|
|
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Best PS3 Game Deals
|
Best PS3 Game Deals, See All the Deals » |
Top deals |
New deals
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() $21.09 9 hrs ago
| ![]() $15.05 | ![]() $14.99 | ![]() $39.96 | ![]() $28.46 | ![]() $26.65 22 hrs ago
| ![]() $18.43 1 day ago
| ![]() $26.69 | ![]() $16.88 | ![]() $29.02 | ![]() $59.95 | ![]() $39.99 |
![]() |
#11 | |
Blu-ray Knight
|
![]() Quote:
For the customer Exclusives are _always_ better. For the industry exclusives are cheaper to make, and often sell as well as a cross platform game does. The reason that the exclusive is a lost art this generation was a self-fulfilling prophecy. Companies felt they _had_ to go multi-platform, so they did. Without a "control" game to compare to, there is no objective way to tell if you could have done better, and since the numbers on a cursory glance look better, it's impossible to convince yourself to go the other way on your next release. The rest of your argument is repeating the tired old fallacy. *EDIT* Want evidence this is a fallacy? It's always a one-way argument. Nobody _ever_ uses the argument when the 360 loses an exclusive, and nobody _ever_ posts that a 360 game should have went multiplatform because of this argument. Last edited by Terjyn; 02-01-2011 at 08:13 PM. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|