PS4’s Third Party Exclusive Content Are Not A Big Factor, Sony Will Stick With PSVR – Analyst

One thing Sony does which helps it retain its dominance in mind share is its co-branding deals wit major third party games; titles such as Call of Duty, Destiny, Star Wars, and Red Dead are all games that get exclusive co-branding, bundling, and marketing rights with PlayStation, subconsciously driving home the association between them and the PS4 for the larger market.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
UCForce322d ago

I think Sony do a great job with PS4 and PSVR.

322d ago
322d ago
DrumBeat322d ago

They already have with PS4. Phew!

PhoenixUp322d ago

“Ward also said that he sees a future for the PSVR- unlike, say, the PS Move, it won’t just be abandoned by Sony, but will become a long term platform, albeit one that is more of a slow burn.”

The PS Move is required for PSVR. Not to mention that every DualShock 4 is embedded with some form of PS Move tech.

Sony didn’t abandon Move like Microsoft abandoned Kinect.

SirKnight322d ago

Why do GamingBolt keep peddling the lie that exclusives don’t matter?

The Nintendo Switch is a great console - but its biggest driver of sales will have been the triple-A exclusives like Zelda and Mario. Exclusives benefit the platform their on.

IGiveHugs2NakedWomen322d ago

Gamingbolt has been downplaying Sony exclusives ever since Microsoft lost interest in making any. Downplaying Sony is the Gamingbolt Manifesto.

dcbronco322d ago

Exclusives matter when they have a 40+% attach rate. Not so much at 4-5%. Seventy million install bases have exclusives selling over 10 million when they matter. Nintendo will probably hit Horizon numbers, better actually, with an install base of less than ten million units. That's impressive. Horizon may be a great game. But people outside of gaming know who Laura Croft is. Bet they don't know the girl from Horizon. Or the kid from the Last Guardian. Or even the characters from the Last of Us. The mainstream make exclusives matter ultimately. Because you want new gamers. No one outside of gaming knows Sony characters. They know Mario, at least they call Link Zelda. They know Master Chief. Sony has no iconic characters.

Gemmol322d ago (Edited 322d ago )


you say Nintendo will probably hit Horizon numbers????? what???

Zelda pass those numbers long time ago even if you did not include Wii U numbers, right when horizon sales slow down and sony drop it to 39.99 after a month and a half when it came out.....I thought it would of kept selling well so they could of kept it at 59.99 a lot longer, but it had no legs

Zelda by itself on Switch probably the best selling game of 2017........but once you add fifa 18 sales on ps4, xbox, switch together, it beat Zelda..........but Zelda vs fifa ps4, and Zelda is the best selling game of first party from 3ds, ps4, or xbox one come close..........if im not mistaken if you do not combine fifa, or nba 2k, or madden sales from different platforms, the top 10 best selling games would have maybe 4 or 5 Nintendo games

you can go by Nintendo last numbers they announced September 30.......or vg chartz or wait for their newer financial report.........

everything else you wrote I agree with......everyone know Lara Croft over horizon main character, last guardian character and all the people from last of us,

people remember game character names when the games are memorable, if its not, no one will remember the character names

Petebloodyonion321d ago

So why did the WIIU failed?
All WIIU exclusive sold very well.
Because 3rd party game sell even more
You may hate GTA, COD, FIFA, etc... but they sell more compared to Bloodborne, Last Guardian, etc.
Even Minecraft on PS4 is a better seller.

zeuanimals321d ago


Holy fanboy. Yes, Zelda sold with like a 110% attach rate, meaning more copies of the Switch version were sold than there are Switches. That puts it in the 10 mil+ area. But it's far from the best selling game of the year. Best selling exclusive? Without a doubt, but you're completely jumping the shark thinking it sold better than everything.

And Lara Croft is known more by more people because the first game came out 20 years ago and they've had a dozen games in the franchise. I dunno, maybe give The Last of Us and Horizon maybe just another freaking game before you compare the franchises? Or maybe more than 5 years for the characters to be part of the geekdom zeitgeist.

The Last of Us on PS3 alone sold more than all versions of TR2013 and ROTR combined. The series already has a massive following and TLOU2 is one of the most hotly anticipated games coming out. It's tracking to sell 10 mil+. ROTR, the second in the series' reboot did 1.3 mil.

I'd honestly say Joel and Ellie are bigger industry icons now and they're also known for being more than just eye candy. You say people remember characters if the games were interesting. Look at every review of TR2013 and ROTR and see how almost all of them mention the bland story and characters. Then look at TLOU's almost universal praise and see what people have to say about its stories and characters. You're lying to yourself if you think these characters haven't made their impact but I'd go a step further and say they're going to outlive Lara Croft if nobody can do something right with her.

dcbronco321d ago

Gemmol I haven't looked at the numbers for some time but I know there is a huge difference in attach rates. Nintendo attach rates make their consoles successful even when they only sell twenty or thirty million units. Firstly, they always sell hardware at a profit. Second, regardless what others do they sell a ton of their exclusives.

Zeuanimals, Sony has been making consoles for twenty years. They have yet to make a Link, Mario or Chief. Last of Us isn't their first franchise. Besides the characters there is also the music. Mario has a memorable tune. The Halo theme still gets me excited after all these years. Again, despite owning a music division, Sony didn't create any iconic music for it's characters.

Sony's position is based on being the older brother's console and people grew up with it. That's the foundation of their longevity along with some previous third party exclusives. But there is no reason to believe any current or previous Sony IP will be huge in twenty years. There will always be kids so Nintendo has that. Microsoft can push engineering(get over it fanboys they have become great at engineering products). I do believe Sony may have a huge surprise with PS5, but exclusives won't be the big selling point. For that to be the case you have to have huge exclusives. Sony only has average ones.

Babadook7321d ago (Edited 321d ago )

“They have yet to make a Link, Mario or Chief. Last of Us isn't their first franchise. Besides the characters there is also the music. Mario has a memorable tune. The Halo theme still gets me excited after all these years. Again, despite owning a music division, Sony didn't create any iconic music for it's characters. ”

Sony has many franchises better than halo. As for music? Again, you seem pretty ignorant.


IGiveHugs2NakedWomen321d ago (Edited 321d ago )


Uncharted 4 has sold more than 9 million copies. Now what?
BTW, not even Halo 5 sold more than 10 million copies and the simple reason is that it's not available on "multiple consoles". Have you figured that out yet?

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 321d ago
WilliamSheridan322d ago

Grimm an analytical standpoint, they don't matter. The problem is these analysts don't factor in, and can't factor in, the sales generated by being known as the console with more exclusives. Just having more exclusive options available for all the genre's really helps the PlayStation brand as a whole. Not to mention the negative marketing campaign against Microsoft. Additionally,a large part of the success cones from what happened right before launch, with the missteps of MS and the underpowered over priced console they attempted to release successfully. The momentum was really all Sony needed with such little difference in the consoles this time around. The One X helped MS regain footing, but now they have to continue forward with a barrage of exclusives.

Anyway, I'm happy to own both sides. Makes these debates easier...

rainslacker321d ago

What is this negative marketing campaign against MS that you talk about? I've seen a few jabs through the generation, but no outright campaign.

zeuanimals321d ago (Edited 321d ago )

The last few years of the 360s life compared to the PS3s played a big role, you can't deny it. MS left the 360 to ride its final years out lazily with a few big releases at the end of every year. Meanwhile, the PS3 only ever got bigger and better exclusives and then it all culminated with what's consider their crowning jewel, TLOU. Sony rode a positive wave all the way through the PS4s launch and they might have stumbled a little bit since but they're still riding that wave.

The negative marketing campaign sure helped, but they were hardly bruising. A few jabs as has been said.

IGiveHugs2NakedWomen321d ago

There is no negative marketing campaign against Microsoft. Microsoft has repeatedly shot themselves in the foot and face with the things they say and the things they do. For the last 3 years gamers have been asking Phil Spencer to make/get more QUALITY games. So what did Phil and his crew do? Cancel games. Delay games. Complain about PS4 crossplay. Push Windows 10. Make $150 controllers. Made the most powerful console ever.

But didn't bother to make any games. In terms of gaming related marketing, Microsoft is there own worst enemy.

Chevalier321d ago Show
XiNatsuDragnel322d ago

Sony is just killin it this gen

Felsager322d ago

Without a doubt. They can easily maintain buoyancy for two more years easily.

Sony has the luxury to carry the VR device due to the extensive list of games. Now VR could go through rigorous tests and improvements. Sony is in the position to use mixed reality in their PS5 console if VR flies.

michellelynn0976322d ago

Because making games has become too expensive.

UCForce322d ago (Edited 322d ago )

I don’t think so, all Sony did pretty well by doing small which is more focus and consistent. Sony did expected that their PSVR would sold about 500.000 PSVR in first week and it did met their expectations. About The Last Guardians, Sony didn’t expect the game going to be huge success like other major franchises, but it did well enough for fans, so they didn’t kill The Last Guardian. ICO and SOTC weren’t that huge just like TLG, but again it did well enough for the fans. About Horizon Zero Dawn, that game was risky for GG and Sony because they did lost a lot of money for making that game and GG didn’t have experience of making open world game, but it paid off for them. The game did sold a lot of copies like 2.6 millions. The game isn’t sold that a lot like BOTW, but like I said Zelda is legendary and Horizon new champion.

michellelynn0976322d ago

A lot of so called AAA games go over $150 million dollars. That does not count marketing cost which can severely add up sadly. That is why 95% of third party games are multiplat now. Even if they sell three million copies, that is barely enough to break even.

AspiringProGenji322d ago

Haha “over 150 M dollars.” Please kid...

yumi76322d ago (Edited 322d ago )


$150 million is a heavily exaggerated cost and it does include things like marketing and legal teams.

The companies that are making games that "cost" that much are also funneling tens of millions of dollars directly into executive salary.

The amount of that $150 million that actually goes to people who work on the projects is a fraction of that cost. This is in part why you see the rise of inde teams that can make games that are on par with these $150 million games. Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice for example which was made by 20 people at a fraction of that cost.

Felsager322d ago (Edited 322d ago )

Flawless answer.

Sony decided to not deprives sectors of their gaming community in the current generation of the PS4. That's why they are too robust and economically buoyant during these years. It was the must impressive leverage ever done for such company. I think Sony themselves never expected this amount of success.

Sony learned how to press and push without hassling. They did fan service, they respected the niche of indie developers and enthusiass, they catered the JRPG and RPG in general and attended the grinding games and multi player games all at once. Sony IS a company that really understands the market. They sum parts and combine them to form a coherent robust library of games, in other words delivery.

The BIGGEST RISK was Horizon Zero Dawn. Sony invested too much but thanks to that the whole thing turned into a medallion for this generation.

Gemmol322d ago

last guardian was not a huge success, it actually went on sale the fastest, then they had to bundle it with ps4, which pad the numbers, if a bundle was brought a million times, that million sales add to the game sales

rainslacker321d ago (Edited 321d ago )

99% of AAA games don't go over $100 million, including marketing. The number of titles that exceed that cost could be counted on both hands, with fingers left over. When it comes to marketing though, the bigger AAA games which get the most marketing, have the marketing paid for by the console maker, so the publishers don't even bear that cost, yet they still get the revenue from the sales of the game.


Sony gave the general costs of H:ZD a while back, and it wasn't exorbitant like one would think from such a big game. WIsh I could find the article, but as I recall, it was in the 40-50 million range. I'm pretty sure that didn't include marketing though, which I'd wager was around $15-20 million.


Found the link

47 million.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 321d ago
UCForce322d ago (Edited 322d ago )

It doesn’t need to. Just good enough. Their games are small and consistent to be honest. About new God of War, if you think SMM playing it safe, you need to understand what risky part about this new direction. It’s that the game will be more personal and grounded. Norse Mythology is more isolated and grounded. Father and Son Story isn’t new, but SMM want Kratos isn’t one dimensional character.

michellelynn0976322d ago

But that is not the case. Horizon is over 100 million in it's budget. What smaller games? Sony does big budget games.

badz149322d ago


Where did you find that Horizon ZD costed over 100mil? Last I heard, it was not even 50mil

Gemmol322d ago

new god of war is the game last chance, did you go blind, last one did not sell well, so they are trying something new, if im not mistaken they fire some of the workers. If anything Sony is strict, if a franchise do not bring in any money, they let it go, look at the many franchise they made over the years and look at the sales of the last one that came out for those franchise, you better hope this one sells a lot more than the last god of war

God of War developer Sony Santa Monica has suffered a round of layoffs, Sony has confirmed.
The layoffs were first reported by IGN, which claims one of the studio's mystery projects was also cancelled.
"SCEA can confirm that we have completed a reduction in workforce at Santa Monica Studio," Sony said in a statement issued to Eurogamer this morning.

rainslacker321d ago

Sony itself said that the cost of development was $47 million.

The marketing budget was probably in the 15-20 million range.

If a game as big as H:ZD only cost that much to make, over 5 years, then it's pretty indicative that games that are much smaller in scale, or just as big, probaly cost less or about the same. It's not like Sony gets discounts on the things that cost more.

The idea that AAA games are upwards of $100 million to make, or much more, is very much overstated by those who think that things like GTA with it's $200+ million budget are indicative of the norm. The idea that these games cost so much to make is perpetuated by some publishers to try and justify their over inclusion of MT tactics to be able to produce the games themselves. That would have made more sense last gen before the huge boom in software sales where more people are buying individual titles, thus even with larger budgets, sales are high enough to bring in a pretty good return on investment.

Knushwood Butt321d ago

God of War has pretty solid pre-order numbers even without a release date.

I'd say Metroid 4 is a bigger risk.

IGiveHugs2NakedWomen321d ago (Edited 321d ago )

HZD had an estimated budget of over $45 million dollars. Don't make things up. There's plenty of reliable information on the web if you conduct a reasonable search.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 321d ago
UCForce322d ago (Edited 322d ago )

“Over 150 million” That’s a hypocritical. I don’t think Sony want to go that far. Like I said, Sony want to focus small and more consistent.

michellelynn0976322d ago

No, it isn't. Considering Sony charges $2,500 a dev kit. Imagine needing 100 people to make a game. Add in the expensive clmputere and programs needed and it adds up.

yumi76322d ago (Edited 322d ago )


Before you go spouting off things you don't know anything about perhaps you should investigate.

First off most indie developers are loaned free of charge dev kits for their projects. The game creation is done on PC's using emulation within the development software. (Unity for example). So a dev creates their game on PC then gets a free loaned out dev kit in the final stages to bug test the game or software. And on top of that Sony has removed a lot of publishing fees that both Microsoft and Nintendo charge. The basic fact is if Sony was pricing game development to high you wouldn't see the numbers of games and indies that have been coming to the system.

And obviously in house studios will have access to any resources that are needed for development.

So how much does it cost to develop for PlayStation 4?

kneon322d ago (Edited 322d ago )


The stuff you mention is irrelevant. The real costs are the engineering/design staff, and they will run you about $200-250k per person per year on average with all costs in, depending on location. Of course, you also need support staff, but they are fewer and cost less.

rainslacker321d ago (Edited 321d ago )

The cost of the dev kit is not per unit. The dev license is actually more than $2500 per game, but within an average studio, that'd include anywhere between 5-10 development units. You don't need a dev unit for every employee, and for testing purposes, a standard PS4/P can be unlocked for testing under heavy restrictions from Sony, although most testing gets done on a PC. Sony provides these dev units included in the actual dev license as needed by the developer. A developer can choose to "purchase" more(still remains Sony's property), although I don't know what they cost.

I'm not sure where you're getting all your information, but given that everything your stating here, and elsewhere in this thread, it seems you are just pulling numbers out of your a**.


The average engineers salary is between 65-90K a year. Artist make between 40-60K. Leads usually make an average or $125K, and higher up the development chain have quite a wide range depending on the company structure.

Added business costs, like taxes or insurance, probably bump that up another 15%, although nowadays, contract workers are more common, which brings that average down closer to around 7-10% as they don't have to pay as much in taxes or insurance or other such business they may not be maintained when their job is done on the project.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 321d ago
UCForce322d ago (Edited 322d ago )

That is dev to develop their game on console. Can you say the same thing with Nintendo ? Horizon Zero Dawn was 60 million dollar dev cost. Its like you want everything to go big. It’s good enough.

UCForce322d ago

About Witcher 3, the development cost was 50 millions dollar and it still considering the best game of 2015.

TheColbertinator322d ago


That hasn't stopped EA,Nintendo,Microsoft,Take 2,Namco Bandai or Ubisoft so perhaps they know how to handle their business just fine.

You,however,know nothing but ignorance is bliss I suppose.

EddieT322d ago

"Activision announced today that Call of Duty: WWII generated over $500 million in worldwide sales in its first three days of release (or “opening weekend,” as the publisher puts it)."

Don't give me that "games are too expensive too make" excuse when we have major publishers posting record breaking profits and within days of a game's release. Even if game were too expensive to make, that would lie at the feet of the publishers that overemphasise the importance of graphics and spectacle over game play and narrative. Stop perpetuating the fallacy that games are too expensive. If they were too expensive to make, they wouldn't make them.

Aceman18322d ago

What a load of bull you keep trying to pedal. To date the only Sony 1st party game we know of with a high budget is GT5 with 60 million. This doesn't even come close to the top 10 ever.

Exclusives matter period its what gives a console it a identity. For me I view 3rd party games as the icing on the cake.

EverydayJoe322d ago

Wasn't it Warner Brothers that dumped 50mil into "This is Vegas" development and then SCRAPPED IT? Now that is an absolute waste, and taking one on the chin for WB.

michellelynn0976322d ago

Who said exclusives don't matter?
Sony has done a good job with budgets. But, a lot of major third parties? No.

Godmars290322d ago

Making AAA has become too expensive. Largely because the expected returns from them are equally ridiculous and exorbitant. Look to the lengths the likes of EA and Activision have gone to secure profits from IPs. How badly they compromised games. That's what creates the "too expensive" myth.

Felsager322d ago (Edited 322d ago )


"Because making games has become too expensive."
"Horizon is over 100 million in it's budget. What smaller games? Sony does big budget games."
"Sony charges $2,500 a dev kit. Imagine needing 100 people to make a game."

These claims are expressions of pure barbarism, monumental constructions of incoherence and ruthless ignorance of the worst degree. The sounds of the beasts makes more sense than all the attempts you had typing all those sentences. A troll with strong "Xbotism" will not dare to write things like that. Even a 12 years old kid could easily take two seconds in google proving the falsity of those claims.

I suggest you to close your account, go to school and pick a job. This is not for you by any means.

trooper_322d ago

That's such a weak sauce argument.

Felsager322d ago (Edited 322d ago )

I don't need to type out the answers but since you insist.

"Because making games has become too expensive."
1. Games are not expensive to make because you have Gravity Rush 2 who performed well. Metacritic: score 80, user score 84.

"Horizon is over 100 million in it's budget. What smaller games? Sony does big budget games."
2. Horizon Zero took 47 million dollars to produce.

"Sony charges $2,500 a dev kit. Imagine needing 100 people to make a game."
3. "First off most indie developers are loaned free of charge dev kits for their projects. The game creation is done on PC's using emulation within the development software." (yumi76 already answered this)

Trooper, do me a favor, don't defend an individual who has no idea of what he's talking about.
Thank you.

: )

trooper_322d ago


When did I defend him?

IGiveHugs2NakedWomen321d ago (Edited 321d ago )

You know what's funny about that "games have become too expensive to make" comment? No one has ever supported it with any proof or facts EVER!

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 321d ago
michellelynn0976322d ago

@yumi76. I only wish it was. I will show you lots of articles were publishers and devlopers talk about the expenses of making games now.

SickSinceSix322d ago

Are those the ones trying to convince us full priced games need lootboxes?

michellelynn0976322d ago

Heck no. I am telling you why this is happening. It has become harder to make any profits off of games because of all the super high tech, online, updates, etc.

UCForce322d ago (Edited 322d ago )

Stop that. It is not.

michellelynn0976322d ago

Why do you want to ignore this? This is a real problem.

IGiveHugs2NakedWomen321d ago (Edited 321d ago )

You claim it's a real problem but you haven't provided any real proof to support the claim.

UCForce322d ago

The only real problem is that major publishers want their game to expensive not because development cost. It’s because they want to look for excuses to make more profit . So watch the video that I previous posted. And it is not.

G20WLY322d ago

Remember: think first, THEN type 😉

Realms322d ago

What your saying is so much BS the problem isn't the rise in cost in development it's over saturation of bad games, that are then expected to make huge profits. If a game like Stardew Valley developed by one guy can make a ton of profit then it's clear that the problem isn't production or development cost the real problem is over produced bad games with big budgets. Good games make money but greedy publishers don't want to gamble and that is why you see the implementation of BS mechanics like micro transactions.

obidanshinobi322d ago

Boo hoo poor publishers and developers.
There's probably 5 - 10 staff in upper management of these big developers that do bugger all work but take home a 5 figure salary.
There's so much wastage at these big studios it's unreal.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 321d ago