Sony and Microsoft first party strategy

[BRiT]

This is related to their new stance on development announcements. They won't announce major games before they're in the 5 to 8 months out range. That means we only know whats set for 2018 and nothing of what's beyond.

 

[iroboto]

This is related to their new stance on development announcements. They won't announce major games before they're in the 5 to 8 months out range. That means we only know whats set for 2018 and nothing of what's beyond.

Agreed. But this is something Phil is going to have to figure out for his potential customer base. Not everyone is going to be happy with this announce to release strategy. So I’m curious as to when there is enough “noise” what he intends to do.

He has at one point in time made mention that he wasn’t doing a good enough job marketing their things, so it’s also possible this is in conflict with giving each thing more time in the spot light before moving on.

Right now it’s X and PUBG. After everyone returns to work in January, I’d be curious to what will be next for their marketing cycle. I’m going to assume he’s properly spaced the games out so that they at least get a month each of the spotlight.

 

[bunge]

I’m not making a judgment on their business decision but on what it could do to the industry. Taking studios or games out of mass circulation is a negative. Adding new games or studios is a positive. This plan seems like a negative for the industry.

 

[iroboto]

I’m not making a judgment on their business decision but on what it could do to the industry. Taking studios or games out of mass circulation is a negative. Adding new games or studios is a positive. This plan seems like a negative for the industry.

well
then you'd be on my agreement that exclusives in general are a terrible thing for the industry and thus a detriment to all of us. It becomes a stupid arms race to see which studios will snatch up more at most extreme end points. That's why this topic is super polarizing.

 

[BRiT]

Discussion on what it takes to get into Game Development spun off to the following thread: https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/...rporate-development-career-paths-spawn.60573/

Yeah, the title will likely change as the topic expands, but it seems more fitting to have it's own thread.

 

[bunge]

well
then you'd be on my agreement that exclusives in general are a terrible thing for the industry and thus a detriment to all of us. It becomes a stupid arms race to see which studios will snatch up more at most extreme end points. That's why this topic is super polarizing.

No, nurturing talent and teams isn’t part of a “stupid arms race”. Snatching up more is a stupid arms race. Taking a platform agnostic game like Destiny and making it Sony or Microsoft exclusive would be detrimental.

A new IP like Cuphead? Great that the developers had the time, resources and support to achieve their dream. Exclusivity like that is wonderful. It allows teams to focus on both technical and artistic achievements.

EDIT: Yes I saw your sarcastic smiley but it’s New Year’s Day and my hangover is making it difficult to come up with a witty response.

 

[CSI PC]

No.

PS2 was a very cheap DVD player and had to compete against kiddy Nintendo consoles and struggling first MS console.

PS4 is still only a main game machine and has to compete against a established Xbox brand (with aggressive price cuts and deals during the whole gen, now more than ever: A PS4 costs $300, a XB1 + UHD player costs $200. The year the successful Switch is released, PS4 sells the most.

And PS4 also has to compete against the powerful Steam and mobile gaming. And they are doing that while making more money via PSN than they ever have. Comparatively Sony didn't make that much money with their PS2s.

Xbox One has sold 25-30 million units, XBox 360 sold 84 million units.
But you missed my points and context while focusing only on that one line, which I concede is not the whole story and maybe been better if I had not included it but I did expand upon it in the posts.
39% of PS2 total units sold after the launch of the PS3 and XBox 360, that is double to what the PS2 sold before the XBox launched and so sold strongly when consoles were probably at the height of perceived performance/price compared to PCs and games availability.
To be fair though, the Xbox was still not really much of a competitor but it started their exclusives and foundation and had some appeal but PS2 was a juggernaut because of price/performance/games that importantly lasted well into the next generation of consoles and its strength was sustained growth sales figure.

Like I said as well the problem with the XBox One is that it was not a 'primary' game machine with the confused corporate narrative (along with other mistakes) and that is what crashed its sales with it being perceived as a multi-media/hub/game box but compromised compared to the PS4 not just in HW-performance but games being developed.
Microsoft thought they could target a broader market with the console but unfortunately it seems it is still the focus of mostly console gamers, fair to say only Nintendo to date has managed to gain appeal beyond the general console gamer.

While you mention Nintendo as a competitor historically the PS2,PS3,XBox360 had greater pressure from the Wii that launched in 2006 and is still Nintendo's best selling console of all time by a long way, I am glad the Switch is doing well but Nintendo are still a fair bit off their heights back then.
I concede I over simplified the 1 year without competition, but it needs to be seen in the whole context that the PS2 actually sold more and just as strongly when there was a foundation of competition/hardware out there when compared to the PS4 for multiple reasons.
The PS2 sold more units in a 3 year window after the launch of the PS3/XBox/Wii than the Xbox One has sold to date (4 years available) while PS4 has sold 2.5x more units than the XBox One up to last quarter of 2017, and that says it all really.
Switch is not really eating into the main console sales as it is seen as a distinct segment or purchased by gamers that buy multiple consoles.

Not sure if has any relevance to this thread but part of the discussion looking historically also needs to consider that both manufacturers back then were willing to sell at much higher loss figures per unit when launching (figure improves over time), the PS3 and Xbox 360 being the extreme.
Anyway IMO the latest gen XBox One X is a better competitor to PS4/PS4 Pro than the the Xbox One is due to the market focus and consumers interested in these consoles.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

well then you'd be on my agreement that exclusives in general are a terrible thing for the industry and thus a detriment to all of us. It becomes a stupid arms race to see which studios will snatch up more at most extreme end points.

The number of console exclusive games, relative to all games released, has never been so small. Because I'm old I remember when when console = exclusive. Activision was the first successful third party publisher formed by digruntled ex-Atari 2600 game programmers, who were unhappy with poor pay and no credits.

I'm not seeing an 'arms race' which I think is probably for for two reasons. First (and obviously) exclusive games have a smaller sales market and if I recall some old Sony public comment, are rarely profitable. Second, factoring in the first point, console manufacturer's can't afford to buy up lots of games. To me it feels like the complete reverse, with first party studios being closed down (or third parties released from contracts) and those develoeprs being freed to work on platform agnostic projects.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I'm not seeing an 'arms race' which I think is probably for for two reasons.

There's no arms race because MS aren't getting involved. They are happy to concede that advantage to Sony.

First (and obviously) exclusive games have a smaller sales market and if I recall some old Sony public comment, are rarely profitable.

Games are rarely profitable. You need a big enough stable to ensure some big hitters that pay the way for all the economic failures. The loss of market size being exclusive is compensate by getting more people onto your platform where you get more license fees from all the other games sold, in theory, which is why it's still a strategy Sony employ.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

There's no arms race because MS aren't getting involved. They are happy to concede that advantage to Sony.

SO they're leaving the field open to Sony

Games are rarely profitable. You need a big enough stable to ensure some big hitters that pay the way for all the economic failures. The loss of market size being exclusive is compensate by getting more people onto your platform where you get more license fees from all the other games sold, in theory, which is why it's still a strategy Sony employ.

The theory that is impossible to prove because it reuired clarity on perpeterually unknown of question, why did x millsion people buy this console and y million buy that console. If Sony subscribed to this theory, and Microsoft chosing to sit out, they could garner greater market share (and thus licensing) by assembling more teams or securign more exclusives.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Sony has more first party devs, more exclusives, and more market share...

 

[CSI PC]

There's no arms race because MS aren't getting involved. They are happy to concede that advantage to Sony.

Games are rarely profitable. You need a big enough stable to ensure some big hitters that pay the way for all the economic failures. The loss of market size being exclusive is compensate by getting more people onto your platform where you get more license fees from all the other games sold, in theory, which is why it's still a strategy Sony employ.

Historically games must had been profitable.
The PS3 originally sold at around $200-300 loss per unit at launch and eventually still ended up at loss at $18 per unit Q3 2009, profits came from the games.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/playstation-3-finally-turning-a-profit-on-each-console-sold/

With PS4 still relies upon games and their service even though its loss per unit is much less than previous generations.
https://www.cnet.com/news/playstation-4-to-sell-at-a-loss-but-sony-expects-profit/

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Historically games must had been profitable.

As Shifty said, it's not about the individual games, it's about all of your games.

Here are the links to the Sony statement, which clarifies that at that time (2014) 70% of Sony WWS games were not profitable. It's not clear on whether WWS were profitable overall, breaking even, or a loss to some degree offset by PlayStation's wider business so the jury is still out.

 

[CSI PC]

As Shifty said, it's not about the individual games, it's about all of your games.

Here are the links to the Sony statement, which clarifies that at that time (2014) 70% of Sony WWS games were not profitable. It's not clear on whether WWS were profitable overall, breaking even, or a loss to some degree offset by PlayStation's wider business so the jury is still out.

That is a skewed statistic because of course not all games are equal, current Steam is a great example of how the majority of games will never generate profits.
With PS4 in the article I posted they state:

According to Eurogamer, Ito said that after a gamer buys a PlayStation 4 for $399, as long as they buy a new game from the device maker and open a PlayStation Plus account, Sony will be able to generate a slight profit on that person.

Meaning not all games to generate profit and that was 2013 with context here probably just one AAA exclusive game required to be purchased.
And this is backed up by the fact the PS3 was still a loss generating product up to 2009, 3 years after it launched meaning it required games and services to generate a profit to make it worthwhile, albeit specific games and exclusives.

Edit:
The article you linked surmises the same by saying:

The recent slate of first-party titles that have likely been money losers for Sony include smaller titles like Tearaway to more expensive adventures like God of War: Ascension. One of the bigger hits includes The Last of Us for the PS3 which will see a PS4 re-release this year.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Sony has more first party devs, more exclusives, and more market share...

True, but only two of those things were definitively true last gen! I've said it before and I've said it again; Sony's first party studios are a significant reason why I personally buy a PlayStation. I don't know whether I'm in a minority though.

 

[CSI PC]

True, but only two of those things were definitively true last gen! I've said it before and I've said it again; Sony's first party studios are a significant reason why I personally buy a PlayStation. I don't know whether I'm in a minority though.

Some of those PS4 exclusives tempted me (still wavering), and I am not a console gamer since PS2 days and the joys of chipping them
Not for pirating but enabling broader access to games and the fun of HW mod.

 

[JPT]

True, but only two of those things were definitively true last gen! I've said it before and I've said it again; Sony's first party studios are a significant reason why I personally buy a PlayStation. I don't know whether I'm in a minority though.

It's not like I count first party devs and goes for the one that has the most. But looking at the portfolios of games that are available for the platform, Playstation has historically been closest to what I like. So that is why I am mainly on Playstation platform.
There is no MS console exclusive I need/want to play, basically. Last ones was Limbo and Braid, but those came to PS3 and now I do not know of any that I want to play that is only available on XBox.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

It's not like I count first party devs and goes for the one that has the most. But looking at the portfolios of games that are available for the platform, Playstation has historically been closest to what I like. So that is why I am mainly on Playstation platform.

Ditto. There’s plenty on PlayStation that either slipped by me unnoticed (Jak and Daxter, Sly Cooper), tired of (Gran Turismo at GT3) or just didn’t appeal (God of a War, everything by Quantic Dream) so the numbers aren’t a factor.

 

[eastmen]

So a guy over at reset era is claiming MS will have

Albion project name wisdom (fable)
Perfect dark by Coaliton
Crackdown 3 4 player coop campaign
Forza horizon japense settings
Aoe4
Halo MMO ?!?!
Mech game

This guy has a good track record from the gaf days aparently Will be interesting to see whats going on. Would be hilarious if MS does Destiny right with the new Halo game.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Age of Empires IV was announced last year. This is the resetera post.