damn platform exclusives :(

[bigmike20vt]

I  posted this 20 mins ago and it has not shown up... I do not think i have broken any rules but if it shows up twice i appologise.

ok I can just about handle exclusives which are 1st party... I hate them
but i get it, (I still hope the oculus stuff makes it to vive and vice
versa once touch is out mind you)
And if Sony studious want to make
their own VR game for SonyVR again, i am used to it.... but FFS do sony
really have to licence up all format devs to bring out locked VR content
just for their platform?

Batman, Starwars battlefront, resident evil and probably a bunch of other stuff.,...... grrrrr!

its not even like i can buy the console and play them, i would need to buy the console AND the HMD.

Apparently
Facebook/Oculus are properly trying to tap up loads of smaller devs to
lock down to the rift. its a  crap trick and goes against everything
Oculus stood for when being KSed.  I must admit I am starting to wish I
had given my money to the VIVE.

[Conan]

Distribution rights and platform exclusives are hardly the same and are two things that have been around electronic gaming since the 70s

[Anonymous]

I own a Samsung and PC because I like the openness of that fact I can choose to be in a hybrid close and open system. At work I have at least 2 guys that tell me how they like their Mac and how much better it is. Does that mean I hate Mac or IPhone? Nope, because they do have some good point about them that I wish I could get on the open system, but am I going to talk down to Apple because they have a close system? Nope because they do have their plus side. More or less, people word chose around here is what is painful to see than what the two market places are offering. Many people calling out others a "fanboy" because they don't know what else to say and act like they are the ones under attack.

"You, Mradr, simply don't get it, so please stop responding if you are not helping. " - like ouch. I give a valid point and get told I am not even worth having around.

[jpolfus]

I suppose at least some of these exclusives may be timed, so they come at a later stage for the other platforms. First PSVR, then PC (Oculus Home, Steam) at a later stage. That seems quite usual these days, right?

[HiThere_]

Don't expect Sony to compete on hardware, when it's hardware was already outdated and proved not good enough for 60 FPS when it was released 3 years ago.

With timed exclusives Oculus VR is playing it nice, which beats playing the sucker.

[MowTin]

Zenbane said:

Well said @Hanover. If I ever bought another VR Device it would likely be the PlayStation VR, due to the idea of playing Final Fantasy with full immersion. The very first Final Fantasy game for the original Nintendo was the first RPG I had ever played. So these titles hold a special place in my heart. Granted, they got a bit too crazy for my tastes after FF3 - but I did play the Final Fantasy MMORP for nearly 1 full year.

I think Final Fantasy in VR would finally bring me back to the series. Although, I also plan to invest in the new Xbox VR platform; cause the thought of Halo in VR rocks my socks.

Point being: there's no reason to complain as though we consumers don't have the option to enjoy multiple Platforms. The Rift works great in its Oculus universe, and I plan to be a part of it for as long as the VR gods allow :wink:

Exclusives are not good for competition and they hurt sales of software developers. Have you noticed how exclusives are almost a thing of the past now? You can play most games on PC, Xbox One or PS4. Software developers have realized that it's better to offer their products to the widest possible base of users.

Exclusives also just force you to make your purchasing decision not on who makes the best hardware but who has coerced the best exclusives. Maybe the two games you want to play most are on separate platforms. It sucks for consumers and developers. 

[bigmike20vt]

LeeU said:

Just wondering, how many of you have an I phone, pretty exclusive, locked down system.

nope.... as you say, I hate the entire apple ecosystem not to mention their over priced under specced hardware.  I bought into oculus based on their attitudes way back when, and I (foolishly) believed Palmer Lucky despite me thinking facebook buyout could only be a bad thing for us, that it would not change the Oculus ethos and that they were still being left to do their own thing.

[ThreeDeeVision]

I was a bit worried at first about the exclusive games, but E3 has calmed my mind.  All the big VR players have some awesome content coming down the line, so no matter which HMD you go with you have some great games to look forward to.

[obzen]

LeeU said:

Just wondering, how many of you have an I phone, pretty exclusive, locked down system.

nope.... as you say, I hate the entire apple ecosystem not to mention their over priced under specced hardware.  I bought into oculus based on their attitudes way back when, and I (foolishly) believed Palmer Lucky despite me thinking facebook buyout could only be a bad thing for us, that it would not change the Oculus ethos and that they were still being left to do their own thing.

Again, what makes you think it's Oculus's fault that the Vive isn't supported in Oculus Home applications.

[Zenbane]

MowTin said:
Exclusives are not good for competition and they hurt sales of software developers. Have you noticed how exclusives are almost a thing of the past now?

Maybe if I refuse to look at history and present day facts, then I guess anything can look like a thing of the past. Last I checked, games like Zelda, Halo, and certain Final Fantasy titles are "present day" exclusives.

In fact, here is a list of exclusives PS4 vs X Box one (you know, the 'present day' console platforms) ...

http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/PS4_Games_vs_Xbox_One_Games

We could get in to Windows and Apple, but you seem more interesting in playing "pretend time" right now. Oh according to the actual field of study (business economics), the exact opposite is true: exclusives are good for competition. The exact opposite of everything you said in this regard is true in the real world.

Exclusives hurt some consumers, specifically those who make less money.

[Zoomie]

I think people may be confusing how they would LIKE these companies to conduct business with what is in the best interest of those companies.

Much like the "We want a free Touch" thread, we as consumers would love access to all software at low, low prices in the most convenient and DRM-free / Spyware-free method possible.

But then how does the developer of said product make money?  What's their incentive to create the product and content in the first place if they're giving it away at cost, or they allow other companies to use the fruits of their investment without any sort of control or safeguard?

Why would I invest $10,000 in a development firm, just to let them list their product on every other device and sales platform?  Why would I conduct research on a product when other companies can simply copy that research and sell at the same or lower price, without the R&D costs I incurred?

My personal reading of this situation (based on multiple sources - including guesswork) is that Oculus doesn't want to allow a OpenVR-> Oculus SDK wrapper because it would remove all incentive for people to install and shop from Oculus Home.  If all games - no matter the SDK, can be played easily on the Vive, it will remove the whole reason for people to have Oculus Home.  Just buy an Oculus SDK program on Steam and the wrapper lets you play it.  Steam gets 30%.  You won't necessarily get features like ATW, but that's only an issue if your rig can't manage a steady 90 fps right?  It certainly didn't stop people from using revive.  This would also explain why Oculus was quick to patch-out revive.

Likewise, HTC and Valve don't want their device to be included natively in the Oculus SDK, because that opens up a storefront other than Steam where users can get content.  In fact, Oculus would have exclusives on their storefront that wouldn't be available anywhere else.  But revive?  At first it looks like a good thing for Oculus because they have twice the market - but in the long run it means all Oculus titles could be sold on Steam without issue.  We all know how direct competition with Steam has worked out for other vendors.

So whose fault is it?