Xbox Head Phil Spencer recently said that Microsoft plans to focus more on first-party games as opposed to third-party deals. During an interview with GameSpot, he was asked how difficult it is to increase market share with Sony grabbing a lot of third-party deals, to which he responded by saying that it has nothing to do with market share.
So, they don’t “gobble” the deals up. They buy them. You know, I read the same things you do, and I know some people think it’s somehow less expensive to sign third-party exclusives if you have a bigger market-share. I can tell you, it has nothing to do with market share.
When you go in to do a deal, with a third party, that third party has its own view of the global market and the value of it. And they should, they should think about their assets and how valuable they are, just like anyone would when they are selling their goods.
Spencer went on to say that focusing on first-party games might be creatively more difficult than signing third-party deals, but that it’s “just a decision” and doesn’t necessarily make things easier or harder. He also pointed out that Sony has some “great first-party franchises.”
I’ll point out too that Sony has some great first-party franchises. I’m a big fan of Uncharted, I thought that looked great at E3. I really admire the team at Naughty Dog, the team at Polyphony.
Spencer then quoted the example of Destiny, stating that although it’s a third-party game that Sony has a deal for, he loves playing it.
Do you think third-party deals have any correlation to market share? Let us know your thoughts.