By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales Discussion - Why do X360 exclusives sell more than PS3 exclusives?

chocoloco on 10 September 2012
kowenicki said:
Because they appeal to more people and more people buy them. Anything else is conjecture, spin, semantics or bullshit.

You are the epitome of a dry martini.

Yet, you are right, but if research was actually done and presented to the public, people could do more than hypothesize.



Around the Network
Ji99saw on 10 September 2012
Andrespetmonkey said:
More/better promotion, more mass appeal, a lot of Halo.

You'll find a lot more variety among AAA PS3 exclusives... a lot more niche titles or titles that are mostly promoted through word of mouth or critic scores because Sony has little moneyz, too little to give big marketing budgets to many games..

I'm so tired of people saying this because it is not true I see Sony games advertised way more than I see any other platform games advertised, not to mention UC3 had the biggest marketing campain I have ever seen they even had a deal with Subway one of the biggiest Sandwich foodchains I know. Sony markets games all the time it's the audiance that talks about them to death but never buy them.



Without order nothing can exist - without chaos nothing can evolve.

"I don't debate, I just give you that work"- Ji99saw

man-bear-pig on 10 September 2012
pezus said:
Jay520 said:
More lists of who has the most exclusives don't really prove anything. This thread is about why 360 exclusives sell more than PS3 exclusives. One of the propositions is that Sony has to spend considerable amounts of money on more games than Microsoft, therefore limiting the budget for each individual game. So, the only games that are relevant are games that Sony/Microsoft have to spend a considerable amount of money.

Company A could release 20 low-budget exclusives over their digital network. But those games collectively wouldn't be as impactful as 5 big budget games released by Company B. Just going by mere numbers, Company A would appear to have to spend more money. But it's actually Company B who has to spend more money. Company A just released a lot of cheap small games.

I just like proving MBP wrong. 


You haven't proved me wrong at all. You're just twisting facts, quoting different sources and using your own estimations to try and prove me wrong...lol



My prediction threads:

Wii U will sell under 40m units (made on 14th September 2012)

PS Vita will sell under 20m units (made on 30th September 2012)

Wii U will sell under 7m in 2013 - I was right

Halo 4 first 9 weeks sales prediction

PS4 to be down YOY in 2015

d21lewis on 10 September 2012

I'm sure Sony doesn't have an infinite amount of money but is there anything that proves that, if they spend $50Million on Game A, they only have $10Million for game B.

And anybody that argues this is, in fact, the situation--are they admitting that Game B sucks? Are they admitting that, by only releasing a few exclusives a year, Microsoft is actually going the "Quality, not quantity" route? Think about what you're posting. From where I sit, it sounds like people are saying, "Since Sony has to release so many different games across so many different genres, they have to release sacrifice quality."

That's not the impression you guys are trying to make, is it?



Andrespetmonkey on 10 September 2012
d21lewis said:
I'm sure Sony doesn't have an infinite amount of money but is there anything that proves that, if they spend $50Million on Game A, they only have $10Million for game B.

And anybody that argues this is, in fact, the situation--are they admitting that Game B sucks? Are they admitting that, by only releasing a few exclusives a year, Microsoft is actually going the "Quality, not quantity" route? Think about what you're posting. From where I sit, it sounds like people are saying, "Since Sony has to release so many different games across so many different genres, they have to release sacrifice quality."

That's not the impression you guys are trying to make, is it?

I talking strictly about marketing budget, it has nothing to do with the quality of the games for the most part.



My Music

Around the Network
d21lewis on 10 September 2012
Andrespetmonkey said:
d21lewis said:
I'm sure Sony doesn't have an infinite amount of money but is there anything that proves that, if they spend $50Million on Game A, they only have $10Million for game B.

And anybody that argues this is, in fact, the situation--are they admitting that Game B sucks? Are they admitting that, by only releasing a few exclusives a year, Microsoft is actually going the "Quality, not quantity" route? Think about what you're posting. From where I sit, it sounds like people are saying, "Since Sony has to release so many different games across so many different genres, they have to release sacrifice quality."

That's not the impression you guys are trying to make, is it?

I talking strictly about marketing budget, it has nothing to do with the quality of the games for the most part.

Yeah, I just realized that.  I should have quoted you.  Your post was on another page.  I went back and looked at the earlier page but by the time I got back, you had already quoted me.



Andrespetmonkey on 10 September 2012
man-bear-pig said:


You haven't proved me wrong at all. You're just twisting facts, quoting different sources and using your own estimations to try and prove me wrong...lol

It means, as I said, the definition you use. I was differentiating between the one you use and the one me and pezus use.


No it doesn't...none of the games in the wiki list are available for the PC aswell

There are plenty on other platforms, including PC. Alan Wake's American Nightmare, Risen, Toy soldiers, Class3/Class4 etc.

 

I know this is a reply to Jay, but I proved you wrong completely here, and would like to hear you tell me you were wrong and I was right.



My Music

Jay520 on 10 September 2012

Andrespetmonkey said:


I know this is a reply to Jay, but I proved you wrong completely here, and would like to hear you tell me you were wrong and I was right.

 

Proved me wrong about what exactly?



Andrespetmonkey on 10 September 2012
Jay520 said:

Andrespetmonkey said:

I know this is a reply to Jay, but I proved you wrong completely here, and would like to hear you tell me you were wrong and I was right.

Proved me wrong about what exactly?

re-read jason. I proved MBP wrong, not you.



My Music

pokoko on 10 September 2012
Ji99saw said:
Andrespetmonkey said:
More/better promotion, more mass appeal, a lot of Halo.

You'll find a lot more variety among AAA PS3 exclusives... a lot more niche titles or titles that are mostly promoted through word of mouth or critic scores because Sony has little moneyz, too little to give big marketing budgets to many games..

I'm so tired of people saying this because it is not true I see Sony games advertised way more than I see any other platform games advertised, not to mention UC3 had the biggest marketing campain I have ever seen they even had a deal with Subway one of the biggiest Sandwich foodchains I know. Sony markets games all the time it's the audiance that talks about them to death but never buy them.

Never buys them?  Did you see the table on the first page?  The games on the Sony side sold very well.  It's only when compared against the Halo series, a sales juggernaut, that they seem low.

In that context, this tread really becomes a question of why Halo sells so well.  Or, from another perspective, you could ask why Microsoft has been unable to duplicate Halo sales.  It doesn't really matter, either way Halo is the anomaly.

The "whys" have all pretty much been answered, though.  It's an FPS, the dominant genre in North America, a market dominated by the 360, and a franchise that Microsoft has spent an enormous amount of resources on.  It's also a series that pre-dates the 360, which means it had a pre-existing fanbase before the 360 launched, and it also had Windows versions which served to extend the fanbase.