RolStoppable said:
eva01beserk said:
Almost double? Danm. I don't see switch passing that. That's the thing about first and third party support. First party sells hardware but third party makes the money. |
It's baffling that there are still people who believe that third party software sales bring in the most money. First party makes way more for Nintendo, meaning a multiplier of around 4 per game compared to what they collect as royalty fee. That's why Nintendo is more profitable than Sony despite lower total revenue from gaming. They can keep selling first party games which have long paid off their development and marketing budgets for their original price or at a mere 33% discount. For Sony, third party software ranks only third in the profit category. The main source of PS profit is PS+ subscriptions followed by microtransactions. Pretty bad when it isn't games that bring in the most profit for a console manufacturer, because it's quite obvious where such a business model leads: Games as a service in order to drive higher subscription rates and more microtransactions. And that's exactly where Sony is going with at least ten first party GaaS titles set to release within the next three years. Jim Ryan's leadership is just about to begin to take its full shape and have my doubts that PS fans will like it. |
Ye his wording is off, but ur also slightly wrong. Third party support is very important because platformers get free money from commission fee. Apple doesn't make games, but their profit from games is huge because mobile games generate tons of money. They get a portion of that without doing anything other than providing service. Sony is similar to Apple, they can earn money without doing much bcuz of the third party games (although there are rumors that Sony pay for exclusivity).
This doesn't mean that Nintendo's approach is bad either, having a solid first party selection that can sell as much as Nintendo does is reassuring and crazy. At one year, 80% of the sales were 1st party. This proves that Nintendo can support themselves, and not rely on others; whereas other platformers such as Sony, Microsoft, Valve, Apple needs that third party support to be maintainable in their gaming division. Imagine Nintendo having that Call of Duty support Sony and Microsoft are fighting over, there's a reason why they're fighting over it. If Nintendo could get as much third party support like Sony and Microsoft, without a doubt they would be at the top. The only reason why being Nintendo works for Nintendo is bcuz they are kinda special as they can sell their hardware with a profit compared to Sony and Microsoft. That's why they have the highest profit margin and operating profit out of the big 3 in the gaming division. However, this also sacrifices huge third party support bcuz hardware specs can't meet the standard. Having a third party support will never be a bad thing as it's basically free money for platformers, one of the reason why the Wii U failed was bcuz of the lack of third party support.
