commercial failure on their hands or not.

But hey its fine that you think the graphics in Watch Dogs is meaningless and that you will be playing the game anyways, that in the end is also really all that matters for you.

Me personally i will wait and see how bad it looks once its released and then decide, if it's terrible even on pc then i will pass on it.

I don't want to go back in the objectivity vietnam, but please do not miss the point: sales do not determine whether a game is good or not. Sales only determine the likelihood the studio will get more work. Sales or not, the quality of the game is unchanged.

If you say "Watch Dogs won't sell because it looks like shit" you might have a point and all we can do is wait and see. If on the other hand you say "Watch Dogs will suck because it look like shit" you are out of line.

Avatar image for HipHopBeats
#44 Posted by HipHopBeats (2850 posts) -

Both GTA V and The Last Of Us both have better graphics than 'next gen' Watch Dogs imo. At this point, I honestly don't see the difference between last gen (PS3 / 360) and 'next gen' games besides a new $500 console and slightly improved graphics. Watch Dogs will eventually share the same fate as any other AAA game once the value depreciates over time.

Avatar image for HipHopBeats
#45 Posted by HipHopBeats (2850 posts) -

@Jacanuk: Exclusives are a good thing and should indeed continue well into current gen. Exclusives give good incentive for choosing one platform over another. Well received exclusives like The Last Of Us and highly anticipated exclusives like Titanfall make for good competition and keep gamer's intrigued more than AAA multiplat releases. With no exclusives, we might as well all game on one platform which would be crap. Not every game needs to be multiplat.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
#46 Posted by Jacanuk (8924 posts) -

@HipHopBeats said:

@Jacanuk:

Exclusives are a good thing and should indeed continue well into current gen. Exclusives give good incentive for choosing one platform over another. Well received exclusives like The Last Of Us and highly anticipated exclusives like Titanfall make for good competition and keep gamer's intrigued more than AAA multiplat releases. With no exclusives, we might as well all game on one platform which would be crap. Not every game needs to be multiplat.

Who are exclusives a good thing for? not for us gamers since it excludes people from playing great games, look at a bunch of nintendoexclusives, or playstation RDR, Last of Us etc. and they are certainly not good for publishers and developers, in fact the only one i see it being good for are fanboys and the console manufacturer.

So what competition? so you see it being as a fanboy vs fanboy thing?

Avatar image for Jacanuk
#47 Posted by Jacanuk (8924 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@Jacanuk said:

You forgot something in this post, so allow me to highlight it.

You can be sure that for some people the graphics matters and will be the reason why someone ends up with a next-gen console and for them a game that looks like crap will mean something. Also you can be 100% sure that for Ubisoft it matters if they have a commercial failure on their hands or not.

But hey its fine that you think the graphics in Watch Dogs is meaningless and that you will be playing the game anyways, that in the end is also really all that matters for you.

Me personally i will wait and see how bad it looks once its released and then decide, if it's terrible even on pc then i will pass on it.

I don't want to go back in the objectivity vietnam, but please do not miss the point: sales do not determine whether a game is good or not. Sales only determine the likelihood the studio will get more work. Sales or not, the quality of the game is unchanged.

If you say "Watch Dogs won't sell because it looks like shit" you might have a point and all we can do is wait and see. If on the other hand you say "Watch Dogs will suck because it look like shit" you are out of line.

Should have clarified it, i am saying that Watch Dogs will be hurt by bad graphics in sales, not that the game will suck and won't have a great story and gameplay if you are one of those that really doesn't care about graphics.

Avatar image for Black_Knight_00
#48 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (20675 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

Should have clarified it, i am saying that Watch Dogs will be hurt by bad graphics in sales, not that the game will suck and won't have a great story and gameplay if you are one of those that really doesn't care about graphics.

Ok, that's better. Yeah, we gamers tend to be a shallow bunch: the game sales might well be hurt because of the visual downgrade, that much is true.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
#49 Posted by Jacanuk (8924 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@Jacanuk said:

Should have clarified it, i am saying that Watch Dogs will be hurt by bad graphics in sales, not that the game will suck and won't have a great story and gameplay if you are one of those that really doesn't care about graphics.

Ok, that's better. Yeah, we gamers tend to be a shallow bunch: the game sales might well be hurt because of the visual downgrade, that much is true.

Indeed we are and what makes it even worse is that they might have delayed it to work on some 8mp that absolute noone will play once they complete the game....

Its sad how much Ubisoft have messed up with this game.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#50 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@ Jacanuk

Nice Try Twinkle toes, you're still wrong about Watch Dogs and Ubisoft.