• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Why aren't there more AAA PC exclusives?

Why aren't there more AAA PC exclusives?

  • lack of first party games from companies like Valve or Epic

    Votes: 38 19.3%
  • consoles are more popular

    Votes: 74 37.6%
  • not enough people on PC with powerful enough hardware

    Votes: 52 26.4%
  • other (comment below)

    Votes: 33 16.8%

  • Total voters
    197

TintoConCasera

Gold Member
Only people with low wages/income, neets or actual kids care about exclusives.

A true gamer connoisseur will have a PC to play any multiplat at ultra turbo max settings while also getting whatever console system has the exclusives they like.

Imagine missing on cool videogames. Not me, I don't wanna miss a thing.

 
Last edited:

Braag

Member
The idea behind exclusives is to incentivize players to buy a certain console over another. PC isn't exactly competing with consoles so wouldn't make sense to not release a PC game also on consoles. Also no one studio "owns" the PC platform for them to exclusively support it.
Though some games are hard to translate on consoles like the Total War series, so they remain exclusive, but if they managed to find a way to make it work on consoles it would make sense to also release it there.
 

Sentenza

Member
throw up team america GIF


Yeah, no thanks. Preferred realtime with pause combat the original has.
Because you are a fool.
I have plenty of gripes with some design decisions Larian made, but the turn-based combat is arguable the ONE area where BG3 improves inequivocably over the originals.
 

Flabagast

Member
Why aren't there more AAA Xbox exclusives today ?

Why will there be not more AAA Playstation exclusives in the future ?

Exclusives are becoming a thing of the past
 
Imagine how it's going to be further down the line especially if this console generation gets drawn out much longer than previous ones due to covid and other issues. There'll be 4080/90, 5080/90, 6080/90 and who knows what else. What would be the point of those ultra high end parts in the future? The bang for buck is going to be miniscule.
This is why I'm not a PC gamer and if I am forced to become one I am either going to go retro gaming 100% or just wait and play games like 4 generations behind using whatever integrated video card my PC happens to have then. There is no way I'm paying over a grand (plus continual upgrades) just to play the same exact game that I was able to play on a console for $500. I don't give a shit about graphics I care about the games, and if it is the same game I'll take the cheapest way to play please. And I say this as someone seriously considering paying $175 for a 3DO, so I even have the money to blow on a PC - I just won't.
 
even valve don’t want to release pc exclusives as, as it is too risky, also consoles is also much more popular, even I have to admit, there is decent chunk of pc gamers, as Sony would never release games on there, if it was not worth it for them.
 

Stuart360

Member
Because unfortunately AAA games dont cost $5mil to make anymore, and no one 'owns' PC so we dont have a Microsoft or Sony bankrolling exclusives.
Still we get all 3rd party AAA games, all Xbox AAA games, and Increasing amount of Sony AAA games, and we can eevn play Nintendo games at way better settings through emulation.

Also we dont get many AAA exclusive, but we get a shit ton of AA and Indie exclusives.
 

Guilty_AI

Member
Most successful PC games didn't get ported "back then". Even just citing your one IP example, it took two decades for the previosu games in the series to get on console.
Not a port but it did get a console exclusive game (2 in fact).
Then there's also Half Life 1&2 (there was even a half life game exclusive to ps2), Deus Exes, DOOMs (another one which also had console exclusive versions), Quakes, HeXen, and so on.

I feel some old timers here glorify those "golden days" faaaar too much.

And when they did get ported they were butchered more often than not, vs multiplatform games nowadays being 1:1.
Dunno, a lot of modern PC to console ports still feel pretty butchered. KSP and Cyberpunk (which CDPR claimed was developed on PC first, and it kind shows) are two examples i can think of.
 

Eddie-Griffin

Gold Member
There are many, unlike some people here, PC gaming is more than Steam and EGS. But some gamers like to pretend you can't game on a PC without those which is weird, or some launcher like Uplay.

For most of PC gaming these didn't exist lol.

Some exclusives like Laser Marbles, Dessert Escape Fox, Fever Elevator, Overload Vibration, Pierce Cut, Tomahawk Mirror, and Rampage gun are just a few examples, along with many of the big AA and AAA exclusives that people know of but for some reason think they can only be played on steam. not to mention big budget strategy RTS like Life Line Phone Booth.

Shame on you for OP for not doing research, if any of these games existed you would look like a fool, but the point is you can buy PC games without EGS and Steam so there are possibly many AAA games that people don't know about here.
 

RoadHazard

Gold Member
There are more people with consoles than people with powerful gaming PCs (not PCs that can play some games).
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Not a port but it did get a console exclusive game (2 in fact).
Then there's also Half Life 1&2 (there was even a half life game exclusive to ps2), Deus Exes, DOOMs (another one which also had console exclusive versions), Quakes, HeXen, and so on.

I feel some old timers here glorify those "golden days" faaaar too much.


Dunno, a lot of modern PC to console ports still feel pretty butchered. KSP and Cyberpunk (which CDPR claimed was developed on PC first, and it kind shows) are two examples i can think of.
Deus Ex was not such a huge game at launch and only accumulated over 1 million sales in like a decade, if we include such cult classics then way more didn't make it to console and it doesn't help your argument (from the Thief games to the System Shock games to keep it relevant for example).

Using the IP for different games as in Dark Alliance/Doom 64 is not a port and is just off topic to what was discussed (Doom got plenty console ports, it's among the most ported games, officially and otherwise, like Myst, but not all games are examples of such, hence these being famous for it).

Sure, you can name drop ported games or series, I never said zero games got ported to think mentioning Half-Life or even Diablo 1 (but not II until the remake, lol) is some kind of counter argument. It's pointless exercise in list warring, I'm not gonna list all unported games cos they're ENDLESS.

Two examples or outliers known as broken as fuck for certain platforms only (ie Oblivion PS3 level of failure) is hardly how most multiplatform games are nowadays and has little to do with PC to console, as console to console has such rare examples just as well (Bayonetta PS3 was similarly bad).
 
Last edited:

Guilty_AI

Member
Deus Ex was not such a huge game at launch and only accumulated over 1 million sales in like a decade, if we include such cult classics then plenty more didn't make it to console and it doesn't help your argument (from thief to system shock etc.).
And many PC games from the modern era also don't make it to consoles. ARMA 3 never got a console port, neither did Euro2/American Truck Simulator, no sign of a port for Half Life Alyx either after +2 years. It really isn't all that different from back then even if some trends changed.

Using the IP for a different game as in Baldur's Gate/Doom 64 is not a port and is just off topic to what was discussed (but Doom itself got plenty console ports, it's among the most ported games, officially and otherwise, like Myst, but not all games are examples of such, hence these being famous for it).
It counts because console architechtures were different from PCs back then, so the mentality many developers had was that instead of doing a port, making brand new games similar to what was on PC was more worthwhile.
 
Last edited:

Stuart360

Member
the amount of people with stronger PCs than consoles is larger than the PS5 userbasey so it makes about as much sense making a PS5 exclusive as it would be making a high rnd PC exclusive
They look at the Steam stats and see 3% on this powerful gpu, 5% on that powerful gpu, and dont realize that those few percent are actually millions of gamers, tens of millions when you add them all together.

Plus you dont need to have a PC as powerful as XSX or PS5, thats the advantage of being on PC, you can change settings to graphics, resolution, and framrate.
 
Last edited:

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
It counts
No, it really doesn't, Baldur's Gate 1 & 2 were PC exclusive until the recent enhanced editions were made and neither Dark Alliance, which was even a different genre of game, nor Baldur's Gate 3 being a multiplatform game now, change that. It has nothing to do with the topic.
 
Last edited:
Deus Ex was not such a huge game at launch and only accumulated over 1 million sales in like a decade, if we include such cult classics then way more didn't make it to console and it doesn't help your argument (from the Thief games to the System Shock games to keep it relevant for example).

Using the IP for different games as in Dark Alliance/Doom 64 is not a port and is just off topic to what was discussed (Doom got plenty console ports, it's among the most ported games, officially and otherwise, like Myst, but not all games are examples of such, hence these being famous for it).

Sure, you can name drop ported games or series, I never said zero games got ported to think mentioning Half-Life or even Diablo 1 (but not II until the remake, lol) is some kind of counter argument. It's pointless exercise in list warring, I'm not gonna list all unported games cos they're ENDLESS.

Two examples or outliers known as broken as fuck for certain platforms only (ie Oblivion PS3 level of failure) is hardly how most multiplatform games are nowadays and has little to do with PC to console, as console to console has such rare examples just as well (Bayonetta PS3 was similarly bad).

Exactly, Guilty_AI is probably an inexperienced gamer and PC gamer in general.

My only explanation for his logic.
 
I got a better question for you: Why would there be a PC exclusive game, when you can simply turn down graphics and release the same game on console?

Why would a publisher decide to limit potential sales?

Hmm, maybe because of things like scale, physics, and AI?

Things PC is more than well capable of pushing to the max, if consoles weren't the priority build of games.
 

squarealex

Member
Because is expensive and not profitable for just 15% of PC Players with RTX 2000/3000

Just pray Sony to release some AAA on PC and bench your GPU.
 
Hmm, maybe because of things like scale, physics, and AI?

Things PC is more than well capable of pushing to the max, if consoles weren't the priority build of games.
New/current consoles are only ~twice weaker on cpu side as well, so there still be no point to build PC game around that. Chances are you could scale back the number of AI in an area and it would still run on consoles.

I guess Nvidia could make a little studio for exclusives that push their cuda and sensor cores to the max with fancy smoke effects all over screen, particles, water simulation that would not run at consoles, but they clearly don't think that it's worth it.
 
Last edited:

TintoConCasera

Gold Member
Oh no, i feel so hurt! How could I, me, my, mine of all people be an inexperienced gamer?!
My pride is in shambles!

Yeah fucker, you better delete your account and never come back.

Or even better, stop feeding this obvious troll. 5$ to it being an alt account of some banned retard.
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
🤷‍♂️ if thats what your heart is telling you to think.
What does heart have to do with anything? BG: Dark Alliance is a wholly different game to BG 1 & 2, it's not a port or a retelling or a remake or an adaptation or anything of the sort. It's a hack and slash with a wholly different story and set up. Citing architectural differences as you did is only another reason for why they weren't ported, not proof Dark Alliance is equivalent to a port as you claim. Although I'm sure that the PS2 could easily handle the Infinity Engine games anyway, it was an engine much older than that hardware (and one could say similar in ways to the Diablo engine that was just fine on PS1, never mind 2) and Dark Alliance being fully 3D makes it more technologically impressive to think it was technology stopping BG ports. Not that anyone tried to give an all in one reason for the games not being ported anyway, there wasn't one, we just discussed the fact most games were indeed not getting ported back then and nothing you have said so far shows otherwise to be so defensive of your false opinion. So yeah, padding your list warring with such titles shows how wrong you are. With your logic you'd say the opposite situation hasn't changed either because hey we get the Japanese console Resident Evil and Final Fantasy games now and we still got games like FF7 and RE2 and 3 on PC back then with their shoddy barebones ports so hey, the situation is the same, but everyone knows things have changed radically and PC now gets way more games and game types it didn't use to have back in the day, even from Japanese and now console first party companies on top, leading to situations like Dark Souls which the platform saved and expanded as a series, just as multiplatform is now the norm even for once PC focused games.
Oh no, i feel so hurt! How could I, me, my, mine of all people be an inexperienced gamer?!
My pride is in shambles!

Okay, I guess that's the level of argument to be expected from you then, carry on.
 
Last edited:

Daytonabot

Banned
Exclusives are over. Valve and CD Projekt have brought essentially everything to consoles. Microsoft brings everything to PC. Sony will likely bring essentially everything to PC.

Nintendo, as has been the case for ~30 years one way or another, is behind the times and is also now relying on a mobile architecture.

Fuck Epic.
 
Last edited:
I think something else that is a part of this is that there have been a lot of advancements in user accessibility and UI/control design since the 90s. In 1998 if you said that you can play an MMO entirely using a controller you would have been laughed at and mocked for fifty pages, but here we are and some of the top FFXIV players are controller only. Hell, I played Baldur's Gate 1 with a controller! And there is no reason it couldn't have been like that back in the 90s, it's just that very few thought about controls like that until recently. So not only are PC/console closer than ever in power, even the way they are played is becoming standardized.
 

yamaci17

Member

  • not enough people on PC with powerful enough hardware"
this one. you can ship ps4, series s, xbox one, one x, ps4 pro all over the world and people will game on them because the game "runs".

there are maybe millions of specs out there that can run games as good as ps4, and a bit better than ps4. look at 1060, the most popular GPU on Steam. it cannot even push a solid 1080p 60 fps in many PS4 ports. most times you will get a weird performance profile between 45-65 FPS, and since most 1060-tier users are budget gamers, they won't naturally have a capable solid VRR screen that can make those framedrops acceptable. not to mention, most of them are hard headed, and "used" to max out. I have 3 1060 friends that refuses to play new games because their GPU is not "capable". suggesting them to use console like lower settings boils their blood for some reason, and of course, they mostly get 30-40 frames at ultra settings. when asked why they do not accept the compromise, they will simply tell you that their GPU used to run everything at 1080p 60 fps ultra maxed before 2018, therefore it should continue to do so.

naturally most of these folks stay away from big AAA titles. I'm not even talking aobut how many 1650/1050ti users are out there. they're practically non existent community for these AAA titles, despite being capable of pushing as much as or just a bit more performance than PS4. for starters, game settings are not properly defined, they just call things low med high, and naturally people who used to play with higher settings cannot accept dropping settings.

and then comes the upper echelons, 1070 and upwards, yeah, they will enjoy these AAA titles. I'm sure all total PC gamers who have a GPU more than capable of 1070-2060 is probably comical compared to total console gamers who have ps4/pro/one/one x combined.

most gamers are scared away from big AAA games. most people with a 1060 simply deems games like gow/spiderman deem unplayable. instead of struggling with 1080p 40-60 fps at medium settings (which they hate for some reason, despite the said settings looking absolutely okay and good), they rather play csgo, rainbow 6, gta 5 or whatever they're hooked up to and have a smooth gaming experience.

this is why pc exclusives like csgo and dota 2 works.

accesibility is important. and most pc people out there simply do not find games accessible, even if potentially they can have a better experience than ps4.

on consoles, people do not question whether game will work on their system or not. they will just accept what is given to them. on PC, it is people who are the judges whether a game is playable to them or not. and most people simply do not even delve into the possibility of playing at 30 FPS. and for some, high settings are too important to leave behind. naturally, only diehard people who "really" want to experience that game will buy the game and play it. even then, it will be a sour experience for them.

imagine being a 1050ti owner, playing most of the popular shooter titles at a perfect locked 60. then comes the rdr 2, and even at low-med settings, you're getting 33-36 frames. one of my friend played this way and although I gave him some methods to lock to 30 in half of his playthrough, he was genuienly thinking he was "butchering" the game and stoppled playing.

do not take this post as a "pcmr" thing. no, I'm not scolding 30 FPS, or low settings. as a matter of fact, I would happily play at 30 fps and med settings on PC if i had similar hardware. its just that on PC, making that choice yourself is tougher than being on console and having no choice at all.

when you have a super high end rig, you make the choice of having even better graphics, but when you have mediocre rig, you actively make choices that most would think unplayable.

this is why consoles works, and will continue to work the way they do.
 
Last edited:

Guilty_AI

Member
Yeah fucker, you better delete your account and never come back.

Or even better, stop feeding this obvious troll. 5$ to it being an alt account of some banned retard.
I wonder if i can get a 'inexperienced gamer' tag, that should shame me in a properly deserved amount.

What does heart have to do with anything? BG: Dark Alliance is a wholly different game to BG 1 & 2, it's not a port or a retelling or a remake or an adaptation or anything of the sort. Citing architectural differences as you did is only a reason for why they weren't ported, not for Dark Alliance being equivalent to a port. Although I'm sure that the PS2 could easily handle the Infinity Engine games anyway, it was an engine much oldfer than that hardware and Dark Alliance being fully 3D certainly makes it more technologically impressive to think it was technology stopping the ports. Not that anyone tried to give an all in one reason for the games not being ported anyway, just discussed the fact most games were indeed not getting ported back then, which you've said nothing to prove otherwise despite being so defensive of that false opinion.

Okay, I guess that's the level of argument to be expected from you then, carry on.
i'm just an inexperienced gamer, of course my visions and opinions should never count when put against the professional, ultra experienced and veteran videogamers, who saw and suffered so much more, survived countless console wars and swapped hardware more times than the number of times they suffered PTSD when their favorite game got ported to rival platforms.
 

01011001

Member
They look at the Steam stats and see 3% on this powerful gpu, 5% on that powerful gpu, and dont realize that those few percent are actually millions of gamers, tens of millions when you add them all together
exactly

Plus you dont need to have a PC as powerful as XSX or PS5, thats the advantage of being on PC, you can change settings to graphics, resolution, and framrate.

yea but this is about high end PC exclusive like Crysis, so in that case I think a 3060ti would be the minimum spec for good performance
 

draliko

Member
you guys don't know how to read math and percentages... steam survey should be around 120 million users last time i checked... so do the maths for powerful gpu and see for yourself... stop being delusional, grow up
 
Last edited:
Last edited:

Stuart360

Member
yea but this is about high end PC exclusive like Crysis, so in that case I think a 3060ti would be the minimum spec for good performance
Yeah but again thats the advatage of PC gaming. Take a XSX/PS5 only game right, that runs at like 1620p or around that number, you could run the same game at the same settings on a 980ti at 1080p, easily.
 

old-parts

Member
There was market data posted 2 years or so ago (superdata or someone like that) showing that the biggest money makers on PC are multi-player titles and that consoles still command the most market share for single player premium games.

The PC has much better whatever suits your specific interest genre via indies, mid tier games just not super big budget single player.
 
Last edited:
Why is this even a topic?

There are no 'AAA PC exclusives' because there is no PC plaform holder. Exclusives are strategic decisions made by plaform holders to value-add (allegedly) to their device. Why would a publisher want to deliberately disadvantage themselves by developing for one platform, without a platform holder's cash convincing them otherwise?
 

MAtgS

Member
It's also why I don't just get a Playstation, besides the fact I don't think many of their games are worth the massive 500 dollar purchase I don't want console exclusives, I want AAA PC exclusives that completely reinvent gaming like how Doom or Half Life did. You can't have that when you're restricted to developing for a console. As much goodwill as Valve does have, I still want them to make more games, specifically VR stuff. Or at the very least, contract third party publishers like Rockstar or ubisoft to make steam exclusive AAA PC games designed for PC first. That would be nice.
Dude, like loads of genres have been born on console. Reinventing gaming requires creative minds, not raw specs. Tetris did far more to change the world on a black and handheld than most PC exclusives ever did.
 
Last edited:
Dude, like loads of genres have been born on console. Reinventing gaming requires creative minds, not raw specs. Tetris did far more to change the world on a black and handheld than most PC exclusives ever did.
Tetris was developed on a PC, and was originally what you'd call a 'PC exclusive', in the sense that the console ports came later.
 
Top Bottom