Because it's all the same in the end :)

It's all computer hardware presented in it's own fashion. Sometimes it's computers and monitors, sometimes it's consoles and TV's. It's all the same, and depending on the group, it can be very fun. But whether any network is local or online, regardless of platform, doesn't matter either if it's a known group of friends that enjoy playing together.

If we exclude different games and input methods - yes. Even tabletop is same then. :)

Indeed :)

So the main point is just gather the whole gand together and gone fishing? :)

That's life. Exclusives drive console sales and this "exclusive tug of war" has been going on for decades now. It won't change. If you look at E3, you'll notice that it's just a "battle for exclusives", even for multiplatform games. For example, Watch Dogs on the PS4 has 1 hour of bonus content not available in other platforms (Assasin's Creed games also did the same on the PS3), Microsoft always gets DLC for COD first on the Xbox, Destiny and Farcry 4 will have some features exclusively on the PS4. The PS4 and the Xbox One are extremely similar consoles, the only real difference are the exclusives. It sucks, but that's life for you. Besides, i think that the PC already has enough good games to last a lifetime. You really don't need every console exclusive in existence.

By the way, Tim Schaffer did say that he'll look into other platforms in the future. It won't remain as PS4 exclusive. Looking at the bright side, this remake would probably have never happened without Sony's influence to being with. When Grim Fandango eventually ships on PCs, thank Sony for that.

I just read that link you posted, and to be very honest i can't see how Sony is "evil" because of that. From what i read there, the game is being funded by Sony, the developer said that they couldn't have made the game without this support. I don't see what's so wrong about it. Sony is funding the damn thing, they are the ones who should decide for which platforms the game will be released. It's their money, and they want to sell consoles. That's capitalism for you.

That's like blaming Nintendo for Bayonetta 2 being a Wii U exclusive. The game wouldn't even exist without Nintendo backing it up.

Objective. There's no way to confirm for sure if it had to do with technical limitations or a deliberate design choice, unless the developers themselves say something about it. KOTOR was released on the Xbox, the same platform that got Morrowind, the huge open-world RPG that PC gamers love so much. If Bethesda managed to squeeze Morrowind into the Xbox, why couldn't Bioware do something similar? So, yeah, i still think that it was a design choice rather than technical limitations imposed on them. Big open-world games were possible on consoles.

There's one thing that i don't understand, though. You just complained about consoles getting exclusive games, and now you're complaining that Deux Ex 2 and KOTOR were not PC exclusives? Seems like some double standards right there to be honest.

I haven't played vanilla WoW, so i can't comment on it. I only started to play WoW years after release.

And that has nothing to do with consoles. What does the closure of Bullfrog, Origin and Westhood have to do with consoles? Do you want to blame consoles for Ultima 8 and 9 as well?

But they are not elitist! Only immature. :)

"Guys, I'm leaving! Wait, I'm not sure now.. actually no, I'm not leaving!"

Cool story, bro.

And you claim not to be able to understand what the OP was talking about.

Dickhead.

Doesn't mean I have to like what they do and have no right to complain. It makes a person like me paranoid when they start playing around with exclusives again like they did for the 360 and PS3 back in their peak especially if they touch PC titles.
I fear that the other platforms are iOS and Android and no mention of PC. And no, I won't thank sony for that even if it comes to PC eventually for them playing the PS4 priority game (I get extra sensitive especially when it's one of my favourite games ever). It's also capitalism now that I'm boycotting sony across the board. Call me narrow-minded or selfish but I guess I won't change.

I guess we don't really know. Most developers then made games for consoles in mind first then port to the PC, since they have the license to develop for the consoles, why waste it. Morrowind and DA:O was made for PCs first then released to the console crowd. Console DA:O had no isometric tactical view on the consoles, not idea what EA gave for their reasons whether it be technical limitations or just being lazy, it pissed quite a number of people, but knowing EA they probably are being butt-lazy. They continued to make DA2 which was the exact opposite of DA:O, it had no isometric camera this time and pissed off the original PC gamers.
Actually I'm not a big fan of Bethesda games and have boycotted their games since Oblivion. Their games had big open worlds but that's about it. Combat is simple, writing is atrocious at points, quests and sidequests fall bland etc.
There's the particularly weird case with Diablo 3. Sure it was released for PC first, but it's reasonable to argue it was made with consoles in mind right at the start. The 4 button hotkey quickbar kinda gave it away. You couldn't hotkey your abilities to the Function keys like you could in D2. Pretty unsurprising when the console versions were announced, the 4 button skills fit the controller perfectly. And yes I know consoles can use the keyboard, just like we can use any USB accessory but most don't. So not only did we suffer always online DRM, and disconnects but we used to have the RMAH, the console versions are free of all that. Yea, I know Blizzard's fault for the last few reasons especially them treating us like pirates.

No, I'm not complaining that games like Deus Ex: IW and KOTOR are not PC exclusives. I'm wondering what would've happened if they had better resources and equipment to develop their games from at that time. I have problems with games going console exclusive only, denying PC releases in the process and I'm also bothered if publishers made their games for the console and not bother to put up a good PC port or game.

Nah, I'm blaming the studios themselves for that, I'm mentioned EA and M$ as 2 examples. And I'm known around here to have a burning hatred for EA since 2003.

In case you get the impression that I'm probably a vile console hater, I'm really am not. I grew up with consoles back in the late 80s to the 90s as much as I did with the PC and I'm a regular at arcades. Games like Mario, Contra, Double Dragon, Golden Axe, Sonic, Duck Hunt, Top Gun, Chip and Dale, Bare Knuckle, I kinda grew up with them during the Nintendo, Sega eras. In fact one of my favourite gaming achievements is being able to complete Contra 2 without using a continue. I had the honour of seeing Akuma appearing for the first time in arcades for SSF2 and I've been going to the arcades plenty since Streetfighter 2 and the early Fatal Fury days to play fighting games and beat-em-ups all the way till Marvel vs Capcom 2 days and now SFIV. I also played games on the Sega Saturn and PS1, games like Resident Evil and the usual fighting games.
Back then console gaming left PC gaming alone mostly. We were happy then. Even though ports were found across platforms like how C&C and Warcraft 2 were on Sega Saturn and Romance of the Three Kingdoms 4 was on PS1 and FF7 and FF8 were on PC as well. It wasn't until the Xbox and Xbox 360 that all these shenanigans came about. But I guess I'll just leave it at that.

Why do they call it the Xbox One?

Because you play it one time and after that it does nothing but collect cobwebs.

Of course you can complain, I just think that it's a waste of time. The "war for exclusives" has been going on since the NES days. It won't change.

That doesn't make too much sense for me, honestly. What would you prefer: for Grim Fandango to remain forgotten in Disney's archives forever or for a port to be made, even if it comes on consoles first and PCs later? I'd certainly choose the second option. Having the game later is certainly better than not having it at all.

And of course Sony will try to make the PS4 a priority. They were the ones who reached out to Disney and made the whole thing possible. Seems fair for me if they get Grim Fandango as a timed exclusive since they are the ones who made it possible. Besides, they don't have that much to gain from the PC market anyway, unlike Microsoft.

I think these games would turn out to be the same. I still think that making both games more "linear" was a design choice. Open-world games were possible in all of the consoles of that generation.

Well, everyone hates EA. To be honest there isn't one single gaming company that i "hate". There are companies that i really don't like (like EA, Capcom and Disney), but i don't "hate" them. The companies that i hate are the ones that cause far more damage than releasing "bad games". I never really understood why EA got 2 awards for the "worst company of the year". No, i'm not happy about EA, i don't like EA, but i seriously can't see how EA is worse than the likes of Monsanto, oil companies or the financial companies that caused the recent subprime crisis. I can't see how making bad games is worse than bringing the whole US economy to its knees.

Yes, and if you come to think about it, it does make sense. The productions costs for games skyrocketed at the last generation, which is why most games nowadays go multiplatform (except for the games being funded by one of the console manufacturers, for obvious reasons). It's not viable to make a triple A game for just one platform, especially the PC, which doesn't sell as many games as consoles.

I have Grim Fandango, the original boxset still in my collection and it's one of the most valuable thing in my gaming possessions. To see a remastered version go to the PS4 audience first instead of us which we have no confirmation of as yet, is a very sour thing for me. I'll grant you that it's Tim Schafer's fault as well. It's a known fact that Tim ran out of money from making Broken Age, I have absolutely no idea how he blew 3million making 1/2 of Broken Age when other companies can come out with a full blown adventure game for 30k. So instead of rewarding the original players who love the games so much, they cater to an unknown audience for the game, who might or might not even care about it and throw us the bone later like 2nd class citizens. Well, Tim needed the money, so something unexpected like this is bound to happen.

We've seen the same thing when supposedly console exclusives make it on PC. The sour people of GTAIV and now GTAV is one example. Pretty sure I've seen salty people over Final Fantasy XIV, also when Kojima said they were making a PC MGS5, just check the commments:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/03/05/hideo-kojima-wants-metal-gear-solid-5-for-pc

I think we both agree by now, it's possibly a factor of either the dev's design themselves or possibly designing the game with console specifications and controls from ground up.

To keep it in the gaming world, EA probably tops the list of my most hated company. They have destroyed far more of my favourite gaming franchises and developers than any other entity out there. And yeah anyone here reading this and wishes to quote that the developers sold out and wanted to be bought out by EA, please keep it to yourself, we've been through this over the years now.

What I meant was that when the Xbox came about, M$ tried all they could to bring the PC gamers into the Xbox console, that's when all the shenanigans started. They started denying or delaying PC releases to get more Xbox exclusives, integrated GFWL into Windows games, made the Xbox controller exclusive to certain games which did not recognise Logitech controllers for example. Sony of course had to retaliate and the PC gamers suffered as a result. But for everything that M$ tried, they failed miserably, GFWL can be bypassed entirely with mods, Logitech and other controllers that weren't recognised were emulated through stuff like Xpadder. And we all know that PC gaming didn't die then, much less now.