Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:
Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:
Miguel_Zorro said:
Gears of War isn't that big of a seller (around 6 million), at least compared to Halo. It had a better sales trajectory than Uncharted 2 has, but it's not that extreme.
As for why Sony can't seem to produce a "Halo" franchise? I think there are a lot of reasons.
1) Marketing. Halo marketing is huge, and effective. I haven't seen Sony go as big with a marketing campaign yet.
2) Bundles. Sony could pick a flagship game and bundle it with their console. They don't do that enough.
3) Investing in franchises across generations. The first Halo on the original xbox sold 6 million. The next one sold 8. They carried that over to the 360, where now Halo 3 sold over 10 million. Sony carried over Gran Turismo from the PSOne, but what about Crash Bandicoot? It had three titles which sold around 7 million each.
4) Not owning their biggest game. The biggest exclusive on the PSOne after Gran Turismo was Final Fantasy 7. The biggest game on the PS2 was GTA: San Andreas. Imagine if Sony had released FF13 or GTA4 as an exclusive on the PS3? Sony could have purchase Squaresoft in the 90s before it merged with Enix. I think they've learned from this by purchasing the first party studios behind their PS3 games (like Media Molecule).
5) The 360 audience is perfectly suited to make Halo big. Most people who own 360s are American. Most people who own 360s like shooting games. It's the perfect audience to make games like Halo and Gears huge. The PS3 has more owners in Europe vs. the Americans, with a bunch in Japan, where shooters don't sell as well.
6) Diverse gaming audience - as mentioned, a lot of PS3 owners like different types of games, it'd be easier to hit 10 million if they all liked one type of game.
7) People who buy the 360 buy it for the games. That's pretty much it. The console has an amazing attach rate. A lot of PS3 owners bought it primarily for the Blu-Ray player. They're not buying a lot of games. A lot of people bought the PS2 because it wasn't that much more expensive than a DVD player. Same story.
When you're looking at mega-franchises (8-10 million sold per title) that started this gen or last, the list is small: Halo, Wii Fit (I'm excluding Play and Sports for hopefulyl obvious reasons). Then multiplats like Call of Duty and GTA. (I may have missed a few). The real question is - what is it about those games that make them such blockbusters?
|
1) I 100% Agree
2) MGS4 was bundled with the last PS2 backward compatible model PS3. So if you wanted a backward compatible PS3, you had to buy MGS4 as stand alone PS3's were different models. Motorstorm did the same, why do you think MGS4 sold 5 million?
Also Halo did 11 million without any significant bundles. There was a Halo 3/Fable 2 bundle a year and a half later on Elite models, but that didn't boost sales much.
3) I think in past generations, Sony relied a lot on 3rd party exclusives. GTA, Resident Evil, Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, all went multiplatform, or simply switched consoles entirely. It should have brought over Crash Bandicoot, bu I think they ran out of money when everyone left them.
4) in 1987 Square was a company on the verge of bankruptcy. In 1990, they were cheap to buy, but largly loyal to Nintendo, and Sony didn't even have a console back then. By the time PS1 came out, Sony did buy about 40% of the square stock, and they still own a large portion now (thats why FFXIII was not released on the 360 in Japan), but by 1996 Square was a rich and expensive company, and then they merged with Enix. Sony tried, but I don't think the had enough $$$ to buy Rockstar or Square. Even MS could only buy a timed DLC exclusive from Rockstar for 50 million.
5) Gran Turismo 5 will sell well as it appeals to PS3 owners tastes better.
6) I 100% agree
7) I 100% agree, I even know people who bought the PS3 for Blu-Ray and end up buying a couple games for it, just because they can.
As for 10 million sellers, there were a bunch in the NES era, but N64 took a dive in sales, so for N64 and SNES era it was uncommon. During PS2 era, games jumped again, remember PS2 has 5 10 million sellers, 3 GTA titles, 2 GT titles.
Wii just tapped that casual audience, and so did Halo and CoD kind of.
|
4) They bought like, 10% or 20% of Square stock. Which is now down to 4-8% due to Enix being the more valuable company when they merged. Additionally, it's non voting stock and Sony never EVER had anyone on their board of directors. So that's NOT why FFXIII was on PS3 only in japan. Sony literally has no rights outside of dividends.
The reason it wasn't on 360 was time. They made the 360 decision late and they didn't want to risk the game being pushed back anymore. (While never having an announced date before, it obviously was meant to come out sooner.)
Also you aren't going to sell 10 million unless you tap some of the casual market.
|
Really, Sony bought a non-voting stock? Way to go cheap. Thanks for correcting me, now I know.
As for your bolded statement, I agree, but I think games like Halo, Call of Duty, and Gran turismo do tap into a portion of the casual audience. A lot of people buy Halo, CoD and GT simply because they are Halo, CoD, and GT, games that are critically acclaimed to be the best of their genre, and have extensive re-playablity (multipler). Yes Wii Party is a much more "casual" game, but HD franchises do tap into a similar audience.
|
Well you gotta realize why sony did it... it was the height of their console power, and Square a valuable ally was hurting bad, and needed a cash infusion or worry someone else would buy them and take them over. Square went to Sony's financial division about the buyout, and the finanical division saw it as a good buy/long term investment.
The thing about Sony is, they lack synergy, luckily Trenton's been working on it, but they stii miss out on so many oppurtunites.
I mean, look at Ghostbusters the game. Ghostbusters is owned by Sony pictures.... yet the game was on every console, every Sony pictures game is.
The branches don't work together.
|
