4 ms·

"e.g. if a new CoD game is available on Game Pass on day one of release that would indeed be an unfair advantage" Timed exclusives are not an unfair advantage,

"e.g. if a new CoD game is available on Game Pass on day one of release that would indeed be an unfair advantage" Timed exclusives are not an unfair advantage, both Sony and MS have bought or paid for timed (or perpetual) exclusive games for their platforms. Are we going to make a rule that bans all exclusive games, and force developers to create ports for all system that launch on the same day?

Adverblessly 4y ago
> Timed exclusives are not an unfair advantage, both Sony and MS have bought or paid for timed (or perpetual) exclusive games for their platforms. I don't think just because the two biggest actors can afford to pay for exclusivity that means that paying for exclusivity is fair. Would you expect itch.io to pay for exclusivity in order to compete in the games market? > Are we going to make a rule that bans all exclusive games, and force developers to create ports for all system that launch on the same day? If you made a rule about this, it would be about banning paying for exclusivity. If a developer wants to make a game exclusive to the PS5 that's up to them, but Sony can't pay them for the privilege.
- newsclues 4y ago
  If you ban paying for exclusivity, I think acquisitions of developers will accelerate which will erode the diversity of independents from the market. All the console makers are already massive publishers with many in-house studios, perhaps there should be restrictions on publishers from owning developers. But there would also need to be a restriction on console makers from owning publishers and developers as well, but perhaps some small allowance for first party devs?
edgyquant 4y ago
This is a bs argument. There’s a difference between having exclusives and buying up the producers of the worlds most popular cross platform games and making them exclusive.
flohofwoe 4y ago
This is more like the Netflix model than the traditional timed exclusives model. E.g. the platform owner also owns all content production to stuff its channel with content. In the short term this can be good for gamers (as long as the platform owner throws absurd amounts of money around for content production in order to grow the subscription base), but I can't see this being good for the long run, especially when there are only two or three big players on the market, and no more independent game developers and publishers are left (Activision/Blizzard isn't exactly a fountain of creativity of course, so that's a bad example).

Adverblessly 4y ago

> Timed exclusives are not an unfair advantage, both Sony and MS have bought or paid for timed (or perpetual) exclusive games for their platforms. I don't think just because the two biggest actors can afford to pay for exclusivity that means that paying for exclusivity is fair. Would you expect itch.io to pay for exclusivity in order to compete in the games market? > Are we going to make a rule that bans all exclusive games, and force developers to create ports for all system that launch on the same day? If you made a rule about this, it would be about banning paying for exclusivity. If a developer wants to make a game exclusive to the PS5 that's up to them, but Sony can't pay them for the privilege.

newsclues 4y ago
If you ban paying for exclusivity, I think acquisitions of developers will accelerate which will erode the diversity of independents from the market. All the console makers are already massive publishers with many in-house studios, perhaps there should be restrictions on publishers from owning developers. But there would also need to be a restriction on console makers from owning publishers and developers as well, but perhaps some small allowance for first party devs?

edgyquant 4y ago

This is a bs argument. There’s a difference between having exclusives and buying up the producers of the worlds most popular cross platform games and making them exclusive.

flohofwoe 4y ago

This is more like the Netflix model than the traditional timed exclusives model. E.g. the platform owner also owns all content production to stuff its channel with content. In the short term this can be good for gamers (as long as the platform owner throws absurd amounts of money around for content production in order to grow the subscription base), but I can't see this being good for the long run, especially when there are only two or three big players on the market, and no more independent game developers and publishers are left (Activision/Blizzard isn't exactly a fountain of creativity of course, so that's a bad example).