badgenome said:
I don't agree with it, really. There's something to be said for having a strong first party, sure, but it's not necessarily more expensive to outsource to third parties for exclusives. Could be cheaper than keeping up your own studios, in fact. Gears of War is by no means a "waste of money" for Microsoft, and there's certainly nothing that precludes third parties from making games that can rival or surpass those of first parties. After all, a lot of people never cared about Sony's first party until they really started to ramp it up after losing so many third party exclusives. The difference in Microsoft's situation is that, instead of just assuming they'll get third party support as Sony did, they seem to be building a strategy around it. And I think that as the generation wears on and their system sells more, it should be easier - not harder - to convince third parties to make an exclusive for them. |
completely disagree. let's say that when the ps3 had a 5M userbase a third party could expect around 5M in sales potential from the ps3.
then at a a 10M userbase the sales potential becomes 10M
at a 20M userbase the sales potential becomes 20M
at a 40M userbase the sales potential becomes 40M
..see how those numbers keep going up regardless of what the 360 is doing? as the generation wears on it is going to be harder and harder for MS to conviece third parties to be exclusive.








