System update already?
I think Diff is partially/mostly right, but everyone's value proposition is different. I will buy consoles for two games. Most people need more than that and they probably need those games (and systems) at a lower price point. So I think a lot of those systems are going to new homes. With the WiiU, every one of those systems is going to a new home (minus the 5% that I am sure people bought in hopes of selling them at a big profit--that blew up in faces).
I don't think the launch was a failure--but it isn't the next coming of the Wii, that is for sure. Most of those systems probably went to people like us. It won't be a primary system.
Last edited by Joust Williams; 07 Dec 2012 at 12:11 PM.
System update already?
Yes, and this is why new hardware is needed. I think we are long past the point where these old-ass systems are undermining the entire industry, as less games are being sold too.
Obviously it's not Sony and Microsoft's job to prop up the industry, but they may launch their new systems and find the interest just isn't what it should be. Customer demand has changed and Sony/MS have only made half-hearted attempts (with system updates and peripherals) to meet the new demand.
Look at the leaked Durango outline, it's completely different from 360 because you need that radically different setup to match what customers want. MS couldn't deliver the 360 Live experience on Xbox.
I'm not even speaking out the Wii U, which seemed to be in line with past hardware launches.
Last edited by Diff-chan; 07 Dec 2012 at 12:37 PM.
If the Wii U isn't pushing strong sales next Spring I highly doubt we'll even see the next Xbox or PS on shelves in 2013. Microsoft and Sony are stretching out this console life cycle because they're making more profit than ever off of their current hardware sales, and their first-party blockbusters still sell well. If one of them does release in 2013 I'd bet on MS. The next Playstation will come in 2014.
You want to launch a console with a bit of momentum though. Not that there is no risk either way, but you wouldn't want to sacrifice passing on one more year of growth for potentially being an afterthought for an entire generation. And MS won't kill the 360 as fast the the Xbox. It sold like 3x as many units.
I have already joined the next generation, though.
Microsoft and Sony can still sell cheaper current-gen hardware (which has a host of new and great-looking games releasing in 2013) next holiday season at the same time as they launch their next-gen consoles.
I'm still expecting Durango and Orbis to come out next Fall. Sony definitely wants to wait, but their desire to beat Microsoft to the punch this upcoming gen supersedes that ideal option. Seems like every game developer/publisher is trying to get their current-gen game out by the end of Spring 2013, even to the possible detriment of an overcrowded release schedule, before the new consoles are revealed at E3.
My guess is Nintendo releases new Wii U iterations of Mario Kart and Super Mario (3D), as well as Retro's new game, against those two console launches.
They are maybe making a bit more profit off each individual unit, but there will come a point where they end up with less overall because they're not selling as much. If sales drop 50% they need to make twice as much off each system just to break even, and they end up sputtering into a new cycle.
It's tough to get actual numbers as to the profitability of the Xbox, but the division it is housed in basically broke even last quarter. The Xbox isn't the new Windows or Office, MS still needs to grow this business and they won't do it by peddling 9 year old hardware and Halo/Forza/Fable over and over.
Last edited by Diff-chan; 07 Dec 2012 at 02:06 PM.
There's probably a reason that only major third parties would demand such a thing.On Tuesday, the Take-Two chairman touted his company's focus on quality and the need for financial stability during a console transition, warning of dangers for game publishers who divert their efforts elsewhere.
"Toward the end of the [console life] cycle, it's bad for everyone," Zelnick said at this week's Credit Suisse Technology Conference. "Third parties particularly limit their release schedules and begin to think about launching for the next generation ... and third parties typically will not launch at the very launch of the next generation because there's no install base and they don't have a hardware business to support [them]."
Zelnick says that generational development gap for third parties can be "quite meaningful."
"If you're not capitalized for the transition, you can find out that you're not there for the transition," he said. "Historically, in every transition that's occurred in this business, one or two third parties have gone out of business. Last time around it was Midway and a couple of others. Midway was the highest profile. Reasonable people can argue about which one it'll be this time. I have my own point of view, which I haven't exactly been quiet about."
Bookmarks