curl-6 said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:
I just looked up PS4 games in 2015 which would have been the equivalent of this year. Here are some games:
Bloodborne
Witcher 3
Batman: Arkham Knight
Rocket League
Just Cause 3
Until Dawn
Mortal Kombat X
Axiom Verge
Dying Light
Fallout 4
Star Wars Battlefront
Assassin's Creed Syndicate None of these games appeared on the PS3 and a couple are actually PS4 exclusives. There are also some significant heavy hitters in there sales wise. By 2015, Generation 8 was well underway. PS5 does not have a lineup anywhere near this. Where are the Gen 9 games? Where are the exclusives? PS4 actually did have plenty of titles that were not cross gen by this time. PS5 is pretty pathetic in comparison. |
Of the 12 games you listed, only 2 are exclusives. PS4 also sold great in 2013 and 2014 when heaps of games were still crossgen. |
Are you arguing against me or are you arguing against a straw man? My argument is clearly about crossgen games including crossgen games this year. PS4 had a plenty of big games that were fully in gen 8 by this time. PS5 is not doing nearly so well on gen 9 only games.
IcaroRibeiro said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:
There are two very old arguments about gaming and hardware. One goes like this: "Check out my PS3. It's soooo cool. It's the most powerful system and has the best graphics. It has a Blu-Ray drive too, so the games can store more space than even an XBox360, and it's far more powerful than the Wii." This is the "hardware sells hardware" argument. The hardware is so cool and powerful, and the graphics on the games are so good, that you want to buy the hardware just for itself. There is a version of this argument almost every generation, "Check out my Neo Geo..." "Check out my Atari Jaguar..." "Check out my Amiga..." "Check out my XBox, it's so much more powerful than the PS2. No one is going to want a PS2 now that the XBox is on the market." The other argument goes like this: "Woah, that game looks awesome! Can I play it on NES? No? We'll, I'm getting a SNES then." In this situation, it's the game that matters. The hardware is an obstacle to playing the software, but if the game is good enough, then the person will buy the hardware anyway. This is the "software sells hardware" argument. Another way of saying it is "the NES is just a box to play Mario", or you could just as easily say "the PS2 is just a box to play GTA". The hardware isn't a feature. It's an obstacle. Good games are what overcome the obstacle and convince people to buy hardware. These arguments never go away, because the most enthusiastic gamers are a very vocal minority that see the hardware as a feature. Meanwhile the mass market always treats hardware as an obstacle. People do not "get to" buy more powerful hardware. They "have to" buy more powerful hardware. It's a chore. And yet, almost every generation you have super enthusiastic gamers who absolutely can't understand why the PS2 outsold the XBox or why the Wii outsold the PS3. Crossgen games are basically the "hardware sells hardware" argument. "People want a PS5, because it's a PS5. It has great games, and people will want to play these games with the best graphics possible. It doesn't matter that these games are also on the PS4." This argument says that hardware is a feature and ignores the fact that, to the mass market, hardware is actually an obstacle. Here is the opposite argument, "People won't buy a PS5 for Elden Ring, because they are already playing it on their PS4." It's not the hardware that matters. It's the games. Crossgen games don't sell hardware, because hardware is an obstacle. The mass market takes the path of least resistance which is to not buy hardware unless they have to. So, the labels are different, but the argument is still the same. People still think a powerful system with great graphics is what sells. It isn't. That actually prevents sales. We might use the term "crossgen", but that is saying that hardware sells itself (assuming the person already has an older system that plays the game). What actually causes sales are new games, games that are new to the person buying them. And if a person can play the game on a system they already own, like a PS4, then they won't buy a system with the same games and better graphics, like a PS5. "Software sells hardware". I don't care how many people argue against me. It doesn't change reality. Reality is still that software sells hardware, and hardware doesn't sell itself. The mass market will not pay $500 extra for a PS5 if they can play the same games on a system they already own. |
Playstation has a very long History of support, when you buy a Playstation you know a fair share of the best games of each generation are coming. Those games are announced years in advance and they absolutely help to sell hardware. Early adopters don't buy for the existing library, they buy to keep playing games for years. You get a PS5 and you know you're know you're getting the next Good of War, Uncharted, Spider Man, Final Fantasy, FIFA, The Witcher, Dark Souls and GTA. It's just a matter of either choosing to get it early or delaying the purchase until any of your favorite titles is released. You are among the ones who likes to wait? Nice. Early adopters obviously don't, that's why they go for the new hardware and choose to play the cross gen titles in the new hardware. Sales of cross gen titles selling better on PS5 compared to PS4 despite the huge gap in userbase and the fact PS4 are cheaper are screaming in your face PS4 userbase isn't really that eager for those cross gen titles. It's perplexing this debate is even happening. Do you really believe people buy hardware to get 2 or 3 exclusives instead of buying the hardware to play a dozen of titles regardless of them exclusive or not? I mean, according to you nobody should buy a Xbox, all their games are on PCs |
I appreciate your explanation, because you are the first poster who disagrees with me and doesn't seem to think the PS5 is selling by magic. What you are describing in your first paragraph is a significant aspect of branding. Some people have a lot of confidence in the Playstation brand, and that is why it is selling now in spite of few PS5 exclusives or gen 9 only software. However, since you mentioned early adopters, I think you know that the selling power of this branding will eventually run out. To keep selling PS5 will need to actually produce compelling software that you can't play on PS4.
"It's perplexing this debate is even happening. Do you really believe people buy hardware to get 2 or 3 exclusives instead of buying the hardware to play a dozen of titles regardless of them exclusive or not? I mean, according to you nobody should buy a Xbox, all their games are on PCs"
I think it is clear I am talking about crossgen games. A person will not buy a PS5 if they already have a PS4 that plays the game they want. A person will buy a PS5 to get a game that is only gen 9. I mean, they might buy an X|S instead, but they have to buy a new system of some kind, and that is why Gen 9 titles sell hardware.
I am not sure, but I think you are also arguing against killer apps. Killer apps are real. Pokemon has been making Nintendo handhelds sell for a long time. Some people might need at least 2 or 3 big games to buy a system though. Once a person buys a system, then they are open to buying other games. It's the killer apps that sell the system. Branding only goes so far. Most gamers buy killer apps instead of a console brand that they are strongly tied to no matter what.
