Quantcast
The 3rd Party Balance Sheet of Terror

Forums - Sales Discussion - The 3rd Party Balance Sheet of Terror

crumas2 said:
amirnetz said:

The question is not really which platform has more exclusives, but which platform is denied titles. Another way to rephrase it is: "Our goal is not to determine a winner, but to identify a loser".

An exclusivity for one of the HD consoles means that the other one does not get the title. If this denial happens often enough to the same platform it will start to become apparent in the marketplace that "that platform doesn't get many of the titles that are out there".

When such a perception is propagated in the market, then "that platform with the fewer titles" becomes a risky purchase to new buyers because the buyers will lack the confidence that all of the future titles will be available on the console. This lack of confidence will cause changes in buying decisions and the platform with the fewer titles will lose share. This lose of share in turn will accelerate the 3rd parties decision to drop support for the platform. And this vicious cycle is called "the death spiral". 

Interesting.  So, are you trying to determine where the non-availability/non-viability crossover point on the graph would be, or do you already have a "ratio" in mind (total body of 3rd party games vs exclusive 3rd party games) and you are trying to see how close the current platforms are to that target ratio?

 ...

Wow, I love your questions. Do I have a cross-over in mind? Not yet, but I do have some ranges in mind though. Let's think through it together (it is a bit subjective and I know others may have other cross over points in mind):

If one platform has on an average week 100% more titles overall (including 1st and 2nd) than the other platform (i.e. twice more), then this is clear and utter domination in market place. By now the winner/losers are well known.

If the one platform has 50% more titles on an average week then I think it is also domination, though in early stages.

If the one platform has 10% more titles on an average week then it will probably fly under the public perception radar. No harm done.

If the one platform has 20% more titles on an average week then I think it is reaching the point of visibility. People may start noticing that one platform has always more titles than the others.  This is the "red zone" for the lagging platform. It may still recover or get lucky and survive it, but it is certainly in danger.

With 30% regular advantage to one platform than I think we have passed the cross over point and the death spiral will start.

So I think we'll need to track which system is starting to trend towards the 20% and later the 30% advantage point. I don't think we are there today, but we need to track it over time to see what the trends are showing.

Do you think this makes sense?



Prediction made on 11/1/2008:

Q4 2008: 27M xbox LTD, 20M PS3 LTD . 2009 sales: 11M xbox,  9M PS3

Around the Network
Million said:

... the consumer doesn't know the difference between 3rd party ,2nd or 1st party titles in many cases they wont' even know a game is multiplatform (possibly due to the way it was advertised) . A libary consists of 3rd party ,2nd part and 1st party games at the end of the day , 3rd party support can be a significant influence I agree but that's only dependant on the level of 1st,2nd party support ,multiplatform games , other consoles , the quality of the 3rd party games in question.

The reason other people are telling you to include these other factors is because the signifiance (or insignificance) of strong 3rd party support becomes more apparent when considered against or with the other variables.

It's all good and well making a list of 3rd party titles which will clearly favour Microsofts strategy of pushing 3rd party support heavily on their platforms but Sony and Nintendo's ethos is different they tend to push internal development more .We're not trying to derail the thread when we say factor in "X" or "Y" but we are in fact doing the very opposite , trying the make the comparison a better quality one.

Before I answer the main point you are making (which is a good point), I want to clear one repetitive perception that is showing on the thread here. The perception that Sony is much more reliant on 1st and 2nd party titles than Microsoft. When looking at the current release (from October onward to April) you can see that Sony is the publisher of 8 titles and Microsoft the publisher of 7 titles. Not a significantly statistical difference. Generally, both companies are publishing less than 10% of the titles for their respective consoles. These titles may be the biggest hits for the platform but for the question of "perception of abundance" they are just a few titles out of many.  

As a last comment on that topic – Looking back we can see that Sony crushed the original xbox and the GC with their 3rd party support. So it really is inaccurate to suggest that Sony is not relying on 3rd parties as a central part of its strategy.

So with that off our chests, you are absolutely making a valid point that the TOTAL sum of titles on the platform is going to determine the “perception of abundance”. When we try to draw conclusions, this is exactly how we’ll look at it.

That said, what we are trying to do here is to find if we can identify a leading indicator that will suggest that a platform is heading into a danger zone. A platform will always have 1st parties – not much variability here. The vast majority of the big 3rd party block busters will also always go multi-plat. No doubt about. Again little variability.

The place where we should expect to detect the first changes in platform support trends will be the independent small 3rd parties.  These are the “canaries in the coal mine”. If one platform is going to start losing support in the market, these independent 3rd parties will be the ones to exhibit the phenomena first.

This thread is about figuring out if there is such a trend evolving and this is why we have resorted to such method of measuring.

Does it make more sense now?



Prediction made on 11/1/2008:

Q4 2008: 27M xbox LTD, 20M PS3 LTD . 2009 sales: 11M xbox,  9M PS3

@amirnetz Yes , yes it does.




PS3: LittleBigPlanet

I also think it is lame to include as "exclusive", games that are also on the Wii. So you should remove "High School Musical 3: Senior Year DANCE!" and change that rule.



whatever said:
PS3: LittleBigPlanet

I also think it is lame to include as "exclusive", games that are also on the Wii. So you should remove "High School Musical 3: Senior Year DANCE!" and change that rule.

LBP is published by Sony so it is out.

In this thread we are more focused on the titles that a platform is NOT getting rather than the ones it is getting exclusively. See my first answer to crumas2.

 



Prediction made on 11/1/2008:

Q4 2008: 27M xbox LTD, 20M PS3 LTD . 2009 sales: 11M xbox,  9M PS3

Around the Network
amirnetz said:

Wow, I love your questions. Do I have a cross-over in mind? Not yet, but I do have some ranges in mind though. Let's think through it together (it is a bit subjective and I know others may have other cross over points in mind):

If one platform has on an average week 100% more titles overall (including 1st and 2nd) than the other platform (i.e. twice more), then this is clear and utter domination in market place. By now the winner/losers are well known.

If the one platform has 50% more titles on an average week then I think it is also domination, though in early stages.

If the one platform has 10% more titles on an average week then it will probably fly under the public perception radar. No harm done.

If the one platform has 20% more titles on an average week then I think it is reaching the point of visibility. People may start noticing that one platform has always more titles than the others.  This is the "red zone" for the lagging platform. It may still recover or get lucky and survive it, but it is certainly in danger.

With 30% regular advantage to one platform than I think we have passed the cross over point and the death spiral will start.

So I think we'll need to track which system is starting to trend towards the 20% and later the 30% advantage point. I don't think we are there today, but we need to track it over time to see what the trends are showing.

Do you think this makes sense?

It sounds reasonable to me.

I wonder if it would be possible to add some sort of qualitative--as opposed to quantitative--ranking for the visibility/appeal of a title.  Perhaps something like:

o   COD 6, Fallout, or GTA5 would be a high-visibility title (sales >= 1.5m) and granted a full point

o   FIFA Soccer 09 or Burnout Paradise would be a medium visibility title (sales <= 1m) and granted a half point

o   Need for Speed: Undercover or Conan would be a low visibility title (sales <= 100k) and granted a quarter point

The thresholds I chose are definitely arbitrary, but might fit within the high/medium/low visibility values.  Using this sort of factor could possibly help alleviate situations where a COD title carries the same impact as a Conan title, which most consumers wouldn't equate because most consumers weren't interested in buying Conan.

With this in mind, if there are 100 total 3rd party games for consoles X and Y, and console X has 3 high-level exclusives, 4 medium level exclusives, and 3 low-level exclusives, then the total impact would be 3*1 + 4*.5 + 3 *.25 = 5.75 points exclusivity out of 100 titles, or 5.75%.  This would likely be more fair than saying console X had 10 points exclusivity, or 10%.

It's not the most scientific way to approach it, but when dealing with qualitative measurements, compromises often have to be made.  Alternative factors could be chosen to determine the qualitative impact due to lack of a title for a console, but consumer demand (sales) is probably one of the more reliable ones.

EDIT: obviously the full/half/quarter point assignments are quantitative values... hard to use high/medium/low in a calculation where the result should be a number



the fail is strong in here



Nobody's perfect. I aint nobody!!!

Killzone 2. its not a fps. it a FIRST PERSON WAR SIMULATOR!!!! ..The true PLAYSTATION 3 launch date and market dominations is SEP 1st

lol seriously are people reading and understanding the OP?

its a list to compile 3rd party exclusives on the Xbox360 and PS3

its basically to have a better understanding of how the two companies are doing with regards to relations with outside developers. therefore how well/bad they are doing in general in the console gaming scene.

correct me if im wrong





Owner of PS3, Wii, Xbox360, NDS, PSP - Feel Free to add me on PSN or XBL :)

Red Alert was re announced for the ps3, and Last Remnant isnt exclusive, neither is crash, and neither is High school musical w.e its called.



 

mM

Demons Soul for the PS3