disolitude said:
While technically I agree that it doesn't really make sense on paper... I don't think its a silly way of thinking. I mean, PS3 will not get much exclusive development from 3rd parties unless sony pays for it. MS also won't get much unless they can pull away from Sony by 10-15 million consoles. MS's presence in Japan is still pathetic and that wont change this gen...but if PS3 gets it together in that region and starts selling as much as the Wii, it may have a beneficial impact on future titles developed for Japan. etc... |
Right now you need to look at it through the eyes of the stakeholders...
Single platform Developers say... "We benefit from the console we develop for selling."
Multiplatform (PS360) Developers say... "We benefit from either console we develop for selling."
Microsoft says... "We benefit from developers choosing to develop on our machine and when customers buy games for it."
Every time a consumer buys a 360, Microsoft gains directly and its exclusive/non-exclusive developers gain indirectly.
Every time a consumer buys a 360 game, Microsoft gains directly and its exclusive/non-exclusive developers gain directly.
Every time a consumer buys a PS3, non-exclusive developers gain indirectly.
Every time a consumer buys a PS3 game, non-exclusive developers gain directly.
Every time a consumer buys a Wii or Wii game, none of the 3 above parties gain.
The problem for Microsoft is that the PS3 is a substitute for the 360. If someone buys a PS3, there's a chance they will buy the PS3 versions of games instead of 360. This is, of course, assuming they already have a 360 because if they don't they're hurting Microsoft even more by buying a PS3 instead of a 360 in the first place!
So developers gaining is good for Microsoft but it's a rather painful mixed blessing.







