{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by TheSpaceGeneral:
7/27/2015 4:17:25 AM
377
Explain to me how the Playstation exclusives aren't immoral
I think the Playstation exclusives are wrong.
Here's my thesis:
[b]Exclusives within a video game (that do not exist as DLC) aren't okay. If everyone pays the same amount of money for a video game, everyone should get the same video game. [/b]
Provide me with a good counter argument as to why my argument and [i]opinion[/i] aren't as good as yours.
Rule: This is all about opinions. Opinions, fundamentally, cannot be wrong.
So, imagine Walmart pays for an exclusive product. I want that product, but I regularly shop at Target. I can drive down to Walmart and buy that exclusive product.
However, say I play Playstation. I see that the Witcher 3 exclusive stuff is only on Xbox One. I want that stuff. I can't drive down to Xbox One and grab it. I have to pay 500 dollars so I can buy exclusive stuff. It doesn't make me want to switch, it makes me bitter at the gaming industries for thinking that this is okay and a good marketing strategy.
Nintendo does it all the time, and it nearly bit them in the butt. If, say Halo, is only on one console, 50% of gamers are going to have access to play it (let's skip PC here). It's going to be able to reach only 50% of a potential audience.
Did Playstation players pay more than Xbox players? No? Then, why should they be entitled to more stuff? This seems almost like internet age segregation, with one group of people being treated with priority over another, who have an equal right to priority. It almost seems... illegal, and immoral at the very least.
The only winners with exclusivity are the corporations. The developers don't win, and the gamers don't win.
[b]This is my Ultimate Metaphor:[/b]
Say you play an RPG. Four classes: Ranger, Mage, Knight, Spoony Bard. You chose Mage. (Mage and Ranger equal Microsoft). You run a long side quest, like the Gauldr amulet in Skyrim. You get to the end and you get an awesome... sword, which only Paladin's and Bards (both Sony) can use. That sword is the exclusive content. You have it (Xbox editions have the content disclocked. That is a fact), but you can't use it. You could have used it, if, hundreds of hours ago you made a different choice, but you can't make that choice now. So, you'd be angry about that. Now imagine your time was money. You spent the same amount of money/time as Paladins and Bards, and you didn't get anything. You'd be mad in the game, and you'd call it robbery in real life.
That's what the exclusives are. A sword for paladins.
-
You may have paid the same amount of money out of your pocket. But Bungie received more money for PS4 sales than they did Xbox One, per copy. Why? Because Sony paid Bungie and Activision more so they they could provide a better experience to its (ps4) player base. The hope is that more people will go with a ps4 to play Destiny, and push players like you to ditch the Xbox one and get a ps4. If you like the service Microsoft provides. Great, stay with them. If you want the service Sony provides better, switch.
-
You can have hawkmoon and that shitty strike if we get halo fair
-
4 RepliesIt is all bullshit and I'm also fed up with exclusive stuff. But companies ONLY think about money. So the consumer's will always get screwed
-
I can agree. 3 weapons won't make me buy a Playstation.
-
Sony's looking out for it's customer base, they even snagged the CoD contract from Microsoft. I can only assume Microsoft needed those extra funds for Halo 5 marketing.
-
Except Sony paid more to bungie... Again, Sony PAID MORE MONEY TO BUNGIE. [spoiler]sony paid bungie more money.[/spoiler]
-
New ps exotic exclusive for ttk!
-
Chill out grandma [spoiler]chill out grandma[/spoiler]
-
2 RepliesAn Opinon can be wrong. This is the problem with schools and the news these days, they've adopted a teach the conflict approach. Is there evolution? All credible science says yes but what's your opinon? None of this is meant to speak to your substantive point.
-
PlayStation users might not have paid more for the exclusives, but Sony did.. These is why it is justified. Somebody paid for the content... And if you really want the content that somebody else bought, you will have to play how they want you to. If we were crossing a river and I had bought a boat, it would be nice of me to let you jump in to cross with me, but in the world we live in people charge money for you to get on the boat... It's just the way it works.
-
PS4 > a mouldy potato > xb1 simple no?
-
8 RepliesEdited by mukavva1905: 7/27/2015 1:57:52 PM[quote]Exclusives within a video game (that do not exist as DLC) aren't okay. If everyone pays the same amount of money for a video game, everyone should get the same video game. [/quote] Playstation players pay more then XBox players. The difference is paid by Sony. edit:typo
-
2 RepliesBetter question: Why is Rockets McDickface arguing morality?
-
2 RepliesBungie - Would you like to buy some timed exclusves for you're customers, Microsoft? Microsoft - No thanks, they can get the vanilla game and be happy with it. Bungie - Okay, would you like the timed exclusives for your consumers, Sony? Sony - Yes please, we'd like that thank-you! ____________________________________________ Xbox players bought a vanilla icecream (game) PS players bought a vanilla icecream (game) Sony decided they'd buy the sprinkles to go with it. YOU were even offered the deal first! So stop ranting about every company BUT the one who screwed you.
-
I can see where you are coming from. However in the case of destiny you do know that the exclusives are only timed exclusives right ?
-
What a silly child. Wait till you grow up a little bit squirt, it will make sense then.
-
Business models live and die by the bottom line. There is no morality involved here. MS is losing the hardware war this generation and with it many exclusivity deals. You want to make a change? Speak with your wallet not your keyboard.
-
2 RepliesIn essence isn't your name a bullet sponge. Thus you should be ready for attacks on your opinion ( which can be just as wrong as it can be right ). Also this is a metaphor.
-
3 RepliesYou think it's a question of "right" or "wrong" and it isn't. It's called BUSINESS.
-
I was fine with the first exclusive, but coming with the dlc is stupid
-
1 ReplyOk let's go with the first paragraph you call your thesis. You should pay less because you receive less? Fine you pay 50$ vanilla, and 15$ each dlc. But now TTK comes and you're getting way more than sony players get! So you should pay 60$ for TTK alone. Glad we found a compromise.
-
Your ultimate metaphor is flawed. You are getting content(unlike that poor bard), but you have to wait for exclusive content to be no longer exclusive. So say... The bard gets a weapon all the classes can use efficiently, and is able to use that sword after he reaches the levelcap. Then that awesome sword gets nerfed so much it summons hostile dremora lords anytime you swing it!
-
2 RepliesEdited by ScotchEggsRules: 7/27/2015 2:05:39 PM[i]"Explain to me how the PlayStation exclusives aren't immoral"[/i] No.
-
Ultimately, you're not paying the same amount to Activision /Bungie. Microsoft is pocketing the money. Sony isn't.
-
1 ReplyEdited by Lull9: 7/27/2015 2:10:43 PMIt's a game and the exclusives are fairly trivial. Who cares if PS players have Hawkmoon? There's no cross platform game play. Most people hate the exclusive strikes. Get over it. Also, try playing Halo on PlayStation. Oh wait... Shut up.
-
Business
