How stated Shawn Layden, former head of PlayStation, the cost of AAA games needs to be reconsidered as they become more technologically demanding and cost prohibitive to produce. According to Leiden, there is one big problem with producing AAA games: exclusivity. In his opinion, the fact that companies like Microsoft and Sony release their $200 million games exclusively has become their Achilles heel, as it ends up significantly reducing their reach.
When a game costs over $200 million, exclusivity is your Achilles heel. It shrinks your target market. Especially if you work in the world of live service or free-to-play games. Another platform is just another way to open a funnel of sorts, to attract more people. In the world of free-to-play, as we know, 95% of people will never spend a cent. In business, the main thing is conversion. You should improve your chances by opening the funnel. The developers are convinced of this Helldivers 2 for PlayStation, which was simultaneously released on PC. Again, you are expanding your funnel. More people are getting into it.
With single-player games, things are different. But if you’re spending $250 million, you want to be able to sell the game to as many people as possible, even if it’s only 10% more. Global installed base of consoles – If you go back to the PS1 and everyone else, everywhere you look, the total number of consoles accumulated never exceeds 250 million. This simply doesn’t happen.
While bringing your game to more platforms can help offset high development costs, it can also reduce the prestige of your platform exclusive. Ultimately, cutting costs may be a better and more efficient solution. Layden is also in favor of this, calling for a return to “AAA” games and the varied, quirky lines that Sony used to publish.
I’m afraid we’ve bought into triple-A, 80 hours of gameplay, 50 gigabytes of gameplay, and if we can’t achieve that, then we can’t do anything. I hope for the return of double-A games. I am for it.
I think back to the PS2 era and there was so much variety. you had
God of War and Assassin’s Creed. There were also Loco Roco, SingStar and Dance Dance Revolution. You had a whole range of entertainment options. With prices ranging from $7-12 million per game, why not take a bet and see what happens? Katamari Damacy, for heaven’s sake, you couldn’t build it today because you can’t even explain what it is. But now, when each bet amounts to three tens of millions, risk tolerance is very low. What you end up with is copycats and sequels and nothing more.
Another problem the former PlayStation executive points out with service games is the lack of space for a large number of them. Games of this style require dedication, and players tend to focus on a small number, meaning it is unlikely that multiple successful service games will exist at the same time.
Look at games with live service. Look at games with live service. I can’t imagine a gaming industry where there are 20 live service games and they are all incredibly successful. There simply isn’t enough energy for this. Remember the times when we played Ultima? Then Everquest came along and everyone abandoned Ultima to play Everquest. Then everyone left Everquest for World of Warcraft. It is difficult to succeed in several games at once, categorized as services or persistent worlds.
It’s worth noting that in all of this talk about the future of consoles, one name that doesn’t get mentioned very often is Nintendo. Why? There are many reasons, but the main one is that with the release of the Wii they decided to retreat from the technological race and have not returned to it since then. People complain about the Switch’s outdated hardware, but it’s what allows Nintendo to release such a steady stream of diverse exclusive games without breaking the bank. It took almost two decades for Xbox and PlayStation to catch up with Nintendo, but it may not be long before they have their own Wii moments.
