I meant notable exclusives which would've been responsible for Sony's success.
Yeah... that is/was me attempting to not write a short novel.
When it comes to Sony: It's Complicated.
As you said, Sony is successful because of the PS1 and PS2 library. Which they themselves, in the grand scheme of things, have barely contributed to. But that library exists because Sony was the front-runner for two consecutive generations (with the first being a freebie because Sega imploded and Nintendo rolled with expensive and overpriced cartridges),
and because during that period they weren't afraid to spend money. When Nintendo struck a deal with Capcom to get some exclusive games, Sony paid out the ass to get
all of those games on the PS2 a year later. Resident Evil 4 may look worse on PS2 than it did GCN, and may have even sold worse, but that didn't really matter. You cannot be the market leader and not have a contender for "Game of the Generation" on your platform. Y'know?
I doubt Capcom needed much convincing to port at least RE4, though.
For many, arguing whether a game is Sony exclusive by circumstance or genuinely Sony backed/owned is an exercise in pedantry. There is no difference in their mind. If they want to play Metal Gear Solid, they will always buy PlayStation. If they want to play Final Fantasy, always PlayStation. Monster Hunter (unless Nintendo steals it lol), Devil May Cry, Dragon Quest (Nintendo lol), Megami Tensei/Persona, From Software - all Sony, all the time. It applies to non-Japanese stuff too; Grand Theft Auto, Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed will also always be on PlayStation. Microsoft could buy Take-Two and Ubisoft on top of Activision and those games would still show up on PS5/6.
There are only two things that can break Sony in Japan (and by extension, the world): Nintendo having an on-par console, and Japan wholesale abandoning traditional console gaming. Which, in the case of the latter, is actually happening. Probably also why Japanese games are showing up more and more often on PC, albeit often with dubious quality.
I didn't know that. Why is that? Due to Sony exclusives or because they prefer local companies?
If by "prefer local companies" you mean "xenophobic beyond all comprehension," then yes.
Now, it's not 100% because of that. Microsoft has absolutely had a hand in their own failures by not continuing to heavily invest in Japan after about 2009. But back in the early days of the X360, before the PS3 launched and a couple years after where it was
super struggling, Microsoft opened the wallet and got a ton of Japanese games either exclusively (Lost Odyssey, Blue Dragon, Tales of Vesperia,
Condemned: Criminal Origins [Monolith is American; Sega proper is Japanese], Dead Rising) or with parity (Devil May Cry 4, Final Fantasy XIII, Resident Evil 5). X360 actually managed to outsell the PS3, in Japan, on a couple of occasions. The internet routinely melted down with each game "betrayal" and surge in sales.
But cracks were always present. Games like Metal Gear Solid 4 didn't come to Xbox. Outside of big marquee title launches, sales were flatlined. Over time, PS3 picked up momentum. Despite the issues with the Cell processor and pricing, games that were once exclusive - Tales of Vesperia and Star Ocean: The Last Hope in particular - made the jump to PS3.
With extra content. People were furious. Consoles and discs were destroyed and posted to the internet, as is wont to happen.
And then, of course, there was the
little problem that was the Red Ring of Death. Which was less of a pain for people in North America than it was for people elsewhere, unsurprisingly.
So PS3 wound up outselling X360 worldwide by the end of the generation. And then... well,
the Xbone (that's Crossbone, y'dig?) happened. Hoooly crap, Don, that's still embarrassing to hear ~11 years later.
With that said… are console wars even a thing anymore? It seems to me, with my limited involvement, that each has their niche now and exclusives are merely a way to fill it.
Of course they are. In all directions. GameFAQs still exists!
Sony and Microsoft still play into it every now and again. It's still, y'know, fucking embarrassing.
Sometimes funny though.
So what do you guys think? Personally it feels like FTC are a bunch of Sony fanboys, it is so weird.
A lot of the arguments are stupid and generally in bad faith because... well, there really isn't a valid legal argument to be made.
You'd have to approach this in the same way that people pointed out with Disney acquiring Marvel and Star Wars. They're creative works, they consolidate power, are
definitely bad, but they don't - can't, really - form a monopoly. Microsoft owning Call of Duty doesn't, y'know, prevent Medal of Honor and Battlefield from existing. This isn't quite like EA having an exclusive contract with the NFL, denying Take-Two the opportunity to compete.
So, yeah. It's functionally Sony spending a lot of money trying to make this not happen, while also spending a lot of money elsewhere to outright buy studios like Bungie and keep other, smaller Top 10 publishers like Square Enix in a limbo state.
gamerant.com
Yeah this is obviously fanboi nonsense. PlayStation does have some excellent exclusives, but not any moreso than any other platform IMO.
