Phil Spencer Says Single-Player Game Sales Are Easier On Consoles
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Does he mean Diablo3 or the original Diablo? Because Diablo 3 was not an offline game. He might as well have used WoW as an example of a single player game.
I also seem to remember Microsoft trying to force their console to be mostly-always-online, something which doesn't seem necessary for a bastion of single player, offline games.
But it's also almost constantly in the top 20 best sellers on Steam even though it came out over two years ago now. Also does your website there track digital sales? Because most sources don't, and I don't think Steam has any obligation to release its sales figures.Jadak said:
Sure, I didn't say it wasn't doing great on PC, it is doing great everywhere. There is certainly no argument to say that Skyrim isn't awesome as a PC game, most would even argue that it is far superior given the modding options.Sight Unseen said:
But, excellent success and superior quality on PC or not, massively superior sales is a hard point to counter, and few business men are going to be looking at the 360's 60% Skyrim share and walk away feeling more inclined to focus on PC.
Did you notice my edit? Are you sure that your website is accurately tracking digital sales ( or tracking them at all?) Since as far as I know, Steam doesn't readily release its sales figures. that 14% market share doesn't sit well with me because, that means that only 2.8million copies were sold on PC. It also says that the peak concurrent players on Skyrim was 330K. This means that OVER 10% of the people who ever bought skyrim on PC were at one point playing it at the same time, and considering world geography and how long a tail skyrim has had in terms of PC sales, I just don't buy that stat at all.Jadak said:
I went to LoL to find a comparison and found out according to this source: http://www.destructoid.com/league-of-legends-has-32-million-monthly-active-players-236618.phtml that LoL had 3million peak players in 2012 and 70 million total accounts created. This equates to only 4% of its total userbase playing concurrently. And this is LoL the most played game in the world right now, and one who probably has a much more dedicated fanbase (I mean how many people who bought skyrim at launch still play it every day?) and they can only manage 4% total population? It doesn't sit right with me.
If you find other numbers, feel free to present them. Objecting to statistics holds little value without present data to counter it.Sight Unseen said:
Could the numbers be off? Sure, although the site I linked is not the only one referencing similar numbers , others include vgchartz 360 [http://www.vgchartz.com/game/49112/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim/], PS3 [http://www.vgchartz.com/game/49113/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim/], PC [http://www.vgchartz.com/game/49111/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim/], albeit with slight better numbers towards PC, but not a game changer.
Most notably is Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elder_Scrolls_V:_Skyrim#Sales], not because its Wikipedia, but because they're sourcing the Bethesda Blog itself, a source which would have access to figures that include Steam sales.
And regarding your disbelief of the 'over 10%' concurrent users figure, its really not as significant a figure as you seem to think. Keep in mind that a big name games like Skyrim sell a great proportion of their copies almost immediately upon release, leaving a limited period of time where many people have the game, and all of them have a serious desire to play it 24/7.
That period is when many such games quite easily hit those peaks. I could not guarantee that such is the case with Skyrim as I do not know when those heights were met, but it would not surprise me. There's is also the fact that games like Skyrim tend to lend themselves quite well to long duration play sessions, increasing the overlap of concurrent players in different timezones.
Now, it would not surprise me if PC has closed the gap some more with recent Steam sales, and will continue to do so in the future, but I doubt it'll be coming out of the 360's shadow any time soon. And even then, more copies moved during sales is hardly as appealing as the by and large full priced console sales.
I, uhhhh......hm.
Wait, does he mean that there are more exclusives on consoles nowadays and less exclusives on PCs? That's the only logical train of thought I can get from that quote and it's still moronic.
Sure, there are less "exclusives" like Half Life 2 on PC, but who cares? Nearly every game made nowadays has a PC version as well. And as the PC digital marketplace continues to grow, I bet even the console exclusives will eventually become "console exclusives with PC ports."
I just got a laptop that can actually run AAA games and have been playing the crap out of Tomb Raider. So, you know....single player games work perfectly fine on PCs, Mr. Spencer.
Wait, does he mean that there are more exclusives on consoles nowadays and less exclusives on PCs? That's the only logical train of thought I can get from that quote and it's still moronic.
Sure, there are less "exclusives" like Half Life 2 on PC, but who cares? Nearly every game made nowadays has a PC version as well. And as the PC digital marketplace continues to grow, I bet even the console exclusives will eventually become "console exclusives with PC ports."
I just got a laptop that can actually run AAA games and have been playing the crap out of Tomb Raider. So, you know....single player games work perfectly fine on PCs, Mr. Spencer.
I think he was trying to say that PC gamers have more access to mods and indie games and online play and such and so will play more games with less commitment to each - if that makes sense. Perhaps indulging in multiplayer and expecting multiplayer from their games due to the PC/Mac generally being always online, whereas a console is something you wouldn't naturally expect to be online all the time.MeChaNiZ3D said:
Or it would be if it wasn't the Xbox One.
Ok, ignoring the fact that he appears to spouting PR BS that's even more retarded than usual, his assertion that Single Player games sell better on consoles is rather confusing.
I seem to remember someone or another claiming that 'single player games didn't sell' due to used games. PC may have sales, but the publishers still get money off those who waited for the price to go down compared to the console users who buy second hand. That why the fist few weeks are make or break for console titles while PC can have tail-end sales that can sometimes beat the profits of the the first week thanks to big sales like the Steam holidays.
I seem to remember someone or another claiming that 'single player games didn't sell' due to used games. PC may have sales, but the publishers still get money off those who waited for the price to go down compared to the console users who buy second hand. That why the fist few weeks are make or break for console titles while PC can have tail-end sales that can sometimes beat the profits of the the first week thanks to big sales like the Steam holidays.
Look I don't know if single player is more profitable then multiplayer. The Batman Arkham series seems to sell really well but then again so does the Left 4 Dead and COD series. My guess would be they're roughly equal. I know when I first got my 360, for the first few years I couldn't afford the Live subscription so I just played singleplayer straight off the disk games. And you know what? It was perfectly fine. I had Dante's Inferno and Fallout 3. But now I do have Live and well...its okay? I mean I played ME3 multiplayer and whatnot.
My guess is this was a dick at TitanFall that's only multiplayer, which is one reason I won't be getting it. I miss the good old days when games had both singleplayer and multiplayer.
Good times, eh?
Good times......
My guess is this was a dick at TitanFall that's only multiplayer, which is one reason I won't be getting it. I miss the good old days when games had both singleplayer and multiplayer.
Good times, eh?
Good times......
He is kind of right, I guess.Andy Chalk said:
Single player, offline games are easier to sell on console, probably because they get the same amount of them/more of them than PCs do and they don't have to compete with a wash of other services, like steam/origin that give out free games like League, DotA that are huge time sinks.
He also kind of skips over the fact that those offline titles are usually triple A, pushing the latest graphics and a lot of people do not get the same quality from their pc as they do from their consoles.
There is a lot more to it than just "PCs sell services, not products", I agree with his message (mostly because it is captain obvious stuff) but he is missing a lot of it.
Then I pitty the 86% who will never know the wonders of:Jadak said:
http://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/?
Their loss not ours. Skyrim is a great example of a PC game because on the community that works to make it better/unique/interesting/etc.
EDIT: and if Skyrim isn't you cup of tea, then go pick a game to mod:
http://www.nexusmods.com/games/?
or go start up:
Are you even aware of the topic you're in? I was not criticizing Skyrim on PC, I much prefer Skyrim on PC. My post is about why those making strictly business decisions may be more inclined to focus on consoles. Read the rest of my posts in this topic if you want a follow up, as this discussion has already been had.Tsaba said:
If you make a post that isn't "complete" and others have to read your Encyclopedia Britannica of posts to figure it out you failed at the initial post.Jadak said:
My point still stands on my reply to your initial post, Skyrim is a great example because of the modding community for a single player game.