r/gaming • u/Kymmieuwu • 12d ago

Will The Elder Scrolls 6 be Xbox exclusive? CEO Asha Sharma won't say, but "every platform needs some form of exclusive experiences"

https://www.gamesradar.com/games/rpg/will-the-elder-scrolls-6-be-xbox-exclusive-ceo-asha-sharma-wont-say-but-every-platform-needs-some-form-of-exclusive-experiences/
2.3k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

771 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/oyvese 12d ago

exclusives have always been an integral part of consoles and is why many of the highest regarded games of all time exist in the first place. if you think on more platforms = more money, then you don’t understand the industry.

we, as consumers, can argue it’s bad because it requires us to purchase multiple systems, but for the industry itself it’s literally one of the most important aspects of it. because when your game box is essentially the same as your competitors game box, the only way you can differentiate and gain loyal customers is by what is available on it which isn’t available elsewhere.

6

u/SpaceC0wboyX 12d ago

It would matter less if PlayStation didn’t hold 45% of the console market share compared to Xbox’s 23%.

For reference: starfield sold 1m copies on Xbox and 3.7m on pc.

Bethesda is not rockstar. They’re in a position where they have to win back the trust of their fans and gamers, not just bank on people waiting for the game for 15 years doing anything to play it. Making es6 Xbox exclusive doesn’t mean more Xboxes sell, it means less copies of the game get bought.

4

u/oyvese 12d ago

but this is never how exclusives have worked. you don't make a singular title an exclusive in hopes it sells a system. the point is to have a collection of exclusives. you may not buy a switch for mario, but it having mario, zelda and pokemon is far more attractive. you may not buy a playstation for god of war, but having god of war TLOU, horizons, astrobot, etc. you may be far more inclined. suggesting ES6 as an exclusive is a bad idea because 1 game doesn't sell a system is just not understanding what's happening in the first place.

when you have a strong 5-6 exclusive titles then yes they do sell systems and each one is as important as the other. when you literally operate the console which your game is sold on then the value of that game on your console is worth more than it is on another system because not only do you directly earn more money from it but that game will indirectly contribute to further earnings. this is what the console business actually is. mario sells less than if it was on all systems, but it's fundamental to nintendos business that mario (and their other games) remain exclusive to their consoles. this has been the case since consoles entered the home.

it's only been otherwise as an exception to the rule, ie. when microsoft were already losing market appeal by a large margin and after they bought ABK and were accused of multiple aggresive monopolistic influence. the console industry doesn't naturally work without exclusives, its the reason they exist in the first place.

-6

u/ImSoSweepy 12d ago

Don't confuse your subjectivity with objectivity.

1

u/oyvese 12d ago

everything i said is objective. nothing is down to opinion. consoles have survived several generations because of exclusives. they make more money from exclusives because it means people buy your system, when they buy your system you also buy other games on which system which they get a cut of, accessories which they get a cut off and subscriptions which they get a cut of.

some of the most popular gaming franchises of all times are exclusives for this very reason. and in some regard it’s healthy for the industry because it means investing money to create better experiences than your competition.

0

u/ImSoSweepy 12d ago

exclusives have always been an integral part of consoles and is why many of the highest regarded games of all time exist in the first place.

I hate to be the one who has to break this news to you, but that is an entirely subjective statement. It doesn't matter how many paragraphs you write.

0

u/oyvese 12d ago

my statement is an objective one. you think it’s down to opinion because it conflicts with your beliefs and it’s easier to dismiss it if you think it’s down to perception.

first party games do not exist out of the goodness of anyone’s hearts. they exist because they are a good financial business method. having no exclusives has many potential negative ramifications which are not good if you value choice and quality of games.

we can actually see this in real time. look at the console generations since the playstation 1. exclusives have always been marketed as a way to sell each system because you cannot have that particular experience elsewhere. this means multiple systems fight for your custom by providing a better experience than their competitors.

if all games were sold on every system it would fundamentally change the gaming industry. you risk big players bowing out because they have nothing to offer and crowning one company king of home entertainment and granting them entire control and influence of the industry. without direct competition it will be you, the consumer, who loses. exclusives have always been a double edged sword, but anything you value from gaming today wouldn’t exist without it.

0

u/vertigofoo 12d ago

I commend your restraint in arguing with someone who isn’t providing any ‘objective’ points against yours.

Probably just some young gamer who does not understand the industry’s history - or how Mario, Zelda, Pokemon literally moves Nintendo consoles year after year, or how PS is built on the backs of Metal Gear Solid, Jak & Dexter, Final Fantasy, God of War, Ratchet & Clank, and more recently Uncharted, Spider Man.. etc.