The issue is that in Europe, the switch is going to be more popular than the ps4 was in North America and the switch in North America is more popular than the ps4 in Europe. Then in Japan and the rest of the Asia-Pacific the switch completely obliterated ps4 and will continue with ps5. Nintendo will continue to dominate the US into 2023 and then switch 2 probs 2024 and they will be the dominant console maker in the US, Japan, China, France, Canada, S.Korea, Taiwan and go head to head in UK, Germany, Spain.
The reasons and consequences of the decline of Playstation in Japan [UPDATE: New Guidelines]
- Thread starter Aquamarine
- Replies 3,216
- Views 295,155
- Start date
- Community Discussion
Last corporate presentation, Nintendo said last fiscal year third party software unit sales were greater than first party, excluding download only.
Soundtrack to this thread.
For units you're right, revenue wise, the splits I shared are accurate.
In France, no:
Game sales for big publishers (retail + digital, but no digital for Nintendo!). First is €, second is units.
Nintendo sold 1,4 million Switch in 2020 (2,3 millions consoles sold for all console manufacturer, Sony + MS sold 900k).
Nintendo sold 1,25 million Switch in 2019 (2,28 millions for all console manufacturer, Sony + MS sold 1,03 million).
Sources: SELL & Figaro interview 1 & 2
Other countries? Maybe, I don't know. Germany = PC.
Think @Oregano was talking about overall sales, not only 1st party.In France, no:
Game sales for big publishers (retail + digital, but no digital for Nintendo!). First is €, second is units.
Nintendo sold 1,4 million Switch in 2020 (2,3 millions consoles sold for all console manufacturer, Sony + MS sold 900k).
Nintendo sold 1,25 million Switch in 2019 (2,28 millions for all console manufacturer, Sony + MS sold 1,03 million).
Sources: SELL & Figaro interview 1 & 2
Other countries? Maybe, I don't know. Germany = PC.
I do wonder about how inertia will shape the Playstation business in the next few years. Because chip shortages are rampant and will continue on for at least another year, it puts them in a tough position of trying to build the audience that will support their business for the next decade while putting a premium on the gateway product that does so.
If hardware is a limited resource, how do you prioritize that resource? My assumption would be to markets where they receive the most revenue on software, mtx, and services. Because if they're selling each console at a loss, it does them little good to send them to Japan where software isn't being bought.
The situation of PS4 coming to an end is also what we need to keep an eye on. SIE does not have the luxury of being able to rely on the install base of the PS4 and wait for supply chains to realign unlike where Nintendo is at with the Switch.
I mean I hate to say it, but I think the current market inertia in Japan along with supply chain issues on hardware and production delays on software, have all made the perfect storm that SIE doesn't have the room to pivot and retake marketshare in Japan without the risk of losing it elsewhere. (Assuming their leadership in America even cares to rebuild their presence in Japan)
If hardware is a limited resource, how do you prioritize that resource? My assumption would be to markets where they receive the most revenue on software, mtx, and services. Because if they're selling each console at a loss, it does them little good to send them to Japan where software isn't being bought.
The situation of PS4 coming to an end is also what we need to keep an eye on. SIE does not have the luxury of being able to rely on the install base of the PS4 and wait for supply chains to realign unlike where Nintendo is at with the Switch.
I mean I hate to say it, but I think the current market inertia in Japan along with supply chain issues on hardware and production delays on software, have all made the perfect storm that SIE doesn't have the room to pivot and retake marketshare in Japan without the risk of losing it elsewhere. (Assuming their leadership in America even cares to rebuild their presence in Japan)
Okay but for measuring third party presence on a platform, I would think units would be more important here. Not that your point would change much since PS’s third party units would be higher.
In France, no:
Game sales for big publishers (retail + digital, but no digital for Nintendo!). First is €, second is units.
Nintendo sold 1,4 million Switch in 2020 (2,3 millions consoles sold for all console manufacturer, Sony + MS sold 900k).
Nintendo sold 1,25 million Switch in 2019 (2,28 millions for all console manufacturer, Sony + MS sold 1,03 million).
Sources: SELL & Figaro interview 1 & 2
Other countries? Maybe, I don't know. Germany = PC.
Yes, and it's worth noting that France in particular is a strong market for Nintendo. More so than other European countries.
Both are important to measure.
One thing I'd like to add is that Sony current strategy was more out of necessity than people give them credits for.
Their selling point was originally getting a lot more 3rd party support than competition. But they couldn't sustain that indefinitely. Even with PS2 dominating the market, the leap in budget due to HD development meant that AAA games targeting a single platform and/or country was a lot more risky.
Some franchises/developers shifted to Nintendo/PSP to continue SD, while others went multiplat, including best buddies like Square. And it was clear the multiplat tendency was going to get worse over time.
If most 3rd party system sellers goes multiplat, what will be their selling point? Nintendo has their 1st party, Microsoft has the war chest to buy exclusivity and lose more money on hardware (and now there's GP and X-Cloud as well).
Their answer was in 2 directions:
- Make system sellers themselves.
- Make 3p system sellers sell significantly better on PS, to facilitate exclusivity deals for them and make it harder for others. And with the audience created by the system sellers, the smaller games wouldn't skip the platform either.
How do they achieve the former? Doubling down on what sticked (high budget cinematic experiences like Uncharted) is much safer than investing heavily on games they don't know if will succeed, specially when they don't have a good historic in creating hits. On top of it, they're very aggressive on pricing, so more people would try their games.
How do they achieve the later? Pushing hard higher budget games in detriment to smaller games and conditioning their userbase to think higher budget games are always better. There's only so much their audience can spend on gaming, and the more is spent on bigger publishers the better it is in this aspect.
Could they find another alternative? Yes. Getting the biggest Japanese 3rd party wasn't enough though and that cost them the country, but purely diverging resources and sales to please smaller publishers could lose their current main selling point. So the answer would need to go beyond that.
Their selling point was originally getting a lot more 3rd party support than competition. But they couldn't sustain that indefinitely. Even with PS2 dominating the market, the leap in budget due to HD development meant that AAA games targeting a single platform and/or country was a lot more risky.
Some franchises/developers shifted to Nintendo/PSP to continue SD, while others went multiplat, including best buddies like Square. And it was clear the multiplat tendency was going to get worse over time.
If most 3rd party system sellers goes multiplat, what will be their selling point? Nintendo has their 1st party, Microsoft has the war chest to buy exclusivity and lose more money on hardware (and now there's GP and X-Cloud as well).
Their answer was in 2 directions:
- Make system sellers themselves.
- Make 3p system sellers sell significantly better on PS, to facilitate exclusivity deals for them and make it harder for others. And with the audience created by the system sellers, the smaller games wouldn't skip the platform either.
How do they achieve the former? Doubling down on what sticked (high budget cinematic experiences like Uncharted) is much safer than investing heavily on games they don't know if will succeed, specially when they don't have a good historic in creating hits. On top of it, they're very aggressive on pricing, so more people would try their games.
How do they achieve the later? Pushing hard higher budget games in detriment to smaller games and conditioning their userbase to think higher budget games are always better. There's only so much their audience can spend on gaming, and the more is spent on bigger publishers the better it is in this aspect.
Could they find another alternative? Yes. Getting the biggest Japanese 3rd party wasn't enough though and that cost them the country, but purely diverging resources and sales to please smaller publishers could lose their current main selling point. So the answer would need to go beyond that.
Last edited:
We don't have any number about it, so who knows.
But of course there are few big games on PlayStation (FIFA, Call of Duty...). Overall PlayStation is big in France, but when you look at software sales every weeks and console sales per year, it looks like Nintendo is the biggest publisher & console manufacturer in France.
MS is (was? Maybe a different story for Series S/X) pretty much nonexistent. And now with game pass MS players do not buy a lot of physical games.
Last edited:
Yup. Thank you @Celine for the recap!
I want to add that Sony’s market position early on benefitted greatly from Nintendo’s business practices and the decision to stay with cartridges for the N64. Sega had some success with courting 3rd parties early on with the Saturn. But that failed to maintain momentum which ended up with Capcom and others bringing their titles to PS en masse at one point.
Their current market position is interesting. It feels like Sony is fighting a two-front war right now. Nintendo is coming at them from the lower end between peeling off indies and lower-spec titles on a portable system which is netting a lot the Japanese market. Meanwhile MS (and PC) are providing a comparable experience for the big budget Western focused games.
Speaking of MS… they’re currently making a big pivot from a 3rd party focus to a 1st party focus with the rash of acquisitions in the last few years. Which I think is strengthening their brand by ensuring that there will be quality titles available for the platform similar to Nintendo practically guaranteeing there will be a Mario or Zelda title near launch of their hardware. But it also damages Sony by taking certain system sellers off the table if MS plans to take them exclusive.
It’ll be interesting to see if MS’s pivot play works compared to Sony’s insistence on staying primarily 3rd party driven
I wouldn't really say it's a matter Xbox becoming more 1st party focused, so much as it is a bolstering of guaranteed content for their Game Pass service that they can be assured will remain available to subscribers; that also grants them further leverage to continue gobbling up major 3rd party releases for Game Pass moving forward.
Microsoft are operating on an entierly different business model to Sony now; and it's a model that could well make Playstation irrelevant outside of its first party content over the long-term (hence Sony's continued pivot towards bolstering their first party strength as a key USP).
So to not be misunderstood, when I talk about "first-party driven" console makers and "third-party driven" console makers, I'm not referring if total first-party software sales are higher than total third-party software sales on a platform, nor I'm in any way suggesting that first-party games cannot become huge hits on third-party driven platforms or, viceversa, third-party games cannot become huge hits on first-party driven platforms.
Instead the distinction refer to what is the main force that enact a platform, in the beginning of the lifecycle, to become an enduring success, that is what trigger the beneficial cycle of success that help attract even more success.
In the case of "first-party driven" consoles the enablers are primarily first-party owned software (think about Nintendo, Atari, Sega and many of the old school console makers which were game companies at heart), in the case of "third-party driven" consoles it's the mass of third-party games (think at the big corporations like Sony and Microsoft).
On Nintendo consoles third-party software typically follow the lead of first-party software (if the latter bring success, the former will ramp up the support), instead on PlayStation and Xbox third-party software is essential to leads the consoles to success (so it's crucial to plan the whole console around them).
In the case of Nintendo, third-party software have a supporting role whereas on PlayStation/Xbox, third-party software has a primary role.
These different approach directly influence the nature/behaviour of the platform holder.
For example if on first-party driven platforms the first-party tends to influence the kind of third-party software that appears (for example family friendly games are a good fit on Nintendo consoles, or in the past arcade games felt at home on Sega consoles), on third-party driven platforms first-party software tends to resonate/to align with the kind of third-party software that drive the ecosystem.
Instead the distinction refer to what is the main force that enact a platform, in the beginning of the lifecycle, to become an enduring success, that is what trigger the beneficial cycle of success that help attract even more success.
In the case of "first-party driven" consoles the enablers are primarily first-party owned software (think about Nintendo, Atari, Sega and many of the old school console makers which were game companies at heart), in the case of "third-party driven" consoles it's the mass of third-party games (think at the big corporations like Sony and Microsoft).
On Nintendo consoles third-party software typically follow the lead of first-party software (if the latter bring success, the former will ramp up the support), instead on PlayStation and Xbox third-party software is essential to leads the consoles to success (so it's crucial to plan the whole console around them).
In the case of Nintendo, third-party software have a supporting role whereas on PlayStation/Xbox, third-party software has a primary role.
These different approach directly influence the nature/behaviour of the platform holder.
For example if on first-party driven platforms the first-party tends to influence the kind of third-party software that appears (for example family friendly games are a good fit on Nintendo consoles, or in the past arcade games felt at home on Sega consoles), on third-party driven platforms first-party software tends to resonate/to align with the kind of third-party software that drive the ecosystem.
Sorry, but this post just doesn’t make sense. MS had to make those acquisitions to get their first party to a state where it could compete with PlayStation’s - how does that make them have a first party driven focus while Sony keeps a 3rd party driven one? MS have done what they have because they’ve been playing catch up. Only one of them experienced major first party growth last gen in terms of sales, had multiple ten million sellers, and have added to it both organically by bolstering internal dev teams and through acquisitions.
Mostly, though Asia actually helps quite a bit for PS4 too obviously. In America Xbox One was quite competitive, more competitive than PS3 was comparably.
Mod post
We've had some concerns and reports from members about unsourced claims happening, please remember to always source your claims to ensure conversation quality is as high as possible.
Also, while not entirely unrelated, remember the premise of the thread is about Japan first and foremost but also how it is contextualised by the overall WW landscape, if a side topic arises and becomes prominent or if you want to focus on another specific market don't hesitate to create a new thread about said topic if necessary or ask someone else to create it if you still have a junior status.
Also, while not entirely unrelated, remember the premise of the thread is about Japan first and foremost but also how it is contextualised by the overall WW landscape, if a side topic arises and becomes prominent or if you want to focus on another specific market don't hesitate to create a new thread about said topic if necessary or ask someone else to create it if you still have a junior status.
Japans population growth is through the floor, the median age of the population is rising rapidly..... people do not like to address the fact that Nintendo had to make massive sacrifices to create a sustainable / successful model.
www.worldometers.info
Switch is not the successor to WiiU.... it is the successor to WiiU and the DS / 3DS.
If you compare DS sales rates to Switch, even ignoring WiiU.... Switch is selling at a far slower rate.
That said... recent sales data from steam shows that PC is not an answer to PlayStations desire to sell more software and neither is cloud / PSNow.
The games on Steam barely make it over 1 million, with a 30% cut to Steam, it doesn't expand the userbase of the PS ecosystem and adds momentum to PC as a competing hardware platform.
Cloud has failed at every turn, announcing that it is better than ever and a few tenths of a second faster I/O times will not make people run to that distribution method.
Sony really need to look at Nintendo.... Nintendo are experts, so are Apple. What did Jobs always say 'Do less but do it really well'.
Nintendo focused on making one really great product that appealed to as many people as possible.
In contrast PlayStation under Jim Ryan seems to be flailing wildly.... expanding to PC, mobile, cloud, Film, TV all at the expense of their core business and core consumer base.
Why does Sony have 2 mobile divisions? Why did they sell SOE only to decide later they wanted in on PC but then made it at the expense of PS exclusivity?
Why are they publishing games on PC when they have a cloud service on PC that it will negatively impact? etc etc
It all smacks of managerial incompetence and Jim Ryan really seems like he will be the John Sculley of PlayStation.
Even down to their acquisitions... there is no real strategic value to them. Except for maybe BP.
Japan Population (2024) - Worldometer
Population of Japan: current, historical, and projected population, growth rate, immigration, median age, total fertility rate (TFR), population density, urbanization, urban population, country's share of world population, and global rank. Data tables, maps, charts, and live population clock
www.worldometers.info
Switch is not the successor to WiiU.... it is the successor to WiiU and the DS / 3DS.
If you compare DS sales rates to Switch, even ignoring WiiU.... Switch is selling at a far slower rate.
That said... recent sales data from steam shows that PC is not an answer to PlayStations desire to sell more software and neither is cloud / PSNow.
The games on Steam barely make it over 1 million, with a 30% cut to Steam, it doesn't expand the userbase of the PS ecosystem and adds momentum to PC as a competing hardware platform.
Cloud has failed at every turn, announcing that it is better than ever and a few tenths of a second faster I/O times will not make people run to that distribution method.
Sony really need to look at Nintendo.... Nintendo are experts, so are Apple. What did Jobs always say 'Do less but do it really well'.
Nintendo focused on making one really great product that appealed to as many people as possible.
In contrast PlayStation under Jim Ryan seems to be flailing wildly.... expanding to PC, mobile, cloud, Film, TV all at the expense of their core business and core consumer base.
Why does Sony have 2 mobile divisions? Why did they sell SOE only to decide later they wanted in on PC but then made it at the expense of PS exclusivity?
Why are they publishing games on PC when they have a cloud service on PC that it will negatively impact? etc etc
It all smacks of managerial incompetence and Jim Ryan really seems like he will be the John Sculley of PlayStation.
Even down to their acquisitions... there is no real strategic value to them. Except for maybe BP.
Japans population growth is through the floor, the median age of the population is rising rapidly..... people do not like to address the fact that Nintendo had to make massive sacrifices to create a sustainable / successful model.
Japan Population (2024) - Worldometer
Population of Japan: current, historical, and projected population, growth rate, immigration, median age, total fertility rate (TFR), population density, urbanization, urban population, country's share of world population, and global rank. Data tables, maps, charts, and live population clock
Switch is not the successor to WiiU.... it is the successor to WiiU and the DS / 3DS.
If you compare DS sales rates to Switch, even ignoring WiiU.... Switch is selling at a far slower rate.
Well Switch has already eclipsed 3DS+Wii U worldwide and is rapidly catching up to both combined in Japan.
Hiska-Kun's graph
The data in the OP is fascinating, thanks for sharing. I'm not sure the first-party-software-share really shows the point being made, because it fluctuates up and down throughout the years and considering Sony eliminated their handheld line (i.e. their best chance at performing well in the market) over the past 5 years, I'd say "stagnation" is a good result for them, particularly given that the 2020 figures bounced back.
The overall software picture is much more representative of the true situation.
The situation with PlayStation in Japan is fascinating and has been discussed at length on most of the forums I go to and many of the posts in here sum up the situation well. I don't really have much to add. Sony as a company have pivoted away from what they were a generation or two ago and given their balance sheets year on year I can pretty much understand why they're doing it, but it always is a shame that the kind of creative projects from them we used to see are long gone.
At least the smaller third parties have found a new home on Switch, which I think is important since I like a lot of them!
The overall software picture is much more representative of the true situation.
The situation with PlayStation in Japan is fascinating and has been discussed at length on most of the forums I go to and many of the posts in here sum up the situation well. I don't really have much to add. Sony as a company have pivoted away from what they were a generation or two ago and given their balance sheets year on year I can pretty much understand why they're doing it, but it always is a shame that the kind of creative projects from them we used to see are long gone.
At least the smaller third parties have found a new home on Switch, which I think is important since I like a lot of them!
Well Switch has already eclipsed 3DS+Wii U worldwide and is rapidly catching up to both combined in Japan.
Hiska-Kun's graph
Yes, it is possible that cannibalizing the home console market actually created more opportunities with the current units flexibility etc...
Will be interesting to see how it does over the next year or two.
My overall point was just that Nintendo adapted expertly to a crisis....by focusing on less, while PlayStation is trying to do everything but quality is not being met with most things IMO and it is distracting from core business.
Just a business philosophy perspective.
France software sales 2019 (physical) :
01. NSW - 7.214.435 <44,47%>
02. PS4 - 6.506.483 <40,11%>
03. XB1 - 1.353.763 <8,34%>
04. 3DS - 806.548 <5,00%>
05. PC - 199.732 <1,23%>
06. OTH - 141.730 <0,87%>
00. ALL - 16.222.691 <100,00%>
If there is some interest I can prepare a thread witch stats for France market from 2008 to 2020.
Last edited:
Not sourcing various arguments after mod post
And UK is a particular strong market for Sony. Moreso than other European countries.
With France being Nintendo-land and Germany being PC-land, that's already the three biggest markets of Europe out of the picture and I've never heard of PlayStation dominance in any other European country. Eastern Europe skews towards PC-gaming, too. I stand by my comment that Europe is not dominated by PlayStation. It's a common misconception, though, where people think Sony's fine "because Europe". Europe has no permant preferences. Except PC, that's always here to stay.
Hostility and antagonizing another user - You can make your point while still being cordial
I'm sorry, but this is just hilarious to me.
Like, really, really, funny. I usually only see this kind of a delirium when it comes to political matters, but do you really see "consistent" with those numbers? The range is from 27.6 million to 16.7 million. There's nothing consistent about them and prior to 2020 there's a pretty clear sharp declining trend, same with PlayStation's numbers. Please, I know it may hurt inside a slight bit, but attempt some manner of objectivity when describing the data. If you want a look at "consistent" data, that would be the first data set, regarding SIE/SCE first-party retail sales in Japan, though there you decided to use the word "stagnating" rather than "consistent". Isn't that interesting?
Yes please. More info threads the better! Thank you
Well though it went down and declined, that was more due to Nintendo worse era and then from 2017+ started to increase despite only 1 major platform instead of 2, so overall it’s much more better than it could of been. Consistent might not be the right word but there post comes across great imo.
No need to go a bit overboard
Edit: not trying to knock ya or anything, but please be a bit more mindful so we can all get along nicely
I don't think it's because of a lack of trying though. We talk about Sony letting Vita die but they clearly had a plan, that they executed fairly well, to move Vita support over to the PS4.
FWIW I don't think the UK is considered particularly strong for Sony, it's the market they face the fiercest competition from Xbox.
Spain was traditionally considered "Sony-land" when it comes to Europe.
PlayStation first party has exploded on PS4 in sales worldwide but has remained low in Japan. Stagnation is correct when consistent is lower sales.
Japan simply isn't interested in what Sony has to offer, I think it's as simple as that.
Sony made games are selling more than they ever did WW, yet Japan doesn't seem to follow (on the contrary).
In the end they don't really need each other, Japan is perfectly fine playing Nintendo & mobile games while Sony is fine selling their games elsewhere.
Big 3rd parties are also doing good (iirc we recently saw a graph for Capcom showing how their sales are more and more WW), but regarding smaller 3rd parties, if they are dependent on japanese sales then they have to put their games elsewhere, because betting on PS atm seems ill advised.
PS sales will increase in Japan when big games from 3rd parties start to hit (Final Fantasy, Monster Hunter, Kingdom Hearts, Dragon Quest, GTA, etc) but they'll always pale when compared to Nintendo stuff.
Sony made games are selling more than they ever did WW, yet Japan doesn't seem to follow (on the contrary).
In the end they don't really need each other, Japan is perfectly fine playing Nintendo & mobile games while Sony is fine selling their games elsewhere.
Big 3rd parties are also doing good (iirc we recently saw a graph for Capcom showing how their sales are more and more WW), but regarding smaller 3rd parties, if they are dependent on japanese sales then they have to put their games elsewhere, because betting on PS atm seems ill advised.
PS sales will increase in Japan when big games from 3rd parties start to hit (Final Fantasy, Monster Hunter, Kingdom Hearts, Dragon Quest, GTA, etc) but they'll always pale when compared to Nintendo stuff.
The perception comes from the fact that the console market is often viewed in isolation.... even without reference to Nintendo and Switch.
In that framing PlayStation has 70-90% of most markets in Europe.
Also most 3rd party, new game sales are made on PS platforms.
I find PC so broad in terms of hardware and software preferences that it is hard to quantify and compare to a uniformly performing console, so when you include it, it really makes things very murky. Many people only play a single game on PC and a game like LoL can be played on virtually anything.
So, my question would be.... is an old office computer being used for LoL a competitor to a PS5 or even a PS4?
I believe this is why we see such lethargic sales of the ported PS games on Steam.... barely breaking 1 million sales each.
Well, it is worth over 10 million unit sales.... so they really need to come up with a solution.... just surrendering an entire market is really squandering decades of work. Even if population trends down and people prefer mobile....
There are several things they could do... including fast tracking a smaller unit and getting more exclusives aimed at the region..... along with buying studios in the area and leveraging their anime IP's.....
This stuff isn't rocket science but they seem not to be even trying and sometimes it seems like they actively sabotage their own efforts.
Sony also sells more PlayStations in Europe than anywhere else.....nearly 50 million units of PS4 for example, 10 million ahead of USA.
PlayStation 4 lifetime unit sales worldwide 2023 | Statista
Sony's fourth generation console, the PlayStation 4, was first released worldwide in 2013.
www.statista.com
It is basically half of their insall-base...
Last edited by a moderator:
As long as they can secure the games that will actually move units, which I mentioned above, they'll keep attracting a good amount of those million of people.
I don't think Japan is big enough for Sony atm for them to be making big moves almost solely focused on them. That said they did hire that Capcom dude recently to oversee their 3rd party relations in Asia so we'll see what comes out of that.
Well, with so many western publishers facing challenges in development and legal forms... I think betting on home talent in Japan would be wise.
I always thought Square would be a great fit for Sony with their massive well of IP's that can be adapted to various media. Especially since MSFT bought Zenimax, it would balance things out a little. I know that chances of this happening are thin though.
I also think ArcSys would be a great get, that fits with the anime push Sony has going on....
If Square were not interested, I would suggest something like MiHoYo in China.... Genshin is massive and incorporating exclusive items into the PSPlus subscription would result in many mobile users getting a sub, revenues would jump on that alone and the MTX's.
Just a few ideas that could help in Japan but also globally....
I would also urge Sony to try and secure a popular shooter given the current landscape but that is totally unrelated to what this thread is about.
I really don't see Sony trying to buy companies with that kind of scope.
Certainly not under the current management... which is a huge part of the problem.
Many investors point out Sony's strong cash flow and their lack of big reinvestment.
They already lock down most of SEs big titles, it doesnt make sense for PS unless its to prevent MS or Nintendo from buying them.
Ok I will send that to moderators when the thread will be ready (probably next month, time to compil data).
Last edited:
I'm sorry, but I need some receipts for that number. We know for a fact that Sony isn't dominating to that degree in any of the 3 biggest European countries.
What are 'most markets in Europe' where Sony has 70-90% of the console market?
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I already made posts regarding Playstation in Japan at Resetera and in a prior MC thread here. I'll add what a massive blunder to completely fail to transition and consolidate their PS3 and PSV base to PS4; devs who used to see a 50/50-55/45 split just had half their sales go poof if they didn't make a Switch version. Sony was not caught off guard by this they had years worth of trends and internal data to show what was going to happen and had ample time to react accordingly. I disagree but for arguments sake if the PS Vita had a bad software sales environment for JP developers, I wonder what people will think of PS5 sales in the end if things don't change? PS5 with all the "major" IPs (mainline FF, DQ, MH, Persona, etc.) struggling to hit PSV software sales numbers (which had only one big IP in Minecraft and if you want to stretch it a Persona port) will speak volumes about modern Playstation as a brand in Japan if current trends continue. Sony needs to cultivate a software sales environment that is conducive for creating evergreens and building a wave that their Japanese 3rd party partners can ride on. It's not a zero-sum game, they can succeed both in Japan and the rest of the world.
But is the ROI of "succeeding" in Japan worth more than investing further into the growth outside of Japan?
ORIGINAL STORY 30TH JUNE: Sony Europe president Jim Ryan is bullish - to say the least - about PlayStation 4 performance in Europe.
"We have a very significant market leadership," he told VG247. "Well, we have market leadership in every country in Europe, and have very significant market leadership in continental Europe. Extremely significant. I don't think market share's any less than 70 per cent, and frequently greater than 90 per cent in continental Europe."
Sony: PS4 market share "frequently greater than 90 per cent in continental Europe"
UPDATE 1ST JULY: Microsoft's Phil Spencer, as if in conversation with Sony's Jim Ryan, has admitted "we [Xbox] need to …
www.eurogamer.net
That was back in 2015, before any of the PS4 big hitters landed.
You can look now on Smyths.ie the biggest toy and games retailer in Ireland where Xbox is fairly competitive historically and see that Series S is not in any risk of shortage... and it is just a few weeks before Christmas.
(press 'select store' to see list of individual stores and stock)
Well said... I also find it sad that PS have bought a porting studio and we have so many great Vita games like MGS PW, Golden Abyss, GOW COO etc that are unplayable on a PS5.... many of these games deserve a full remake but resources are being put into PC ports instead.
Why are they adding to PC instead of enriching their own platform? It is bizarre.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry, but you're using a time where Nintendo was still struggling with Wii U. That's just not fair debate style. Hope you can see that.
Not sourcing various arguments after mod post
Well, I consider switch last generation and primarily portable.... so why compare it to PS5 at all?
If you can choose when and where to compare, so can everyone else and it makes it extremely complicated for everyone.... I hope you see that.
Anyway I believe Nintendo isn't even included in his percentages there, just Xbox and PS4. So no need to worry about it.
I think one of the things that has benefitted Nintendo as time has gone one and hurt PlayStation more and more as time has gone on is the change of entry point to the hobby. The last time a PlayStation was a mass market hit in Japan was the PSP.
Effectively as people have left the hobby/ecosystem on PlayStation they haven't been replaced by a new one. It's much more likely a new entrant to the hobby is playing mobile games, and if not mobile then they've been playing on Nintendo handhelds for the last decade.
It's probably hurt more with Switch as the consolidation of platforms meant the few older skewing properties Nintendo has have been brought together(Fire Emblem, Xenoblade, 3D Zelda) and as more of the midtier stuff has gone multiplatform it means PlayStation has even lost its edge as the platform for older teens/young adults.
One of the consequences that has perhaps been underestimated is that even if Japanese publishers want to aim for worldwide success and make decisions based on that the future talent pool's preferences are going to be dictated by domestic preferences. We've already seen publishers talk about the struggle of attracting talent in Japan interested in working on console games but that's only going to get worse and even those that are interested in working on console games might prefer to work on Nintendo consoles in the future.
On a related note the decade long(or longer) schism between the most popular console and the most supported console has also hurt third parties and is a major reason that porting to Switch/going multiplatform doesn't instantly double/triple sales for long running franchises. They've lost a decade of brand familiarity with the wider audience.
Effectively as people have left the hobby/ecosystem on PlayStation they haven't been replaced by a new one. It's much more likely a new entrant to the hobby is playing mobile games, and if not mobile then they've been playing on Nintendo handhelds for the last decade.
It's probably hurt more with Switch as the consolidation of platforms meant the few older skewing properties Nintendo has have been brought together(Fire Emblem, Xenoblade, 3D Zelda) and as more of the midtier stuff has gone multiplatform it means PlayStation has even lost its edge as the platform for older teens/young adults.
One of the consequences that has perhaps been underestimated is that even if Japanese publishers want to aim for worldwide success and make decisions based on that the future talent pool's preferences are going to be dictated by domestic preferences. We've already seen publishers talk about the struggle of attracting talent in Japan interested in working on console games but that's only going to get worse and even those that are interested in working on console games might prefer to work on Nintendo consoles in the future.
On a related note the decade long(or longer) schism between the most popular console and the most supported console has also hurt third parties and is a major reason that porting to Switch/going multiplatform doesn't instantly double/triple sales for long running franchises. They've lost a decade of brand familiarity with the wider audience.
Since a current talk here is PS 1st party not doing well in Japan, I decided to go after some data from MC Top 1000 to get a clear picture. Before reading, keep in mind: used sales not counted. I noticed that PS games do quite well in the used sales charts. And obviously, no digital data.
The Last Guardian: 130.030K
Bloodborne: 38.722 PS Hits + 52.355 Complete Edition + 217.720 Base Edition = 308.797k
Uncharted 4: 48.335k PS Hits Edition + 194.474k = 242.809k
Horizon Zero Dawn: 95.559k PS Hits Edition + 228.772k = 324.331k
God of War: 117.545k
Spider-Man: 316.791k + 36.929k goty edition (190% boost from last year due the new one btw) = 353.720k
Days Gone: 204.102k
Death Stranding: 323.707k
Detroit Become Human: 62.000k value selection + 112.133k = 174.133k
The Last of Us 2: 239.598k
Ghost of Tsushima: 473.612k
GT Sport: 86.931k PS Hits edition + 271.311k = 358.242k
Not really too far from most big 3rd party releases this gen, save from big stuff like Final Fantasy and Monster Hunter.
The Last Guardian: 130.030K
Bloodborne: 38.722 PS Hits + 52.355 Complete Edition + 217.720 Base Edition = 308.797k
Uncharted 4: 48.335k PS Hits Edition + 194.474k = 242.809k
Horizon Zero Dawn: 95.559k PS Hits Edition + 228.772k = 324.331k
God of War: 117.545k
Spider-Man: 316.791k + 36.929k goty edition (190% boost from last year due the new one btw) = 353.720k
Days Gone: 204.102k
Death Stranding: 323.707k
Detroit Become Human: 62.000k value selection + 112.133k = 174.133k
The Last of Us 2: 239.598k
Ghost of Tsushima: 473.612k
GT Sport: 86.931k PS Hits edition + 271.311k = 358.242k
Not really too far from most big 3rd party releases this gen, save from big stuff like Final Fantasy and Monster Hunter.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
From their point of view at this point I would say no. For context my original stance on this matter is that Sony at this point is using Japanese games solely as a differentiator against Xbox overseas. For example the SE AAA JP money hats, I wouldn't be surprised to see more of them as this gen progresses quite frankly as it's easier in the short term for Sony instead of building those experiences in-house. Nintendo can build software that succeeds everywhere I don't see why Sony couldn't long term. Games like Ghost of Tsushima and Nier proved the appetite is there IMO.
I can't fault them for 3rd party decisions but for 1st party games absolutely.