-
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 Results for October 2015 [Up1: Xbox #1]
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
slavesnyder
Member
They just don't make movies like that any more.
Also, physical skews young as the trade in credit is more important to them.
Wrt halo, if the fanbase is older with more disposable income, higher digital makes more sense--compared to games like cod that is. I could just be stereotyping halo fans as mostly over twenty, maybe that is wrong.
This for the link. I think I finally understand their stategy.
Universal apps can target a single class of device like pc, they do not have to run on all devices. Universal apps can only be sold through the windows store. Since MS has a huge financial incentive to get everyone coding universal apps (Windows store only), they will not be putting much effort into non-universal apis for developers who do not want to use the windows store going forward. In order to create software that uses all the power and functiomality of MS's operating systems, even if they are only making something for PC, developers will have to use the Universal Windows Platform, and therefore the windows store.
This will, over time, effectively transition the pc from an open platform with multiple vendors into an ios style ecosystem. Ca-ching!
slavesnyder
Member
... and now we imagine a parity clause 2.0
More of a queso fresco person, myself. So good.
serversurfer
Member
First, Queso, thanks again for all of your insight. It's been super informative, so much appreciated. <3 That said, I fear we're clogging the thread here, so let's try to separate some wheat
So, no sense of which way the wind is blowing on this one, or how hard? Retail are actually in kind of a tough position here, I'd say. On the one hand, it'll likely be a while before they're likely to see much in the way of software moving through their stores. On the other hand, if adoption is slowed or killed by high margins on the hardware, it'll be that much longer before they do start seeing significant software sales, if ever.
Okay, then still not having much sense of scale here, it seems to me that a drop like that might easily be explained by digital substitution. I know you disagree, but see below.
You also claim that indies don't count as substitution because they had no business being physical in the first place. I would argue that's still a form of supply-side substitution. A few years back, when digital-only wasn't yet a viable option, the equivalent of four or five indy teams would be pooled together by some rich person who would pick the "best" of the five ideas the devs had "No, wait let's combine them all!!" and then they'd all hope their niche game would magically become five times more popular because they had worked five times as hard on it. So the very existence of indy publishing is digital substitution, and games are likely being substituted at higher than 1:1, meaning the same time and money that used to go in to a single, mid-tier, physical release is now being spent on multiple indy releases, and those projects individually each have a greater chance of success. So, very much a win for the industry, and very much a case of digital substituting for physical.
I say substitution happens all the time because it often makes a lot of sense in a lot of cases. You argue that if it makes more sense, you're not substituting; merely choosing the better/reasonable option.
So, given that we differ so greatly on what even constitutes substitution, I fear we're at a bit of an impasse, unless you have something else you'd like to add.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but is the ratio of substitution to incrementation within the digital slice a secret? Unverifiable? What? I've asked you to quantify numerous times and in numerous ways and I think I've been fairly polite about it but it feels like all you've done is dodge, and it's getting a bit frustrating.
If you're unable to answer the question that's fine. If you're unwilling to answer the question, that's fine too. As I said, no one here is going to fault you for keeping secrets secret, and there's no shame in simply not knowing something, but I fail to understand why we're engaged in this semantics battle over the definition of meaningless, or more to the point, why you haven't responded to the fairly simply query, "Just how much are we talking about?" Seems like if you just provided the data, the reader could assign their own significance, or you could use math and stuff to prove that even though the number seems quite large, it still has no statistical significance, so are you unwilling and/or unable to do so? If so, we can just move on, but like I just said, I guess we can't even agree on what counts as substitution in the first place, so even if you give a figure, I'll still have no idea what you're actually counting.
/sigh Oh well. Thanks again for the good argument. <3 I just feel bad that we got stuck. =/
But yeah, while XBox still carries some weight in the console space, on PC specifically, Steam rules and XBox is met with some suspicion, thanks to GfWL, etc. So MS can't really announce they're here to take over from Valve, even if that's their ultimate goal. First you embrace. Then you extend, and that puts you in a position where you can finally extinguish. RTFM
I thought so.
So, no sense of which way the wind is blowing on this one, or how hard? Retail are actually in kind of a tough position here, I'd say. On the one hand, it'll likely be a while before they're likely to see much in the way of software moving through their stores. On the other hand, if adoption is slowed or killed by high margins on the hardware, it'll be that much longer before they do start seeing significant software sales, if ever.OHHhhhhh! Sorry!! >< When you showed me the chart of Fad Mountain and said, "See the drop?" I was like, "Well, duh, but that looks more like a correction for an anomaly that a real drop." As it turned out, Fad Mountain was actually built out of three or four anomalies happening simultaneously, but I still wasn't sure how we were supposed to compensate for their absence. So yeah, sorry, but I didn't really catch on to the fact that I was supposed to be ignoring the spike and just looking at the fact that we're currently below even the pre-spike levels. Yes??
Okay, then still not having much sense of scale here, it seems to me that a drop like that might easily be explained by digital substitution. I know you disagree, but see below.
Wait. So the Yakuza franchise's transition from physical-only to digital-only doesn't count as supply-side substitution because it's not really viable as a physical release? Sorry, but that strikes me as an awfully convenient definition. It only counts as substitution if it's not a good idea? Da fuq? I would cite the Yakuza franchise as a textbook example of digital substitution.
You also claim that indies don't count as substitution because they had no business being physical in the first place. I would argue that's still a form of supply-side substitution. A few years back, when digital-only wasn't yet a viable option, the equivalent of four or five indy teams would be pooled together by some rich person who would pick the "best" of the five ideas the devs had "No, wait let's combine them all!!" and then they'd all hope their niche game would magically become five times more popular because they had worked five times as hard on it. So the very existence of indy publishing is digital substitution, and games are likely being substituted at higher than 1:1, meaning the same time and money that used to go in to a single, mid-tier, physical release is now being spent on multiple indy releases, and those projects individually each have a greater chance of success. So, very much a win for the industry, and very much a case of digital substituting for physical.
I say substitution happens all the time because it often makes a lot of sense in a lot of cases. You argue that if it makes more sense, you're not substituting; merely choosing the better/reasonable option.
So, given that we differ so greatly on what even constitutes substitution, I fear we're at a bit of an impasse, unless you have something else you'd like to add.
So you're saying the Anatomy of a $60 Game thing is wrong? Walmart pay $45 for a copy of your game, while Sony pay $42, and the costs of physical distribution are just all wrong in that chart, so EA ends with far more than 27 of the 45 dollars Walmart handed them initially? What about EA's claims of double margins on digital? Misleading?
Ugh right back at ya.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but is the ratio of substitution to incrementation within the digital slice a secret? Unverifiable? What? I've asked you to quantify numerous times and in numerous ways and I think I've been fairly polite about it but it feels like all you've done is dodge, and it's getting a bit frustrating.If you're unable to answer the question that's fine. If you're unwilling to answer the question, that's fine too. As I said, no one here is going to fault you for keeping secrets secret, and there's no shame in simply not knowing something, but I fail to understand why we're engaged in this semantics battle over the definition of meaningless, or more to the point, why you haven't responded to the fairly simply query, "Just how much are we talking about?" Seems like if you just provided the data, the reader could assign their own significance, or you could use math and stuff to prove that even though the number seems quite large, it still has no statistical significance, so are you unwilling and/or unable to do so? If so, we can just move on, but like I just said, I guess we can't even agree on what counts as substitution in the first place, so even if you give a figure, I'll still have no idea what you're actually counting.
/sigh Oh well. Thanks again for the good argument. <3 I just feel bad that we got stuck. =/
Well, at first, sure. But if Steam controls 90% of the PC gaming market or whatever the actual value then MS sorta have little choice but to try to take some of those sales away from Valve. Sure, the market's gonna grow, but that's not the portion of the market MS are interested in capturing.
But yeah, while XBox still carries some weight in the console space, on PC specifically, Steam rules and XBox is met with some suspicion, thanks to GfWL, etc. So MS can't really announce they're here to take over from Valve, even if that's their ultimate goal. First you embrace. Then you extend, and that puts you in a position where you can finally extinguish. RTFM
Honestly, the only reason you can run Office on iOS and stuff is because a few years ago, people would say, "Oh, this doesn't run Office? I guess I'll throw it away and buy something useful." But then, people started saying, "Oh, they don't have Office for my iPhone? Well, what else can I use to make memos and stuff?" It's basically there to help keep a grip on users that have started to wander off to greener pastures.
"Real next-gen" claims will probably start coming as more cards fully support DX12, I'd imagine. But yeah, we already know Windows offers the best gaming experience, so I'm sure that will be what's pushed as the counterpoint to their mobile offerings. "Best gaming at both ends of the spectrum! And cross-buy! And cross-play!!"
Because the question was, "Why did you choose that particular device?" and not, "Why do you like video games?"
I'm interested in knowing just how many people feel that way. Anything you can share?
"Probably meaningless."
<3
Yup.
Yup.
CosmicQueso
Member
Thanks for all of your insights as well. Really appreciate the thoughts and time too.
Someone must know, but that person ain't me. I'm as curious as the next person.
Yep!
Which is a reasonable assumption, given the information you have available. I'm just saying based on information that isn't available, I think digital is much more additive. But, given the lack of data available, I can see why that's a hard leap to make.
I mean, maybe? But it's very doubtful Yakuza would have been published on disc in the US, given just how poorly the other versions sold. The only reason it's coming out is because of Digital. So, more additive. It's not a substitution, unless you're counting NOT HAPPENING as the option being substituted for?
If what you're saying is that development resources that would have gone into packaged games are now going into indies because of digital, well, of course they are. That's very obvious.
But you're assuming zero sum here. As if every dollar allocated to digital development is a dollar lost to packaged development. It's just not the case.
However, one of my key points (again, we agree here) is that as big Packaged games rose in risk profile, fewer pubs, developers and titles in the packaged space remained.
So, we're in agreement. Just coming at it from difference angles.
Oh yeah. That thing is off in the detail for sure. Made be a dev if I recall, not someone actually on the business side. I mean, it's ballpark, so whatever. But there's a lot in there that is incorrect.
You're right. I've dodged. Because getting to that answer isn't something that can be done looking at one title. It's seeing that, despite the growth on the digital distribution side, sales on the packaged side have not changed where we'd have expected them to be years ago. If Digital was truly substituting for Packaged sales, growth in Digital would be offset by lower than expected sales on the Packaged side. This is not happening.
How much what? A game used to sell 100% Packaged, now it's 80% Packaged 20% Digital, on average. But Packaged size hasn't changed much.
So if a game used to do 1m units Packaged, that same game released today would be expected to do 0.9m-1.1m Packaged, with around 0.2m-0.3m Digital.
Does that help?
Well, if NPD just released its monthly data feed lots of readers could assign lots of their own significance on all kinds of things. I'm not in a position to give out proprietary info, so feel free to disagree. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, just sharing my own observations based on over a decade of looking at this stuff daily.
You just want clarity that I can't provide and proof that the data itself cannot provide. It happens. This stuff is incredibly complicated and the data we have to use sucks.
I thought so.
Someone must know, but that person ain't me. I'm as curious as the next person.
Yep!
Which is a reasonable assumption, given the information you have available. I'm just saying based on information that isn't available, I think digital is much more additive. But, given the lack of data available, I can see why that's a hard leap to make.
I mean, maybe? But it's very doubtful Yakuza would have been published on disc in the US, given just how poorly the other versions sold. The only reason it's coming out is because of Digital. So, more additive. It's not a substitution, unless you're counting NOT HAPPENING as the option being substituted for?
If what you're saying is that development resources that would have gone into packaged games are now going into indies because of digital, well, of course they are. That's very obvious.
But you're assuming zero sum here. As if every dollar allocated to digital development is a dollar lost to packaged development. It's just not the case.
However, one of my key points (again, we agree here) is that as big Packaged games rose in risk profile, fewer pubs, developers and titles in the packaged space remained.
So, we're in agreement. Just coming at it from difference angles.
Oh yeah. That thing is off in the detail for sure. Made be a dev if I recall, not someone actually on the business side. I mean, it's ballpark, so whatever. But there's a lot in there that is incorrect.
You're right. I've dodged. Because getting to that answer isn't something that can be done looking at one title. It's seeing that, despite the growth on the digital distribution side, sales on the packaged side have not changed where we'd have expected them to be years ago. If Digital was truly substituting for Packaged sales, growth in Digital would be offset by lower than expected sales on the Packaged side. This is not happening.
How much what? A game used to sell 100% Packaged, now it's 80% Packaged 20% Digital, on average. But Packaged size hasn't changed much.
So if a game used to do 1m units Packaged, that same game released today would be expected to do 0.9m-1.1m Packaged, with around 0.2m-0.3m Digital.
Does that help?
Well, if NPD just released its monthly data feed lots of readers could assign lots of their own significance on all kinds of things. I'm not in a position to give out proprietary info, so feel free to disagree. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, just sharing my own observations based on over a decade of looking at this stuff daily.
You just want clarity that I can't provide and proof that the data itself cannot provide. It happens. This stuff is incredibly complicated and the data we have to use sucks.
I was not fond of clowns even before it came along.
super-heated plasma
Member
He's sitting right over there. *high five*
CosmicQueso
Member
Surfer, let's try this one more time. A good college try.
Substitute - This word implies causality, and an either/or situation. "Instead of product X, I will instead buy product Y". In this case, the customer could substitute a Digital purchase (Y) for a Packaged purchase (X). +1 sale to Digital, -1 sale to Packaged.
This also implies, then, the following statement: "Packaged sales are down because digital sales are up".
However, I do not believe this is the case.
My position is:
So, that statement above becomes "Packaged sales are down and digital sales are up."
I think this because the average sales per Packaged release have not significantly changed over the past 6 years.
This is represented here, where 96% of the variability in Packaged sales from year to year can be explained solely by the change in release count (don't get hung up on the HH thing, taking out HH doesn't change the correlation significantly):
If digital were truly substitutive, the average sales per packaged release would reasonably go down, correct? The correlation between these two factors would also weaken as each year passes, right? A bigger portion of the sales of that title would go digital, the overall sales would stay firm, therefore Packaged sales would go down.
But this is not what is happening.
For example, more copies of GTAV sold on disc than ever before. More copies of GTAV sold digitally than ever before. Just because digital goes up, does not mean packaged has to go down. Therefore, digital is not a substitute for packaged, but rather a new, growing addition (and therefore incremental) to the business.
Does this make more sense?
Substitute - This word implies causality, and an either/or situation. "Instead of product X, I will instead buy product Y". In this case, the customer could substitute a Digital purchase (Y) for a Packaged purchase (X). +1 sale to Digital, -1 sale to Packaged.
This also implies, then, the following statement: "Packaged sales are down because digital sales are up".
However, I do not believe this is the case.
My position is:
- Packaged sales are down because there are fewer Packaged releases getting made.
- Digital sales are up due to an increase in digital adoption as well as more titles being offered digitally.
So, that statement above becomes "Packaged sales are down and digital sales are up."
I think this because the average sales per Packaged release have not significantly changed over the past 6 years.
This is represented here, where 96% of the variability in Packaged sales from year to year can be explained solely by the change in release count (don't get hung up on the HH thing, taking out HH doesn't change the correlation significantly):
If digital were truly substitutive, the average sales per packaged release would reasonably go down, correct? The correlation between these two factors would also weaken as each year passes, right? A bigger portion of the sales of that title would go digital, the overall sales would stay firm, therefore Packaged sales would go down.
But this is not what is happening.
For example, more copies of GTAV sold on disc than ever before. More copies of GTAV sold digitally than ever before. Just because digital goes up, does not mean packaged has to go down. Therefore, digital is not a substitute for packaged, but rather a new, growing addition (and therefore incremental) to the business.
Does this make more sense?
Yep same. Clowns are creepy.
SEGAvangelist
Member
I fucking hate clowns.
Imru al-Qays
Banned
Aha, so that's what it's all about. This whole Microsoft wants to be the next Valve thing is a sideshow - Microsoft wants to get people to actually use its Windows app store.
Aye.
Abdiel, we who will enjoy games, a warm home with family and a big Turkey dinner salute you, and we will think of you and the crazyness that should not normally start until Friday morning...
Thanksgiving lunch is a thing now, haven't you heard?
In store for prep by 3pm. Doors opening at 6 in NH. Some stores will be issuing tickets for doorbuster items for easier checkouts to the lines earlier than that.
Sigh.
3pm-3am. Back at Noon to Close.
Fuck.
Someone posted that picture in the Sony sold through thread of the stacks of consoles... that's pretty accurate from what I can tell. I feel like MS is relying on the sheer volume of bundle types, while we just have a lot of those Uncharted bundles. The fact that their price is now lasting all weekend is also going to make a difference too, I think.
We'll see how it goes.
Good look bro.
Hockeymac18
Member
I'm sorry man... The encroachment on Thanksgiving day has always made me a bit depressed, and it seems it gets worse every year. It's one reason I have never "done" black Friday myself.
Hope you get some good rest after this weekend (although I realize that's just the start of the holiday craziness).
Welfare
Member
Yeah, MS is having a variety of bundled games while Sony are focusing on 3 big ones. Will be fascinating to see which strategy works this Black Friday.
Yeah, there's that, but the price points for MS's bundles are also all over the place too. Well, not literally all over the place, but they aren't all at the same great really low 'black friday' special bundle price. All the bundles are discounted, obviously, but that's still not making some of the bundles that much more attractive in terms of them already being so expensive on their own.
And they didn't really send us a whole lot more of re-stock on the ones that *will* be their cheaper options to go head to head with those uncharted bundles. Which, honestly, those are the ones the customers are asking about. The ones where it is the cheapest price, that's what people care most about on Black Friday.
LOW COST MAN. I NEED THEM DOLLARS OFF. Even if you can do some inventive analysis and probably get a better arrangement with a specific bundle otherwise.
(shrug)
We'll see. I'm going to be fucking exhausted.
DriftingSpirit
Member
I see Sony taking Black Friday this time around. MS got the edge last year by undercutting Sony by $50. With price parity, folk will naturally lean toward the PS4 Uncharted bundle. Of course, both consoles will sell boatloads and make Abdiel a tired man after it is all said and done.
NDP_Mulcair
Banned
Hi Jawmuncher! NPD_George here!
Activision Blizzard's 'Guitar Hero Live' is an interesting phenomenon. In The NPD Group's October 2015 U.S. Games Industry Report, the software SKU of Guitar Hero Live sold 121K units.
Please note that, when doing a direct comparison, this is 88% more units than the prequel sold numerous years ago. And, this is despite the steep starting price of $100. So it would appear that from first glance that Guitar Hero Live is a success for the company.
But yet, in September 2009, just a year earlier, the regular Xbox 360 SKU of Guitar Hero 5 *alone* sold more units (157K) than Guitar Hero Live managed (all Guitar Hero 5 SKUs sold 499K combined). Thus, the revival of the Guitar Hero franchise may be short-lived, especially because the rival from Mad Catz 'Rock Band 4' sold around the same number of copies as Guitar Hero Live.
Sony is going all in this holiday season.
So they were pretty close huh? Wonder if we will see a significant bump for either this month. Some console buyers might pick up a one or the other with their console purchase.
Any thoughts on the performance of Just Dance? Do you think we will see another entry in the series?
I hope you live at the very least....
panda-zebra
Member
Thank you for the guitar #s.
NDP_Mulcair
Banned
Hi RexNovis!
Ubisoft is reeling from the dramatic declines in their 'Just Dance' franchise, as I do not believe 'Just Dance' is a franchise that enjoys skyrocketing digital adoption to counter-balance its physical retail declines. Just two years ago in October 2013, a typical Just Dance release (in this case, Just Dance 2014) would sell just under 150K, and now the title is down to around 40K.
Those types of declines really speak to the decline of the 'Nintendo Wii' ecosystem where the Just Dance titles once thrived. Companies choose not to invest in a series that is declining rapidly, so I believe if the Nintendo NX is unsuitable for the Just Dance platform, then there is a very real chance that we may not see any titles from the series next year. Production costs for the series must be rather low so it may be still worth the ROI, but the reliable 'Nintendo Wii' ecosystem continues to shrink, so the window of opportunity for profit expansion is diminishing along with it.
I don't believe it has been discussed or revealed yet, but Ubisoft Entertainment had another 'Just Dance' release besides Just Dance 2016 this month. Their new release 'Just Dance: Disney Party 2' had incredibly low sales. Think around the 4-digit range low.
That sort of performance only fuels the 'Just Dance failure' fire which may compel the Guillemot family to cancel the series.
I honestly had no idea another Just Dance title released. It's crazy that it slipped under the radar like that. Clearly nobody else knew about it either and yea 4 digit sales had to be tough pill for Ubi to swallow. Ill be curious to see if they resurrect the franchise for another release with NX or just leave it be. Thanks for the info/insight!
Cthulhu_Steev
Member
I spent 15 years working Christmas (UK) in shops, it was hideous, but not a patch on the horror of Black Friday - although we have some big name shops kicking back against it this year because sales just drop for weeks beforehand as people wait for bargains, and it is so undignified watching people fight over 'cheap things'.
So best of luck, Abdiel. Always love to hear your insights in these threads, see you on the other side.
slavesnyder
Member
It's just to confuse sales Gaf with twisted software charts, counting soft bundled games as sales.
Listen, Amazon: We will NOT fall into this trap!
You know, I think it is possible that the seeming stabilization of packaged sales may actually be due to the XBL/PSN/Steam revolution of small digital only games, since a number of them, including phenomenon Minecraft, have gotten packaged releases. Games like Minecraft and Shovel Knight would have never existed without the revolution of small digital only games, but because these games ended up being hits within that realm, they eventually ended up with a physical release which increases the number of physical titles available.
slavesnyder
Member
Ironic.
First, digital sales kill retail business, now digital sales bring indies into retail.
For now, this is only true for PC market, as Console is still working quite well with retail boxes. We'll see how things develop.
The thing is, before retail was the main source of revenue for PC games. Now, no game can survive on retail alone. Boxed games are more of an additional buck to make and a marketing instrument.
tattooed_dwarf
Member
Whoah, Sony going all in to win this holiday in US. Might get kitchen sink there too.
EventHorizon
Member
Viva La Revolución
Welfare
Member
I now see this game thanks to Amazon and there was no release on Playstation? It's on the Xbox One, 360, Wii, and U, and that's it.
Well that's odd.
Third party leaved PlayStation confirmed.
Just Dance is probably one of those titles that will see a huge increase thanks to Black Friday deals. Still, that debut is awful. Really, really awful.
Thinking about Black Friday, since the Smash Splat pack is coming, I was wondering what's Splatoon LTD as of October. The last update we had was 600,000 units sold between retail and digital.
CosmicQueso
Member
Excellent point.
SatelliteOfLove
Member
Yup, building walled gardens around an end user group instead of attracting them into it of their own volition. There's no GFWL or PS4 spanners in that works. Otherwise why W10 and Valve's Linux embracing?
Very good point. Those games on Nintendo consoles got similar spotlight to what we see with games like COD, and Assassin's Creed on Xbox/PlayStation. Nintendo made those games their "big third party titles" so the Wii U doing poorly has definitely hurt various family friendly/kids game series.
No. Us PC gamers have very few issues purchasing software from other stores (say, halo 6 being windows store exclusive because by then the X1 will just be another windows 10 PC). But we aren't going to be *locked down* in a closed platform. That's the entire purpose of having an open platform at your disposal.
The family friendly market is no longer in the home console ecosystem for the most part, hence the danger to its long term future