 |
|
|
| |
Feature: 'Analyze This: Do Exclusives Still Matter?'
by Brandon Boyer
|
|
| |
|
March 12, 2007
|
| |
In the latest 'Analyze This' series of exclusive Gamasutra features, we ask analysts from Screen Digest, Creative Strategies and Wedbush Morgan Securities their thoughts on how important exclusive titles are for this new generation of the console war.
Specifically, we asked:
How important are exclusive titles for this new generation of the console war? (It looks like exclusivity may not be as strong for this generation as last, or would you refute this?)
For this generation, is it a detriment or still advantageous (or necessary) for a third party developer to be tied to developing exclusive titles?
What are the key exclusives which you are keeping an eye on to move sales for a specific console this year?
As part of his response, Screen Digest's Ed Barton said:
”Given the hardware market is likely to be more competitive this time round, we aren't seeing the pressures which existed in the [prior] generation for third parties to coalesce around one dominant hardware platform. Yet.
On the other hand, acquiring [several] exclusive games for a console platform is much more significant in terms of driving hardware sales. This brings to mind Phil Harrison's oft quoted observation: "Killer games don't matter; killer catalogs do."”
He added:
”In my view there is no incentive for third parties to develop exclusively for a single platform, unless there is some form of financial inducement from the hardware manufacturer. If you want the largest potential user base, you go multi-platform.”
You can now read the full Gamasutra feature on the subject, including more feedback from Creative Strategies and Wedbush Morgan analysts (no registration required, please feel free to link to this feature from external websites).
|
| |
|
|
