Slashdot Mirror
Next-Gen Console Exclusives Explored
SeventhStar writes "Siliconera has an article with a long list of exclusive titles broken down by next-gen console. The Playstation 3 only has a few exclusive games at the moment; 29 are third-party, with 12 are made by Sony. Meanwhile Microsoft has 48 Xbox 360 exclusive games, with 23 of them are developed internally. However it looks like the real winner for exclusive games is the Wii. There are 39 titles only for the Wii and even ported games are going to play differently. When you adjust the amount of exclusive games on the Xbox 360 for its one year head start, the Wii has more original games coming out for it. Since console exclusives help determine which console to purchase is the Wii in a good spot?"
Why don't we wait and see how many of these games are good, and then make our decisions?
Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Donkey Kong, Starfox, Pokémon, the list goes on and on... like them or not, Nintendo has the strongest first-party lineup.
Circumcision is child abuse.
Watch these and tell me you don't want to try the console out. These people honestly look like they are just having fun. Some of these also really made me understand the possibilities for the casual gamer with this system.
Unstable Apps: Our Android Apps Don't Suck
Well, it might not help for male gamers...
If my quick sum is correct.
I can't wait until this comes out!
Wow! I can finally buy happiness!
I mean, time and again companies show my how happy other people are using their products, but I never seem to get the same happiness they portray. What could be wrong with me, or perhaps I'm not getting the same product that they were happy to own. Do these companies switch their products on me, selling me one that doesn't make people happy, while showing off the ones that do?
But this one, I believe it's real. I trust that when Nintendo shows me that people who use their product are happy, it has to be true. I'll be happy for sure, this time.
I mean, what else could make them that happy? They couldn't possibly be that happy about the money they,re getting paid to look happy, since we all know money doesn't make people happy. The Wii will do it, oh yes. Just look at them, happy as can be. I so want to be happy like that. I so want to get a Wii.
I'm so pwned by marketing.
Mario has been whored out into every possible genre that you can think of.
Exactly. Mario has been used in completely different ways with different storylines throught out his life (you know what I mean by his life). Mario is really a brand. Everytime he appears, it's in a new game with a different story and new style of gameplay. EA Sports games on the other hand are the same game with better graphics and updated rosters. Other than that the differences are incremental and unoriginal.
You can't say that Mario games are unoriginal just because they used the same set of characters over again. That'd be like saying Shakespear was unoriginal for writing with the Latin alphabet.
The summary doesn't match the article either, which says "35 for sony, 18 of them in house."
The real thing to think about are titles that _aren't_ going to Wii but _are_ going to PS3/360. The big one that comes to mind right off the bat is GTA 4 (hate it, love it, its going to be a huge title). I'm wondering if the Wii's percieved underperformance will cause devs to shy away and have "next-gen" mean 360/PS3 only.
Also, is this article really a surprise to anyone? Nintendo always has the strongest 1st party titles because they have the strongest lineup of characters and games people love.
I would think that the devs will do no such things, but their higher ups in PR, to make the games seem more mature, would not be as likely to have the developers make the games for the Wii. However, everyone remembers Goldeneye 64. I mean, even I remember it, and I have never owned a console. I think the main thing, as everyone says, is Nintendo's licensing.
Personally I would want (if I could afford it) a PS3. It's not just about the graphics. It's about Linux, a hard drive on the "cheap" model, GTA IV, the cell processor, a large capacity optical drive, and yeah, what look to be the best graphics of any of the systems.
I have freaks! I did something right...
If a console has the highest number of exclusive titles, but 90% of them suck, then it doesn't matter.
...
The console with the highest number of good exclusive titles will have the advantage. Given Nintendo's history of making most of its own exclusive titles, and designing them in such a way that they seem "too childish" to most gamers, I'm betting the Wii's lead won't help them that much.
The Wii will only win if Nintendo can successfully overcome the American audience's perception that Nintendo is "for kids". Having the cheapest console on the market, with magic flying dildos for controllers, isn't going to help.
The Wiimote looks like a remote control for the average TV/DVD player, so I really don't want to know what you do to your TV remote
Anyways, good (relative term that is meaningless) console exclusives have never mattered too much in the videogame world; it can be argued that Sony (over the past 2 generations) has produce less revolutionary exclusive games for their consoles but has remained dominant mainly due to the preception of a greater library of games. From the begining Sony attracted a lot of exclusive shoveware that was not avaiable anywere else, which meant that when parents were looking to buy their children a Dora The Explorer game (or when teens were looking for a homoerotic wrestling game) they bought a Playstation product. Sony is losing this advantage because the cost of development on a PS3 title is too large for most of these shovelware developers; they are now producing a lot of crap for the Wii which will give it the apearance of having a more diverse library than the PS3 even though you wouldn't want to play these games.
If a console has the highest number of exclusive titles, but 90% of them suck, then it doesn't matter.
Um, Playstation much? I mean, I know 1996 was a looong time ago, but to remember how crappy 90% of PS1 games were compared to N64 games, you don't have to think back that far, you can just go to the games section of any pawn shop or thrift store and see rack after rack of games that quite obviously suck so hard you wonder how on earth they were ever produced.
The fact is that in every generation, the machine with the most games wins, period. So near as I can tell, it does not matter much if those games are good or bad. Look at the Game Boy: it bested competitor after competitor on the strength of its library and its battery life, vastly inferior graphics be damned. Similarly, the DS is beating the PSP not just because it has a crazy stylus, but also because the PSP has very few games.
If you want to predict the sales of a console, what matters most is the number of games published for it, nothing else.
"It isn't. Untitled projects cannot be counted because they don't exist."
Wrong.
Those titles are straight from the publishers themselves. Many of those games like the Naughty Dog title we already have released media from.
"Also, that list is every single announced game for the PS3, not just games scheduled between release and March 2007. "
Wrong.
All the non-exclusive PS3 titles were trimmed.
Wrong.
Those titles are straight from the publishers themselves. Many of those games like the Naughty Dog title we already have released media from.
Would you like a list of titles that have names, video footage, even gameplay footage that never saw the light of day? Do I need even mention Duke Nukem Forever? A game can cease to exist at any point, and the fact remains that until it has a name, the chances of it being vaporware are much higher. To be honest, a name is no more proof of existence than video footage is, but we have to draw the line somewhere. "Also, that list is every single announced game for the PS3, not just games scheduled between release and March 2007. "
Wrong.
All the non-exclusive PS3 titles were trimmed.
Regardless, the fact remains the scope of the article was for a specific time period, and that list exceeds that time period. If you're going to go with that list, even including the untitled games, then you have to reasonably do the same for the other 2 ssytems, so you can't really compare that list to the list given by TFA, because you're not utilizing the same restrictions under which the article was operating.
just some guy
"Funny that people complain about EA and their sports games being unoriginal, but Nintendo has a tendancy to use the same characters with a slightly different plot and no one criticizes them for a lack of innovation in games."
I love when this argument comes up. Heh.
Compare SMB 1, 2, and 3 to Sonic 1, 2, and 3. Superficially they're very similar, but play-wise, you have to totally re-adjust to play any of those three games. Try playing Mario 3 then go back to Mario 1. Ouch. The original Sonic trilogy felt like a few expansion levels were added. Blah blah blah.
You're confusing the terms sequel and franchise. You cannot do that if you wish to understand what has made Nintendo consistently successful over the years.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)