Should Sony & Nintendo be considered anti-consumer for having exclusives?

  • 56 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
#51 Posted by R4gn4r0k (31198 posts) -

Epic is doing something new, you can't 1:1 compare this to what's happening with consoles or other businesses.

Epic is buying out games so they don't appear on other stores, they are buying up games that were set to launch on other stores, grabbing them and locking them away at the last minute.

This is a new strategy, and we will see if this is succesful for them in the coming years

It won't be

Avatar image for sakaixx
#52 Posted by sakaiXx (5679 posts) -

Please port beg more. I love these pity threads

Avatar image for SecretPolice
#53 Posted by SecretPolice (35330 posts) -

When compared to Mighty MS, they all are anti-consumer... For the gamers... Jazz. :P

Avatar image for JVII
#54 Edited by JVII (644 posts) -

Having exclusives allows them to finance the development of those same exclusives. Losing exclusivity would harm the incentive and financial structure that allows them to make the games that they do. So no, they are not anti-consumer. This just seems like a cognitive dissonance motivated excuse for why other systems aren't competitive in terms of exclusives.

Avatar image for Enragedhydra
#55 Posted by Enragedhydra (1083 posts) -

The PC has more exclusives overall whether you consider triple A or not. We know exclusives are anti consumer but who cares.
If they have enough good exclusives (myself it is at least 10) i'll buy the system, if not I won't buy it.
In the end you can choose to not spend your money on something you find anti consumer

Avatar image for Enragedhydra
#56 Posted by Enragedhydra (1083 posts) -

@ahmedkhan1994 said:
@lundy86_4 said:

This is... Absurd.

Epic is money-hatting and it's entirely different from releasing legitimate exclusives. Furthermore, the Epic Store is a complete trojan, and that's another reason why people are up-in-arms.

So i have been trying to get some clarity on "Epic Money Hatting". I know Epic takes a smaller cut of the sales than steam does but is Epic out here writing checks to developers on top of that to secure exclusitivity? If not, and its just that they take a smaller cut of the sales than Steam, then im afraid that i don't see that as money hatting, that's just business...

Now if Epic is telling those devs that they cant get that lower rate unless they release on EGS as an exclusive, than i can somewhat see that as moneyhatting.

Epic is cutting cheques to these developers to secure exclusivity. We heard that from the Phoenix Point team. They said that even if everyone asked for a return of their money from their preorder they would still be in the black due to Epic cash.