Support NeoGAF

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Just don't look at Nintendo

Invalidates his entire argument by arficially cherry-picking the datapoints.

MS's recent successes are anything but proof exclusives are not important. Virtually all of their recent successful games were conceived as 3rd party titles that MS had almost nothing to do with, back before they bought the publisher.

If anything, the current success of Bethesda and Activision titles on PS5, is just proof that the audience for those publisher's games were overwhelmingly on PS and PC platforms to begin with.... but we already knew that, because Zenimax and Activision financials published sales data showing the Playstation as the favoured console platform for their games, long before MS invaginated them.

 

[Felessan]

Not really, yours is just a bunch of bullshit based on absolutely nothing.

Childish behaviour is what you are displaying.

You are just in denial
Mario, animal planet etc are the same game for kids for like 4 decades already. The fact that some are infantile enough to play them as adult doesn't change anything.

 

[MMaRsu]

You are just in denial
Mario, animal planet etc are the same game for kids for like 4 decades already. The fact that some are infantile enough to play them as adult doesn't change anything.

Wtf is animal planet bro what are you even talking about

Youve never played a Nintendo game have you

 

[BlackTron]

Irrelevant? No. Dominating market? Also no.
Sony pursuited portable market from long time ago, it took a break with the rise of mobile to understand how to structure their proposition.

And I doubt that it was Switch that compelled them to get back, Nin handhelds were there for decades, reaction to Switch if any should have been years ago. But Nintendo as always sustained heavily by 1st party and it's not working strategy for Sony
It's probably Steamdeck as example how it can work, rise of high profile f2p (those themselves can sustain portable) and indie/A gaming that will have no problem porting that define their vision how portable will operate and especially how it's game catalog will be populated (the issue that killed Vita)

I think that Sony left the portable market because they didn't have the resources to support it. They felt they would have to work too hard to carve out those gains against Nintendo and wanted to spend those stat points going all-in on home console instead. It's not because they were kicked out, or failed to be good enough; they simply didn't bother. But, it was somewhat bizarre because they launched an unsupported handheld before reversing course, almost as if they expected it to be a success without support first, or something.

But I don't think the decision to return to handheld became a thing until Switch. Sony left the segment in the dust and the timing of their reintroduction after 150 million Switches moving seems slightly coincidental. Switch itself inspired Steam Deck, which jointly inspired a gauntlet of slick PC handhelds...but Sony is in their own bubble, all right.

 

[PeteBull]

None of that matters after the entire Xbox One fiasco where the Xbox brand was flushed down the toilet.

Obviously, im just saying there was different path avaiable, provided xbox ceo was some1 like peter moore, not those 2 cucks we had after him.

 

[lughnasadh123]

Each of the big three found the lane that works best for their business needs both in hardware and software - all of them from a failure that necessitated a pivot.

Still, the dream will always be able to play any game on any device. No more walled gardens. Let the best hardware and software survive.

 

[PeteBull]

Each of the big three found the lane that works best for their business needs both in hardware and software - all of them from a failure that necessitated a pivot.

Still, the dream will always be able to play any game on any device. No more walled gardens. Let the best hardware and software survive.

That would mean all the consoles would die off, we got proof with xbox here already, and we gonna have even more proof with microsoft's next gen console(?), u think xbox series has terrible sales? Wait for next gen xbox- by then even most hardcore and devoted xbox fanatics wont have any delusion about having access to exclusive content of any kind, which means they either go with new xbox to be cut off from all sony/pc only games, or instead go sony if they like console form factor/experience or go straight up pc route for maximum profit.

 

[Horseganador]

MS is proving that getting your audience used to paying as little as possible for games has its consequences. Then they release Expedition 33 and it sells 96% of physical copies in the UK for PS5.

 

[jroc74]

For MS

And we're done here.

Thank you.

Also "just don't look at Nintendo"

Ok, I think this is a joke thread. Good job OP, you got us.

 

[Brakum]

The industry isn't harsh. There are like a billion gamers, not counting mobile. Just don't limit yourself to 100M willingly.

 

[BlackTron]

Sony still has exclusives. If they went day one PC I wouldn't have a PS5. I just wish they had more exclusives because then the system would be more valuable to my family. It's basically just an Astrobot machine waiting for something Daddy cares about.

It's funny you say that because Astrobot is the biggest reason I'm actually missing owning one at all. If I had known there would be a PC version of GoT I wouldn't have bought a PS4 Pro...on top of my base PS4. This PC thing just halted my PS upgrading in its tracks. I had a real belief Astrobot was too mascot-ey to ever bring over, but then they teased it in a tweet when the game came out. Xbox-level marketing genius.

MS is proving that getting your audience used to paying as little as possible for games has its consequences. Then they release Expedition 33 and it sells 96% of physical copies in the UK for PS5.

Well when you want to become a third party publisher, step one of course is to go on a several year campaign to kill the market for buying games on your own platform, if you have one. Gotta completely wash away the old identity first.

 

[HJuggernaut]

100% wrong. Exclusives push console sales, but they need to come early in the gen.

 

[UltimaKilo]

The console market is very risky, given Sony and Microsoft lose money on their base consoles and software is becoming so damn expensive to make.

Those of you who always maintain a high-end PC are the beneficiaries of this new world.

I do hope both Microsoft and Sony get into the handheld market by 2029. I'd also love for Sony to create a stand-alone PSVR by 2030/31 and abandon console-tethered VR completely after this gen.

Roadmaps show we should have some impressive VR tech finally hit the market by 2032 and SNY could be a market leader.

 

[lughnasadh123]

That would mean all the consoles would die off, we got proof with xbox here already, and we gonna have even more proof with microsoft's next gen console(?), u think xbox series has terrible sales? Wait for next gen xbox- by then even most hardcore and devoted xbox fanatics wont have any delusion about having access to exclusive content of any kind, which means they either go with new xbox to be cut off from all sony/pc only games, or instead go sony if they like console form factor/experience or go straight up pc route for maximum profit.

Consoles would still be around since not everyone wants to go PC, you're likely to see even more innovation in them to gain favor. Either way, I don't really care what the platform is so much as the games themselves. Let the people decide where they want to play rather than being forced into it.

 

[AJUMP23]

Nintendo is proving Exclusives matter.

MS never recovered from the bad messaging around the XBOX 1. They fumbled. MS would need PS to fumble badly to recover market share.

 

[Felessan]

I think that Sony left the portable market because they didn't have the resources to support it. They felt they would have to work too hard to carve out those gains against Nintendo and wanted to spend those stat points going all-in on home console instead. It's not because they were kicked out, or failed to be good enough; they simply didn't bother. But, it was somewhat bizarre because they launched an unsupported handheld before reversing course, almost as if they expected it to be a success without support first, or something.

But I don't think the decision to return to handheld became a thing until Switch. Sony left the segment in the dust and the timing of their reintroduction after 150 million Switches moving seems slightly coincidental. Switch itself inspired Steam Deck, which jointly inspired a gauntlet of slick PC handhelds...but Sony is in their own bubble, all right.

People here are too concentrated on console warring ignoring bigger picture
They didn't have much problems with Nintendo as PSP showed. Nintendo is a world in itself concentrated on it's 1st party and often younger audience that it's not too hard to carve enough playerbase for themselves.
What killed Vita per Sony themselves was not 3ds, another weak portable, but rapid rise of smartphone gaming, especially in Asia, those require a heavy efforts content wise to stay competitive, especially from 1st party because a lot of 3rd party support also was heavily affected, they too migrated to mobile.
It took mobile to mature and start spilling back to console market, technology advanced/stagnate enough to make 720p/4K differentiator between portable and home viable.
And now window of opportunity open again even if we ignore Nintendo and leave it's part of market untouched - mobile now have the same games (Fortnite, Genshin etc) that you can offer at better quality (and size of the market is huge, easily x10 of Nintendo) and also as extra you can offer SP games that somewhat easily scaled down to portable format.

 

[Three]

 

[rickybooby87]

First, big shout out to my man Phil for allowing a dirty Pony like me to play Indy, Oblivion and soon, the new Doom, my PS5 Pro has been busy.

Second, I think there is still a future in consoles for Microsoft, mainly because there are fanatic zealots that will never abandon Xbox, additionally, it's another area of access for funneling people into GamePass, which has become their primary product offering at this point.

 

[Bungie]

Yeah

Quoting my post out of context when Im saying exclusives vs day 1 on gamepass. Of course loyal Xbox fans can be upset when you're told it's exclusive then it's really not but some content creators & couple tweets isn't the majority regardless.

Imagine the outrage if Microsoft decided Indiana Jones wasn't day 1 on gamepass & everyone had to pay for it because they knew it'd sell well.

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

Exclusives are no longer viable for Microsoft because how badly they've fucked up over the years and pissed away their userbase.


Nintendo and Sony are thriving with exclusives however. In fact, exclusives or timed exclusives are the reason they are both as successful as they are.

 

[damiank]

Indiana Jones wasn't meant to be exclusive at the start. Then MS happened, paid to change the contract, then put it on PS anyway.

Outstanding move

 

[Truthtellers]

For MS

/Thread.

 

[Trogdor1123]

Sony's PC excursion has been a miserable failure aside from Ghost of Tsushima and Helldivers 2. Hell, in a world where Sony never put games on PC Concord might not have become such a meme and might even have been mildly successful.

Think of it this way: Marathon would not currently be in danger if Concord hadn't maxed out at 670 players on SteamDB.

What are the actual numbers moved on pc?

 

[tr1p1ex]

There's exclusive and then there's timed exclusive. A lot of the stuff on the PS/Xbox are very front loaded sales wise. And then are quickly discounted. It makes a lot of sense at that point to offer said game on other platforms at full price. AT that point you're making more money on hte other platform than your own. Roughy speaking.

 

[DrFigs]

There's exclusive and then there's timed exclusive. A lot of the stuff on the PS/Xbox are very front loaded sales wise. And then are quickly discounted. It makes a lot of sense at that point to offer said game on other platforms at full price. AT that point you're making more money on hte other platform than your own. Roughy speaking.

I don't know if it has to be this way. To some extent, all games are front loaded, but perhaps they'd sell longer if Playstation didn't put them on ps plus for free after 1 or 2 years. xbox and gamepass are even more of an issue.

 

[Fbh]

Yeah, because people are lining up to get a Switch 2 so they can play Cyberpunk and Street Fighter lol.

Exclusives aren't magic.
You can't fuck up an entire console gen, then fuck up the first few years of the next console gen and expect to magically fix everything with a few exclusives.

Maybe if the Series X had launched with exclusives like Doom Eternal, Oblivion Remaster, Indiana Jones and Avowed spread out during the first year, instead of you know....basically nothing, things might have looked different for them now.
And even if that were the case, they'd have struggled because Ps5 had the advantage of being backwards compatible with a much more popular console (Ps4 vs X1), which was much more popular because of a stronger exclusives focused strategy.

 

[Baemono]

Imagine the outrage if Microsoft decided Indiana Jones wasn't day 1 on gamepass & everyone had to pay for it because they knew it'd sell well.

They shoud've done it to be honest

 

[kpopSuperstar]

6 million for Japan is not a flop, the Saturn sold more than the Mega Drive, N64, Game Cube or Wii U, and they killed it after only 4 years to release the dreamcast,

The flop was in the rest of the world, as they only sold 5 million

Mega Drive, N64, Game Cube and Wii U all did poor in Japan.

A Japanese company selling under 10 million in Japan in bad.

 

[Humdinger]

What if I told you it's both?

Having good first party exclusives and also being the platform of choice to play third party titles is a virtuous cycle

Once you've established your platform as being one that rewards both types of players, it's very hard to dislodge you from your market position

I agree that both factors are involved, and in fact I'd say there are probably about a dozen factors involved. I don't mean to make it sound like it's a simple linear causality. Lots of factors are always involved. I don't want to write an essay, though.

Look at the bolded phrase in your quote: "Once you've established..." and then ask, "And how do you establish that?" How does it happen that a platform becomes the default choice to play third party games, when those games play just as well elsewhere? If you say, as my previous interlocuter did, that Sony succeeded not because of exclusives but because they were the default choice for playing third party games, then you're just arguing in a circle. You're assuming what you're trying to explain: that your platform is the default choice for third party games. Yes, it is. But why did that happen? You haven't explained anything.

Here is my admittedly simplified explanation. It happened because Sony won over the core gamer demographic by consistently delivering great exclusives, whereas MS failed in this regard. This went on for over a decade. Once you've got the core, the casuals follow. At that point, the virtuous cycle you mention kicks in. But it begins with having good exclusive content you can't get elsewhere. (Again, not the only factor, but a big one.) To me, this is just common sense.

 

[Zacfoldor]

Or Sony. They are doing just fine. Their PC sales are so low that I dont know why they even bother.

So out of the Big 3, the one at 3rd place is the only one who went multiplatform. Figures.

I agree, Sony should stop porting games to PC.

PC gamers only play older f2p games and almost none of them play slate releases. They will never pay full price for Sony's style of game even if it was day 1.

Everybody thinks PC gaming is the future but PC gamers who have been in PC gaming know the spending habits of PC gamers can never support the same types of games as console.

They are two entirely different audiences. Not many console gamers know this but EVERY PC gamer knows this. They keep shit from you. I was one for decades.

For example, there are casuals in PC gaming too. Not casual by your definition, but for example, there are WoW players that play 40 hours a week and can't name a Playstation game. PC casuals have a very narrow view of gaming and gaming knowledge. There are also traditional casuals on PC. Only when you become a higher up in a large raiding guild do you actually see the humanity that PC gaming has to offer, and understand the drawbacks of the audience for larger gaming as a whole. PC will never replace console. The markets are way different. Look at how many people are actually ON PC(a metric shit ton) and how poorly most major games sell on there. By the numbers every PC release should make consoles look like shit.

 

[DeepEnigma]

From what I gather in this thread...

It's only okay when Nintendo does it. Sony shouldn't do it because... Xbox execs sucked at their jobs.

 

[Hookshot]

Make Cod exclusive but you have to beat 10 Candy Crush levels a day to have access.

MS saved.

 

[tr1p1ex]

MS has just been proving they focused on the wrong things.

It started with RROD being a financial disaster and soiled the brand's reputation to some degree. Then they dropped the ball by packing Kinect into Xbox One as well as tried to make the focus tv...which never made a lot of sense given an XBox One was overkill as a streaming box. And the Kinect added $100 to the cost which doomed X1 from the start.

And this generation they did the questionable XBox S sku and then tried to hook gamers on more subscriptions with GP with subsidized prices while trying to convince publishers to make less money with GP.

The whole time... all this money lost ....could have been focused onto developing quality games.

 

[Seiryu21]

Yeah, because people are lining up to get a Switch 2 so they can play Cyberpunk and Street Fighter lol.

Exclusives aren't magic.
You can't fuck up an entire console gen, then fuck up the first few years of the next console gen and expect to magically fix everything with a few exclusives.

Maybe if the Series X had launched with exclusives like Doom Eternal, Oblivion Remaster, Indiana Jones and Avowed spread out during the first year, instead of you know....basically nothing, things might have looked different now for them.
And even if that were the case, they'd have struggled because Ps5 had the advantage of being backwards compatible with a much more popular console (Ps4 vs X1), which was much more popular because of a stronger exclusives focused strategy.

That's exactly it. Microsoft killed xbox by ignoring it for too long.

 

[Puscifer]

Meh, tried it. Not into renting.

It will take me 2 months to finish Clair Obscure Expedition 33. I'd rather buy it for $45 than rent it for $40.

Game fly is still a thing and the superior product. I'd rather pay to play what I want then what's given to me

 

[mckmas8808]

OP hasn't posted since the thread was created.
Everyone here just got trolled.

Yep, basically this.

 

[mckmas8808]

Each of the big three found the lane that works best for their business needs both in hardware and software - all of them from a failure that necessitated a pivot.

Still, the dream will always be able to play any game on any device. No more walled gardens. Let the best hardware and software survive.

NO WAY!!!!! I don't want this crap at all! PLEASE keep the walled gardens. I like competition.

 

[Puscifer]

What MS proves is that without worthwhile exclusives, your hardware business dies.

Also that you shouldn't go about buying massive publishers without a long term plan to make it worth investing in to begin with. The fact they want gamepass engagement + physical sales + digital sales just shows they have no idea how to manage this. You can't buy your way into a Sony Santa Monica or Naughty Dog, that's the end result of YEARS of people being allowed practice and hone their craft

 

[Killer8]

You still need exclusives to get people to buy into the platform. There is a reason why Sony are not putting most of their games day and date on PC - Herman Hulst said it himself that they want to entice PC owners to play the sequels on PS5.

 

[EverydayBeast]

MLB The Show since 2020 maybe earlier has been successful on Switch and Xbox so I would suspended all the "exclusives don't matter" talk when they do for BIG exclusives like Zelda, Halo and God of War.

 

[Durin]

I agree, Sony should stop porting games to PC.

PC gamers only play older f2p games and almost none of them play slate releases. They will never pay full price for Sony's style of game even if it was day 1.

Everybody thinks PC gaming is the future but PC gamers who have been in PC gaming know the spending habits of PC gamers can never support the same types of games as console.

They are two entirely different audiences. Not many console gamers know this but EVERY PC gamer knows this. They keep shit from you. I was one for decades.

They're not going to stop porting to PC, when it costs so little to do it vs that money they get, and will keep getting over time on existing releases. PC isn't their most direct competitor, they want the extra user-base for multiplayer titles (Helldivers 2 sold more on PC), and they acquired studios for the sole purpose of porting.

Literally on PC now, you have Oblivion Remastered, Baldur's Gate 3, Schedule 1 and Clair Obsur: Expedition 33 in the current top most played games on Steam, none f2p. f2p service-based games are always going to be in top lists though because of lowest barrier to entry, continuous content drip so no single-player trail-off, and they typically can run on the weakest of machines. Even PSN's top charts are filled with them, just like mobile.

You do have difference in audience, as I don't think cinematic story-heavy action/adventure games resonate as well, but then you have Souls games that regularly do well on PC (same with open-world rpgs like Ghost of Tsushima), and Bloodborne just re-releasing would sell great on both platforms. The challenge for Sony selling games is that more games come out on PC each week to compete against, so you fragment possible audience.

 

[SNG32]

I agree, Sony should stop porting games to PC.

PC gamers only play older f2p games and almost none of them play slate releases. They will never pay full price for Sony's style of game even if it was day 1.

Everybody thinks PC gaming is the future but PC gamers who have been in PC gaming know the spending habits of PC gamers can never support the same types of games as console.

They are two entirely different audiences. Not many console gamers know this but EVERY PC gamer knows this. They keep shit from you. I was one for decades.

For example, there are casuals in PC gaming too. Not casual by your definition, but for example, there are WoW players that play 40 hours a week and can't name a Playstation game. PC casuals have a very narrow view of gaming and gaming knowledge. There are also traditional casuals on PC. Only when you become a higher up in a large raiding guild do you actually see the humanity that PC gaming has to offer, and understand the drawbacks of the audience for larger gaming as a whole. PC will never replace console. The markets are way different. Look at how many people are actually ON PC(a metric shit ton) and how poorly most major games sell on there. By the numbers every PC release should make consoles look like shit.

Why would Sony stop putting games on PC when they have nothing to lose other than make money. Besides they realese games on pc when the game stops selling massive units on console. I don't know what people expect sales to be on pc when gamess release a year and half or more after console. We know that in order to see the biggest sales on its gotta be day and date.

 

[StueyDuck]

Wait do we have forza numbers? didn't it just release?

I hope it does well, it's a good racer and more people playing it is a good thing.

 

[m14]

Exclusives matter to Nintendo because they are the only company able to sell consoles on the strength of their first party titles alone.
However, Sony's exclusives are irrelevant to the vast majority of people buying their consoles. Their best selling game on PS5 is Spider-Man 2 and that's more down to the popularity of the IP itself.

 

[clappedcheeks]

NO WAY!!!!! I don't want this crap at all! PLEASE keep the walled gardens. I like competition.

"No walled gardens" is going to be the next Microsoft rallying cry. Currently it's that exclusives are bad because they want to actually sell software by putting their games everywhere, and they don't want to alienate the diehards. Next they will start lobbying for no walled gardens so they don't nave to pony up any fees to Nintendo or Sony. That way they get to make 100% of the money on the games they sell without any need to invest in their own ecosystem, just sell on established and successful ecosystems instead.

 

[Taddypole]

I personally feel once consumers move on from a product its hard to win the back..

 

[Badlucktroll]

It's oddly satisfying to play microsoft games on Ps5. I am doing oblivion and forza horizon 5 right now

 

[mckmas8808]

Exclusives matter to Nintendo because they are the only company able to sell consoles on the strength of their first party titles alone.
However, Sony's exclusives are irrelevant to the vast majority of people buying their consoles. Their best selling game on PS5 is Spider-Man 2 and that's more down to the popularity of the IP itself.

Are we not counting God of War?

 

[m14]

Are we not counting God of War?

They sell well but only a minority of PS owners ever buy the GOW games, never mind get close to finishing them.
Mario Kart 8 sold almost 70 million copies on the Switch! That's a game that moves hardware.

 

[MagnesD3]

If xbox had exclusive killer apps people would buy them. Its been a long time since they had a Halo level game. Thier libraries quality has had a cap for years.