Friday, August 18, 2017

After-Thoughts: Console Launch and Longevity

Today I want to talk about the correlation between a console's launch sales and its overall lifetime. This is something that I don't think gets talked about a lot but since this is something I may have something for, I'll go ahead and discuss it.

Before we start, let me define my terms. A console's launch sales are the number of copies of said console that are sold within the first 3 months of its release. Some will debate that number but generally speaking, 3 months is a good figure to call the launch window. As for its lifetime, it is the number of years that console is being supported by the company that created it. In relation to consoles, this would be how long after the launch window the console is still receiving games and how long non-native functionality goes before it's cut off completely. And, when I say non-native functionality, I'm referring to any function or feature that requires active upkeep on the part of the system developers. So for example the ability to play a physical copy of a game you already own on your device is native functionality and doesn't count but online services such as online multi-player or digital game purchases are non-native functionality because they require a party other than the console itself to maintain.

This is one of the biggest reasons the Wii U failed so hard I believe and why the PS4 has been doing so well up to this point. Now, anyone with half a brain and a basic understanding of math can tell you that bigger launch sales are better for the companies that make the devices and therefore better for the devices themselves. However, there's an understated facet of this that I believe warrants a small discussion.

Now, there are many reasons a launch can succeed or fail. Most people generally like to call attention to the fact that a console may do better if it has more exclusives, however, I think the reality is a bit more nuanced than that. You see, a console's life cycle certainly does better the more exclusives it has but there's more that goes into a launch than just exclusive titles.

One of the biggest reasons the Wii U failed at launch was due to poor marketing, due to the fact that many people didn't even know the Wii U was a brand new console with brand new games. However, regardless of why that launch figure was poor, that poor launch figure stifled its ability to last in the long haul.

Okay, so to better understand this point we're going to look at the PS2. The PS2 also had a bit of a stifled launch due to a lack of games for anyone who's not playing fighting games, since some of the only launch titles were Tekken and DOA. However, over time more and more people started buying PS2's. This was due to the fact that, while it didn't have a lot of games, it also served the function of a "cheaper than a dvd player" dvd player. Since DVD's were becoming the standard medium to record movies and TV shows on for distribution this made the PS2 a god send for a lot of families who wanted DVD players but didn't have the money to actually buy one.

This extended number of people buying the console meant two things: first was that Sony had more money coming in to fund more games and the second was that since so many more people were guaranteed to have a PS2 more game developers from 3rd party publishers felt comfortable putting games on it as well, essentially amounting to more games either way.

Now, to the Wii U's credit, it did get some favorable exclusives after a while. Mario 3D World, Monster Hunter 4, Smash Bros. 4, Pokken Tournament, Pikmin 3, Bayonetta 1 and 2, and The Wonderful 101 were all titles that people did genuinely want. However, it's one thing to sell games to people who already have your console and it's another thing entirely to try to sell your console and games to someone simultaneously.

Initially, a lot of people were upset when they found out that Bayo 2 would be exclusive to the Wii U and, sure, after a while, they calmed down. However, I think it's fair to say that the reason this outrage occurred was because the game was being put on a console that they either didn't own or had no intention of owning.

This is something that many people are aware of but nobody's thinking of the implications related to this. If a lot of people already had or were planning on getting a Wii U this wouldn't have been a big deal. However, because Bayo 2 was put on the Wii U, a device that many people were not initially planning on buying, they had to consider whether Bayo 2 was worth buying a whole console for.

This may make me sound like I'm talking down to you and I apologize for that but I'm going to break this down really quick just in case there's someone that doesn't understand. Okay, so if you already have a console, the game you're considering buying is only going to cost the amount you pay to buy the game. However, if you don't own a console the game is on, you now have to factor in the price of the console.

If, at launch, Bayo 2 was $60, that means the only trouble would be determining whether to buy it over another game. However, if at launch you had to buy a Wii U to go with Bayo 2, suddenly that $60 is going to become $380 or so depending on the Wii U you actually get. If you were already planning on getting that Wii U anyway it wouldn't be a big deal. However, for most people buying 2 or 3 games for a device you already own is a much better deal than getting 1 game and a new device. The difference is that one $60 game will only last so long but 2-3 $60 games will last longer and, even if you factor in replay value paying almost $400 just to play 1 game is going to be excessive for a majority of people.

The benefit the PS2 had was that it was already in the hands of a lot of people due to the DVD factor and, once it was in your hands, you probably got games to play on it and, even if the PS2 broke during the time you owned it, you'd have enough games to play that it would justify replacing it.

Generally speaking, if you have a strong launch with a lot of people who own your device, that gives you more opportunities to sell games to them and sell them replacement units as well. But if you're selling a game and a console at the same time, that's going to be a lot harder.

The counter argument I can see will be that a console won't sell if it has no games on it and that's somewhat of a fallacy if I'm being honest. It's very rare even for the best selling consoles to have games come out as early as the first 3 months of the console's launch and it's even more unlikely that you'll want to buy all of them right out of the gate. Consoles are not sold on games themselves they're sold on the promise of games.

This is why I think the Wii U had such a hard time recovering from its lackluster launch. It didn't have a wide enough variety of games to sell to people and because of that not as many people were interested. Sure, some people bought the console just for Bayo 2 or Monster Hunter 4. However, the majority of people are not going to buy a device just for one game and if they see no other potential prospects they can look forward to, they won't see the point.

This is where another problem with the Wii U starts to crop up, the console was announced to the public at the exact same time as it was to developers and since the tablet functionality changed how games would be developed for it, no one had the time to make a game for the device before the majority just decided to pass.

This meant that the console had no games to promise at launch and it didn't seem as if any were coming any time soon. This meant people weren't buying which meant games weren't being made which meant more people weren't going to buy it and it's an endless cycle.

Compare that to the PS4's launch where, yeah, it didn't have too much but so much was announced for the device that even if none of the launch titles interested you you probably got the device for a game that was coming down the pipeline.

The point is that, for many people, they're not necessarily buying a console for a single game or any other functionality that the console offers. They're buying the console hoping to develop a library for it. If they buy the device and it turns out that the games that were advertised were not what was promised, well that is just bad luck. But if you buy a device for some hypothetical games that are not exactly promised and you buy the device and it has no games you want on it ever, that's just poor judgment. That's why, when it comes to selling a device, it's up to the company responsible for it to show off at least some of what's planned to be on the device.

If they don't show off what's planned to be for the device, it's less likely to be purchased and it will make it harder for games to be made for it at later times.

That's all for now. Have a wonderful day.

No comments:

Post a Comment