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

Forums - Sales - PS3 exclusive sales... whats the deal?

S.T.A.G.E. on 01 March 2009
De85 said:
nen-suer said:
Resistance sold almost 4 million
games like Tomb Raider DMC 4 sold on ps3 more than xbox

Xbox dont sell Rpgs (hello square enix)

u wanna say something state all the facts

Oblivion, Fable 2, Mass Effect, and Fallout 3 have all done over 2 million so I'm calling bullshit on this right now. 

If we're to assume that you mean JRPGs by your square-enix dig then I still have to call bullshit as Lost Odyssey is closing in on one million, but the highset selling PS3 jrpg is well short of 500k, despite the massive install base advantage in Japan.

 

 

Good examples. +1



Around the Network
Smashchu2 on 01 March 2009
kowenicki said:

This is a serious question and is not trolling.  I just dont understand why the top notch PS3 exclusives dont shift huge numbers.  These are all high qaulity titles and yet they just dont compare in sales. 

If we look at arguably the 4 most hyped games (exclusive) of this gen so far with their 1st week (2 weeks for LBP) and LTD sales.

360

Halo 3           3.8m          9.1m     

Gears            0.6m          5.8m

Gears2          1.9m          4.6m

Fable2           1.0m          2.5m

 

PS3

MGS4             1.7m            3.9m 

Res2              0.23m          1.4m

LBP                0.31m          2.0m

KZ2                0.8m(?)       3.5m ????

 

Why is this? I can't explain it....

I do not belive that the install base is the issue here (Gears1 for instance launched with a 5m install base I believe) and even if it was factored in the numbers still dont compare.

Someone explain this to me (without resorting to fanboy nonsense from either side).....there is something different in the buying habits of the respective console owners???

 

1)Quality is determined by the consumer. Since customers are what keeps everything running with their money, they are the only ones who can say what is a good or bad product. If your talking about low sales, then quality is also low.

2)Hype=/=sales. Super Mario Brother had no hype (most core gamers hated it). Wii Fit was not hyped (most core consumers hated it). Nintendogs was not hyped. Pokemon was not hyped. The only two games that are top sells (top 50) that were not hyped were Halo 1 and 2 and Super Smash Brother Brawl. Halo was not really hyped until after the first one.

Now, to explain your problem, lets look at Metal Gear Solid 4 and Little Big Planet. They are both games that greatly over shoot their consumers.

Metal Gear Solid is essentually a movie/game hybrid. People don't buy games to watch, they buy them to play. "But the game doesn't have that many cinamatics, and there's lots of gameplay." But there is still too many. Play though the game again and you may notice the long winded cinamatics and the fact they come almost back to back. How is the player suppose to enjoy the game if he/she doesn't get to play it. Additionally, the game tries to make a point. Never, ever, try to make a point. No one cares. Think about this: before Starwars, movies "made points." But, along comes Starwars and Jaws with their special effects, and people like them. Super Mario Bros never tried to make a point. Pokemon didn't try and make a point. Heck, Halo and Smash Bros don't try to make points. Look at many of the best selling games and you'll see they enjoyed the gameplay, not the story. People don't want Sonic to be revived and make points. They want a high speed platformer that is fun to play. People were happy with Megaman 9 becuase it returned to classic Megaman gameplay, not becuase it tried to make a point. Story does not sell gams. People don't care if the Government does this or we the fact we should be careful lest the Government put nanomachines in us. We just want to play the game.

With Little Big Planet, the problem is in User Generated Content. This will explain a lot of the problem with a focus on UGC. The big concern is that people buy games to play premade content. Ever notice how people talk about how this level was fun or that level was fun. Yes. They aren't esstatic when they have to make or download the rest of the content. Again, look at the top selling games. Only Starcraft and Brawl have user generated content (Halo might too. Not sure).

As for Resistance and Killzone, they may not have attributes that would make them enjoyable to consumers as apposed to Halo. I know one person I( know love Resistance becuase it is like a PC shooter. But he is playing a console. I know Halo has been successful for making FPSs work on consoles. Much like Goldeneye, the game is designed for the console. I'm not sure of any other reasons, but take a look at halo and Resistance/Killzone. Find the big differences and you'll find your answer.

 



Reasonable on 01 March 2009
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Reasonable said:

As many have patiently pointed out (including me) the PS3 does not have as many owners focused so exclusively on a relatively small number of genres.  As a result the 360 sells certain games exceptionally well (Gears, Halo 3, COD4) while only matching the PS3 on others and sometimes seeing a smaller attach rate for install base.

The PS3 sells a broad spectrum of titles well but isn't dominant in any one really (with perhaps the exception of GT and FF although that's to be proven).  Also, many owners (and those who haven't bought yet) are still waiting for their favourites to hit, like God of War, or a new Jak game, etc.  MS has done an excellent job of building out the 360 on the base of the Xbox as the console for formerly PC centric games (its no accident Halo was originally heading for PC before MS bought Bungie and altered its development trajectory as well as fostering titles such as Splinter Cell, etc).

 

The 360 sells a broad spectrum of titles as well, I think you should accept the fact that it's fairly even now on that playing field for the two systems.

I indicated its selling much better across more genres myself, however its really big sellers are still mainly shoorters/online action games.

To assume a majority of PS3 owners want it only for BR or DVD is unwarranted, and unless you can provide anything other than anecdotal evidence (i.e. your mates dad) then I doubt I nor others are going to take your point seriously.

 

Prove me wrong on this. No one has yet, so I want you to be the first to do it.

Actually, as you raised the point the onus is on you to prove it right.  You made a bald statement 'people used PS3s mainly to play movies and haven't backed it up with proof.  Why should I do the work for your statement!?!

For example, I'm on my third PS3 (2 downed with the yellow light of unkown failure) and my friend is on his first 360, yet despite our anecdotal example the PS3 remains the console with the better track record for reliability - I'm just in the minority who are unlucky with their PS3's while my friend is in the majority of 360 owners with no problems.

What does this have to do with the sales of games?

 

Nothing, its to prove that anecdotal evidence such as 'my dad's mate bought a PS3 to play BR's' is meaningless with regard to your statement.  You need documented reasearch or polls showing a majority behave as you've claimed.  My point shows that individual experiences do not automatically show the majority view.

The 360 will likely always outsell PS3 titles in certain genres, but as others have argued it hasn't proven yet it can sell a broad set of genres equally well (although it is improving on that score).

Of course it can. Alot of games will have legs for the Xbox 360 and the PS3 once the mass market get their hands on systems from both companies.

Again, I myself also indicated the 360 should be able to sell well across all genres (to PS2 levels) but that it hasn't yet.

 

Look at the PS2 - it's success was never down to having a small number of massive sellers (such as Halo, Gears, etc) but instead by being the default console of choice across the broadest set of genres with good sales of games in each (a success the PS3 has failed to emulate so far).


Actually....it was. Sony had a monopoly on 3rd party titles, so they didn't have to worry about much. A small minority of those third party titles ended up being the face of Sony. Big mistake. Microsoft arrived and now Sony is doing what they should've always been doing much like Nintendo in focusing on first party titles. The reason The PS3 cannot emulate their PS2 value is because of Microsoft taking the 3rd party away from them. They were the powerful company beating up on little guys like Nintendo and Sega. What Microsoft is doing now is no different than what Sony did. Actually...it's nearly a mirror image. The only reason people aren't running to MS faster was because of RROD and the Microsoft name. Now that RROD has been dealt with it's selling quite smoothly. All they have to worry about are the first party titles and trust me, those are coming.

Actually... it wasn't - i.e. down to individual titles.  Your statement is correct and indeed backs up my statement - the PS2 had the sales it did because it got essentially all the 3rd party support as well as having strong franchises and 1st party support.  Again, the 360 (and the PS3) are nowhere near this level of support.  Indeed, with rising game costs, particularly HD games, outside of PSN/XBLA titles I find it hard to believe that either will see the number of titles released the PS2 did unless one or the other becomes super dominant, which looks unlikely at this stage.  And with the economy shutting down many smaller developers, well, just as the number of movies each year decreased as costs rose I think we're going to see the same with games.

 

 

 

Now, how about some proof regarding your statement?  I and others have called doubt on it and you're asking us to prove you wrong, but I say you need to take a proper stab at proving yourself right first.

 

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

mrstickball on 01 March 2009

I think the 'less diverse' argument for the 360 is laughable at best.

Care to name any genre that the PS3 unanimously sells better at?

The X360 has 64 different million-selling games. The PS3 has 27. 27! Do you realize how bad that is for a supposedly 'more diverse' library?

Lets look at a few genres:

Racing:

  • GRID: X360 leads by 140,000 Units
  • NFS ProStreet: X360 leads by 370,000 Units
  • Pure: X360 leads by 160,000 units

Shooter:

  • CoD: Modern Warfare: 360 leads by 3.02 million units
  • Blacksite Area 51: 360 leads by 190,000 units
  • James Bond - Quantum of Solace: 360 leads by 260,000 units

Family:

  • Guitar Hero III: 360 leads by 1.1 million units
  • The Simpsons Game: 360 leads by 600,000 units
  • Lego Batman: 360 leads by 150,000 units

Action:

  • Assassin's Creed: 360 leads by 1.12 million units
  • Devil May Cry 4: PS3 leads by 160,000 units
  • Tomb Raider Underworld: PS3 leads by 110,000 units (X360 is eating away at the margin, however.)

Sports:

  • Madden 09: 360 leads by 690,000 units
  • Fifa 09: PS3 leads by 280,000 units
  • WWE Smackdown vs. Raw: 360 leads by 110,000 units

RPG:

  • Fallout 3: 360 leads by 810,000 units

The argument that the PS3 user base is more diverse is beyond hilarious. Why is it that 90% of all multi-plat games sell better on the 360? To me, that doesn't mean that the PS3 is more diverse: it tells me the 360 beats the PS3 pretty badly when it comes to diversity. When the PS3 has a very low 5.5-6.0) attach ratio vs. the 360 (8.0+), it also shows me further the PS3 userbase lacks diversity, since they aren't buying many games to diversify their library, either. The rare instances the PS3 actually wins are usually skewed with heavy Japanese sales such as a DMC4, PES, and such. But again, that's 10% of titles, which isn't diversity.

The simple reason the PS3 gets it's rear end handed to it in SW sales:

  • Bad attach ratios
  • Lack of major exclusive IPs

Those are the 2 best reasons I've found so far.

I'd really like a major rebuttal that shows what genre the PS3 flourishes in that the 360 does not. If there's ever an issue, it's always regional (a game selling more in a specific area or culture) rather than an actual full genre across more than 1-2 games.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Reasonable on 01 March 2009
Smashchu2 said:
kowenicki said:

This is a serious question and is not trolling.  I just dont understand why the top notch PS3 exclusives dont shift huge numbers.  These are all high qaulity titles and yet they just dont compare in sales. 

If we look at arguably the 4 most hyped games (exclusive) of this gen so far with their 1st week (2 weeks for LBP) and LTD sales.

360

Halo 3           3.8m          9.1m     

Gears            0.6m          5.8m

Gears2          1.9m          4.6m

Fable2           1.0m          2.5m

 

PS3

MGS4             1.7m            3.9m 

Res2              0.23m          1.4m

LBP                0.31m          2.0m

KZ2                0.8m(?)       3.5m ????

 

Why is this? I can't explain it....

I do not belive that the install base is the issue here (Gears1 for instance launched with a 5m install base I believe) and even if it was factored in the numbers still dont compare.

Someone explain this to me (without resorting to fanboy nonsense from either side).....there is something different in the buying habits of the respective console owners???

 

1)Quality is determined by the consumer. Since customers are what keeps everything running with their money, they are the only ones who can say what is a good or bad product. If your talking about low sales, then quality is also low.

2)Hype=/=sales. Super Mario Brother had no hype (most core gamers hated it). Wii Fit was not hyped (most core consumers hated it). Nintendogs was not hyped. Pokemon was not hyped. The only two games that are top sells (top 50) that were not hyped were Halo 1 and 2 and Super Smash Brother Brawl. Halo was not really hyped until after the first one.

Now, to explain your problem, lets look at Metal Gear Solid 4 and Little Big Planet. They are both games that greatly over shoot their consumers.

Metal Gear Solid is essentually a movie/game hybrid. People don't buy games to watch, they buy them to play. "But the game doesn't have that many cinamatics, and there's lots of gameplay." But there is still too many. Play though the game again and you may notice the long winded cinamatics and the fact they come almost back to back. How is the player suppose to enjoy the game if he/she doesn't get to play it. Additionally, the game tries to make a point. Never, ever, try to make a point. No one cares. Think about this: before Starwars, movies "made points." But, along comes Starwars and Jaws with their special effects, and people like them. Super Mario Bros never tried to make a point. Pokemon didn't try and make a point. Heck, Halo and Smash Bros don't try to make points. Look at many of the best selling games and you'll see they enjoyed the gameplay, not the story. People don't want Sonic to be revived and make points. They want a high speed platformer that is fun to play. People were happy with Megaman 9 becuase it returned to classic Megaman gameplay, not becuase it tried to make a point. Story does not sell gams. People don't care if the Government does this or we the fact we should be careful lest the Government put nanomachines in us. We just want to play the game.

With Little Big Planet, the problem is in User Generated Content. This will explain a lot of the problem with a focus on UGC. The big concern is that people buy games to play premade content. Ever notice how people talk about how this level was fun or that level was fun. Yes. They aren't esstatic when they have to make or download the rest of the content. Again, look at the top selling games. Only Starcraft and Brawl have user generated content (Halo might too. Not sure).

As for Resistance and Killzone, they may not have attributes that would make them enjoyable to consumers as apposed to Halo. I know one person I( know love Resistance becuase it is like a PC shooter. But he is playing a console. I know Halo has been successful for making FPSs work on consoles. Much like Goldeneye, the game is designed for the console. I'm not sure of any other reasons, but take a look at halo and Resistance/Killzone. Find the big differences and you'll find your answer.

 

 

<!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"; panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4; mso-font-charset:128; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1 -369098753 63 0 4129023 0;} @font-face {font-family:"\@Arial Unicode MS"; panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4; mso-font-charset:128; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1 -369098753 63 0 4129023 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;} p {margin-right:0cm; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0cm; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";} @page Section1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:36.0pt; mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} -->

Good points, although I think it would be more accurate to say the consumer defines 'popularity' than 'quality'.  I hate to sound elitist but many games, just as with films and books, that are not the best quality sell very well because they are popular.

As for the article I'd say it gets LBP very wrong in its assumptions and although it has some good points it has a fair number of flaws as well.

The simple fact is that with games (as with films, etc) there is a desire to appeal to the broadest audience, yet due to different people's preferences this in fact requires a number of titles / approaches.

LBP for example is going to sell between 2 and 3 M LTD at least.  For a small title it's hardly a failure and in fact it's clearly a pretty strong success (and in terms of profits I'm guessing the DLC has pushed its profits comfortably above those its initial sales would have delivered).  The hype only came in after it was underway and the press went ecstatic.  Sony then tried to push it beyond what it was.  From their comments its obvious MM wanted LBP to release as a more modest title and were nervous of the mad hype being heaped on it.  There is a market for user content generated games; it’s just smaller than the one for Halo/COD type games.

The simple fact is that the best mix for the consumer is a blend of 'safe' titles mixed with more risky new IP and approaches.  Not all will succeed.  But the alternative is to have nothing but a flood of essentially safe titles or known IP.

Sorry to go OT on LBP but I get angry when I read articles like the one you linked that, deliberately or not, are arguing the safe path - people like this, they don't like that, only give them this, etc.  It's basically the argument of finding an exact recipe and sticking to it.

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Around the Network
psrock on 01 March 2009
mrstickball said:

I think the 'less diverse' argument for the 360 is laughable at best.

Care to name any genre that the PS3 unanimously sells better at?

The X360 has 64 different million-selling games. The PS3 has 27. 27! Do you realize how bad that is for a supposedly 'more diverse' library?

Lets look at a few genres:

Racing:

  • GRID: X360 leads by 140,000 Units
  • NFS ProStreet: X360 leads by 370,000 Units
  • Pure: X360 leads by 160,000 units

Shooter:

  • CoD: Modern Warfare: 360 leads by 3.02 million units
  • Blacksite Area 51: 360 leads by 190,000 units
  • James Bond - Quantum of Solace: 360 leads by 260,000 units

Family:

  • Guitar Hero III: 360 leads by 1.1 million units
  • The Simpsons Game: 360 leads by 600,000 units
  • Lego Batman: 360 leads by 150,000 units

Action:

  • Assassin's Creed: 360 leads by 1.12 million units
  • Devil May Cry 4: PS3 leads by 160,000 units
  • Tomb Raider Underworld: PS3 leads by 110,000 units (X360 is eating away at the margin, however.)

Sports:

  • Madden 09: 360 leads by 690,000 units
  • Fifa 09: PS3 leads by 280,000 units
  • WWE Smackdown vs. Raw: 360 leads by 110,000 units

RPG:

  • Fallout 3: 360 leads by 810,000 units

The argument that the PS3 user base is more diverse is beyond hilarious. Why is it that 90% of all multi-plat games sell better on the 360? To me, that doesn't mean that the PS3 is more diverse: it tells me the 360 beats the PS3 pretty badly when it comes to diversity. When the PS3 has a very low 5.5-6.0) attach ratio vs. the 360 (8.0+), it also shows me further the PS3 userbase lacks diversity, since they aren't buying many games to diversify their library, either. The rare instances the PS3 actually wins are usually skewed with heavy Japanese sales such as a DMC4, PES, and such. But again, that's 10% of titles, which isn't diversity.

The simple reason the PS3 gets it's rear end handed to it in SW sales:

  • Bad attach ratios
  • Lack of major exclusive IPs

Those are the 2 best reasons I've found so far.

I'd really like a major rebuttal that shows what genre the PS3 flourishes in that the 360 does not. If there's ever an issue, it's always regional (a game selling more in a specific area or culture) rather than an actual full genre across more than 1-2 games.

It's very simple why multi-plat games sell better on the 360 than the PS3 : The huge userbase advantage in NA. That's it.

 



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)
Smeags on 01 March 2009

The OP got me wondering... What are the biggest 1st week sellers this generation? Let's find out.

360:

1. Halo 3 (3,815,444)
2. Grand Theft Auto 4 (3,377,873)
3. Gears of War 2 (1,896,244)
4. Call of Duty: World at War (1,301,675)
5. Fable 2 (1,049,788)

PS3:

1. Grand Theft Auto 4 (2,547,973)
2. Metal Gear Solid 4 (1,711,226)
3. Call of Duty: World at War (735,630)
4. Gran Turismo 5 Prologue (639,548)
5. Pro Evolution Soccer 2009 (613,801)

Wii:

1. Super Smash Bros. Brawl (2,767,256)
2. Mario Kart Wii (2,408,699)
3. Wii Fit (1,626,973)
4. Super Mario Galaxy (1,075,164)
5. The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (820,122)

DS:

1. Pokemon Diamond/Pearl (3,501,701)
2. New Super Mario Bros. (1,218,484)
3. Pokemon Mystery Dungeon: Explorers of Time/Darkness (1,067,874)
4. Pokemon Platinum (992,995)*
5. The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass (707,542)

PSP:

1. Monster Hunter Portable 2nd G (857,429)*
2. Monster Hunter Freedom 2 (807,298)
3. Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII (778,735)
4. Dissida: Final Fantasy (503,401)*
5. God of War: Chains of Olympus (237,474)

All Together:

1. Halo 3 (3,815,444)
2. Pokemon Diamond/Pearl (3,501,701)
3. Grand Theft Auto 4 (3,377,873)
4. Super Smash Bros. Brawl (2,767,256)
5. Grand Theft Auto 4 (2,547,973)
6. Mario Kart Wii (2,408,699)
7. Gears of War 2 (1,896,244)
8. Metal Gear Solid 4 (1,711,226)
9. Wii Fit (1,626,973)
10. Call of Duty: World at War (1,301,675)
11. New Super Mario Bros. (1,218,484)
12. Super Mario Galaxy (1,075,164)
13. Pokemon Mystery Dungeon: Explorers of Time/Darkness (1,067,874)
14. Fable 2 (1,049,788)
15. Pokemon Platinum (992,995)
16. Monster Hunter Portable 2nd G (857,429)
17. The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (820,122)
18. Monster Hunter Freedom 2 (807,298)
19. Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII (778,735)
20. Call of Duty: World at War (735,630)
21. The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass (707,542)
22. Gran Turismo 5 Prologue (639,548)
22. Pro Evolution Soccer 2009 (613,801)
24. Dissida: Final Fantasy (503,401)
25. God of War: Chains of Olympus (237,474)

*Japan only

If you see anything that needs changing, give me a holler.



3DS Rec Thread ~ Wii U Rec Thread ~ Xbox One Rec Thread

mrstickball on 01 March 2009
psrock said:

It's very simple why multi-plat games sell better on the 360 than the PS3 : The huge userbase advantage in NA. That's it.

So it's not a difference of actual gamer demographics, but mere userbase, then, correct?

 



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Reasonable on 01 March 2009
mrstickball said:

I think the 'less diverse' argument for the 360 is laughable at best.

Care to name any genre that the PS3 unanimously sells better at?

The X360 has 64 different million-selling games. The PS3 has 27. 27! Do you realize how bad that is for a supposedly 'more diverse' library?

Lets look at a few genres:

Racing:

  • GRID: X360 leads by 140,000 Units
  • NFS ProStreet: X360 leads by 370,000 Units
  • Pure: X360 leads by 160,000 units

Shooter:

  • CoD: Modern Warfare: 360 leads by 3.02 million units
  • Blacksite Area 51: 360 leads by 190,000 units
  • James Bond - Quantum of Solace: 360 leads by 260,000 units

Family:

  • Guitar Hero III: 360 leads by 1.1 million units
  • The Simpsons Game: 360 leads by 600,000 units
  • Lego Batman: 360 leads by 150,000 units

Action:

  • Assassin's Creed: 360 leads by 1.12 million units
  • Devil May Cry 4: PS3 leads by 160,000 units
  • Tomb Raider Underworld: PS3 leads by 110,000 units (X360 is eating away at the margin, however.)

Sports:

  • Madden 09: 360 leads by 690,000 units
  • Fifa 09: PS3 leads by 280,000 units
  • WWE Smackdown vs. Raw: 360 leads by 110,000 units

RPG:

  • Fallout 3: 360 leads by 810,000 units

The argument that the PS3 user base is more diverse is beyond hilarious. Why is it that 90% of all multi-plat games sell better on the 360? To me, that doesn't mean that the PS3 is more diverse: it tells me the 360 beats the PS3 pretty badly when it comes to diversity. When the PS3 has a very low 5.5-6.0) attach ratio vs. the 360 (8.0+), it also shows me further the PS3 userbase lacks diversity, since they aren't buying many games to diversify their library, either. The rare instances the PS3 actually wins are usually skewed with heavy Japanese sales such as a DMC4, PES, and such. But again, that's 10% of titles, which isn't diversity.

The simple reason the PS3 gets it's rear end handed to it in SW sales:

  • Bad attach ratios
  • Lack of major exclusive IPs

Those are the 2 best reasons I've found so far.

I'd really like a major rebuttal that shows what genre the PS3 flourishes in that the 360 does not. If there's ever an issue, it's always regional (a game selling more in a specific area or culture) rather than an actual full genre across more than 1-2 games.

 

Just to be clear I'm comparing both the PS3 and the 360 to the PS2 as the definition of a broad library (shovelware and all).  I'm not saying the PS3 has a more diverse library but that via brand and customer expectation its owners are expecting a more diverse library than they're getting.  The 360 has done very well to broaden out over more genres, although its truly big sellers remain shooters/online titles.

For multi-platform titles the 360 should outsell the PS3 - it has more owners so unless the title particularly appeals to PS3 owners it simply cannot fail to outsell the PS3 version.

The OP was why are PS3 titles tending to sell less than 360, and the answer is:

1) smaller install base spread over broader demographic owners and without a clear lead in any territory

2) a more difficult install base to secure big sales in due to 1) above

3) 360 does have a specific core genres it excels in and leads in one specific territory (US, which drives the big sales for Gears, COD, etc)

 

If you look at your own figures you'll see that apart from a few big titles (COD4) the 360 lead tends to be around 200,000 to 300,000 units, which is in line with the install base difference - i.e. the 360 skews to certain demographics.

I do agree though that anyone claiming PS3 itself has a more diverse library of titles is nuts.

Just want to be clear in case you're missreading my own statements as arguing the PS3 does indeed have a more diverse library.

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

mrstickball on 01 March 2009

Reasonable, what about the fact the 360 does tend to have a 33% higher attach rate than the PS3? That certainly plays a big part in the PS3's struggle to find more sales.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.