I wanted to share a few thoughts and hear what others think on this topic. I have no general argument, just some thoughts I have had over time as I have read some other people's thoughts that often gets me thinking on this topic:
I have a few observations on this topic, but mainly since I've been reading the site since early 2012, this has really got me thinking:
What exactly guarantees a console will be a success at launch as well as overall?
I don't have a fixed argument on the subject, but I think in the nuetral sense of the word, are one of the more fickle consumer bases out there and determining what we want at any period of time can be difficult. That is to say, we go from one thing to the next, aiming to feed one desire and satisfy another, all in an attempt to feed our overall general gaming appetite.
So what decides what we want more of? Once we find that one thing that has us hooked and feeds that appetite as consumers, do we generally consume the first thing then move onto the next? It seems like hype is only maintained with a series/IP for example if we still desire more of the last thing we just consumed. Outside of that, we are always looking for something new to lust over, or maybe just to hold us over until that next big game in the series we still lust for comes out. Or maybe we are just buying, catching up older games we may have missed (or may not have felt like spending $40-60 bucks on) until the next console generation starts.
What exactly determines what that next 'must have' IP will be? Isn't generating hype from basically nothing for attracting large amounts of gamer interest generally difficult?
In the past, outside of games, consoles have generated a lot of interest in advertising how many "bits" the console has. That is, how graphically advanced will this be over the last generation and what does this mean for my favorite IP or game genre that I like to play?
With all the advances in technology over the years, aren't we are virtually spoiled by good graphics, beautiful soundtracks and full motion video at this point that now that that cat is out of the bag, what next can they do to capture and impress us? It used to be graphics did encourage a lot of purchases, because who wants the crappy 8-bit pixel system version now, when we can have 16-bit, or 32-bit? Or 64? Or 128? Voice acting, mouths moving, downloadable updates, etc. Now we can have all the things we love(d) about the games we've played, reimagined in more beautiful bits. Now, we are entering the "looks uncanny" graphic capabiilties territory. Yeah, everything looks nicer, but what really stands out now?
Even worse, it's hard to get us to want to try anything that is too different from things we have already experienced previously, or rather is just too different from our general tastes. That's why nostalgia is such a good market. All the classic remakes... Donkey Kong Returns, Duck Tales, Kirby's Return to Dreamland, among many others. It's easy for us to imagine wanting to play those. I mean aren't we generally specific in what we like, even critical at times (see any gaming site comment board) and we've shown that it takes a LOT to keep us incredibly loyal... much less hooked.
So, when we think about what generates consumer interest in terms of game launches, there are so many variables involved and so many different things that each of us desire at any one moment that it almost makes us almost something like a variable. What is determined as a successful console launch in a single period depends greatly on whether or not it can capture our desire and interest... much less lust for it to the point that we will invest the money pretty much right away as soon as we can. If we could determine that, we could determing what will help a console launch become more likely to succeed versus saying what exactly will certainly make it successful. Determing what makes or breaks a console launch seems to depend on a variety of factors versus just a few... timing one being of them.
That's why sometimes I have a problem with logic that a console "must have this new game released" or "this must happen or else" to be a successful launch. The only problem I can see with that thinking is that it is missing the important timing variable that captures gamer's interest at it's height. Interest can fade very quickly because one moment we could hooked, but then another moment the "next big thing" comes out and we start to look for that on the horizon.
A good example would be with the Wii U. We know what to expect now because there's a release schedule and a console. Obviously, Mario, Zelda, other Nintendo IPs are pretty much guaranteed. However with PS4 around the corner, there's still a mystery to solve and much that can surprise us. I'm sure there are more than a few people holding off thinking "Well, I really want to be excited so I will hold out and wait to see what the PS4 will come up with".
I know some of us are gaming connoiseurs who spend enormous chunks of our income on gaming and buy many of the consoles and new releases just about. I'm sure the big 3 take those people into account because they are mainly the ones who have both the income and the dedication to buy consoles at launch. However, there are many of us who have to be more selective with our money since it's in shorter supply. This is why I wonder at times just how important exactly is the launch period of a console to it's overall performance? Sure, it generates hype and a healthier customer base initially... but in examining numbers as people interested in sales, what exactly does this period tell us about the overall consumer?
Anyway, these are just a few of my thoughts and are in a state of flux. What are your thoughts? What generates interest and what guarantees a sales success for a console?
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
