Support NeoGAF

[Killroyskbg]

Right, you didn't understand the data presented, and then used that to invent things that aren't actually happening (that PC routinely misses games, routinely gets delayed games, or routinely gets low quality ports).

I've tried to explain what the data is actually showing repeatedly, and you literally went to "well the report doesn't explicitly SAY that I'm wrong, so I must be right!" even though, you know, I've literally laid out exactly why you must be wrong with the actual numbers involved.

Believe what the fuck you want. We live in a post-truth world. Chemtrails are real. Climate change was invented by chinese manufacturing. Consoles make all the real gamer money.

How long did it take to get GTA V on PC? Where is Destiny on PC? Why do we need durante to fix dark souls? Why did WB have to pull Batman from PC? No PC is obvioulsy the plattform with no problems when it comes to AAA games.

and I have tried to explain it to you but you fail to understand. Here are some quotes from the report we are talking about."

"Consumers spent $41 billion on mobile gaming"

"Consumers increasingly download games directly to their consoles, spending $6.6 billion in 2016. "

The chart you talked about says premium games revenue.

Now show me were it says it not includes software as in games in those numbers. Or just send me another meme and prove how mature you are.

Edit: And what numbers? Civ6 not being on the list when I explained why it was not?

Do you think console gamers spend over 590million $ alone on microtransactions in CoD when the game itself made about 500 million in the first tree weeks?

 

[jroc74]

Interesting thread.

So is consoles still dead? And that digital info...some GAFers are going to be happy about finally being right about their 9 friends soon.

 

[copelandmaster]

How long did it take to get GTA V on PC? Where is Destiny on PC? Why do we need durante to fix dark souls? Why did WB have to pull Batman from PC? No PC is obvioulsy the plattform with no problems when it comes to AAA games.

Look at the data. Rockstar knows they have everyone by the balls. They are pretty much the only ones who get away with the legendary "double/triple" dip on such a large scale.

Do you know what happened to the 360 and PS3 versions of TF2 vs the PC version? Patching console versions cost money. Patches for your heavily online focus game need to be frequent, and in both Destiny and especially TF2's case, for the long haul. That is a hugely unpredictable problem for your first outing on your major new multi million MMO shooter IP. Maybe Destiny 2 will have this sorted out.

From Software hadn't made a PC game in years. The port was a quick and cheap 1:1 port of the 360 version, but better. Nothing broken, just was below what PC gamers expected. Guess what? DS2 and DS3 are extraordinary PC versions, save for their bad m&k controls and their capped framerates.

Because WB is shitty and treated their PC customers like shit (they have a history of doing this) by diverting minimal (outsourced, lowest bidder) effort and time to the PC versions of their games.

Your logic is flawed and you have an obvious agenda.

 

[LordRaptor]

Do you think console gamers spend over 590million $ alone on microtransactions in CoD when the game itself made about 500 million in the first tree weeks?

Yeah, I think thats a little more plausible than what you claim.

Because using numbers I have no particular reason to think are way off - and probably good enough for napkin maths - CoD:BO3 had 4 $15 DLC pack releases in exactly the time period this report was tracking, which would only be obtainable digitally regardless of whether someone was playing from a disk or a digital download copy, and that if only half the userbase purchased would be worth $720million in revenue.

The alternative scenario that you suggest is that a bit under half of all sales across all platforms were on console.
Digitally.
In the period 4-12 months after launch.


receipts.gif

 

[Killroyskbg]

Look at the data. Rockstar knows they have everyone by the balls. They are pretty much the only ones who get away with the legendary "double/triple" dip on such a large scale.

Do you know what happened to the 360 and PS3 versions of TF2 vs the PC version? Patching console versions cost money. Patches for your heavily online focus game need to be frequent, and in both Destiny and especially TF2's case, for the long haul. That is a hugely unpredictable problem for your first outing on your major new multi million MMO shooter IP. Maybe Destiny 2 will have this sorted out.

From Software hadn't made a PC game in years. The port was a quick and cheap 1:1 port of the 360 version, but better. Nothing broken, just was below what PC gamers expected. Guess what? DS2 and DS3 are extraordinary PC versions, save for their bad m&k controls and their capped framerates.

Because WB is shitty and treated their PC customers like shit (they have a history of doing this) by diverting minimal (outsourced, lowest bidder) effort and time to the PC versions of their games.

Your logic is flawed and you have an obvious agenda.

Everything you talk about is about money. Yet you fail to understand that was exactly what I was talking about. TF2 cost to much money to patch on consoles but destiny somehow had 4 different versions they were able to patch and get approved by Sony and Xbox yet the plattform without these costly quality checks gets no version? Maybe because they dont belive it will sell enough on PC to support it?

Why do you think WB obviously spends so little resources on games on PC? Perhaps they have much less to gain?

But no its only because they hate their PC customers not that they see less potential profit from them.

 

[Killroyskbg]

Yeah, I think thats a little more plausible than what you claim.

Because using numbers I have no particular reason to think are way off - and probably good enough for napkin maths - CoD:BO3 had 4 $15 DLC pack releases in exactly the time period this report was tracking, which would only be obtainable digitally regardless of whether someone was playing from a disk or a digital download copy, and that if only half the userbase purchased would be worth $720million in revenue.

The alternative scenario that you suggest is that a bit under half of all sales across all platforms were on console.
Digitally.
In the period 4-12 months after launch.


receipts.gif

You think more than a third of everyone buying a CoD game buys every DLC? At full price?

No I mean that the DLC combined with new buyers of the game made 590mil $ together.

Like I said earlier it is both downloaded games +dlc +micro.

Edit: and how many at launch who were interested in the dlc did not get the seasonpass? No they all waited and bought every singel one as a standalone one?

 

[LordRaptor]

Like I said earlier it is both downloaded games +dlc +micro.

That's because you've changed your argument since Page 3, which I'll take as a partial credit in highlighting how ludicrous at least some of your claims are that you've U-turned that this is about digital sales and are now no longer talking about PC having no bricks and mortar.

And that's literally the point of this research data - to work out what sort of 'aftermarket' revenue titles can command digitally, because - again - we already know from company earnings reports how many copies of any given title are sold, and usually what the digital / retail split is.

What is less clear is things like DLC attach rates, or MTX conversion for non-F2P titles. Oh shit, that's what this report covers!
In the case of BO3, they made nearly half as much revenue again from DLC sales on console as they did from initial sales revenue across all platforms.

 

[Killroyskbg]

That's because you've changed your argument since Page 3, which I'll take as a partial credit in highlighting how ludicrous at least some of your claims are that you've U-turned that this is about digital sales and are now no longer talking about PC having no bricks and mortar.

And that's literally the point of this research data - to work out what sort of 'aftermarket' revenue titles can command digitally, because - again - we already know from company earnings reports how many copies of any given title are sold, and usually what the digital / retail split is.

What is less clear is things like DLC attach rates, or MTX conversion for non-F2P titles. Oh shit, that's what this report covers!
In the case of BO3, they made nearly half as much revenue again from DLC sales as they did from initial sales revenue.

Show me when I said that and made a U turn? I have never done it but you have insisted on it being pure MT and DLC without software and I can quote you on it.

You still belive it is only MT and DLC?

Also read my edit in my last post and answer me.

 

[LordRaptor]

You still belive it is only MT and DLC?

Given the stated timeframe the period covers, the numbers they show and the titles involved, yes.

I can't answer why people would buy individual DLC rather than season pass, I don't know, but there's plenty of scope for speculation.
Second hand purchasers? (the reason DLC sales can exceed base unit sales)
Kids without high disposable income getting the base game for christmas and buying their own DLCs with pocket money?
People waiting to see if a DLC pack is worth it or not before buying?

There are a myriad of plausible reasons.

 

[Octavia]

I'd like to know a detailed breakdown of the mobile section. Games individual revenue, realistic amount of players, % of players that contributed to over 50% of the revenue (I'm guessing it's like 1%).

Who the heck is spending all this money on f2p mobile games? I just don't see the appeal, and not because the games are 'junk', but because a competitive game where you pay to win seems pointless when there's cheaters and botters who will always be millions of dollars in content ahead of you for free.

 

[Killroyskbg]

Given the stated timeframe the period covers, the numbers they show and the titles involved, yes.

I can't answer why people would buy individual DLC rather than season pass, I don't know, but there's plenty of scope for speculation.
Second hand purchasers? (the reason DLC sales can exceed base unit sales)
Kids without high disposable income getting the base game for christmas and buying their own DLCs with pocket money?
People waiting to see if a DLC pack is worth it or not before buying?

There are a myriad of plausible reasons.

So we are down to late buyers being dumb and buying singel dlc when many of the dlc are out and kids with pocket money exceeding the first tree weeks combined sales of CoD and seasonspass....

Right.

 

[LordRaptor]

because a competitive game where you pay to win seems pointless when there's cheaters and botters who will always be millions of dollars in content ahead of you for free.

Those sorts of games are usually server-authoritative, so basically 'uncheatable' in that way. They're mostly all based on Travian but with nicer graphics too.

 

[Killroyskbg]

.

Still waiting on you to tell me were I did my supposed U-turn.

Or maybe an apology?

But based on previous behaviour I might be asking to much from you.

 

[Killroyskbg]

In the case of BO3, they made nearly half as much revenue again from DLC sales on console as they did from initial sales revenue across all platforms.

Wait you just proved yourself wrong here. It is impossible for the 590mil in the report for BO3 on console not to include software sales of the game if the dlc was only half of the initial revenue (500mil can provide link if you want).

 

[LordRaptor]

Initial sales revenue as in the the revenue made from the initial sales of the software, not as in the sales made at launch.

 

[Killroyskbg]

Initial sales revenue as in the the revenue made from the initial sales of the software, not as in the sales made at launch.

Sorry missunderstod that. Still I find it impossible to account for 590mil without new software sales.

See it's not hard to say when you missunderstood.

Still waiting on you to tell me about my U-turn.

 

[ArtHands]

Interesting thread.

So is consoles still dead? And that digital info...some GAFers are going to be happy about finally being right about their 9 friends soon.

Not dead yet but the PC, mobile is growing significantly while console growth is slowing

 

[Killroyskbg]

Not dead yet but the PC, mobile is growing significantly while console growth is slowing

According to this report PC is actually growing slower and if you want to include casual browser games they are actually declining.

China PC biggest markets growth went from 16 to 4% growth so no you are wrong about PC.

Mobile on the other hand have consumed 3 umbilical cords and is transcending. (Bloodborne reference)

[edit] link for reference
https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/global-games-market-reaches-99-6-billion-2016-mobile-generating-37/