AussieGecko said:
Reasonable said:
Doesn't matter - they're shooters. Someone who doesn't like shooters and plays jRPGs etc isn't going to show interest in Bulletstorm. They're different types of shooters for sure, but it's pretty obvious that they're going to either appeal (or not) to roughly the same demographic.
Also, my point is Bulletorm didn't get the message across it was different in the marketing I saw. For the average PS3 FPS playing gamer looking at titles in a store he'd (or she'd) see two FPS except one they'd know and one they wouldn't.
We're talking differences within a common genre here, not totally different genres. An example would be releasing a fun racing title same week as GT. Totally different style but I guarantee the same result - the less known title will get cannabilized to hell by the bigger IP.
|
Shooters are not all the same, fighting games are not all the same, racing games are not all the same and so on and so on. Otherwise there would be 1 fps, 1 racer etc etc. Bulletstorm is enough different, why it didnt sell, god knows.
You say one they know and one they don't? Epic is one with their logo, they flaunt that sod. Most people that have that activeness with games would know the Epic logo imo
|
You're not getting it. Trust me, I work in advanced forecasting techniques for retailers worldwide, and this is a pure and simple case of cannabilization. It's textbook. I can tell you exactly why it didn't sell on PS3 comparably to 360 and that is Killzone 3.
To the average gamer Bulletstorm simply doesn't seem different enough. Bulletstorm, Killzone, yeah those sound really different. You're confusing the smaller number of people who are enthusiasts with the average majority. Most people aren't that informed or intersted beyond the basic knowledge of the title and what they've picked up from marketing for new IP unless it's had a vey specific push - the big push Gears was given by MS comes to mind. The title was great, but I seriously doubt it would have seen the sales it did without the excellent marketing campaign that brought the title to market.
You're also ignoring buying habits. Two FPS titles release. Few gamers will buy both at the same time no matter how different they are - it's simple economics. The majority will pick one. The choice on PS3 was a high end exclusive with a known brand or a new IP. 9 times out of 10 the new IP always loses in those cases.
There's no mystery here. The ratio of PS3 to 360 sales vs almost all other multi-platform titles in the last 12 months tells the tale.
On PS3 Bulletstorm got cannabilized. On 360 it did better although as an Epic branded title hardly a huge amount either.
Just looking at the title on its own the marketing simply didn't click. The title is generic FPS. The cover is generic FPS. The tagline "kill with style" didn't click and didn't convey the core mechanic to the gaming masses.
Bulletstorm simply didn't stand out and on the PS3 this was a particular problem because it launched right next to Killzone 3. On 360 it got a fairly clean launch with nothing competing for the sales.
Of course all FPS, racers, etc. aren't the same, but they tend to appeal to the same group of people time and time again.
With Bulletstorm and Killzone 3 I'd estimate the overlap must have been at least 80% - i.e. 80% of the people who might consider each would be the same people. That's a horrible overlap to launch into.
Last time we saw something like this was Prototype/Infamous, although in that case Prototype did a better job of seeming different plus it was a case of two new IPs at the same time even if one was exclusive. With Bulletstorm it was new IP up against a big title with a 3 in the title.
You see the exact same thing with popcorn movies all the time with the exact same result.
