Gamescom is well underway now and most of the big announcements are out of the way. We’ve seen plenty of good news for gamers since Microsoft kicked off the press conferences on Tuesday afternoon but one area that has drawn a lot of attention, particularly from angry PlayStation fans, is that of exclusivity.
The exclusivity of Rise of the Tomb Raider was, perhaps, clumsily announced, with carefully selected language and a degree of obfuscation around what the message actually was – was it exclusive forever or only for a period of time? Does this mean the PC version is on hold too? We got mixed messages or defensive posturing from some of those involved in the deal. The developers themselves issued a statement saying that partnering with Microsoft would really help them. Well, yes, I would assume that plenty of money changed hands and that financial security will put many minds at Crystal Dynamics well at ease.
It’s difficult to judge the developers (or their publishers) too harshly when there’s a bag full of cash on the table that means they all get to feel safe in their jobs for the duration of the game’s development. They undoubtedly do want as large an audience as possible to play their game, that’s a driving force for most creative producers, but if someone is offering them financial security, they’d be taking a significant risk to turn that down. I struggle to be too damning about anybody taking measures to ensure they can continue to feed their families for the foreseeable future. That said, I think that exclusivity is generally a bad thing for developers, almost as much as it is for the people that enjoy their products.
I’m not talking about first party exclusivity here. Uncharted and its numbered sequels being made only for PlayStation 3 (so far) has meant that the best was wrung out of the system and it made for a better experience thanks, in part, to the fact that the developers were able to focus on the strengths and weaknesses of the system they were developing for. This is true for many exclusives, even if it is often simply a side effect of the cold, hard business-minded fact that top quality exclusives can tempt people into buying one system over another.
But it’s rarely a good thing for a third party game. Rise of the Tomb Raider now has a significantly smaller install base to sell to. Choosing a convenient figure for my limited mathematical skills, if ten per cent of all new-generation console gamers buy it, this exclusivity decision has cut off a million potential sales on PlayStation 4. Using that simple figure, for the sake of argument, this decision has cut Rise of the Tomb Raider’s future sales from 1.7 million copies down to 700,000. That’s significant.
It also tarnishes the future of the series in the minds of over half your potential customers. Even though it has eventually been revealed as a timed deal, when Rise of the Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition (or whatever they pitch the almost inevitable eventual release as) finally does come to PS4, there might still be people who no longer want it. Even if the PlayStation fans are prepared to forgive the momentary slight of being prioritised beneath their Xbox-owning counterparts, Square Enix will have to spend another round of marketing budget on getting awareness raised. Selling your game twice to a million people each time seems like it would be more expensive than selling it once to two million.
And what do Xbox owners get now that this deal has been done? Exactly nothing that they weren’t already getting. Third party exclusivity is simply a deal that takes away from people – it’s only ever a negative interaction with your fans. It’s someone using their money simply to stop a group of people enjoying something. That’s the very definition of mean-spirited.
Let’s not let everyone else off the hook either. Tomb Raider is the bombshell that most people are reacting to but there’s plenty of other instances around the exclusivity issue that devalue the creative work and belittle the passions of those who pay for it.
Exclusive content is a recent favourite strategy of both Sony and Microsoft. But it’s self-evident that the content a game like Destiny will have exclusively on PlayStation is content that is surplus to the needs of the game. If you can afford to hold it back from half your game’s players, it’s obviously not needed to play the game. So you’re dedicating development time and resources to making superfluous tat that does nothing for the creative work – but plenty for the business side of things. And if it’s so unnecessary, is it really worth having for those that are lucky enough to have the golden ticket of the requisite console? It’s detrimental to the development process, pointless for the fans of the medium and only really beneficial to the people who care more for the cashflow than the creativity.
Exclusive content – whether it’s a multiplayer map, a section of single player gameplay or an entire game – is a con, foisted upon us by the business people who infest the modern games industry and don’t really care about advancement of the medium, just about advancement of their company’s market value. I can’t blame them for striving to get better at doing what they do but I can’t help wishing their influence wasn’t as strong as it has become.
As long as we keep falling for the polarising trickery that drives a wedge between fans of video games, by throwing money at it or by fighting over how important it is to us and our choice of platform, they’ll keep running the same con. We, as fans of games – as those that nurture the medium and encourage its continued evolution – must embrace all that is inclusive, adventurous and innovative so that the medium may continue to offer us more and more meaningful ways of interacting with it. There is nothing inclusive, adventurous or innovative about exclusivity.
beeje13
Its not just timed, its money hatted exclusivity full stop.
Case in point, Dead rising 3, multiplatform if Microsoft didn’t send a chunky cheque. Bad for the industry.
Ryse, would not exist without Microsoft, who funded and published the game. Overwhelmingly good for the industry. Too bad Microsoft tried to extort Crytek for the sequel, but the original point stands.
Now, as primarily a PS fan, I cringed a few times during E3 and the like when Playstation exclusive content for destiny is promoted. Exclusive marketingand brand association hurts no one. But restrictions within the game do.
RedStarGlow
Good article! For me, it is less bothersome if you don’t know what you are missing. It today’s world is it hard not to know however. Isn’t there some cost involved in porting or developing the game on multiple platforms? Do companies normally write for one platform first before porting or do they write for multiple platform simultaneously? It is does seem somewhat evil to only develop for the console with fewer shipped units.
Dazbobaby
Summed up in 4 words:
It’s all about money.
Sure for the coders, the artists, the designers, producers, sound engineers and the rest, it’s about creating a game.
For those higher up the food chain it becomes less about the game and more about the numbers.
For those at the top, it’s not about systems, accessories or even the product, it’s all about maximising profit over EVERYTHING else.
This is where indies shine.
Take for example a friend of mine, InfiniteStates, he’s making a game for the Vita and iOS in his spare time. For him (and the rest of the team) it’s less about money and more about making the games they want to play. While some indies might need the cash because it’s their only source of income, most will agree that it’s about the creation of something they willed into existence.
It seems to me that publishers have moved on from being gamers, wanting to help bring a game to life, from being geeks themselves to just being business people.
The Von Braun
As something of a ‘seasoned’ gamer, i look at all this as really nothing new and the industry having learnt nothing.
Any readers on here remember:Heart Of Darkness?, it was, at the time, the most hyped, most expensive (it seemed) in terms of production costs, game going, coming from guy behind Another World, expectations were immense.Phillips originally funded the development, wanted game to be THe ‘Killer App’ for the CD-i, but combination of game being delayed and CD-i bombing at retail saw the game put up for auction, Atari then wanted it for the Jaguar CD ‘Killer-App’, but were out bid by likes of Sega, etc and press were reporting it’d launch exclusively 1st on the Sega Saturn.
Think game took something like 6 years to finally appear, i’m only aware of reading the Playstation and PC versions reviews (game really was’nt that great, at all…it seemed).Saturn also had limited timed exclusive release of Tomb Raider did it not? yet series went onto become associated with the Playstation, Saturn never saw another Tomb Raider title.
MS with Xbox, did a lot of marketing of ‘Only On Xbox’ and whilst Ninja Gaiden, Project Gotham etc etc were superb, Brute Force, Vodoo Vince, Dino Crisis III, Bruce Lee etc anyone?.
We’ve seen people buy hardware not for the games, but fact they offered option of being a cheap DVD/Blu ray player (at the time) PS2 then PS3, or did’nt charge for online play, so are exclusives really the system sellers they once were i wonder?.
Maybe Crystal Dynamics simply did’nt want to go head-to-head with Ps4 Uncharted in terms of trying to convince PS4 only owners to buy one or the other and a staggered release might benifit them in the long run? hope being PS4 only owners might be more tempted with an ‘enhanced’ version of new Tomb Raider down the line? sure it’ll have bonus content of 1 form or another.
Thing that strikes me most though, as a 360/PS3 owner is yet again, i don’t need a new console to play this, as it’s coming out on 360, i’m no ‘Graphics Tart’ so can put up with weaker visuals, so from a MS point of view, it’s not convinced me to get an Xbox One.
Possible subject for future debate on here:
Just when will developers leave last generation behind?
Project Cars, Tomb Raider, another new Forza game coming out on 360,it’s already had Titan Fall, PS3/360 getting Destiny…….where’s the tipping point of ‘This Gen’ only?
The Von Braun
Bladesew:you’ll no doubt recal the ‘joys’ of the 8/16 Bit home micro era:
I owned an Atari 800XL, yet software support dried up, so i moved to a Commodore C64, yet we never saw Chas, Rebelstar 1 or 2 Isometric Batman etc, they stayed on the ZX Spectrum etc.Plus if i wanted things like Project Firestart, i needed a disk drive!.
I then moved to the Atari St, St died in USA so no Interceptor, Eye Of The Beholder etc etc, games also wanted a 1 Meg machine, moving to a PS1, i had to pick up cheap PC few years later for AVP/C+C:Generals, System Shock 2, Freelancer, MOH:AA, Xcom 3 etc.
Always had to pay to play it seems, multiple platforms often the norm.