By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
BMaker11 on 11 June 2013
Edit Thread
lestatdark said:
BMaker11 said:
lestatdark said:

That comparison is a bit skewed, at least in regards to FFX -> FFXIII when it comes to exclusives to multi plats decreases. If you wanted to compare in relation to FF games, you'd have to use FFXII, which is sitting at 5.95M, below FFXIII. 

While I'm not saying that you're correct or wrong in regards to the outlook of other exclusive -> multiplat sales, you have to take in account a lot of other factors. Series over-exposition, decreasing quality, bigger availability of similar or higher caliber of games in equal genres, etc, etc. 

I chose FFX because it's a JRPG that released a short time after the PS2 released, and I think we're led to believe that FFXV will be similar in that regard.

But there are more examples.

Devil May Cry: averaging 2.5-2.7 on PS2. Sold on par with multiplat DMC4

GTA: SA: sold 20M on PS2. Sold on par with multiplat GTAIV

Tekken: averaging 3.5-3.7 on PS2. Sold on par with multiplat Tekken 6

Hell, even the WWE Smackdown games were averaging around 3 million exclusively on the PS2, then multiplat they sold on par or less.

Now look at the games that stayed exclusive

MGS: averaged 5.3ish million on PS2. MGS4 outsold 3 and is almost at MGS2

Ridge Racer: in the 1.3 million area on PS2. Sold similarly on PS3 (Ridge Racer 6 did negligible on 360, which could lead credence to the issue of brand recognition that doesn't transcend consoles like a Madden or CoD does)

In the 1st Party, Ratchet and Clank was in the 2.3 - 2.7 million range, on average, on the PS2 and the same thing happened in PS3.

I wish I had more examples for 3rd party exclusives, but a lot of them went multiplatform. But my point still remains. We have statistical data that the amount of people that are gonna buy a game is all but set in stone. If the game is on one platform, it'll sell that amount on that platform. If it's on multiple platforms, it will still sell that amount with just different distributions amongst the multiple platforms.

I don't see how game companies haven't noticed that in the last 8 years and still go mutliplat to "expand their audience" when it just flat out doesn't happen

 Edit: you can call it being butthurt, but I'm just offering a sound rebuttal to any sort of reasoning for it going multiplatform. Especially when you look at the sales of SEs games on the 360. FFXIII on the PS3 sold 82% of TOTAL SALES of SEs games on 360. 1 PS3 SE game sold 82% of the total number of SE games sold on the 360. Think about that and tell me how this is in anyway a "good investment" to put resources into the 360 versions of KH3 and FFXV. Hell, FFXII-2 was considered crappier and sold less than FFXIII and the PS3 version of XIII-2 sold more than the 360 version of XIII and comprises almost 40% of the total sales of SEs games on 360.

It's simply not logical to bring them to the XB1

You do make a sound case in those examples, but remember that also most of those games, which had multi plat entries on the PS3/360 era, were also of much lower quality than their PS2 exclusive counterparts, maybe except from MGS4 (review wise), from those that you posted.

I think one of the major reasons why multi plats from this gen trailed behind exclusives from previous gens was mostly due to lower quality. A lot of series dropped their standards (whether this was because of them going multi could be up to debate).

I agree that the biggest logic behind expanding the audience, at least on the publisher/developer side, is (in theory) to get equal sales between both consoles and thus a higher sales base. Since that hasn't happened with most cases, I agree that it's debatable as to whether or not the model actually works.

Based on quality/review:

DMC4 average is around 84. Only DMC1 got in the 90s. DMC3 is about an 84 as well and nobody liked DMC2

GTASA and GTAIV scored about the same. Tekken 6 scored less than Tekken 5, albeit, only by a few points. All the Smackdown games are in the 80s. Tools of Destruction is right up there with the best R&Cs. GoW3 is in the 90s with with GoW1+2. Ridge Racer 7 is right there with it's exclusive PS2 counterparts. etc. et al. Far from "much lower quality". From a reviewer standpoint, the quality of these top games haven't changed much between generations. So I don't see that as an adequate reason to at least even lessen what I've stated.

All that matters is, as you agreed, in most cases the "sell on both consoles to achieve maximum sales" model is debateable (I flat out say it doesn't work as shown statistically). But hey, if they want to funnel millions of dollars into making a game on a platform where people aren't going to buy it (I mean, come on. almost 3mil XIII-2 PS3 vs 0.65 360. We have issues when the wonderfully crappy The Last Remnant on a much smaller userbase sells the same as a huge title like XIII-2 when the 360 was at 60M+ sold) then that's their financial loss. Or maybe MS is just giving them a bunch of money. That's the only reason I see them even giving that company the time of day

 


This quote tree has been shortened.

yo_john117