High-Def Digest Forums

High-Def Digest Forums (https://forums.highdefdigest.com/)
-   Gaming Smackdown (https://forums.highdefdigest.com/gaming-smackdown-42/)
-   -   PS4 vs. Xbox One exclusives to date (comprehensive list, updated every 3 months) (https://forums.highdefdigest.com/gaming-smackdown/143283-ps4-vs-xbox-one-exclusives-date-comprehensive-list-updated-every-3-months.html)

RedRedSuit 01-15-2016 01:00 PM

Correct. Only 80+ are included. I explained why I didn't try to list lower scoring exclusives in the original post. Essentially there are too many of them at that point. But feel free to do it if you want. I'll warn you it's not that easy.

For dick measuring purposes the 80/85/90 categories should be more than enough.

RedRedSuit 01-15-2016 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Averry (Post 2570021)
Its baffling as to Sony's lack of out put from it's big guns. I mean, from Sony's perspective, it's a failure to capitalize on its huge install base and rake in dough. I don't really think that's going to change in a dramatic way. Getting out Uncharted will be huge, but I don't think it's going to be the start of a big shift.

Indeed, I wrote similar in the OP, and Dennis quoted agreement also.

To keep it in perspective, however, if you look at the first party retail games, MS has done only a little better. Yes, they were able to put out Halo a few months earlier than Uncharted, and Forza is regularly releasing unlike GT. And... that's it.

Your comment about a lack of a shift is affected by that point. Also, at least on paper, this year for PS4 looks good and would indeed be a shift. But I know better than to announce this as fact; delays and cancellations are all too frequent.

RM 01-15-2016 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cuco33 (Post 2570034)
OK, I personally think metacritic worship is a crock but if the argument is based on meta 80+ games then by all means go for it. If I had a say I would say 75 and higher, because perfect score is 100 and decent/good game could be a quarter off that mark so 75. But I am not making the rules. This was pitchforked reactions against a single poster, mid, due to AAA and great titles and the whatever score its supposed to be.

I don't think it's "Metacritic worship", as almost no one here really gives a shit about their scores anymore. It's just a universal number that we can all point to and see very clearly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cuco33 (Post 2570034)
Still not sure why dlc are in these lists.

Metacritic splits them out as such, so it does make some sense if you're looking specifically at their scores. It should be obvious we would roll them up in any discussion other than Metacritic numbers though. I doubt you will see any Cronies trying to argue Resogun actually counts as 3 games.

Basically, the Metacritic numbers are a place to start the conversation - not the beginning and end.

RedRedSuit 01-15-2016 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cuco33 (Post 2570034)
OK, I personally think metacritic worship is a crock but if the argument is based on meta 80+ games then by all means go for it. If I had a say I would say 75 and higher, because perfect score is 100 and decent/good game could be a quarter off that mark so 75. But I am not making the rules. This was pitchforked reactions against a single poster, mid, due to AAA and great titles and the whatever score its supposed to be.

Still not sure why dlc are in these lists. I still think PC is the best way to go because the console exclusives are fairly light. The stand out big titles are even less.

80+ is a cutoff for a great many people, myself included. mid's cut off is (well, was) 85.

DLC is included for those that care about it. If you don't, there is specifically a section which removes it from considerations.

I know for a fact that downloadable add-ons can be significant. The ones that aren't won't be scored highly anyway.

cuco33 01-15-2016 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedRedSuit (Post 2570035)
Correct. Only 80+ are included. I explained why I didn't try to list lower scoring exclusives in the original post. Essentially there are too many of them at that point. But feel free to do it if you want. I'll warn you it's not that easy.

For dick measuring purposes the 80/85/90 categories should be more than enough.

If 80 is the threshold its probably cleaner to just leave it 80 and above. Dont see value breaking it up 80/85/90 but thats on you.

RedRedSuit 01-15-2016 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cuco33 (Post 2570042)
If 80 is the threshold its probably cleaner to just leave it 80 and above. Dont see value breaking it up 80/85/90 but thats on you.

It's not broken up.

The three sections are independent. If you don't care about 85+ or 90+, you just ignore those sections.

To be clear, the 80+ section counts all games 80 and higher (not just 80-84).

cuco33 01-15-2016 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cuco33 (Post 2570042)
If 80 is the threshold its probably cleaner to just leave it 80 and above. Dont see value breaking it up 80/85/90 but thats on you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedRedSuit (Post 2570038)
80+ is a cutoff for a great many people, myself included. mid's cut off is (well, was) 85.

DLC is included for those that care about it. If you don't, there is specifically a section which removes it from considerations.

I know for a fact that downloadable add-ons can be significant. The ones that aren't won't be scored highly anyway.

I just dont get why dlc would even make it in. Its the game that matters, not so much the dlc. As an example resogun, a small indie title, is counted up 3x because of the 2 dlcs heroes and defenders. Like imagine if halo 5 dlc came out every quarter (kind of like cod) and reviewed, that halo 5 could potentially get counted 5x rather than once. Another example, forza 4 had the porsche expansion pack, but I would only have counted fm4 only and not the expansion; and imagine if all dlcs were reviewed? Fm4 would have gotten added up like 10x if rated 80 or above. Obviously some dlc is much better than others and even stand alone.
But again, its your thread and rules. I just think its strange counting it.

cuco33 01-15-2016 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedRedSuit (Post 2570043)
It's not broken up.

The three sections are independent. If you don't care about 85+ or 90+, you just ignore those sections.

To be clear, the 80+ section counts all games 80 and higher (not just 80-84).

Gotcha. I just see it as extra effort to split out more tiers that arent really needed. If it were my thread id set the threshold at 75 or 80 and list all games, split em up as indies and full titles maybe.

Still, will be intersting to see how bad current gen is. Thats my mantra, my motto. Im all about that pc nowadays, and I wouldnt count games also available on pc as well. One main reason to get into a console is for the exclusives, the games that arent available anywhere else. Both consoles will suffer if you remove games also available on pc.
Too many variables

RedRedSuit 01-15-2016 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cuco33 (Post 2570044)
I just dont get why dlc would even make it in. Its the game that matters, not so much the dlc. As an example resogun, a small indie title, is counted up 3x because of the 2 dlcs heroes and defenders. Like imagine if halo 5 dlc came out every quarter (kind of like cod) and reviewed, that halo 5 could potentially get counted 5x rather than once. Another example, forza 4 had the porsche expansion pack, but I would only have counted fm4 only and not the expansion; and imagine if all dlcs were reviewed? Fm4 would have gotten added up like 10x if rated 80 or above. Obviously some dlc is much better than others and even stand alone.
But again, its your thread and rules. I just think its strange counting it.

The size is what matters. I didn't count the Bloodborne expansion as a full game, because it's not. Bloodborne is. The Bloodborne expansion IS however a big game; that's why it is included. It isn't a full-price game, so it's not counted in that list.

Anyway, you can see easily that the expansions have little effect on the result because PS4 has so many more titles anyway.

P.S. Map packs are not typically reviewed, so it's pointless to imagine it. Expansions are reviewed and are fair-game.

RedRedSuit 01-15-2016 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cuco33 (Post 2570046)
Gotcha. I just see it as extra effort to split out more tiers that arent really needed. If it were my thread id set the threshold at 75 or 80 and list all games, split em up as indies and full titles maybe.

I DID split out full titles vs. smaller games.

85+ and 90+ have been oft-discussed tiers on this board and needed to be included.

Every conceivable combination is in the OP.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:22 PM.