Sub $200 pricepoint - When will next-gen get there?

[one]

I agree, exclusives for the Playstation will not be as abundant as they were last round. Phil Harrison concurs, as he has stated that they will have to rely on 1st party titles to distinguish themselves

That'd be the trend for a while, third parties have to earn money and experiences for next-gen big budget production and next-gen R&D in the first place.

Out of curiosity, how many third-party exclusives have PS2/Xbox/GC got for recent years? AFAIK most Japanese games are on PS2 naturally but how about others? Xbox/GC got exclusive games too, did PS2 get significantly more exclusive games for it after those consoles got to sub $200 in 2003? Now, back to next-gen, if you think there'll be less PS3 exclusive games, what's your prediction about the number of Xbox 360 and Wii exclusive games?

 

[scooby_dooby]

People will buy for the future, the core version are dead ends.

Well that depends entirely on what the future needs are.

What if the only future use is to play games? Core is not a dead end at all, quite the contrary, it's everything you'll ever need to play games.

You seem unable to accept there are people out there who just want to play the games, people who don't care about online demo's or having a HDD, these people do exist, after all 100 million of them bought a ps2 last generation, it had the exact same functionality as the core 360.

 

[pc999]

That'd be the trend for a while, third parties have to earn money and experiences for next-gen big budget production and next-gen R&D in the first place.

Out of curiosity, how many third-party exclusives have PS2/Xbox/GC got for recent years? AFAIK most Japanese games are on PS2 naturally but how about others? Xbox/GC got exclusive games too, did PS2 get significantly more exclusive games for it after those consoles got to sub $200 in 2003? Now, back to next-gen, if you think there'll be less PS3 exclusive games, what's your prediction about the number of Xbox 360 and Wii exclusive games?

I think that wii will have (relatively at least) lots of exclusives (most of them already are) by its own nature but also because of companys wanting to avoid next gen costs/R&D and companys that think that they have a better chance on Wii. This at the begining then if it does have sucess I expect it to keep the trend.

On 360 it is harder to say at the begining I expect more on the 360 but it looks like it will be hard to proffitable in just one console if you do not have a big hit, on the other side I expect Sony and MS to try to get the most exclussives in the big hits and the others multiplatform games too.

Probably it will depend on the money that S/MS are wiling to spend or in special cases that the console does have some really important advantage for the game (eg FFXIII), but it is very hard to predict IMO. (Scooby dooby also have a good point about japonese games on PS3)

What do you think?

 

[scooby_dooby]

Well PS2 had something like a 4:1 advantage for available titles, I think XBOX had around 900, PS2 ~4000.

I think that PS3 will end up having more games then 360 after a few years roll along, but they'll mainly be japanese games, and it'll be by a small margin instead of the HUGE gap we saw last generation.

 

[MBDF]

Here's my take on what the price points over the next few years will look like:

PS3: May 2007: 599 p, 499 c X360: May 2007: 329 p, 229 c Wii: May 2007: 249
PS3: May 2008: 499 p, 399 c X360: May 2008: 249 p, 199 c Wii: May 2008: 199
PS3: May 2009: 399 p, 299 c X360: May 2009: 229 p, 179 c Wii: May 2009: 179
PS3: May 2010: 299 p, 229 c X360: May 2010: 199 p, 149 c Wii: May 2010: 149
PS3: May 2011: 249 p, 199 c X360: May 2011: 179 p, 129 c Wii: May 2011: 129
PS3: May 2012: 199 p, 149 c X360: May 2012: 149 p, 99 c Wii: May 2012: 99

Now, I may have been conservative with the PS3... the question is, is the brand strong enough to withstand being almost double the price of XBOX in 2007, or will there be enough price reduction (such as 65nm) in terms of it's parts to lower the price next year to compete with the inevitable price drop of the X360 next may? Or will Sony wait till the holidays 2007 to lower the price, and by how much?

 

[Skrying]

Well that depends entirely on what the future needs are.

What if the only future use is to play games? Core is not a dead end at all, quite the contrary, it's everything you'll ever need to play games.

You seem unable to accept there are people out there who just want to play the games, people who don't care about online demo's or having a HDD, these people do exist, after all 100 million of them bought a ps2 last generation, it had the exact same functionality as the core 360.

You and Acert just dont get it. Your comparison to the PS2 is completely invalid. You cant compare that past system to this one, it doesnt work that way. The setup is new, there were no such things as a premium and core version of the consoles last genreation. Is this such a hard concept? Must be because you keep bring up the PS2 which is of no relevence to what I'm trying to get across.

Acert, the option is NOT between two entirly different consoles. After all, you like to keep bring up price. The difference is between the core and premium version of the same basic console. Between the Xbox 360 core or premium for example. This is a $100 dollar difference. If you're on a budget in the first place then you're going to look at the cheapest console that carries the game you want, which would in this case be the Xbox 360, then you're going to decide if the difference between the core and premium models is worth it or not.

Also, scooby, you are completely limited by the fact of the core version of the PS3 not including HDMI, which is a big part of its Blu-Ray drive. If you cant watch Blu-Ray media in HDTV then there's no point in it.

MBDF, the Wii and the core version of the Xbox 360 will never be the same. Nintendo will be very agressive with dropping the price of the Wii and if they let it match any version of a 360 or PS3 then they have lots of trouble on their hands.

I wouldnt be surprised to see a $75 Wii at the end of its lifetime.

 

[Acert93]

Now, back to next-gen, if you think there'll be less PS3 exclusive games, what's your prediction about the number of Xbox 360 and Wii exclusive games?

IMO all the platforms will have fewer total exclusives, but not maybe not as big of a drop off as some have expected. The drop off will in some ways put more emphasis on other areas (marketing, value, etc), but it also puts more pressure on the exclusives that remain.

It appears the PS3 will continue to have the most relevant exclusives on average (i.e. the most AAA games that appeal across the board in Japan, NA, And Europe). Sony has a very strong internal core of developers who have produced quantifiable exclusive content. There is no argueing against GT, God of War, Shadow of the Colossus, ICO, Naughty Dog (Jak and their new IP looks solid) and Insomniac (Ratchet & Clank, now appearantly Resistance), SOCOM, and so forth. They have some great franchises to leverage even without 3rd party exclusives. But maybe their big ace in the hole is they have the corner on the market for games like MGS, FF, DMC, Tekken, VF, etc. AAA games that move systems. Sony also wisely moved on Ninja Theory and has them and HS tied up and also has Guerrilla. Sony also struck gold by getting an 'exclusive' to Assassin's Creed and UT2007 wont hurt either. Sony's Japanese dominance will also translate into continued exclusive support from many smaller Japanese-centric titles. So Sony looks fairly solid in regards to exclusive content: Existing 1st party franchises + Existing exclusives from 3rd parties + Smart dev house purchases.

MS has made a good push in branching out. They have been funding/starting a lot of new IPs (Mass Effect, Too Human, Viva Pinata, Kameo, Crackdown, Alan Wake, Blue Dragon, Lost Odessey, etc). They also have got some solid licensing by attracting stuff like Carmack's next RTCW game. The internal studios look kind if slim in many ways. Rare has been average at best. There is Bungie/Halo, Forza, and now Fable. Shadowrun is not looking to hot. (Why titles like UL, Shadowrun, and Genji live on I don't know). On the positive the PC is looking to be an even strong source of good exclusive content this time around for MS. A number of devs have commented on the similarities of the PC and 360, and between the MS tools, XNA coming online, and the featureset chosen for the GPU I think this will continue. Since I don't consider a PC a console or even competing platform (and the sales are very meager comparatively so the drain is small) MS has also setup a lot of "exclusive" PC software. Just in the first year there will be Fear, Battle For Middle Earth 2, Prey, Quake 4, Call of Duty 2, Oblivion, Condemned, etc to name some of the notable franchises. MS doesn't seem very interested in carrying on Crimson Skies, MechAssault, Brute Force which is a hit on exclusives. While Sony has made a number of timely snags of dev houses, MS has seemed to have some misses (outside funding new IPs). e.g. Bizarre Creations should have been picked up, especially considering how close they are with the Forza team. Allowing them to go multi-platform with a title with Sega was a mistake IMO. You also have to wonder how titles like Jade Empire, Ninja Gaiden will remain exclusive.

But skimming this years top rated titles, it is pretty clear a LOT of franchises are already multi-platform. I think some big budget, big name franchises may go exclusive. But in the same many new smaller IPs will be exclusive. In some ways it balances out, in others it does not.

The reason I think we will see a shift toward more exclusives, outside dev costs, is how the market has shaken out this time around.

Last time Sony was first to market. They sold 100M PS1s and were first to market--18 months before MS and Nintendo. Sony had like 25M consoles on shelves before MS and Nintendo even get theirs out the door, and at the Xbox/GCN 1 year mark Sony had broken 40M consoles while its competitors, combined, had not exceeded 15M units. The race was all but over. Going exclusive with Sony made very good financial success.

This time some things have changed. Sony still sold 100M units the preceding generation, but this time they are entering a year later than MS. MS looks pretty solid to have 10M units out about the time Sony launches and Sony's launch will be fairly restrained. Instead of 6M units in the wild before the US launch, Sony is going to have 6M units in the 4month launch window. MS has also moved in on key exclusives (like GTA, last gens best selling title) and clearly has a more robust software lineup this generation than they did last generation at this same time. While last generation is made sense to jump on Sony early (they were the market leader the gen before and were in the new one as well), this one looks a little less clear early on, especially considering Sony's high retail price. It would appear more business savvy to maximize your investment and go multiplatform if possible to cover all your bets and recoup your development costs.

I think this will shift the focus away from more "free" exclusives to more timed exclusives.

All my opinion of course. I think there are still a lot of quality exclusives on both sides of the fence, and then there is Nintendo (not mentioned because of the hardware/porting differences). I think in general a lot of quality 3rd party titles will be available on both platforms. So it will come down to internal titles -- which is a matter of taste -- and to "strengths". Sony has a huge benefit of Japanese support and has long held relationships with many 3rd parties and franchises associated with the Sony brand. MS has strong PC ties. There is some blurring in there for both, but what platform you like will depend a lot on taste. It will also come down to things like cost of the console, marketing, features...

And the wild card: Who will find the next Halo? The next GTA? Both of those were new titles (for the most part) last gen. So who is this gens sleeper hit that totally tips the industry on its head?

That, in many ways, will be the biggest question this gen. Finding that one or two KILLER app. Will it be an old game re-invented from an established dev house? Or a totally surprising title?

 

[Acert93]

Acert, the option is NOT between two entirly different consoles.

Of course it is. I want GTA4. The PS3 has it at $499. The Xbox 360 has it at $299. I can have the SAME basic experience on both consoles for different minium prices. This does factor into consumer purchasing decisions.

After all, you like to keep bring up price.

How odd that I keep mentioning price in a thread titled, "Sub $200 pricepoint". And my point is that price, along with other factors, is very important to the casual market who typically purchase consoles after this price point.

You and Acert just dont get it.

Nice that you say that, but you basically ignored all my points and questions (like how is the Core version a dead end?). Your continued theme is features and I pointed out a number of reasons that as this generation moves on and the consumer focus changes from early adopters and enthusiests to the casual mainstream the selling points change.

Enthusiests = Biggest and Greatest Tech... games will follow
Casuals = I want to play game X... gaming is not my life, where can I get the games I want cheaply?

The general market is fickle. Ask Sega. Ask Nintendo. Enthusiests and features only carry you so far. The core purpose of the device is gaming, and at some point delivering it at a low price with substantial and appealing software is vital to driving sales.

And yes, every generation before this is valid as they contain valuable information about consumer desire and opinions. Those things shift and change over time, but they are valuable--more so than random opinion. And one thing has held true: Hitting key price points is important, and that the best tech does not always win.

No one is saying past console generations dictate this one, but it is very short sited to ignore a market that has endured 4 previous generations. And even if you were right that it was worthless to appeal to such (Even in the context of how this gen is different), then your personal points are equally invalid because you have ABSOLUTELY no clue if your points are valid looking forward as they are just your guesses. I am not invalidating your opinion, only challenging it. Telling me I "don't get it" because I don't agree with your own view of the industry really doesn't achieve much.

Still waiting to learn how the core is a dead end...

 

[Skrying]

I'm not going to counter your points because you dont follow as to why the decision would much more likely be between the Xbox 360 core and the Xbox 360 premium....

 

[Skrying]

I'll touch on one thing, on why the core version are a dead end:

The core versions are only $100 cheaper. The addition of say a hard drive will erase this in the future, the addition of other such benefits to going with the included parts with the premium package will end up costing you more than that $100.

The dead end statement was to do much more with the PS3, due to its lack of HDMI on the core version its a complete dead end to the biggest cost factor of the console: The Blu-Ray drive.

When you pay for such expensive consoles you want to be able to get more than just games out of them. This is how MS and Sony are justifying the added costs this generation. The reason why Nintendo says games is the core is because this is all their machine does, this is also part of the reason their machine is of a much lower price than the others, its a game only device. While the other two are marketed as coverenge devices.

 

[one]

The reason why Nintendo says games is the core is because this is all their machine does, this is also part of the reason their machine is of a much lower price than the others, its a game only device.

Nintendo may be a bit more ambitious contrary to what they are preaching to "gamers". Wii has standard WiFi and a web browser (Opera), and the controller has the shape of a TV remote which can act as a pointer... The only drawback is it's SD.

 

[OtakingGX]

The only drawback is it's SD.

ED.

 

[thenefariousone]

Your own words contradict the point you are trying to make, especially in a conversation about "Sub $200 pricepoint - When will next-gen get there?"

In many parts of the world market that make up the 200 million ps1/2 sales, A $100 US difference is not "only" a small difference. In many parts of the world with low valued currency, that $100 difference is a dealbreaker.

And in such places, buying the xbox 360 core and using a cheap third party memory card is very compelling argument.

If you look around, you can find official memory cards for as little as $20.

I'll touch on one thing, on why the core version are a dead end:

The core versions are only $100 cheaper. The addition of say a hard drive will erase this in the future, the addition of other such benefits to going with the included parts with the premium package will end up costing you more than that $100.

The dead end statement was to do much more with the PS3, due to its lack of HDMI on the core version its a complete dead end to the biggest cost factor of the console: The Blu-Ray drive.

When you pay for such expensive consoles you want to be able to get more than just games out of them. This is how MS and Sony are justifying the added costs this generation. The reason why Nintendo says games is the core is because this is all their machine does, this is also part of the reason their machine is of a much lower price than the others, its a game only device. While the other two are marketed as coverenge devices.

 

[Pozer]

And the wild card: Who will find the next Halo? The next GTA? Both of those were new titles (for the most part) last gen. So who is this gens sleeper hit that totally tips the industry on its head?

That, in many ways, will be the biggest question this gen. Finding that one or two KILLER app. Will it be an old game re-invented from an established dev house? Or a totally surprising title?

You are completely right. MGS, Halo, Zelda will sell millions of copies but the console winner is always decided by having that one must play title that wasn't able to be made with last gens hardware. Every companywants that system seller game that appeals to the casual masses. Last gen it was GTA, before that Crash Bandicot (I said casual masses), before that Sonic. before that SMB1.

Halo while a huge gaming phenom was still a fps which limited its appeal and availability to causual and non-gamers. WII may broaden the fps appeal though

 

[Crossbar]

Nintendo may be a bit more ambitious contrary to what they are preaching to "gamers". Wii has standard WiFi and a web browser (Opera), and the controller has the shape of a TV remote which can act as a pointer... The only drawback is it's SD.

Surfing the net at SD will be a bit of a pain, but they have at least chosen the right browser for the job.

Would it be possible for the Wii to support 720p just for browsing or is it restricted by the cable support or something else?

 

[scooby_dooby]

The core versions are only $100 cheaper.

Only $100? $100 is alot. At $299/$199 pricing scheme that's 50% more for the premium. At $199/$99 the premium is twice the cost of the core. Why would cost conscious consumers waste money on features they don't want or need?

When you pay for such expensive consoles you want to be able to get more than just games out of them.

No, when you pay for a console that's what you expect. You are not everyone.

And this is about sub $200 pricepoint, $199 is not terribly expensive and it stands to reason there are millions of people willing to pay that price 'just' to play games.

 

[Urian]

Digital Cameras are ever in the same price range and year after year models with more improvements appear in the market. The same we can say with Cell Phones and MP3 players.

Since the consoles are electronic consumer hardware I believe that the better for all of us is fixing the price of all them to a reasonable price that everybody can pay but with a little more improvements, for example:

Xbox 360 Premium Pack Christmas 2006: 299$
Xbox 360 Premium Pack with 100GB HDD for Christmas 2007: 299$

The games are going to be the same, the motherboard the same but with some improvements that don´t hurt the final user.

 

[TheChefO]

Generally the parent buys what the kid says to buy, and tries to follow that to the detail, or else Little Johnny turns into Mean Little Johnny.

Agreed there is a certain percentage, but consider historical data. Neo Geo was heads and shoulders above every other system on the market. It was simple to justify the additional cost. Because of this it was highly desirable by gamers. Yet it did not sell in droves. Why? Cost. Parents decided that $600 is above their threshold.

Parents do generally want to keep their kids happy as you said, but there are limits.

 

[TheChefO]

However, I think it is important to keep in mind the development of titles before the price announcement. Coming out of last gen, I'm guessing a large majority of developers focused on the PS3 as their target next-gen platform, simply because the PS2 was the previous market leader by such an unquestionable margin. This was before they (the developers) had any hard data on the platform. But nonetheless production was started. I think this could very well be reflected in the number of games released with the PS3 as the target platform for the 1st couple of years (as that would reflect development time that could not be easily be shifted after the price announcement) despite the 360 having a larger userbase.

Going back a few weeks ERP answered the question of how long it takes to swap a title from one target to another. This was also a serious consideration I had was how many devs were "betting the bank" on ps3 and potentially sticker shocked at the announced price and consequently "stuck" developing for something which might not sell as well as they initially thought which may be a big impact on their bottom line.

ERP answered that he can typically take a title and get it from one platform to another in less than six weeks. While I agree this will have some affect on initial title availability, I think any dev making a game at this point has to have a devkit for a 360 and Wii to ensure financial stability. While there may be a few exclusives in 2007 I think anyone making one of those exclusives is concurrently having a team working on the other devkits to get up to speed for smooth porting of the game to multiplat asap.

 

[TheChefO]

That'd be the trend for a while, third parties have to earn money and experiences for next-gen big budget production and next-gen R&D in the first place.

Out of curiosity, how many third-party exclusives have PS2/Xbox/GC got for recent years? AFAIK most Japanese games are on PS2 naturally but how about others? Xbox/GC got exclusive games too, did PS2 get significantly more exclusive games for it after those consoles got to sub $200 in 2003? Now, back to next-gen, if you think there'll be less PS3 exclusive games, what's your prediction about the number of Xbox 360 and Wii exclusive games?

I don't have specific numbers but any look at a typical game store shows ps2 had a lot more games than xbox and justifiably so. The majority of the "exclusives" weren't so much paid by Sony to ensure "system sellers" but simply devs choosing the system which had the vastly larger installed base. Many nitch titles and a handful of AAA exclusive titles.

I think the AAA titles will see a major shift away from exclusive (time perhaps) and the nitch games will also have a shift. Some will shift to multiplat while others will shift to target the games to their core audience (whever/however that shakes out next gen).