|
When it comes to software, certain
multi-platform games might sell better on the Xbox 360, like Call of Duty. But do you see the need for differentiation where
multi-platform games are concerned? You can buy them for either system, so what's
the differentiator for you...?
PD: There's
a couple of different ways to attack that question. One is: when companies are
approaching us for co-marketing support or collaboration, then differentiation
is a big deal. We like to talk to third-parties about, "Hey, if you can
help us show off the unique attributes of our platform, whether it's through
extra content -- the Blu-ray disc can store a lot more than our competition,
and if there's ways to show that off. That's one thing we can do, or...
using the Sixaxis controller with the Dual-Shock, that's another."
The fact
that every PlayStation 3 has a hard drive, and the DLC -- our competition doesn't
have that type of environment where every unit has a hard drive.
Those types of differentiating factors are a big deal when we're talking about
some of the co-marketing.
I think
if you look at some other data more recently -- and this goes back to the point
of Sony providing development support. If you look at how Electronic Arts titles are
indexed as one example on our platform -- versus the Xbox 360 from last year to the
previous year. We're seeing now EA Sports titles overindexing [selling more copies relatively] on PS3 vis-a-vis
the install base.
We think
part of the reason for that is the investment that EA made in their development
tools. If you go all the way back to the launch of the 360, they had a year
head-start, so development tools and environments across many third parties
were set up to have a head-start on the other platform.
Over time, we also were
confident that people would catch up, and again I think if you look at EA
Sports and drill at that data a little bit, you can see that they're now starting to overindex on our platform. People
are starting to gravitate towards the PS3.
There's
not a lot of differentiation in those titles; EA didn't do a lot extra to show
off sort of the first part of the answer. So we're starting to see some
momentum shift our way, which we think bodes well for us in the future from a
third-party perspective.
Julie Han:
I was going to say Street Fighter [IV] in February actually sold 300k on each platform, and what we need to take
notice of is that we had less install base than Xbox. [Sony subsequently provided a document explaining this in more detail, including a number of stats on titles that sold relatively better, taking install bases into account.]
PD: So
even if they're at parity now, given the install base differential, there's
something pretty dynamic going on behind the scenes.
Something Microsoft talks about a
lot, though, is their attach rate, because they do have a very impressive
attach rate. How are you guys tracking on attach rate?
PD: I
think that one of the reasons their attach rate is higher is they launched
against the core gamer a year earlier, and I think our install base has always
been a bit more diverse.
Perhaps this becomes a blessing and a curse for them
because they've proven on the previous generation -- they never really expanded
their market outside that core gamer, which meant they kind of stalled after
awhile.
In the
independent market, they tried very hard with content that would appeal to
folks who like games besides Halo and
Gears, and I don't think those games
really worked well on the Xbox 360. You
compare that to PlayStation, which has always been a very big tent and a
platform that stood for games that everyone could have fun with.
So it's not
just about Killzone and Resistance but LittleBigPlanet and Ratchet
-- these are the types of experiences you have on our platform. That means that
we're bringing in multiple audiences at the same time as opposed to the typical
"Okay, we're gonna get the core, and then the next group of guys are gonna
come in," and so on and so on, and your tie ratios will dwindle or
decrease over time.
I think
what we've got is a more diverse install base out of the chute. Part of that too is that some of the folks
buying PS3s are probably Blu-ray aficionados. So they're buying it -- and this
is probably a smaller percentage of them -- but gaming is something that they're
discovering: "Oh, this machine also plays games!" That's usually the
flip [side]; people are like "Well now that I've got the PS3 I'm going to expand
to the Blu-ray library," and it's actually doing both of those
things.
We think,
over time, we'll continue to build the install base against the core gamer,
whether it's things like Killzone and
God of War coming up and those great
titles that we'll continue with. But we'll also be broadening the market to
social gamers, casual gamers, A/V aficionados that we can get involved in
gaming for the first time.

Sony/ThatGameCompany's Flower
One thing is that I think the core
gaming thing can be a bit limiting a perspective; there's probably more
diversity in the audience potential between just core/casual or
core/social. I think there's a lot of
different taste ranges out there and I think that's maybe what you're speaking
to a little bit.
People who would traditionally be
the hardcore don't only want to play shooters, and that's a potential
differentiator. I think that's kind of what the PS2 was like; there was
actually a broad variety of games that were not just targeted towards sort of
one silo. You think there's a more narrow targeting on the Xbox 360 right now?
PD: I
think you said what I wanted to say better; you're right. We'll go head-to-head
with them on the shooter genre; if you love shooters, you're going to have a
wonderful time on the PS3.
But like you said, core gamers -- I believe LittleBigPlanet is a fantastic core
gamer game. It's also a game that my ten-year-old daughter plays; it's always
been something that touches both sides of that fence. Uncharted,
Heavy Rain... I could go on and on.
We've got
a lot of games that core gamers like, and it's not just with a headset playing
a shooter online; core gamers do have diverse tastes. Then you get to the
broader part of that message because I think whether it's my daughter playing LittleBigPlanet or people playing Uncharted for the movie-like experience
and not sort of the game-centric aspects of it.
We always
run out of time in these interviews where we're not diligent enough to make
sure we're mentioning Flower and flOw and The Last Guy. Those games play into diversifying the
audience with games that give you maybe a shorter form of entertainment but
games that core gamers appreciate for their design.
|
Does he think that everyone is so stupid that we would find such an argument persuasive? Let's see, a lot more 360s have been sold with hardrives than PS3s. There are many more users of Xbox Live than PSN. So how is the fact that EVERY PS3 has a hard drive and the DLC a big differentiating factor? What an a**hole.
Curious about how Rock Band for PSP would play. Music games are fading away. Also, the fun of those games is sharing it with others... having to bring four PSP together when playing... I am skeptical.
Games created for systems usually must adhere to the lowest common denominator. So a 360 game engine cannot assume there is a hard drive to help optimize performance, while a PS3 game can. That's not to say a 360 game can't make use of performance if a hard drive is available, but it is more difficult.
The point that is trying to be made is that there is a lot of value to a PS3 console, whether that comes from a built in hard drive, internal wifi, free live play, etc., and he wants to educate consumers on that fact.
If you are personally a 360 fan and don't like the PS3 then there is nothing wrong with that.
I still play a lot of PS2 games (which look great upscaled on the system - THANK YOU Sony for that!), and what I am hoping to see are more 3rd party exclusives, especially the niche titles like all the JRPGs and SRPGs that make the PS2 library so unique.
...also I feel Sony needs to bring back backwards compatability. They did a great job with the first-gen PS3s, and one close friend of mine is holding off on buying a PS3 until this feature returns.
I do understand the single SKU consideration for developers, but while they can't count on every single solitary 360 having a hard drive, they can count on the lions share of them having one. And they can count on having more 360s with hard drives than the raw number PS3s. This makes his claim that "Those types of differentiating factors are a big deal when we're talking about some of the co-marketing." seem spirious and disengenious. (By the way I actually favor the PS3 as a better value than the 360, if I could only have one, I would have the PS3).
However, he uses a qualifier with his differentiating claim of being significant in terms of "co-marketing." However, what does he mean by co-marketing here? Why is this important when the numbers themselves don't support his premise? I am baffled by the use of co-marketing here.