Cross Platforming...

[FireFox.]

What you do think? Is Cross Platforming good or does it take away the buyers choice? Does it affect what games you buy? Does it kill the systems?

These are the questions that I have been asked by many, so I thought it would be nice to open this topic up here. Personally, Cross Platforming is more bad than good. Yes, I can understand the sports game crossing over to different platforms. I can even understand racing games like Burnout and Need For Speed being crossed over to all.

Although, what I do not is when a game like FF or Devil Cry is being put on XBOX360 along with releasing it for PS3. Is it nice? Somewhat yes, only for those who can't afford all systems. But it is starting to get out of hand.

For example, how many exclusive titles are their really out their. I can name a few. Metal Gear for PS, Halo for Xbox, Zelda for Wii. I could name more but the honest % of exclusive titles is but slim to none.

Not to mention, that it really does really kill the buyers choice. For example, a person may be deciding whether to buy a XBOX360 or a PS3. Well besides the system differences in terms of games their is really nothing.

The only games to come out recently only for Xbox is Lost Planet, Gears Of War, upcoming Mass Effect, and upcoming Halo 3. (There is more I know, but I'm namin the games with try potential.

So, tell me, what do you think about the Cross Platforming Issue?

 

[Duality]

I don't like cross-platforming. It makes you feel like "why the hell did I buy this system then?"
It's fun having exclusive games. I mean, sure, some games should be cross-platform (like Call of Duty, Soul Calibur, etc.) Generic fighting/shooting/sports games. But action/adventure/RPG should be exclusive. I don't know why i divided it like that...But I like it when storylines are unique to a system.

btw, your avatar should be the firefox logo.

 

[The Conquerer]

I think there is a difference between multi-platformed and ported games. I believe each console should have their fair share of exclusives, I mean exclusives are what makes each console unique in a sense. I mean there are games that define each console and should be exclusive, when those games get ported, they lose quality and technically the developers die. I believe consoles should have their own franchies (or at least some key franchise titles because some of them could go to the handhelds or other consoles and be considered sidequests, minigames, etc) and exclusives as well.

I mean games that takes on the console's unique fuctions and abilities. I don't believe exclusives or KEY franchise titles should be ported. But multi-plaformed developed games are good as well. I mean if they could be developed on multiple platforms at the same time, then each console could have an altered and or benefited version of a particular game.

But I believe multi-platformed games are able to be spreaded across each console fairly, while giving off different and unique effects from the consoles. But Exclusives should remain exclusive, when they get ported, the quailty drops and the attractiveness of the consoles as well as the developers lowers.

 

[SuperEclipse]

It's only bad if the devs are lazy and do a half assed port. Games are muti now because they cost more to make. So unless the Big boys ((Sony. MS, Nintendo)) lay down some money for that title too be exclusive. Then chances are it will be muti.

It's good idea why? 1. More money 2. Bigger and a new fanbase. 3. Top dog of last gen isn't top dog anymore. Why didn't you see tons of exclusives on the xbox? Because it lost and devs didn't want to take a chance make it exclusive and it not sell.

My have the tables turned this gen.

the quailty drops and the attractiveness of the consoles as well as the developers lowers.

Is that why DMC4 is going to look the same on the 360 and PS3? And how about VF5 the devs said the 360 will have the better version. Mercenaries 2? UT3? shall I go on? Form what I seen most games ported the 360 look the same if not better on the 360. Just look at reviews.

 

[The Conquerer]

Is that why DMC4 is going to look the same on the 360 and PS3? And how about VF5 the devs said the 360 will have the better version. Mercenaries 2? UT3? shall I go on? Form what I seen most games ported the 360 look the same if not better on the 360. Just look at reviews.

I'm being in general. I'm just saying, its not good for either console to lose exclusives. I mean I'm glad I get to play Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, but that's not what I do, I don't crave on another console's exclusive and hope it gets ported. I mean games that are able to work on both the 360 and PS3 equally gets spreaded across platforms. Games that requires a specific console's engion, usually stay exclusive, but if they get ported, the qualilty drops. I like multi-platformed games, but its not good to lose exclusives.

 

[Shadow Soldier]

It all comes down to money. You think game developers are making games just because they love the job? No, they are only making the games because they love the job because they love the money.

And when they bring something like Devil May Cry to the Xbox 360, they're just in it for the money.

 

[Shinjuku]

I'll my 2 cents on the issue, and this is what I'll say. I hate it.....I hate it down right hate (okay it's not that bad), but regardless I don't like it. sports games, racing games, fighting games(except a few). I'm okay with even a few RPG's I'm okay with.

All this Multiplatform crap to me makes it harder for people to choose the console they want. Alot of PS3 owners(and potiental buyers) had something to look foward to with DMC4, but now most of them probably are thinking different into getting a 360. Then I can tell Capcom will be lazy with the 360 version DMC2 wasn't even multiplatform, and it wasn't a great game.

I remember three games that were all good until going multiplatform. Those are Sonic, Crash bandicoot, Spyro the Dragon. Those games were all great on their original consoles, but whet Sonic went to the Xbox and PS3 as well as stayed with Nintendo it started to suck hard. It just continued as you can see with the new Sonic. Same thing with Crash and Spyro 1-3 on both games were great. Then both went to Xbox and Gamecube started to suck.

Then like someone said it takes away the unquie part of the console. The PS3 has to suffer cause GTAIV is basically being developed on the 360 then it's gonna be ported to the PS3. That's in vice-versa to the 360 has to suffer cause DMC4 is using the PS3 tech to be made. So in the end both get half-assed versions of the game which both could have been good.

 

[Square Ninja]

Is that why DMC4 is going to look the same on the 360 and PS3? And how about VF5 the devs said the 360 will have the better version. Mercenaries 2? UT3? shall I go on? Form what I seen most games ported the 360 look the same if not better on the 360. Just look at reviews.

That's kind of an unfair statement considering that programming for the 360 is more similar to previous consoles than the PS3 and the 360 has been in developers' hands for a longer period of time.

 

[Koji]

Console exclusives build console fans, and trust between game developer and console developer.

In my case, I'm a fan of Playstation because playstation exclusives are the only exclusives that really appeal to me. Tekken 2, was one of my first PS1 games, Tekken Tag Tournament was my very first PS2 game, Tekken DR was my second PSP game, and I'm eyeing Tekken 6 for PS3.

Sony sees that Namco is keeping to their tradition of keeping Tekken exclusive to Playstation (although they slipped in 2001, developing for GBA, and failing). But Namco has managed to build that bond with Sony, and Sony can trust Namco's Tekken to support their console.

Had Tekken 6 been moved to Wii only, then many PS3 fans including me, would probably become Wii fans. So by keeping exclusive titles, everyone is gaining trust.

 

[New2Ya]

I remember three games that were all good until going multiplatform. Those are Sonic, Crash bandicoot, Spyro the Dragon. Those games were all great on their original consoles, but whet Sonic went to the Xbox and PS3 as well as stayed with Nintendo it started to suck hard. It just continued as you can see with the new Sonic. Same thing with Crash and Spyro 1-3 on both games were great. Then both went to Xbox and Gamecube started to suck.

Crash and Spyro's succes on the Playstation and the failure because it was just bad afterwards on other consoles, was not because of the exclusiveness really. It had more to do with the developer behind it, a 1st person dev for Sony.

Insomaniac. They make WONDERFUL games, and it's a real loss that they had to leave the 2 franchises. Fortunately, we have Ratchet and Clank, which will be a game that can compete with the older Spyro's and Crashes any day... (Im a big big BIG Spyro fan)

Then like someone said it takes away the unquie part of the console. The PS3 has to suffer cause GTAIV is basically being developed on the 360 then it's gonna be ported to the PS3. That's in vice-versa to the 360 has to suffer cause DMC4 is using the PS3 tech to be made. So in the end both get half-assed versions of the game which both could have been good.

I dont think GTAIV is developed on the 360 first, but I could be wrong. It's not logical though. Porting from PS3 to 360 is easier and keeps most quality intact, than porting from 360 to PS3.

 

[Puck]

Here's what kills consoles. It isn't cross platforming. It's MMOs. 360 and PS3 are being haunted by those abominations. And it's really taking a toll. With KOTOR 3 becoming a MMO, the 360's hope of dominance has gone down the drain. Shadow Run becoming an MMO was also a giant blow. And FFXI almost ruined the FF series for being as worst as Aquaman the video game. The other problem is game developers losing their creativity and being lazy( *cough*Ubisoft*cough*).

 

[Square Ninja]

The other problem is game developers losing their creativity and being lazy( *cough*Ubisoft*cough*).

The industry has always been like this. The only difference is that it's easier to still make a profit while remaining "unoriginal."

 

[Vandread]

Whatever makes the most money is what goes in the world. No matter how many times a developer may say that they did this or that for the fans, in reality, they do it for the fans' money more than anything else. And by being on more than one console, they can gather more fans, and more revenue. If the first-party companies want their exclusives, they need to fork over a ton of money to make up for the loss of potential money that the developers could have gained on all platforms.

 

[Q]

lol @ Jinx. It wasn't multiplatform - uber-pwnage Insomniac left the Spyro series. OMFG it was awesome. So awesome before then. D: My hearts cries for the good three games...the Blessed Trio. The only true Spyro games in my mind. Ehh, I'm not gettin' a PS3 unless Metal Gear Solid comes out soon. Which it is not. And if SSBB comes out, I'll glomp the Wii and return to my Nintendo love-rootz. Gawd, I love SSBM. That game is teh pwn.

 

[CAB_IV]

I think companies need exclusives on their systems, otherwise it totally kills the desire to buy their consoles. Everyone would get the Wii, or maybe the Xbox 360 if they didn't like the Wii's style. PS3's price problems would be more so exasperated.

by not crossing consoles, it helps increase the demand so that higher prices are justified, and that people feel justified in spending the money.

recently though i think the rise in big name games going to different platforms is because the PS3 isn't producing. Games like Grand Theft Auto IV, DMC 4, that new MGS game. from what i understand, people aren't buying enough of them and PS3 has been having delays

this goes back to the money making part. you can't sit on a game like that for to long, otherwise the developer looses money, and customers get angry.