@m4a5: I see you've still provided no counter argument to the importance of exclusives I presented, but your replies are demonstrating redundancy very well :)
@m4a5: Ah, I see we've gotten to the point where you've got no counter argument, so you've fixated on that word disagreement. I've already explained how the exclusives argument is redundant, and now your responses are becoming redundant as well.
I think we're at the end of this conversation. Have a good day :)
@m4a5: I wouldn't think it my responsibility to define words for you, but here, I'll give you the google definition of redundant: not or no longer needed or useful; superfluous.
So yes, the exclusives argument is redundant. The reason it is redundant is because it has been going on for years, yet time and time again exclusives have proven why they are important to a platform. If there weren't exclusives, there'd be no need for separate consoles. Without separate consoles, there would be less need for innovation. There is a reason Nintendo can sustain itself with almost zero third party support, because of their exclusives. Their success alone shows the power of them.
If you see - no - value in exclusives, we will simply have to agree to disagree.
@m4a5: Yes, redundant is just fine in this case. I'll wait for the day Sony starts releasing Spider-Man, The Last of Us, God of War, etc, etc on Xbox and Nintendo platforms before we talk about how obsolete it is.
There is absolutely value in having exclusives, especially if Xbox wants people to sign up for Game Pass. If you can't get Call of Duty outside of the Xbox eco system, it draws more people to that system, either through buying a console to buy the games physically/digitally or signing up for Xbox Game Pass. Alternatively, you can buy it on PC which has been part of Xbox's plans for a long time.
Thelostscribe's comments