By Zaid at Friday, August 15, 2014 9:50:00 AM

Rise of the Tomb Raider would be an Xbox exclusive many a gamer a lost their minds (and perhaps regained part of it with the

When it was announced during Microsoft's Gamescom conference thatwould be an Xbox exclusive many a gamer a lost their minds (and perhaps regained part of it with the "timed exclusive" announcement ). Despite everything else that has happened at the conference it feels like that is the only piece of news anyone cares about. And it seems the majority opinion on this turn of events is that the exclusivity is not in the best interest of gamers. I can understand why people might feel that way, but people are wrong.

Exclusivity? Exclusivity is great.



Caption: This is coming… eventually…



Bitter pill to swallow

The feeling of betrayal many are experiencing regarding this exclusivity is understandable, especially if they are Tomb Raider fans who’ve already made a financial commitment to the PlayStation 4. It’s a tall ask expecting people to shell out an additional R6299 for the privilege of getting to play a game, just because they may have made the ‘wrong’ choice of console.



Bayonetta sequel on Wii U.

As my colleague, Tauriq Moosa, pointed out recently it may be admirable that you’re a loyal fan of the series, but the game’s creators owe you nothing as far as their future projects are concerned. And it should also be noted that it is entirely possible that the game’s very existence was made possible by the exclusivity, as is the case with thesequel on Wii U.

Rise of the Tomb Raider’s exclusivity,

I don’t what to harp on about and speculate as to the right and wrong ofexclusivity, timed or otherwise . I’d much rather try to get a handle on why people are so dead set against this idea of platform exclusivity generally. As I said, the prevailing sentiment seems to be that exclusivity is a bad thing and we should avoid it.

But exclusivity is not a bad thing. Truth be told, to my mind exclusivity is actually a good thing. Some of the best games ever made were exclusives and neither the industry nor gamers suffered for it.



Exclusive games are better games

I realise that what I am about to say is clouded in the rose-tinted lenses of nostalgia, but I would contend that it is no less true for it. Many veteran gamers my age would agree that the 16-bit era was a golden age for gaming. It was also a time when we had a particular boisterous console war going on between SEGA’s Mega Drive and Nintendo’s SNES.



A primary reason that this particular era was so good for gaming was that SEGA and Nintendo were constantly trying to outdo each other and the primary weapon in their war of one-up-manship was to make brilliant games. It wasn’t just a case of the Mega Drive and the SNES battling each other, but individual franchises on those consoles also took aim at each other and in the process gamers got an assurance of quality products.



If Nintendo had Final Fantasy then SEGA had Phantasy Star. If Nintendo had Final Fight then SEGA had Streets of Rage. If Nintendo had Contra III/ Super Probotector then SEGA had Gunstar Heroes. If Nintendo had Zelda then SEGA had Beyond Oasis. If Nintendo had Mario then SEGA had Sonic.

You can argue forever about which console's exclusives outdid the others or you can bring up the case for whose games have withstood the test of time better (it was Nintendo,obviously), but that's no really the point. During that period of time, we had a situation where rivalry and competition was spurring quality products and gamers on both sides were winning.

Now none of this is to say that the 16-bit era didn’t have clunkers in its library, it did, but the fact that both consoles had an extensive selection of exclusives proved to be a boon for both systems. It meant that each side worked harder to provide great experiences and ultimately, in the long run, it made for a higher percentage of quality games for both systems.



More Exclusives Needed

You don’t have to look at the 16-bit era to see this. It’s apparent even now. Take a look at the first party games on any of the consoles and then tell me you don’t see the quality work at play. The Last of Us, Gears of War, Legend of Zelda, the upcoming Star Citizen. All these games are platform exclusives and to a man they exhibit quality in spades. You may have you preferences, but that last bit is undeniable fact. Exclusivity, by and large, breeds better games.



So why then, in this modern era should we limit the exclusives to only first-party developed games? Getting a development team to focus their efforts on a single system seems like a simple way to motivate a team to produce quality work. And pitting them against a rival, giving them a target to chase, history already tells us that can produce great franchises.



Now none of this means I want a future where we only have exclusives, but I think a more of them would only be beneficial overall.



What's you take on the matter?

Related articles:

Zaid's Twitter / MWEB GameZone Twitter | Facebook