"..we can't get the full experience until Sony decides to unclench their collective anuses?"
While I agree with the notion that everyone should be getting content for 3rd party games/series at the same time, the above statement is dripping in so much irony that it takes a better man than me to ignore.
SONY unclench their anuses? Pretty sure (by which I mean completely, without a doubt, certain) that Micro$haft were the ones to start this stupid war of exclusives in 3rd party games. To begin with in games like Call of Duty, and more recently with Tomb Raider (like you so eloquently put, a series that started and grew on a "rival" console). The latter isn't just exclusive content, either. It's a sequel to a franchise, an entire game, that has a timed exclusivity. It's a disease that is affecting gamers on both sides, but it is a disease that the Xbox created.
To reiterate, I don't like exclusivity at all, I think all games and content should be available across all consoles, so more gamers get to enjoy more great experiences, irregardless of what console they decided to buy (obviously games developed by studios owned by the console manufactorer excluded).
English
-
"Irregardless" isn't a word, but regardless of that, the point is moot because I Don't look at games in terms of the console company it's on, I go to the source: the developers. Let's face it, neither Sony, nor Microsoft, nor Nintendo would have enjoyed the success they've all had at one point or another without the independent developers and gaming studios providing them with games worth playing. "$ony vs Micro$oft" bravado is irrelevant, petty, and serves no purpose. Doesn't matter what either of them offer a developer or what conditions they slap on their agreement, it is still the developer's choice whether they go along with it, or tell them flat out "you give us what we need or you don't get the most hyped game of the last 3 years, period."
-
I agree, but at least when Microsoft does it, it's only like a month (Tomb Raider) or 1 week CoD dlc. This is exactly why I don't buy sony. And after this stunt, no more bungie. The only reason I'm still here is because I was stupid enough to buy the season pass. Never again.
-
Remember, Activision controls everything Bungie does. Stop buying their games if you want to try and effect change. Was online with someone last night who was pissed at how much content he felt was missing from Destiny, but then went on to express his desire for the next COD. I explained to him why, if he felt that way, he should refrain from giving his money to anything with Activision's name on it, that all these companies ever want is a financial return for their investment, and that money is the thing that talks the most. He replied "hmm...yeah. But I want it"... And therein lies the problem.
-
I bought Destiny because it's a Bungie game, not because Activision was involved. I know Bungie. I have thoroughly enjoyed THEIR Halo since the beginning (343 has yet to do anything noteworthy with the franchise except to bury it in launch day issues that will never be fixed despite literally dozens of full out title updates). I'm not a CoD player. I've only played one of their games one time because it was the only game in the house (brother bought it at a tag sale) that a friend of mine and I both have. Now we both have Destiny and Reach, so CoD goes back in the drawer never to be seen again. But let me reiterate, I bought this game as a BUNGIE fan, just as even if it wasn't a Fable game, I would consider buying a title put out by Lionhead. Whether the bottleneck is on Sony's end, or if Activision is the goat here, honestly I don't care half as much about who the problem is so much as the problem itself.
-
Lol, see I don't have that problem. I can't stand CoD, I pretty much don't like anything Activision does, just bought this cuz of bungie.
-
Then you, sir, are that much smarter than everyone else! I saw Activision's name on the box and got a feeling which I chose to ignore. And now I know :-p
-
While I agree for the most part. The N64/PSX was the first real exclusivity battle in console land. Not pointing any fingers tho'. It's a good way to build your audience. But I don't agree with the way it's being done nowadays. Entire titles; yes, shortly timed exclusives; maybe but it's ridiculous imh, timed exclusives on partial expansions, utterly laughable if you'd ask me. This method has no merit whatsoever.
-
Timed exclusives on launch day and expansion content that, at the end of said time of exclusion, will likely be rendered irrelevant. PS players got a full set of armor for each class. Personally I would have loved to have had access to the Manifold Seeker helmets for my Warlock. But all the exclusive armor is rare quality, and I need legendaries and exotics at this point. And by the time those armor sets are available to xbox players, all three characters I have will be 20+, so NONE of them will have any need for rare gear. The (currently) two exclusive strikes (one launch day, one in this DLC) might still have some relevance by then, but not likely, for a number of reasons. First, strikes all have a level attached to them, and a cap on the level of any gear "earned" through completion. You can run the Devil's Lair strike all day every day until the console dies, you'll never get better than level 8, MAYBE level 9 gear in the post-game drop. Ever. By the time xbox players can run these exclusive strikes, they won't have any characters who can benefit from the drops. And let's face it, it's hard to believe anyone claiming "I'll play it for the story" because, well, what story? Every trailer, every interview, every bit of commentary about this game leading up to its release has suggested a story far deeper, far more vast, and far more gripping and intense than the watered down fluff that was delivered. But the second reason why the content may very well be irrelevant by the time it's made universally available is quite simple: you don't screw with gamers. You promise them something earth-shaking and deliver something piddly, and then tell half of them they won't even get the full experience until a year later, guess what? They won't be there a year later. They'll trade your game in for something that gives them the FULL content on day one and they'll never look back. Will I still be there? Yea, probably, but only because I invested in the limited edition with the season pass AND had to trade in over a dozen games to do so, so whether it can or not, Destiny needs to keep me entertained until such a time as I am able to afford something else. Even if it delivers less story and innovation than the average Facebook game, at least I can still play it with friends until they move on to something else.