PS4 Best-Selling Console in the US in 2017, Call of Duty: WWII Best-Selling Game - News

Ok, I just caught it was just for December 2017. Geeeez....give me the top 10 for ALL of 2017 please. December means nothing to me. I'm sure Horizon would be in the top 5 then.

You just don’t get it, right?!

No, he doesn't. Here's under the impression that first party titles are for sales, when they are in fact for attention interest to the platform so that big titles like Call of Duty sell more on PS4. He doesn't recognize that the whole business model of a console is to make money on licensing, not necessarily first party titles.

Wait for God of War and Spiderman dude.

@Errorist76 What's there to get, Here is another article showing that 1st parties aren't the be all end all for consoles that many make it out to be. Only one 1st party exclusive hits the top 10, in 2017 and at the bottom of that 10 mind you. Rinse and repeat just like last year. 1st party Exclusive in my book are incredibly overrated especially on this site.

Everybody and their granny have explained you that it's not just the top 10 selling franchises that matter. I'm not going to explain it to you again just because you seem too stubborn to accept reality.

I don't know if I can dumb it down far enough, but I'll try:

Sony doesn't just make money off of games and hardware they sell. They also take a cut of every game sold on the system for licensing. Let's say for the sake of argument that it's something like 20%, meaning about $12USD for a new game. This is in contrast to a brand new game, which we'll go ahead and say is about 80% profit- $48USD.

Let's also say we've got an exclusive game that sold a million copies. That's $48 a copy, so Sony is looking at roughly $48m. Great numbers, yeah? But wait, what's that?

Is that FIFA 18?

Oh, so we've got a game now with 8m copies sold. So at the 20% rate we have.... Oh my. $96 million, twice what the exclusive made. Oh but that's just one... Wait.

Is that GTAV? It sold over 16 million copies? That's $192 million? Well that must be a fluke.

... is that Call of Duty: Black Ops 3 at just nearly 15 million copies?

So it would seem we can make money off of super-popular titles, even if we don't necessarily own them. If only that other similar console wasn't here. What can I do to make money and simultaneously draw more people to the system? Oh, I know! We'll make exclusive content for our system that can't be played on the competitor's platform. That will draw people in, and then they will also purchase the super-popular titles on our system! We'll make more money than it would seem on our own property, and then we'll make licensing green when they buy the next iteration of the crowd favorites!

Valve may not use exclusives to draw people in, but they don't need to in order to succeed because they won the Second Age of PC Gaming before it even started, having been the first company with a reliable name to release a storefront that, for the most part, worked.

Nintendo goes full sail the other direction, instead relying on tried and true, nostalgia-fueled exclusives in which they collect all the profit. This is probably why they have fairly little incentive to encourage third party titles: why do that hen the next Zelda will easily break 10m?

And Xbox.... Is suffering. The only users they have are ones that were heavily invested in Xbox and their friends. They need exclusives to bring in new users (like myself), and I hope that's the positive change they're talking about for E3.

@Errorist76 Mate I don't care what kids on the internet think, there grannies or there mums and dads. The problem with this is that people just go with what the majority like to believe. Link me stats not your statements. This article plus many others state exactly what I am saying. You want to go against my word well tell me how many 1st party games on both PS4 and X1 toped the top 10 in 2017 in sales? Your answer is right there. Weather you want to admit I am right is a different story. that's your problem right there.

Way to go upvoting yourself.

Azuren you basically just proved my point without agreeing with me. Exclusives are only there to help, there Not the Be all and End all for a console. There are heaps of ways to sell a console to customers, exclusive are only a small portion of that. If exclusives mattered than the WiiU would have been a high selling console.. oh wait it wasn't, exclusives didn't save it. PC don't need exclusives yet gamers continue to jump on the PC band wagon. The industry grows by how a product is marketed and its advertisements. without it top rated games wouldn't sell and the shittier games that are marketed better will outsell the better games.

Like the Xbox. Right. Got it.

Oh wait, no.

You say I'm proving your point, but all I'm proving is your gross misunderstanding of the point of exclusives and why they DO matter. Just look at the Xbox's dwindling state to third place: you think that's not because experiences are being offered exclusively elsewhere? Of course you don't, you don't like evidence. Here's a good indication:

What happens to Switch sales when a Mario releases? What happens to PS4 sales when an Uncharted releases? Do they remain the same? Or do they bolster the numbers available to buy the big name games? Compare that to when Xbox announced a slew of old games being added to Backwards Compatibility. Hmm. Let's make it a bit more fair for Xbox and compare the release of a new game to the release of BC on XB1: roughly equal. A project to build an emulator and optimize games to run on it had roughly the same boost as an Uncharted game. What about the X? An entire new hardware line amounted to a Zelda release.

Your constant evaluation of the Wii U seems to have one basic flaw in the thought process involved: you seem to imply that the Wii U had no gains from exclusives, when in fact they were the only gains. The only time Wii U had good sales was when a Zelda, or Mario, or something else was released on it. The Wii U didn't fail because exclusives don't matter: the Wii U failed because it was so bad it outweighed the golden exclusives released for it.

Also, thanks for the downvote. Glad to know you'll not only shamelessly upvote yourself, but will also downvote when called out on it.

I was just playing two quality third-party exclusive PlayStation titles this morning neither one of them on the top 10 charts. That's because the PlayStation platform has quality and quantity which makes the system an appealing purchase. This is why not only does it sell well what is the best selling console off this generation. And hats off to Nintendo for doing so well. Just look at their top 10 and we see why.

Gasp How DARE you bring logic into this, Ka-pi?

I am completely late to the party and I know Azz is banned, but here is my refutation to Azz's argument from a week ago for those who are interested. It contains statements from NPD analyst Mat Piscatella and a survey from the International Data Corporation (IDC).

Exclusive games do not need to be the de facto driver of hardware sales, but they can be significant contributors. And the more exclusives you have, the greater the cumulative effect.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8692176

It isn't that Nintendo doesn't know what third parties arw. It's just that their first party games are more popular. Third parties have had some success on the Switch, though.

*are

I just love it when I make a typo on my phone.

Some success. Operative word being "some".

What's wrong with what I typed?

Nothing's wing with it. I fully agree. What I typed in the first post was hyperbole; I don't really believe Nintendo doesn't know what third parties are. But they do seem to have an issue with obtaining them.