I'll just ride right past the part where we start hauling out exclusive lists again and the inevitable 'Those don't count!' arguments begin, and point out that ultimately, all Sony really had to do in order to achieve a strong global lead is remain competitively close in the U.S.. Outside its typical markets- U.S., U.K., and I thiiiink some Central and/or South American markets- the Xbox franchise is at a pretty massive disadvantage.
Unlike Sony, who's had three prior generations to establish fanbases for various franchises, to say nothing for establishing the brand of their console in general, Microsoft's generally been second fiddle over there. So if Microsoft hauls out a new Halo in the middle of long-held Sony territory? Nobody's going to care, regardless of the quality of the title, because to put it simply, Halo's just not exciting. Like, at all. And waiting ages to actually launch in these markets (giving the PS4 the same head start that the 360 enjoyed in the U.S. last generation) proooobably didn't help either, because by the time they did, the PS4 was already well on its way to building momentum in markets it had already held the home-team advantage.
So, even if Sony had less exclusives (again, riding right past list wars,) they're ultimately going to have exclusives that will strike more of a chord with audiences in the global market. Mcrosoft would face a massive uphill fight trying to get that audience to care about any of their heaviest hitters, requiring an advertising blitzkrieg that would cost a truly absurd amount of money, and possibly not even work regardless... because in a lot of those markets, Gears and Halo just don't hit very hard. Maybe titles like Scalebound will have better luck, it remains to be seen.
So, we've established that Sony holds sway in numerous markets, enough to give it a sizable lead over the Xbox One all on its own. All they need to do now is hold Microsoft's previous strongholds. Not even WIN them, (though that's a bonus,) just keep up with them, and not lose to the extent the PS3 lost against the 360 in the U.S.
Let us go with the assumption that most of Sony's exclusive titles just generally don't appeal to the typical American audience. (I honestly don't know, all I can speak for are my personal tastes, which lean more towards the PS4's roster. But you know, different strokes, etc.) That's the point of securing stuff like Call of Duty and other triple-A things that were previously very much an Xbox staple; basically, the message here is 'Okay, not interested in our roster of Japanese titles, or smaller games, or even upcoming first party exclusives that don't have guns? Baseball not your thing, story-driven platformers a no-no, puzzle-driven first-person games not interesting, aaaand no real stiffy at whatever the heck Tearaway is? Well, the upcoming Ratchet and Clank has g- too cartoony? Okay! FINE. Well here's that series that has LOTS of guns and grit, and a shiny bundle for it, and you can get the DLC on our platform earlier. HAPPY?!'
Becoming the go-to console for the biggest titles in the biggest genre in the U.S. served the Xbox 360 very well, as having both Halo AND being the 'CoD' console just made it the obvious shooter-box. Sony can't have Halo, obviously, and their own work on first-person shooters have been hit-and-miss, so the inevitable counter-move is to get a foothold on the OTHER Juggernaut shooter franchise.
In any case, the principle applies to Microsoft filling the Uncharted-shaped hole in their roster with Tomb Raider's year-long exclusivity. It's just inevitable to bolster your vulnerabilities, which can be found in the lineups of both platforms. =P
Log in to comment