Report: Online console games bring in more revenue
by Kyle Orland 
{ Sep 7th 2007 at 7:30AM }
It seems like just yesterday when online functionality was a new, exotic feature that was far from required for most games. Now, it seems, online functionality is practically a must if a publisher wants to squeeze as much money as possible from a release. Reuters is reporting on a new study by research firm Electronic Entertainment Design and Research that shows, so far in this generation, console games that allow online play bring in nearly twice as much revenue as games that don't.This isn't that surprising, considering mega-sellers like Madden, Gears of War, and Resistance are weighing on the online side. Would these same exact games make half the money without an online component? It's hard to say, but it's definitely a possibility, and one that should worry online-shy Nintendo. According to the study, only two percent of Wii games included an online component as of June 1, compared to 23 percent of PS3 games and a whopping 77 percent of Xbox 360 titles. That could translate to a lot of early revenue left on the table for the big N. Look, just make the Super Smash Bros. Brawl's online functionality relatively painless and all will be forgiven, all right?
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
copa @ Sep 7th 2007 7:47AM
Nintendo is quaking in their boots, which happen to be made from $100 bills.
hegemonyhog @ Sep 7th 2007 7:50AM
How much is that swayed by the 360's sales lead? The console with the most units out in the wild also has the strongest online component - you could just as easily say that the 360 has sold more games than the other two systems so far, and it would be just as accurate.
Last generation, you could have easily said that games that used a Square button sold more than games that used a Y button, but that doesn't mean that every system should have a Square button.
Jason B @ Sep 7th 2007 10:02AM
I understand your point and you could be correct. But I think that it is becoming more and more evident to game publishers and developers that there is more to gaming than just immersing ones self in a game's environment and story alone. When you add in the social aspects of online and especially cooperative online game play you really broaden the appeal of a game. Don't get me wrong I loved losing myself in games like Bioshock and Oblivion but I also really enjoy meeting up with friends for our Thursday night Gears sessions.
OnimushaSoki @ Sep 7th 2007 8:10AM
I personally choose games that have online or multiplayer capability over those that don't. More replay value than I'd receive replaying the game on some half-assed "extra mode".
...And as I pleaded for yesterday(and many months prior), please quotably confirm Smash Bros Brawl will be online, Nintendo. I can't stand the dumb friend code/Wii code system, but I'll grin & bear it just to have online access in Brawl(and Mario Kart Wii).
Crono @ Sep 7th 2007 10:32AM
yeah, everybody says Brawl is online, but Nintendo hasn't said that it would be since they first announced the game was in development.
If it doesn't have online, keeping it a secret up until launch (like they did with MP3) is only going to hurt them. If they let it out now, the community can "get over it" before launch.
zero @ Sep 7th 2007 8:15AM
I do agree that multiplayer extends the life of a game; however, it also seems like the single player experience has begun to suffer. Obviously, this doesn't apply to every game. I would say in general, that if a game has great multiplayer, the single player campaign suffers and vice versa.
Houp @ Sep 7th 2007 8:26AM
Does this account for Oblivion IV as well? This game had no online features, but had a lot of content (Read $$$) as much if not more than the cost of the original title available for download. And yes... I'm one of those suckers that bought the Horse Armor...
Gimbal @ Sep 7th 2007 8:30AM
Oh no's...Bioshock is going to tank.
Jules @ Sep 7th 2007 9:11AM
OMG this is so dumb. I could've told you that online games could bring in more money because of DLC. It's not rocket science that games that sell add on items/stages could make more moola than those that don't.
I disagree that online games should be implemented by everything. Infact i think that focusing on the online side of things is ridiculous. The more online games that come out, the less chance that you'll actually find someone to play with. I mean take Halo 2 for example. I don't have any figures to back my statement up but i'm sure that the number of online players of that game has gone down in the past year. I put that down to newer shooters such as gears/rainbow 6 coming out and so people playing them as well. Now when Halo 3 comes out i'm sure most Halo 2 players will play that online instead. So eventually it will get to the stage when it will be difficult to find someone to play halo 2 when you want to play it.
Now take into account all 3 consoles, with new online games coming out everyweek, and the millions of people in different time zones. We will soon get to the point when most of the games you attempt to play online will not have any players, except for new releases. So this is why i'm all for single player games and less so for multiplayer one. And it particularly annoys me when people whine about games with no online stuff - as long as single player is good, the online should be just a nice bonus, as it will be the single player that outlasts the online multiplayer in the end.
jadenguy @ Sep 7th 2007 9:17AM
i think we can safely say that there is a segment of our society that is well served by highly online gaming. several, really. there's the young working professional with a job and not too many IRL friends, and especially not work friends because he's got a career and an image he's molding that 'playing games' and drinking and swearing might not be beneficial to. and he needs to play with somebody. there's the kid that's got an internet connection, probably plans doing something with computers when he graduates, thinks the people at school are mostly tools, and doesn't want to get dressed and ready to go all the way to his friend's house when he knows he can get almost the same experience with him on the net. then there are the citizens of the internet, turned onto the experience at some time and stuck with it, who live here by choice as naturally as some would live in a used record store, who have a lot of online friends. and i hear rumblings of stay at home moms being a growing demo, certainly. so somebody is buying online because it's better than offline for them. and if the games being made werent' online, somebody will make them, necessity being mother of invention and all that.
TRUTH @ Sep 7th 2007 9:33AM
Its all about ONLINE, Well @ least 4 me!!!
Meowzers @ Sep 7th 2007 2:52PM
Personally, I don't care about online. When I see a game, I want it because it's a damn good game. I hate people, and the real world is a pain in the ass enough. Online though, no one knows how to play properly, use proper grammar, and most people just try to be something they're obviously not.
I've gone through 20 years of gaming without Online crap, I can keep doing it.
Burnt Meatloaf @ Sep 8th 2007 5:17AM
Cheers. Online experiences are horribly inconsistent. That pretty much defeats the purpose of any crafted project that comes from a professional developer.
Where's all this groundbreaking AI we were promised? Rock stupid AI is still the norm everywhere!
Mr Khan @ Sep 7th 2007 4:39PM
This seems more of stating the obvious, online games offer easier access to multiplayer (especially for only children like me, who rarely buys games that match his friends' tastes)
But i've always preferred a good, challenging, single player component (but not one like Strikers: Charged's marathon mode, having to play through all 3 cups with the same team ftl), but even multiplayer focused games like Mario Kart can still offer that hectic 150cc/Mirror Mode madness. I know that higher selling online games won't mean the decline of single player games (that would be as idiotic as the argument that casual game influx means the downfall of hardcore titles), but i don't like how games that do include online play sometimes tend to have a crippled offline component