Has exclusivity ever been beneficial for the consumer?

[TallOne123]

I remember watching a video by the YouTuber boogie2988 where he explained that although exclusivity is a cancerous practice now, it was beneficial for the consumer back in the day, and I remember being very confused by this.

 

Is this right? Was there a time when exclusivity was actually seen as good for the consumer? And if so, how?

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

I can't think of any reason to why it will be good.

[thekeemo]

nope its monopoly

meaning that one company can control the prices like it wants

[TacticlTwinkie]

Exclusivity only seems to benefit the seller, not the consumer. Maybe I am missing something, but I can't think of a situation where it truely benefits the consumer.

[Trik'Stari]

No.

 

And it never will be.

[Pomfinator]

The only thing I can think of is that exclusivity can sometimes allow games that couldn't have otherwise been made, to be made.

 

Recent example, Bayonetta 2.  Bayonetta didn't exactly sell like hotcakes, but it's a great game, Nintendo ponied up cash to Platinum and Platinum could make the game, thank god for that.  And nothing is wrong with first-party exclusives either, I don't care that Last of Us is only Sony, cause it's Naughty Dog.  But Rise of the Tomb Raider...that's a different story.

[Remilia]

I'm not sure, but it probably helps a bit on competition, like major exclusive titles getting funds from Microsoft/Sony.

Personally I think a lot of the titles look so good that I'd buy a console to play just a few of them, if I could have afforded it.

 

But purely on the consumer side, nah, not significantly anyways.

[Humbug]

Not good. Anti competitive.

Especially situations where devs are paid off to make a game exclusive. E.g. Microsoft paying off tomb raider dev to make sure it doesn't come to PS4 and windows (their own platform) at release.

[-TesseracT-]

Nope, there's nothing that I can think of. In long term however, Windows exclusives could benefit the platform. More people could come over and PC gaming could grow as a whole.

[LogicalDrm]

In a way maybe. Like when you focus on one platform and make game that is as good on that platform as your whole budget allows. But in general sense no, I don't see how it would benefit consumers as mass.

[Tacitus]

If you care only about graphical tech-demos maybe? Just look at (rather than play) The Order. Stunning.

[Misanthrope]

The only thing I can think of is that exclusivity can sometimes allow games that couldn't have otherwise been made, to be made.

 

That's now immediately deflated with kickstarters and free game engines.

[IhazHedont]

It's political move called "Divide, and reign".

[Camul]

Never was and never will be. Just a way to force customers to buy a specific platform if they want to play an exclusive game. It takes away options from the consumer. I don't know what the hell that guy was talking about, because he's wrong.

[razor767]

No, it's an anti-competitive way of getting consumers to invest in a specific platform.  

 

I've never understood why certain consumers brag about exclusives as well. 

[ACatWithThumbs]

Yes, it has some benefits at least on PC.(Best example is Star Citizen)

On console not as much but it helps to push the most out of the platform.

[Almercenary]

Depends. If a whole game is "toned down" because of 1 platform, then yes it is. If not, exclusivity sucks.

[typographie]

Depends. If a whole game is "toned down" because of 1 platform, then yes it is. If not, exclusivity sucks.

 

Call me an optimist, but I don't believe it really works like this. PC versions of games suck from time to time, but I think the simplest and most likely explanation is the boring, obvious stuff: budgets that are too tight and deadlines that are too aggressive. Or just that the developers never intended to make the PC version "shine" in the first place. That's not the same thing as intentionally handicapping a game for the benefit of another platform.

 

Exclusivity is usually bad for the consumer. The exception is when it's a game that could not have existed without an exclusivity deal backing it's development. The textbook example is Bayonetta 2. For all its critical success, the original Bayonetta didn't do that well financially. Bayonetta 2 probably would not have seen the light of day without the backing of a huge publisher like Nintendo who saw value in it as a console seller.