War On Video Game Exclusives

Typically, we have “exclusive” fallout from the console war which forces the hand of the consumer to purchase all consoles to play all the games they love. Many hardcore gamers are into first person shooters like Halo and Gears of War but also like their Grand Theft Auto and Final Fantasy fixes. In years prior, you’d have to invest in Microsoft and Sony’s solutions to get your fix. Now things are changing.

With these third party developers playing neutral in the war on consoles, Microsoft and Sony are forced to rely on near “first-party” titles to keep their army strong. Metal Gear Solid is a Sony exclusive and Gears of War and Halo have been Microsoft’s hype babies for a year or so now. The problem? Many of these exclusive games are not divisions, subsidiaries or in any way under the wing of the console makers.

Nintendo holds exclusive rights to almost all their hard hitting titles. Mario, Link, Zelda, Samus Aran and all their mascot style characters are designed, developed and marketed under the name “Nintendo.” These characters are all part of Nintendo’s lineup of solid best selling titles including the Metroid, Zelda and Super Mario Bros. series and all their spin-offs. Nintendo has the power to re-implement their characters into games like Mario Party, Mario Kart, Links Crossbow, Metroid Prime, Metroid Pinball and a huge array of other first party titles.

Microsoft and Sony must continue to play nice with Konami, Bungie, and Epic Games to keep their exclusivity. What happens if one of these developers “betrays” their console and starts shipping multi-platform?

Epic Games and Konami are big time developers with their own independent thinking, would they ever push away from their exclusive deals with their partners? Bungie is no longer part of Microsoft but is bound, in some ways, to deliver Halo products on Microsoft’s console (for now). If these hard hitting blockbuster titles go multi-platform the war would get bloody.

These major publishers could indeed ship non-exclusive product lines in favor of a wider audience if, in fact, the console units grow closer in sales numbers. Sony’s PlayStation 3 console slowly creeps up to the sales figures of the Xbox 360 which means publishing a title on one console may only net you 50% of the possible audience (assuming a small number actually own both consoles). Given both are “hardcore” consoles, this also means those gamers are ready and willing to buy 2-3 video games a quarter for their console(s).

Why would a publisher settle for half the audience when they can ship on two platforms and grab a bigger piece of the pie? The console developer, Sony or Microsoft, would have to bribe pay the publisher money for an exclusive or timed exclusive deal. That’s all fair in business, but what if the competition becomes heated enough that a paid exclusive pays out less than selling on both consoles?

If the major publishers backing Microsoft and Sony opt to ship on both consoles this will force Sony and Microsoft to form higher end first party development teams (or buy them) in order to solidify real exclusivity. In essence, expanding teams (in all gaming genres) like the Microsoft Game Studios to ship more games per year as a sharp weapon against the competition.

The only other option for the console makers would be to let the “exclusives” model die and develop a game industry of watered down consoles with the only major difference being the logo and design of the box.

It might be a hard pill to swallow, but the only way to hold up the highest degree of competition and first party titles is to force everyone to want to buy all consoles.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Episode 329: Back AgainEpisode 329: Back Again

Gaming Podcast is back after being off for a week. This time out, there’s a Gaming Flashback as Jordan and Jonah discuss The 7th Guest, which was coincidentally just released on Steam.

This week’s news includes:

  • Xbox One and PlayStation 4 headsets compatibility issues
  • Dark Matter abrupt ending blamed on failed Kickstarter drive
  • Rockstar New England working on “next version of famous IP”
  • Fassbender on Assassin’s Creed film: it’s “definitely happening”
  • Struggling Scrolls may go free-to-play

This week’s Question of the Week, “What was your favorite adventure game?”

Episode 260: CivilizationsEpisode 260: Civilizations

This week is packed full of gaming goodness, as the winner of the Civilization V contest is revealed. If that weren’t enough, the news items for the week invoked a lot of conversation:

  • New Halo 4 multiplayer details revealed
  • EA dismisses “big layoffs” claim, always “growing and morphing”
  • Rumor: Microsoft finding new ways to “monetize” Xbox Live

The podcast also features some great, heartwarming Reader Feedback as well as a new contest to win a code for Magicka. The question of the week, “What books featuring magic do you like the best?”

Why Doesn’t iTunes Have Game Trials?Why Doesn’t iTunes Have Game Trials?

Nothing is more annoying than going into iTunes to see what video games are available for the iPod Touch and iPhone to find it cluttered with hundreds of duplicate games. Developers seem to find it most useful to release two games instead of one single game: a full version and a “lite” version.

itunesDevelopers know gamers want to try before they buy, so many will create a game they’re hoping to sell, then a limited “lite” version with partial levels or stripped of features. They’re obviously trying to work around the fact that Apple released a half-assed game shopping experience. These pro and lite versions assist in cluttering the shopping space.

iTunes App Store should allow users to trial a game by allowing them to download a neutered version of the game title or using a time-trial like many other downloadable game services. Electronic game downloads are usually non-refundable because you can never give back a product which you can make infinite copies. The solution to getting users to buy into your product is to allow them to try before they buy.

Apple’s obviously enjoying the immense game sales from the application store but they may be able to increase their sales by allowing gamers to see what they’re buying before they walk away empty handed. This would also limit the total products found in the App Store because developers won’t have to post to revisions to their game title to allow gamers to try before they buy them.

There are some obvious downsides, Apple wouldn’t be able to boast the thousands of products in their store because many would be substituted for a real game download system. Okay, that’s really the only download I can think of… any others?

Developers may opt out of a trial system, forcing gamers to buy it before they try it based on the text and screenshots or utilize a time trial or limited featured version.

Thoughts?