Hi again Malstrom!
The post(s) about Bobby Kotick and Activision-Blizzard reminded me about what appears to be Sonys approach considering third parties, and why does Kotick, as well as Wada from Square Enix, feel justified about telling Sony
As you have pointed out yourself, even Sonys first party studios are practically third party studios, Sonys idea was to get as much third parties (ie. games) on their console(s) as possible, and the vast majority of game sales on Sonys consoles are third party sales (according to Sony, 3rd party sales should account at least 80%).
The above also means, that Sony makes its money with license fees, that makes the third parties as Sonys customers.
After all, Playstation 3 was just what the big 3rd parties wanted, with high cost of entry to wipe out smaller competitors and giving the flashy visuals they wanted. This method is also what Microsoft wants to emulate with Xbox
When Kotick it telling Sony what they should do, he is talking from a customer perspective, instead of business perspective.
Since Kotick seems to be a strong believer in the old market values, it’s natural for him to think he would have influence to future consoles design, after all, the two “old values” console manufactures are dependand on third party games.
What Kotick is doing is his loss and too bad for us gamers, he seems to be taking Blizzard with him.
Oh, and here’s one Miyamoto interview from E3. I personally love the parts where the interviewer obviously tries to get Miyamoto to say something along the lines “we’re screwed due to economical situation” and “digital distribution is the future”.
If you haven’t read it yet, enjoy:
http://4g-wirelessevolution.tmcnet.com/news/2009/08/05/4310136.htm
I have seen the interview, but I don’t really have anything to say about it. Miyamoto’s position on digital distribution is echoing what Iwata said not too long ago. Nintendo isn’t successful because of their ‘vision’. They let the customers have the ‘vision’ and let them in the driver’s seat. Since the customers don’t seem to be in any hurry for digital distribution, Nintendo is just following their lead.
Kotick shouldn’t be blamed for all that is going on with Blizzard, though I likely made that impression. The guys in charge of Blizzard are going along with all this. They have the clout to say, “No,” and Kotick would back off. They aren’t saying no.
But you made a very interesting comment about third parties that, in the “console war” ruckus and all, no one has truly explored.
I’m disgusted with how third party companies are portrayed. Each third party has a halo on their head. It is their opinions on the game consoles that matter, not the customers. While every other thing a console company utters is “marketing”, everything a third party says is ‘gospel’. Third party companies might as well be portrayed as walking on water.
Maybe in the 8-bit and 16-bit days, third parties were small and frail. Today, third parties are quite capable of being goliaths.
The interesting point you made was that the BIG third party companies WANTED Next Generation precisely to lock out and bankrupt the SMALL third party companies. So when they fail, like Eidos, a company like Square-Enix can come scoop them up. This angle isn’t being explored anywhere and it should.
In a recent video shown in above post on the implosion of Next-Gen gaming, Chris Kohler makes the remark that third parties underestimated the costs of Next-Gen gaming. I find this difficult to believe. Nintendo easily understood the costs which was a reason why they didn’t go the Next-Gen route.
What if third party companies DID understand the costs of Next-Gen gaming? The costs required to make a game would be so high that it would lock the market. Smaller companies couldn’t get in. Other companies would go bankrupt and be cannibalized by the large companies.
I think what went off track wasn’t that third party companies miscalculated on the cost of Next-Gen gaming but that they assumed Next-Gen gaming would grow as it had in previous generations. They all assumed PS3 would perform similar, on a lesser scale, to the PS2 or perhaps Xbox 360 would pull an upset.
While third parties say they don’t want to compete with Nintendo, what if the reality is that they don’t want to compete with smaller third party companies that have huddled towards the Wii? On the HD Twins, there is less software competition because the high costs have locked out so many competitors. And the values of the HD Twins is for the high production value and graphics which is how smaller third party companies can never compete. But with something like new interfaces, the smaller third party companies are running around with slingshots which makes goliath’s advantage irrelevant.
Kotick running around and acting like he is King probably is because he thinks he is. You are right that the PS3 is exactly what third parties companies wanted. Unfortunately, it isn’t what customers wanted.
King Kotick is so arrogant that did you know he has mocked the recent issues that EA has. He said how Activision-Blizzard is making a profit, how it is not ‘restructuring’, and more. EA has changed much lately, but its biggest change is its embrace of New Generation and its values.
I wonder if this is, in part, some of the impact that Peter Moore has. Peter Moore, having worked as a head guy for two consoles (Dreamcast and Xbox 360) has considerable experience from that perspective. Peter Moore never could bring himself to criticize the Wii and even recommended people buy a 360 and the Wii together (probably not what Microsoft wanted to hear, haha). He publicly admitted that when the Wii came out that Microsoft had the ‘wrong’ strategy. Even to those working at Microsoft, Peter Moore’s resignation came very sudden as Peter Moore took up the very lucrative potion as being in charge of EA Sports. A year or two later, Motion Plus is released with EA’s sports games with Wii Sports Resort following it.
Nintendo has spoken highly of Peter Moore. His experience at Sega (a game centric company unlike Sony and Microsoft) and his experience at Microsoft (in seeing the full ‘Next-Gen’ strategy), would give him the insight needed to see the rising New Generation continent especially immediately after the Wii launch. It is just wild hypothesis on my part, but I suspect Peter Moore is one of the factors influencing EA to turnning their gigantic ship toward New Generation.
King Kotick can laugh… for now. But his pattern of exploiting existing IPs (exploitation is his word) is going to end up taking too many trips to the well. One day, they will lower the bucket and the water won’t be there. Customers will have become tired of it just as they are getting tired of the ‘music games’ like Guitar Hero. Call of Duty won’t be selling like it is forever. While the addition of Blizzard is clearly the crown jewel, World of Warcraft won’t last forever. The talent that made that game has long gone. If Blizzard made World of Warcraft 2, no one would care. The current direction Blizzard is going with Starcraft 2 is not something Starcraft fans and new consumers like. Long term, I think King Kotick is ordering his ship to sail in the wrong direction.
A reader jumps into this post: “But it has Blizzard! It can’t sink!”
Like any company, Blizzard operates on the pleasure of its customers. I assure you sir, it can sink. Since I look at things in matters of probability, is the probability for a company like Blizzard’s profits to increase, at the rate it has, or to become stagnant or decrease? I would say the latter is more probable. Besides, conventional wisdom is betting on the former. No one would expect it which is reason enough to seriously consider it. This generation has been a rollercoaster of twists and turns, so why not consider this one as well?
“But this ship can’t sink!” *ker-plunk*
