When in history has a console sell 4.2M in the first 1.5 months? Never... not even close in fact.
Exactly, and I've made it clear that it is amazing that both the PS4 and the One have sold so many units, with so little going for them (in terms of games, etc), and are still so readily available. I think this is a great thing for the console gaming industry. You seem to be pushing some odd agenda that I'm trying to figure out.
Interesting... so all of the towns you've visited had PS4s in stock, yet NO online retailer have them available, and every other anecdotal report, including my own, have said that there are no PS4s in sight. Very strange... Sony's allocation in the US seems very poorly managed. /s
No, that's not what I said. Go back and read my messages. I've clearly stated that some stores had NEITHER console, some stores had BOTH, some stores only had One's and stores that had both had more One's than PS4's.
I've clearly stated that One's are more readily available than PS4s. HOWEVER, it is not difficult at all to find a PS4. Not just in my Small Town USA, but also in any of the towns I've passed through during the last month.
Why do you keep saying 'free'? I never once said free.
I don't. I added it once to that last message in regard to the exclusivity to the Next-Gen Madden release because you are the one that added COST into the equation when you stated that exclusives would cost LESS last generation because MS launched first and if they wanted to acquire exclusives this generation it would cost them more because they didn't launch first. MS didn't PAY to get "Next Gen Madden" on the 360. They got it for "free" by the simple fact that they launched first. All the other exclusives or timed exclusives they had to pay for.
When did I say Sony acquired third-party exclusives? I clearly said that Sony generally doesn't operate that way.
Uhhhh.. What? Your entire premise was that it would be more difficult for MS to acquire third party exclusives now that they aren't leading in the install base.
I've said that MS acquired all those third party exclusives PRIOR to launch, before install base numbers even existed. I asked you to demonstrate where EITHER manufacturer spent money to acquire exclusives AFTER launch. Now you're saying Sony just doesn't do that.
Great. When has MS ever done that?
Where is the support for your idea that it will be more difficult for MS to acquire third party exclusives because Sony has sold more PS4 than MS has sold Ones? Where is the support for your idea that MS (since you just stated that Sony never does it anyway), acquires third part exclusives AFTER LAUNCH?
Why do you keep twisting my words, or even putting words in my mouth? I said that I personally feel that Sony will have a software advantage, because they are known to have one of the best first-party teams, all of which are working on PS4 now. PlayStations have always had great software from their first-party teams... Naughty Dog, Sony Santa Monica, Sony San Diego, Polyphony Digital, Guerrilla Games, Sucker Punch, Evolution Studios, XDev, Team ICO, Media Molecule to name a few. Then they have a handful of what I would consider '2nd party' teams working exclusively for PS, such as Quantic Dream and Ready at Dawn.
And none of that has anything to do with third parties, right? Can we agree on that? Nothing you've said above has anything at all to do with third parties.
Yet, this discussion started because you stated that it would be more difficult to acquire third party exclusives based on launch window sales data.
So what relevance does any of that have to do with this discussion?
Again twisting my words.
I absolutely think that it was cheaper for MS to secure third-party exclusives when they had a year headstart vs when they're trailing the competition in install base, yes.
How can you not see that these are two completely different things?
I've already said that the idea that third party exclusives were cheaper to obtain for the 360 because they launched a year earlier is logical and passes the smell test. There's no facts to back this up, but it seems like a sound enough theory that I'm willing to agree.
But then you take another leap into "trailing competition in install base". How do you get there? The exclusivity deals were done
prior to launch. They are always done
prior to launch. If you can't provide examples of exclusivity deals that were done after both consoles were established you have absolutely nothing to base your conclusions upon.
There's no way I can prove that, so just agree to disagree. Personally I think MS was/is far more active than Sony in trying to secure exclusive deals with third-parties because their first-party team isn't nearly as strong as Sony's (IMO). I think MS made several deals with third-parties because they were in a good position to with the 360 at launch, with absolutely no direct competition for a whole year. Once the PS3 established a solid user base, those deals weren't happening any more, probably because it became too expensive.
Sorry, we can't agree to disagree because what it comes down to is timing. MS was certainly more active in acquiring third party exclusives with the 360 than with the One. Were they aided by the fact that they launched a year earlier so those exclusivity rights came at a lesser cost? Possibly.
Is it clear this year that MS didn't focus on exclusivity deals for third party games and focused on spending their money in other areas instead (such as the NFL deal)? Absolutely.
Do you have anything at all to point to the fact that MS was still trying to obtain exclusivity deals with third parties after the PS3 had an established user base? If not, your entire theory lacks any sort of factual foundation at all.
My whole point in all of this is, unless MS strengthens their first-party studios, I feel Sony will have an advantage in software in the long run.
That's fine, and that's all well and good, and I'm not sure I disagree with your statement.
My point is that the difference in install base between the PS4 and One has no impact at all on acquiring third party exclusives. Third party exclusives are obtained prior to launch, not afterwards. You haven't give a single example of a third party exclusive that was obtained by either MS or Sony after both consoles had established their install base.
Why? Because it doesn't happen. Once you establish your install base you no longer need to spend the money to acquire third party exclusives because console price point is a greater determining factor.
I think MS made a huge mistake in not acquiring more third party exclusives prior to launch.
I don't think at this point, with both consoles having tremendous launches and yet still available, that the difference in install base has any impact on obtaining third party exclusives. Because those exclusives would have been obtained prior to launch.
