starcraft said: As squilliam pointed out, there is a reason MikeB left out raw sales numbers. The PS3 comes off far less swimmingly when they are included. At the end of the day the attach rates for the consoles are VERY different. The Xbox 360's is much higher. Now people like Tombi claim they are the same by convincing themselves its reasonable to do point-in-life comparisons. That only serves any real purpose when the comparison is with a console from a previous generation. The only attach rates developers are going to look at when deciding who to develop for are point-in-cycle rates. At this point in time/cycle, the Xbox 360 has a far higher attach rate than the PS3, regardless of headstarts etc. One could use a point-in-life comparison to imply the PS3 will continue to grow its attach rate at the end of the generation for one year longer than the Xbox 360, but there is a reason why even that argument is flawed. By now, its just plain common sense to realize that the PS3 and Xbox 360 will have tails FAR lower than the PS2's and FAR behind the Wii. Though it started later in the generation, the PS4 will be forced out at a time competitive with the Xbox 3 and Wii 2, meaning any late catchup in attach rates is unlikely, and will in any case be irrelevant to games production.

 

That's just stupid to be fair. As a developer, you don't look at how the console has been performing over it's life cycle, you look at how its performing now, otherwise EVERYONE would develop for the PS2 surely? If console A sold 10 million consoles and 100 million pieces of software, thus 10 games to every owner, yet next year sold 10 million consoles and 20 million pieces of software, only 1 game to total console owners, how would looking at the total cumulative attach rate help me make my decision?

It would clearly suggest that the console is still selling alot more games than it really is. To suggest developers completely ignore recent sales data is incredibly ignorant.

On the subject of attach ratios, I will post these since I don't think I ever used them:

Note these are only good through March, but they give you a great look at how attach ratios have progressed. Click to enlarge.

@ CAL4M1TY

The games are popular in Japan. I don't like Pokemon or cooking mama games myself, but it would be wrong for me to claim there's no appeal factor for such games for other people.

MikeB said: kingofwale said: MikeB said: @ kingofwhale take Bioshock of your "games are currently not available on the PS3" I clarified this in the notice underneath. I agree, but at this point BioShock isn't yet available for the PS3.   yeah, but under the PS3's bolded list, you stated "10 exclusives which are very unlikely to ever become available on the 360" All I'm saying is... use the SAME standard in both lists.   IMO I couldn't as there are many unknown factors. For example Mass Effect may someday hit the PS3 platform, as it's based on an older middleware Unreal engine, a PS3 port should technically be easy to accomplish (with better results, less pop-in issues and no need for mandatory cutscenes to cover up loading times). But like BioShock a PS3 port has been denied.

 

If either Sony or MS holds console exclusive rights to a game it is unlikely that game would appear on a rival platform. lol. Regardless if a later version port on alternative console would indeed look better.

Bladeneo said: starcraft said: As squilliam pointed out, there is a reason MikeB left out raw sales numbers. The PS3 comes off far less swimmingly when they are included. At the end of the day the attach rates for the consoles are VERY different. The Xbox 360's is much higher. Now people like Tombi claim they are the same by convincing themselves its reasonable to do point-in-life comparisons. That only serves any real purpose when the comparison is with a console from a previous generation. The only attach rates developers are going to look at when deciding who to develop for are point-in-cycle rates. At this point in time/cycle, the Xbox 360 has a far higher attach rate than the PS3, regardless of headstarts etc. One could use a point-in-life comparison to imply the PS3 will continue to grow its attach rate at the end of the generation for one year longer than the Xbox 360, but there is a reason why even that argument is flawed. By now, its just plain common sense to realize that the PS3 and Xbox 360 will have tails FAR lower than the PS2's and FAR behind the Wii. Though it started later in the generation, the PS4 will be forced out at a time competitive with the Xbox 3 and Wii 2, meaning any late catchup in attach rates is unlikely, and will in any case be irrelevant to games production. That's just stupid to be fair. As a developer, you don't look at how the console has been performing over it's life cycle, you look at how its performing now, otherwise EVERYONE would develop for the PS2 surely? If console A sold 10 million consoles and 100 million pieces of software, thus 10 games to every owner, yet next year sold 10 million consoles and 20 million pieces of software, only 1 game to total console owners, how would looking at the total cumulative attach rate help me make my decision? It would clearly suggest that the console is still selling alot more games than it really is. To suggest developers completely ignore recent sales data is incredibly ignorant.

I suggested nothing of the sort?

At the end of the day, some people, including the OP, try to imply that the two console's attach rates are the same, when they most certainly are not.  I did not once say that developers would look at attach rates to the exclusion of recent sales data (or any other indicators).  I simply said that they would give more credence to what is happening NOW rather than what would be happening now IF we had had aligned launches or what MIGHT happen at the end of the generation.

 

@ starcraft

Just initial costs are higher due to being differently designed, requiring some additional R&D. But you can do a cheap quick and dirty port, some have done so. However if you tackle this R&D, the following game based on the same game engine will not take additional resources comparitively, there's just potential to go further than the 360 is capable of through additional R&D.



Here the new multi-platform releases cost about the same, of course the 360 due to its 1 year headstart has more budget priced games.

Scratch resistent Blu-Ray discs costs a little more to make than DVDs, but not that much. DVDs less than 1 Euro in small 5k quantities, Blu-Ray disc less than 2 Euro at small quantities.

@ starcraft

Look at Sqrl's chart posted above. For a similar timeframe all 3 consoles seem perfectly alligned  (although it should be noted Nintendo as a games publisher dominates the Wii charts, relevant to 3rd parties).

One crucial thing to note is that for those people who owned a console for a longer period of time, the attach ratio goes up.

So let's say (hypothetical, let's say people are only allowed to buy consoles on one day a year, the real scenario is of course far more dynamic with new game releases (and holiday seasons) pushing for many new console owners anytime of the year):

First year:

1 million 360 owners buy 5 games.

Results so far:
- 1 million 360 owners.
- 5 million 360 games sold.

Attach ratio: 5

Second year (PS3 launches)

2 million 360 owners buy 10 games.
1 million PS3 owners buy 5 games.

Results so far:
- 2 million 360 owners
- 15 million 360 games sold so far.

360 attach ratio: 7.5

- 1 million PS3 owners
- 5 million PS3 games sold so far.

PS3 attach ratio: 5

You undestand? As the install base of the PS3 and 360 move closer, it's mostly relevant how big the install base is and how many games are sold per year. How many past games people have in their homes for a specific console is not relevant to game publishers.

MikeB said: @ starcraft At the end of the day, some people, including the OP, try to imply that the two console's attach rates are the same, when they most certainly are not. Look at Sqrl's chart posted above. For similar timeframe all 3 consoles seem perfectly alligned. One crucial thing to not is that for those people who owned a console for a longer period of time, the attach ratio goes up. So let's say: First year: 1 million 360 owners buy 5 games. Results so far: - 1 million 360 owners. - 5 million 360 games sold. Attach ratio: 5 Second year (PS3 launches) 2 million 360 owners buy 10 games. 1 million PS3 owners buy 5 games. Results so far: - 2 million 360 owners - 15 million 360 games sold so far. 360 attach ratio: 7.5 - 1 million PS3 owners - 5 million PS3 games sold so far. PS3 attach ratio: 5 You undestand? As the install base of the PS3 and 360 move closer, it's mostly relevant how big the install base is and how many games are sold per year. How many past games people have in their homes for a specific console is not relevant.

 

Uhm I think I know what you're trying to say but your wording is kind of bad. Is this what you mean?

The longer people own a console the more games they own and the higher their personal attach ratio is. As the average length of ownership increases for the console so to will the average of all personal attach ratios (ie the overall attach ratio for the console).

 

edit: Again this is good through March '08 only.

@ Sqrl

Exactly and if you take this into account, PS3 owners roughly buy just as many games per year as 360 owners do.

The PS3 install base has been and will be catching up with the 360 significantly this year.

The average months of PS3 ownership will go up, but will probably never reach 360 levels because I expect 360 sales to slow next year and PS3 sales to considerably pick up. So there will be a continued stream of new PS3 owners keeping the average months of ownership down.

Ideally the PS3's average months of ownership will go down, as this in effect means a hell of a lot new consumers are buying a PS3.

MikeB said: Data seems  Although I counted Call of Duty 2 as a 360 exclusive it's old with COD3 and COD4 already out on the market and you could play the PS2 game on the PS3 if you wanted. Conclusion: The PS3 has just as many top games as the 360 has, despite the 360's one year headstart. IMO 360 fans claiming the PS3 has no games should be left ignored.

 

Wait, what?

PS2 CoD2 Big Red One, has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with Call of Duty 2 for PC/360 which is the BEST WWII shooter ever seen the light of day.