PS3 exclusive sales... whats the deal?

Smashchu2 said:

kowenicki said:

This is a serious question and is not trolling. I just dont understand why the top notch PS3 exclusives dont shift huge numbers. These are all high qaulity titles and yet they just dont compare in sales.

If we look at arguably the 4 most hyped games (exclusive) of this gen so far with their 1st week (2 weeks for LBP) and LTD sales.

360

Halo 3 3.8m 9.1m

Gears 0.6m 5.8m

Gears2 1.9m 4.6m

Fable2 1.0m 2.5m

PS3

MGS4 1.7m 3.9m

Res2 0.23m 1.4m

LBP 0.31m 2.0m

KZ2 0.8m(?) 3.5m ????

Why is this? I can't explain it....

I do not belive that the install base is the issue here (Gears1 for instance launched with a 5m install base I believe) and even if it was factored in the numbers still dont compare.

Someone explain this to me (without resorting to fanboy nonsense from either side).....there is something different in the buying habits of the respective console owners???

1)Quality is determined by the consumer. Since customers are what keeps everything running with their money, they are the only ones who can say what is a good or bad product. If your talking about low sales, then quality is also low.

2)Hype=/=sales. Super Mario Brother had no hype (most core gamers hated it). Wii Fit was not hyped (most core consumers hated it). Nintendogs was not hyped. Pokemon was not hyped. The only two games that are top sells (top 50) that were not hyped were Halo 1 and 2 and Super Smash Brother Brawl. Halo was not really hyped until after the first one.

Now, to explain your problem, lets look at Metal Gear Solid 4 and Little Big Planet. They are both games that greatly over shoot their consumers.

Metal Gear Solid is essentually a movie/game hybrid. People don't buy games to watch, they buy them to play. "But the game doesn't have that many cinamatics, and there's lots of gameplay." But there is still too many. Play though the game again and you may notice the long winded cinamatics and the fact they come almost back to back. How is the player suppose to enjoy the game if he/she doesn't get to play it. Additionally, the game tries to make a point. Never, ever, try to make a point. No one cares. Think about this: before Starwars, movies "made points." But, along comes Starwars and Jaws with their special effects, and people like them. Super Mario Bros never tried to make a point. Pokemon didn't try and make a point. Heck, Halo and Smash Bros don't try to make points. Look at many of the best selling games and you'll see they enjoyed the gameplay, not the story. People don't want Sonic to be revived and make points. They want a high speed platformer that is fun to play. People were happy with Megaman 9 becuase it returned to classic Megaman gameplay, not becuase it tried to make a point. Story does not sell gams. People don't care if the Government does this or we the fact we should be careful lest the Government put nanomachines in us. We just want to play the game.

With Little Big Planet, the problem is in User Generated Content. This will explain a lot of the problem with a focus on UGC. The big concern is that people buy games to play premade content. Ever notice how people talk about how this level was fun or that level was fun. Yes. They aren't esstatic when they have to make or download the rest of the content. Again, look at the top selling games. Only Starcraft and Brawl have user generated content (Halo might too. Not sure).

As for Resistance and Killzone, they may not have attributes that would make them enjoyable to consumers as apposed to Halo. I know one person I( know love Resistance becuase it is like a PC shooter. But he is playing a console. I know Halo has been successful for making FPSs work on consoles. Much like Goldeneye, the game is designed for the console. I'm not sure of any other reasons, but take a look at halo and Resistance/Killzone. Find the big differences and you'll find your answer.

Good points, although I think it would be more accurate to say the consumer defines 'popularity' than 'quality'. I hate to sound elitist but many games, just as with films and books, that are not the best quality sell very well because they are popular.

As for the article I'd say it gets LBP very wrong in its assumptions and although it has some good points it has a fair number of flaws as well.

The simple fact is that with games (as with films, etc) there is a desire to appeal to the broadest audience, yet due to different people's preferences this in fact requires a number of titles / approaches.

LBP for example is going to sell between 2 and 3 M LTD at least. For a small title it's hardly a failure and in fact it's clearly a pretty strong success (and in terms of profits I'm guessing the DLC has pushed its profits comfortably above those its initial sales would have delivered). The hype only came in after it was underway and the press went ecstatic. Sony then tried to push it beyond what it was. From their comments its obvious MM wanted LBP to release as a more modest title and were nervous of the mad hype being heaped on it. There is a market for user content generated games; it’s just smaller than the one for Halo/COD type games.

The simple fact is that the best mix for the consumer is a blend of 'safe' titles mixed with more risky new IP and approaches. Not all will succeed. But the alternative is to have nothing but a flood of essentially safe titles or known IP.

Sorry to go OT on LBP but I get angry when I read articles like the one you linked that, deliberately or not, are arguing the safe path - people like this, they don't like that, only give them this, etc. It's basically the argument of finding an exact recipe and sticking to it.

Existing User Log In

New User Registration

Sales - PS3 exclusive sales... whats the deal? - View Post

Recent Badges:

Currently Playing: