-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NPD Sales Numbers for November 2008
- Thread starter EviLore
- Start date
timetokill said:
The same studio worked on Wii Music, Animal Crossing, and Wii Sports Resort at the same time. And those were the big showcase games at E308. Everything else was "Oh yeah, the SMG team and the Zelda team and the Pikmin team are ALL working on new things." IntSys and EAD Studio 1 (or whatever the fuck it's called) were pretty much the only internal teams carrying the two platforms after March.
timetokill
Banned
AniHawk said:
Sounds like a top-tier team to me. Those are some really important titles to be working on.
Well, I see Activision up there drinking some victory champagne with GH WT. The problem will always be the same; third parties don't know for sure how the approach the Wii and unless someone gives it a shot, the Wii and developers will be stuck in a neverending cycle of doubt. Square-Enix now gives it a try with DQ X.timetokill said:
Yes, EAD. But that was only a small team.timetokill said:
For this year we have 3rd party numbers up through July for both. 360 was out-pacing it then YTD by about 2 million or so IIRC. We have numbers for Nintendo and pretty good estimates through September for the 360. It was still out-pacing it up until that point by 2 million give or take with a conservative estimate for 360. We don't really have any 3rd party comparisons beyond that point. We also know through mid November Wii had about 80 more 3rd party games released on the platform YTD.
RattleHead_
Member
Would be interesting to know the number of 3rd party games for each system to help put that graph into perspective.Armada said:
Joe Molotov
Member
diss said:
Some of us had HDTVs last gen.
Just for the record, I can come up with a much better hypothesis than "Nintendo is magical" that also is much more logically robust.
I think virtually all game publishers approach game design in a slightly different way from Nintendo. I think companies like EA and Ubisoft approach a game and ask, "What demographic does this appeal to?" And then work their hardest to make it appeal even more to them. If it's a shooter, it's going to appeal to males age 16-35. Therefore, add more profanity and violence, add somber tones and grizzled men. If the game has animals in it, put as much pink on the cover as you can, and make the game as cute as possible. This makes the game appeal more to 16-35 year old males (or 6-14 year old girls, respecitvely), but also tends to make other demographics even less inclined to purchase that software. That's the approach though, and in the past its worked: pick a demographic, and nail it as hard as you possibly can.
By comparison, Nintendo seem to approach all demographics -- boys, girls, men, women, and the elderly -- with a single game. I think this does have a weakness: these types of games tend to appeal less strongly to any single demographic than a game that was targeted exclusively to them would, but overall tends to sell more. Put more simply, a Nintendo game may grab 1/3 of each demographic, but appeal to all demographics in the process, while an EA game may appeal to 4/5 of a single demographic, but have virtually no appeal outside of that.
This may seem like a fairly minor distinction, but it dramatically changes how games sell on a Nintendo system. I think the Wii is built on the backs of a wide variety of consumers: boys, girls, men, women, and the elderly. All of them. Hardcore gamers and casual ones, old school gamers who like the VC and new wave ones, too.
In that particular environment, companies like Nintendo do well, because that particular hardware has a wide variety of consumers. Games that target a single demographic -- whether that demographic be exclusively 16-35 year old males like Call of Duty or exclusively 6-14 year old girls like Dogz -- will do less well, although the user base is big enough now that they can do well enough if executed properly.
That is why they struggle. That's my theory, at least. This is something they can alter, but it's very challenging. Changing your entire philosophy of game design is a very difficult thing to do, even if it may not sound like it.
I think virtually all game publishers approach game design in a slightly different way from Nintendo. I think companies like EA and Ubisoft approach a game and ask, "What demographic does this appeal to?" And then work their hardest to make it appeal even more to them. If it's a shooter, it's going to appeal to males age 16-35. Therefore, add more profanity and violence, add somber tones and grizzled men. If the game has animals in it, put as much pink on the cover as you can, and make the game as cute as possible. This makes the game appeal more to 16-35 year old males (or 6-14 year old girls, respecitvely), but also tends to make other demographics even less inclined to purchase that software. That's the approach though, and in the past its worked: pick a demographic, and nail it as hard as you possibly can.
By comparison, Nintendo seem to approach all demographics -- boys, girls, men, women, and the elderly -- with a single game. I think this does have a weakness: these types of games tend to appeal less strongly to any single demographic than a game that was targeted exclusively to them would, but overall tends to sell more. Put more simply, a Nintendo game may grab 1/3 of each demographic, but appeal to all demographics in the process, while an EA game may appeal to 4/5 of a single demographic, but have virtually no appeal outside of that.
This may seem like a fairly minor distinction, but it dramatically changes how games sell on a Nintendo system. I think the Wii is built on the backs of a wide variety of consumers: boys, girls, men, women, and the elderly. All of them. Hardcore gamers and casual ones, old school gamers who like the VC and new wave ones, too.
In that particular environment, companies like Nintendo do well, because that particular hardware has a wide variety of consumers. Games that target a single demographic -- whether that demographic be exclusively 16-35 year old males like Call of Duty or exclusively 6-14 year old girls like Dogz -- will do less well, although the user base is big enough now that they can do well enough if executed properly.
That is why they struggle. That's my theory, at least. This is something they can alter, but it's very challenging. Changing your entire philosophy of game design is a very difficult thing to do, even if it may not sound like it.
-ImaginaryInsider
Member
diss said:
I think for a lot of traditional gamers, they paid the dough for gameplay/genre/franchises found on said consoles.
RattleHead_ said:
Or to know how much money was spent. I suspect the Wii has more games on a per title basis, but is drastically lower on the actual dollar investment. I don't think it's silly to suggest that Ubisoft spent more on Assassin's Creed alone than they have on the entire Petz line for the Wii, comprised of 6 games so far.
Weisheit said:
This
soldat7 said:
You didnt answer his question. How many have attempted to?
GH is the best thing from a third party on the Wii so far this gen. And it has reaped the rewards. All of the systems are going to have genuinely good games sell bad, HD consoles got a LOT of that this months with VC, Mirrors Edge, Banjo, LBP and others. So its not just the Wii capable of having a good game not blaze the charts. There is an outlier though, there hasn't been a single game from a third party on the Wii with as much imagination and effort put into as Mirrors Edge has.
Weisheit said:
What else could he say? There was no way out of that corner, so he misdirected the conversation.
As for the numbers Im not really shocked but Nintendo did a really half assed effort at filling this holiday season with games. I know its not fair to expect them to carry every month of the year solely on their shoulders, but as a consumer I dont really give a damn about their third party issues. I just want games. Its freaky to see the Wii explode like that. Ive seen some people mention that maybe they left the season open for the third parties to feast without having to compete with them, but Im not to sure I buy that.
soldat7 said:
Tell me your joking....you COMPLETELY evaded his direct question because you didnt have a response worth a damn, then your trying to claim HE is the one with no argument? :lol
Metaphoreus
This is semantics, and nothing more
chespace said:
You can't characterize "Nintendo's output as of late" as only the Wii ___ titles. In fact, according to Wikipedia's list of Nintendo-published games, if we exclude the Wii ___ titles, we are left with: Zelda, Excite Truck, WarioWare, Super Paper Mario, Mario Party 8, Big Brain Academy, Pokemon Battle Revolution, Mario Strikers, MP3, Donkey Kong Barrel Blast, Battalion Wars II, Fire Emblem, Mario Galaxy, Endless Ocean, Smash Bros., Mario Kart, Mario Super Sluggers, Wario Land, and Animal Crossing. This excludes VC games (including the introduction of Sin and Punishment to the U.S.) and WiiWare games (such as the Art Style games). So what's not to like about "Nintendo's output as of late" when considered objectively? And you can't say that you're just upset because there haven't been a lot of big Nintendo games released recently, because your definition of "as of late" includes Wii Sports, which is a launch title.
Now, reread my last paragraph, and keep in mind that "Nintendo's output as of late" should probably also include their DS games since the end of 2006, which my list does not.
lol
this november and december in shops i see an army of mothers standing in front of the wii games shelves and from the look in their eyes it's clear that they have no fucking idea what to buy (other than the big ticket items, e.g. mario kart, wii fit, wii play). but then after umming and ahhing, they end up walking away with a whole bunch of stuff, including ubisoft crap. so third party sells if people have the system.
i also saw one mother being dragged around by her 12 year old brat who wanted dead space, fallout 3 and call of duty for the 360. great games but the last thing xbox live needs is more aggressive, retarded children
about the HDTV comment i made earlier, i'm speaking from my own experience and saying that i can see why some people make a clear distinction between HD gaming and non HD gaming. in my opinion there is a huge difference between 480p and 720p, enough to have it be a pivotal factor in system choice. but if it's not that important to you, it's not that important to you
this november and december in shops i see an army of mothers standing in front of the wii games shelves and from the look in their eyes it's clear that they have no fucking idea what to buy (other than the big ticket items, e.g. mario kart, wii fit, wii play). but then after umming and ahhing, they end up walking away with a whole bunch of stuff, including ubisoft crap. so third party sells if people have the system.
i also saw one mother being dragged around by her 12 year old brat who wanted dead space, fallout 3 and call of duty for the 360. great games but the last thing xbox live needs is more aggressive, retarded children
about the HDTV comment i made earlier, i'm speaking from my own experience and saying that i can see why some people make a clear distinction between HD gaming and non HD gaming. in my opinion there is a huge difference between 480p and 720p, enough to have it be a pivotal factor in system choice. but if it's not that important to you, it's not that important to you
Stoney Mason
Banned
Opiate said:
Good post
-ImaginaryInsider
Member
Metaphoreus said:
He can characterize whatever he wants because he stated it as in his opinion.
He's allowed to do that, even when the Wii sells 2 million in a month.
MisterHero
Super Member
LOL UR NOT JUNKWAFFLEEmCeeGramr said:
LCfiner said:didn't see this posted.
Valkyria Chronicles numbers
33K
http://www.edge-online.com/news/valkyria-largely-ignored-us-gamers
You know I come home from work after working an extra 2hours and I read this shit. I now know what it feels like to have someone piss in my breakfast before I eat. If I was rich I would right sega a check for 10M to make up this.
manueldelalas
Time Traveler
Metaphoreus said:
I completely agree, the thing is that Nintendo's holiday lineup was very weak, but compared to the other consoles (Snes, N64 and GC) the volume of games Nintendo makes is much bigger..
I think this was done because they really don't needed to release any games to win the holidays (2 million W-T-F). I think they are just waiting the dollar to be stronger and to fill the early months of 2009 with games. They could have released Mario Party 9, Fatal Frame 4 and Disaster for the holidays and have a solid lineup, but for Nintendo it does more business sense to release them next year on the slow months.
If Nintendo was third party they would have obviously released many games for the holidays, but their interest is to keep selling those Wii's (2.4 being made in a month).
I predict that next years holidays will be the same for Wii releases (nearly non existent) but then third parties will release many games.
ZombieSupaStar
Member
Eteric Rice said:
more people own wiis but they buy less software
less people own 360s but they buy more software
overall wii sells the most, just less per person compared to 360
Excelent post.Opiate said:
The problem is, it's not Nintendo intent to change the philosophy of third party devs. If that were true, why did Reggie talk about bringing "big" games to Wii like GTA? Third parties think they need to change because they don't understand Nintendo. Nintendo want's third parties as they are. At least, that's the impression I get.Opiate said:
They do on the other consoles. You know, those other loss making consoles that aren't breaking sales records. A year or two ago the arguments were that because Wii is far and away the best selling console it will ipso facto have the best library "because it always happened that way." It's a bit dumb now for people to be saying "well you can't always expect good games on Nintendo consoles!".Sadist said:
lowlylowlycook
Member
ZombieSupaStar said:
This is true, but it's a combination of 2 factors. The average 360 has owned their console longer and also buys slightly more games over the same time of ownership.
Aaron Strife
Banned
The best part of a EA buy-out would be that Warren Spector's Mickey Mouse platformer would be that much closer to reality.Y2Kev said:
(also, I believe it was Pixar who bought Disney, as Pixar staff now has more control internally than former Disney staff. I could be wrong though)
Fredescu said:
No the fuck they dont :lol
ME, Gears 2 and LBP are all good, but your being ridiculous now. Galaxy is the game of the gen thusfar IMO closely followed by LBP. Saying that caliber of game is released with regularity on all consoles no sweat is pure, unfiltered bullshit.
Fredescu said:
People do tend to forget that Nintendo released SSBB and Mario Kart, two huge titles in 08 as well. I think people would have been more forgiving if these two games came out at the end of the year instead of the beginning, since even though the total amount of games doesn't change, people would be more forgiving because they would have something to look forward to (such as when Twilight Princess came out, and Nintendo didn't have much else throughout 06). At least, that's how I figure the psychology works anyway...
boiled goose
good with gravy
Stoney Mason said:
Its a theory backed with an argument which = good post.
Wrong or right we will never truly know, but its so much better than all the crap that gets posted.
No, on other consoles they have decent third party support and those help the console library of the other 2. Wii has very little. Then it all comes down to first party, but Nintendo put all it's heavy hitters out at the ending of 2007 and the beginning of 2008. Those are the titles of their top studios, who worked a long time on these games. It's only logical that they didn't have time for other AAA projects to work om.Fredescu said:
BUT, that's a big mistake of course. They should have had something big, but they missmanaged. Or, if they had a decent third party support, that would hide the fact that their own output at the end of the year was pretty underwhelming. Again, they made a gamble and it didn't pay off. It would have been better if they had some fail safe.
Aaron Strife said:
Nope, Disney bought Pixar for $7.4 billion in an-stock deal deal. Since Steve Jobs owned 51% of Pixar, this instantly made Jobs the largest individual shareholder in Disney at 7%. Pixar co-founder/executive vice president became chief creative officer of Walt Disney Animation Studios and Pixar Animation Studios (reporting only to Disney President/CEO Robert Iger and consulting with Disney Director Roy Disney).
Saint Gregory
Member
Opiate said:
Wow, excellent theory. If it holds true the only real hope for third parties is to emulate Nintendo (LOL, good luck with that) or wait until the Wii userbase is so huge that you can still pinpoint demographics and be successfull. DQX is going to do a lot to make that happen in Japan but what will be the big demographic expander in the west?
Opiate said:
Good post , but that does not apply to all Ninendo games. They do have other studios that makes games like FE, BW:Wii, Advance Wars, Metroid, ect... that focus on more core/ niche games. The Mario and now Wii titled games seems to be their games for everyone and their biggest sellers. I think Zelda is their only core type game that puts up Mario/ Wii title like numbers. Nintendo makes a range of good software for almost every type of gamer.
Edit:
Sadist said:
I agree , but the market has not listened to Nintendo this entire gen so why would anyone start now.
Weisheit said:
You have a tiny bit of spittle running down the side of your mouth. Chill out.
Of course third-party publishers have tried to exploit the userbase. That's the fundamental crux of my argument: third-party publishers don't know HOW to exploit the userbase like Nintendo themselves does because they can't define the userbase. You surely don't expect many publishers to put up tens of millions of dollars into a Wii game that may or may not speak to the userbase, do you?
As much as Wii 'enthusiasts' want it to happen, [western] publishers will never divert major resources into making 'hard-core' games on the Wii. That strategy has rarely paid off on past Nintendo consoles and is risky at best now on the Wii.
Puncture said:
Really? I don't think many would disagree with you here.
Saint Gregory
Member
Sadist said:
That's the other thing. When the Wii launched Nintendo probably really wanted to reverse the trends of the previous two generations because they felt it lead to their downfall, but with the success they're seeing now without the help of third parties you really have to wonder if they wouldn't prefer things the way they are and keep the whole pie to themselves.
In Japan you see them actively courting big games (possibly because the Wii isn't dominating there, handhelds are) but in the western markets it seems like they couldn't give a fuck.
boiled goose
good with gravy
Saint Gregory said:
emulating nintendo is one approach, but it might not be the answer...
as a publisher you can also grow a certain demographic on a console... for example rpgs were popular on the ps1 because of square enix. madden popular on ps2 because of EA, etc. capcom had success on the GC and wii with RE.
first party titles also help, for example halo opened the way for shooters on xbox.
its not easy, but i think we can all agree that more effort is usually better.
I have a theory that a certain game is to take a load of the blame for the lack of good core third party efforts on wii.... and that is Red steel. The game was so bad that it basically made the wii controls seem more inaccurate for games than it actually was.
Imagine the opposite. had red steel been amazing wii would probably have tons of FPS by now. Red steel sold over a million copies with terrible reviews... no doubt it would have been more if it was great and wii would have an established fanbase for these types of games.
Yep, Nintendo timed things very poorly. Even if you strip away the third party stuff from the other platforms, the first party stuff alone is still better. Third party support would help, and Nintendo probably aren't loosing much money over their poor timing, but it would be nice to have some things to play.Sadist said:
Eteric Rice
Member
soldat7 said:
Fixed.
boiled goose
good with gravy
Fredescu said:
well said...
yes it would be nice...
at least i have a 360 and will be trying out AC for the first time.
@Opiate: do you agree with me that, in a way, you could say that Nintendo tries to design their games around specific jobs, while the others design them around specific audiences?
Not saying this is the case with each and every Nintendo game, but, you know, as a general rule...
Not saying this is the case with each and every Nintendo game, but, you know, as a general rule...