A bit of recent number crunching suggests that Sony's first party exclusives are coming up short in the sales department, despite receiving critical acclaim. When compared to the AAA titles of other systems, Sony's big-name games just aren't performing how big-name games should.
According to the figures, only one PS3 game has ever managed to sell over a million copies (when we discount console bundles), and that was the original Resistance: Fall of Man, way back at the system's launch. Since then, PS3 games have generally hovered around the 500-750K mark, with LittleBigPlanet being the only other title to sell over and above that region.
Comparing this to Gears of War selling over a million copies within launch month, Gears 2 selling 1.5 million in the same time, Super Smash Bros. Brawl and Mario Kart Wii raking in four million and six million sales respectively, we can see that Sony has a problem on its hands.
This is a theory I've shared in the past (that Sony fanboys naturally crucified me for), but it's the truth. The PS3 does have great games, but for some reason they are just not acting like proper AAA games. My weekly delve into the UK Charts demonstrates this enough, and the UK is where the PlayStation brand has always had strong support.
Sony has always lauded the strength of its first party lineup, but it seems that this focus, as well as the fact that its exclusive games are always dripfed to us inconsistently (seriously, it's taken over three years for a God of War game to launch?), seems to have not paid off.
Contest:
10:40 AM on 06.29.2009
| 
This could be totally off the mark, but of the six people I know with PS3s, all bar one of them are gamerlite. They hardly play at all. The one guy who is an avid gamer, played mostly on his xbox until the recent release of Killzone2 which has become his 'thing' for now.
I'm not sure if Sony know who they're aiming at anymore. MS has fucked them over a bit, I fear.
Could this be a factor? If only so many people own the console then only a percentage of those people can buy those A++ games.
I mean, I work in a Play N Trade and for every PS3 I sell I've sold 3 360s. Especially after the 360s price drop. The system is cheaper and still affords the prestige of "I've got a NEXT GEN console." Plus there are some ridiculously popular exclusives on it.
I don't think the problem is the games themselves, but perhaps its the install base? A lot of people bought PSTRIPLES for the blu-ray and don't play games.
doesn't surprise me that devs are starting to consider dumping it. it seems the only one to benefit from its ridiculous pricing is sony.
Completely agree, nearly everyone I know personally who has a PS3 is hardly a 'core' gamer. We will probably get ripped to shreds but it's the truth. And to the people that say that a 'true' gamer should have all consoles; well that's nice if your minted but the PS3 has hardly had enough to make it a must-have, especially considering the price. That will of course change going into 2010 but as of now, meh.
Oh and as for the, it's cheap for a blu-ray player argument, well whoopy doo, I'm a Total Film subscriber - a bit of a film geek - and I still don't see the need to upgrade yet. My cheap DVD's will do me fine for now.
Another part (bigger) is just that the 360 came out first, reeled in a shit-ton of the hardcore gamers that buy a shit-ton of games, and therefore has a larger install base of people willing to buy more games.
Yet another reason is the way the gaming media absolutely acted like fucking dicks when the PS3 first launched, completely crucifying it instead of offering the same leeway the 360 got and giving it a reputation as a machine that is too expensive with too few games, and that reputation has been burned into the mind of the consumer. My friends with 360s still think the PS3 is $600 with no good games. Again, that's the fault of Sony for shit marketing, but once the consumer has an idea of what a product is in their mind, they don't abandon it easily. My 360 friends are really surprised when they find out just how much the PS3 offers in kickass games.
The PS3 still gets unfair treatment in the press most of the time since most game journalists jumped on the 360 bandwagon like everybody else did in 2005 and therefore, it's just natural for them to favor the console they own, like all of us do. The problem is that most game journalists are unwilling to admit that they themselves are susceptible to bias. Garnett Lee on 1UP.com has stated a couple times on the 1UP Yours/ListenUP podcast about how the media does treat the PS3 unfairly.
Another reason is the scattershot nature of the exclusives. I'm not talking about their release schedule, because yeah, some of them get delayed, but good games come out on a pretty consistent schedule. There's seems to always be some game for my PS3 that I want to drop the cash on coming up in a few months. I'm talking about the identity of those exclusives. The 360 pidgeonholed itself into Halo, Gears of War, and all sorts of other extreme manliness for its exclusives. The stuff like Viva Pinata that tries to veer away from the norm of grunts and desaturation doesn't do nearly as well. The PS3's exclusives are not like the 360's for the most part. We've got stuff like The Last Guardian that is a hell of a lot more artsy that ANYTHING the 360 will EVER offer you. We've got quirky stuff like flOw, Flower, The Last Guy, Noby Noby Boy, etc.
So it's difficult to then ask a game like Killzone 2 that would probably do a hell of a lot better on the 360 to come out and perform like a 360 game.
Basically what I'm trying to get at is that it's a more complicated situation than what's being outlined in the post. The PS3 has a ton of great exclusives, and I'd argue that the 360 just can't match in terms of game quality, but the 360's user base is just more willing to buy more games.
It's not just Sony's fault.
I want his job.
It cannot be denied.
The PS3 has been a failure on so many levels.
I guess you weren't invited. It was a fun event. A bit awkward with the kissing bit.
I take it you've played the Last guardian then?
Granted it looks sweet. But no point coming across like it's the best fucking 'artsy' (which could potentially read 'artwank') thing ever commited to game-code, and the 360 will NEVER have anything like it bullshit. Braid was pretty 'artsy' I thought. And are you in charge of the direction of ALL future 360 titles?
You made interesting points, and then bollocksed it up with that ever present chink in the PS3 fanboy armour: Speculative mindwanking.
Sony alienated that entire audience with their high price point. When all you want to play is Guitar Hero, a couple of sports franchises, an FPS and a racing game, it makes no sense to buy the more expensive console. Sony got arrogant, they thought that they could beat MS by having top-tier exclusives. Despite their quality, these titles don't win console wars. PS2 wiped the floor with everyone else by becoming the automatic choice for the casually hardcore gamer.
360 took everything that made the PS2 successful and copied it expertly. They learned from their competitor because they had to after the failure of the original Xbox. In the last-gen, 1st party hardcore games didn't save the gamecube and raw power didn't save the Xbox. Sony promptly went and built a powerful system who's pricepoint makes it's hardcore 1st party games the only reason to buy it.
This is why Sony have a smaller install base and why they have such poor sales figures for their first party games.
Does any of that make sense or have i gone on a bit of a ramble?
@whatisdelicous
IMO the PS3 doesn't have the exclusives YET that the 360 can't match but it does seem to be coming (hence why I'll be getting a PS3 no later than March - GoW baby =>). Also the "media acted like dicks" because it WAS too expensive with no games, if Sony didn't want that image burned in to consumers minds then they should have done things differently, hardly the press' fault for reporting the truth at the time.
Seriously though, It is a bloody wonder why the PS3s top games sell so little compared to the 360s. I don't own a PS3, but the fact that Halo sold so much more than any DECENT game is enough to make me angry.
And when I get angry, I get a PS3.
Do you think that after what the head of Activion said about the PS3, Sony dev studios might think about stopping supportin the PS3? If their games don't sell enough they might be in a situation where the only way to save their company would be either to focus on PSP games.
Or to a crazier extent start porting their once exclusive games to Nintendo and Microsoft platforms just to be able to keep making games !
LOL *joke*
It's odd, but PS3 gamers seem to buy games well after release. They don't seem as inclined to buy a game at launch as Xbox gamers from what I've read. This could be because the install base is naturally lower (being a newer console than the 360) but people just buying the consoles also seem to build their libraries with games already released.
I don't think comparisons can really be made between the PS3 and the Xbox unless one can look at the figures to see sales of AAA games within roughly the same period from launch to account for similar install bases...
They'd be performing much better if it wasn't for that.
Needs sum install base to sell gems.
Sony hasn't made a bad system; they've made bad decisions. Microsoft on the other hand, has made a crap system, but great decisions (particularly in relation to community aspects). It would be great if both sides could come to a happy medium with their products, but that's not going to happen. Hopefully Sony can turn the beast around in the next couple of years (no more shit like Home, more interesting stuff, plz).
Morne
Simply put, MS had made America it's bitch.
My friend's father is a multimillionaire, and my friend is single and his father hooked him up with an extremely high paying job. I'm married, my wife doesn't work (currently), and I work on-campus at a university. I'd say he brings home 2-3x as much money as I do.
Games he owns on the PS3? Resident Evil 5. That was all he had for over nine months. Recently he blew his dad's money buying every rock band and guitar hero game available on the system, but seriously...that is all he has. Myself, on the other hand, have had the 360 about the same amount of time and have around 30 games for it, not counting Xbox Live games.
He was my roommate before I got married, and he is certainly a very hardcore gamer (probably more so than me). He mentioned to me the other day he loves his PS3 for the Blu-Ray and the games he has, he just can't find any games he wants for the system. He doesn't play FPS games often on consoles, which eliminated the two biggest franchises on the system (Killzome and Resistance).
Granted, he's buying God of War 3 day one (and I'll be at his house watching him for sure), but it was sad to see him comment that the system he plopped down more than twice what I paid for my 360 "has no games he wants."
Still, it does play Blu-Rays. The thing just really needs a price cut. I would consider getting one if it weren't so damned expensive, simply for Blu-Ray and God of War.
PS3 is the Gamecube of this generation. It has hardcore, frothing fanboys, some fantastic and unique titles, but ultimately it had been already chosen as the "loser," and I'm afraid it will just fall in a similar downward spiral. And keep in mind I loved the Gamecube and had one.
I expect flaming to begin shortly. Where is sexualchocolate when you need him?
Valkyria Chronicles is a prime example of Amazing Game, low advertising.
Is a shame, but it'll be fixed when price drops.
- They wanted the Blu-ray player in it.
- They wanted a $600 price tag.
well... now you got it.
I only know 1 other person that owns a PS3 besides myself, and he bought it as a Blu-Ray player, and only owns 2 games. While I bought my PS3 as a "game machine", and buy and pre-order games. Everyone else I know, owns an Xbox, for one simple reason ----- the price.
Advertising is the main thing Sony needs to really improve on I think.
The pricing argument doesn't hold up. If the dude makes that much bank, and comes from a wealthy family, I'm sure he owns a more expensive car than you do as well. Does that mean that the brand you own is worse, or his is better? Not necessarily. And if he doesn't own a more expensive car.. what the hell is the argument? Because to me it's like you're saying wealth and ownership of a PS3 go hand-in-hand. I'm not going to lie, the price is a sticking point for a lot of people, but it's not totally unreasonable considering you have a blu-ray player installed in the console.
As for the whole 'Gamecube of this generation' remark... bleh. No reason to touch that. Decrying fanboys one minute, than firing off a remark like that in the next sentence makes me deaf to your argument. 'Hardcore, frothing fanboys, some fantastic and unique titles'? You just described the Wii, amigo. If it weren't for the money coming in from the casual market, the system would be dead in the water.
I'm still more willing to take a good deal of strong B-games over a few A-games when the price point is so high.
Also, complete lack of Backwards Compatibility still keeps me away from caring about any "price drop" talk. Emulation can't be that hard for the PS3.
If I built a console that broke down, causing the owners to buy a new one 2-3-4 times over, of course I'd have a larger install base...
Did the PS2 had a mascot?
how many gears of war in US only ?
I'm not sure mascots matter as much as they did back in the 16-bit heyday, at least not in terms of the hardcore gaming market. Sonic is now on Nintendo platforms, and Crash Bandicoot is pretty much on everything. For the casual market, yes, Mario is still a strong identifier that people trust. But those people who would be drawn to a given console due to a mascot are probably not the market for a $300-$400 dollar system.