Support NeoGAF

[Sammy Samusu]

Never expected Fatal Frame 5 would sell more than Bayo 2 as I thought Bayo has more mainstream appeal... However, it looks like that might happen. I'm really impressed by how consistent Fatal Frame franchise has been.

And it's growing (albeit small) with every new entry.

WII : Fatal Frame: Tsukihami no Kamen ( Nintendo ) { 2008-07-31 } - 29,869 / 73,449
PS2 : Fatal Frame III: The Tormented ( Tecmo ) { 2005-07-28 } - 46,671 / 69,147
PS2 : Fatal Frame II: Crimson Butterfly ( Tecmo ) { 2003-11-27 } - 42,006 / 64,450
PS2 : Fatal Frame ( Tecmo ) { 2001-12-13 } - 21,770 / 42,195

We will see if FFV will continue that trend.

 

[Nirolak]

Right, Nintendo wanted to attract core users but the problem is they're basically trying to do that on their own. If 3rd parties had made a concerted effort to do the same rather than drop the system after launch window there might've been a chance but as is it's obviously just not happening.

Well I mean, what did you expect?

The standard expectation of third parties is that you bend over backwards to meet their hardware requests and platform policy demands and heavily support their titles - even when they're not exclusive - if you want their content.

 

[sörine]

Well I mean, what did you expect?

The standard expectation of third parties is that you bend over backwards to meet their hardware requests and platform policy demands and heavily support their titles - even when they're not exclusive - if you want their content.

Nintendo generally did that at launch for Japanese publishers though. They were involved with the platform well over a year before launch, Nintendo's licensing model is industry standard, eShop regulations matched or improved on the competition and nearly every big 3rd party launch window game (TTT2, MH3U, NG3RE, DQX) saw direct Nintendo support in terms of content, distribution and/or promotion.

Perhaps Nintendo halted that sort of support and incentivizing after launch, or perhaps 3rd parties took their ball and went home after almost everything bombed. My guess is the reality lies somewhere in the middle.

 

[Opiate]

Well I mean, what did you expect?

The standard expectation of third parties is that you bend over backwards to meet their hardware requests and platform policy demands and heavily support their titles - even when they're not exclusive - if you want their content.

That's of AAA developers.

The expectation of small publishers or indies is that you provide middleware support and set up your platform to make small publishing runs economically feasible (e.g. if you make a game which you expect to only sell 10,000 copies). My understanding is that Nintendo isn't very good at that, either.

Please note I'm not saying I disagree; I'm just saying that the high end and low end will have different needs, and I don't think Nintendo is doing a very good job of servicing either.

 

[Scum]

Right, Nintendo wanted to attract core users but the problem is they're basically trying to do that on their own. If 3rd parties had made a concerted effort to do the same rather than drop the system after launch window there might've been a chance but as is it's obviously just not happening.

Should have had NoA and NoE to do some grunt work years ago.

 

[Mpl90]

That's of AAA developers.

The expectation of small publishers or indies is that you provide middleware support and set up your platform to make small publishing runs economically feasible (e.g. if you make a game which you expect to only sell 10,000 copies). My understanding is that Nintendo isn't very good at that, either.

Please note I'm not saying I disagree; I'm just saying that the high end and low end will have different needs, and I don't think Nintendo is doing a very good job of servicing either.

Probably, that was kind of true at launch, but Nintendo is pretty good for indie developers right now, between Unity, Nintendo Web Framework, free dev kits to specific developers, good results from indies, etc.etc. and they don't seem to be changing in a negative way their indie policies.

 

[hiska-kun]

Pre-orders for Pokemon ORAS double pack are already closed.

 

[crinale]

Probably, that was kind of true at launch, but Nintendo is pretty good for indie developers right now, between Unity, Nintendo Web Framework, free dev kits to specific developers, good results from indies, etc.etc. and they don't seem to be changing in a negative way their indie policies.

I'm wondering if Nintendo's initial development environment was troublesome to third parties or something close to it happened.

 

[sörine]

I'm wondering if Nintendo's initial development environment was troublesome to third parties or something close to it happened.

No more than most platforms really. UE3 for example came up to speed much faster on Wii U than it did PS3 or Vita.

In very broad terms the big hurdle for ports initially seemed to be the different hardware ideology (comparably GPU heavy) versus what PS3/360 had directed developers towards previously (comparably CPU heavy). And unlike with PS4 or XBO, Wii U simply isn't high spec enough to brute force ports with more specialized code.

 

[Nirolak]

That's of AAA developers.

The expectation of small publishers or indies is that you provide middleware support and set up your platform to make small publishing runs economically feasible (e.g. if you make a game which you expect to only sell 10,000 copies). My understanding is that Nintendo isn't very good at that, either.

Please note I'm not saying I disagree; I'm just saying that the high end and low end will have different needs, and I don't think Nintendo is doing a very good job of servicing either.

Right, getting support for all the major middleware and successfully onboarding your customer base to using your digital store front is definitely something that helps tremendously with indies.

Nintendo has been having some success there, especially on Wii U, though only started somewhat recently on that front.

 

[Nintendojitsu]

Well I mean, what did you expect?

The standard expectation of third parties is that you bend over backwards to meet their hardware requests and platform policy demands and heavily support their titles - even when they're not exclusive - if you want their content.

This sounds more like corruption no matter how many times I read it.

 

[Nirolak]

No more than most platforms really. UE3 for example came up to speed much faster on Wii U than it did PS3 or Vita.

In very broad terms the big hurdle for ports initially seemed to be the different hardware ideology (comparably GPU heavy) versus what PS3/360 had directed developers towards previously (comparably CPU heavy). And unlike with PS4 or XBO, Wii U simply isn't high spec enough to brute force ports with more specialized code.

The Wii U also has a bit of an awkward situation in that it seems to be a DirectX 10 class GPU which means it's technically compatible with DirectX 11, but some of the ways in which DX10 hardware handles things like compute shaders is by dynamically recompiling them down to pixel shaders which makes them run significantly worse.

I feel they could have a lot more middlware success if they simply meet the hardware feature set expectations of developers even with a less powerful system next generation because most engines are already built around scaling tremendously in terms of hardware power, but are significantly less flexible in terms of feature set requirements, since modern mobile hardware often has leading edge feature sets with notably less raw power.

Like what's really hamstringing the 3DS in terms of mobile ports and indie games is that it uses an OpenGL ES 1.1 hardware set, which is not even semi-compatible with OpenGL ES 2.0 in the same way DX10/DX11 are, thus causing major middleware and engine issues.

 

[Nirolak]

This sounds more like corruption no matter how many times I read it.

Publishers get charged ~$10-12 just to have a disc printed for a console regardless of whether the game sells or what they're charging for it, and sometimes have to meet minimum print runs of 10,000-50,000 units.

That's the appeal of making a console. You get to collect that licensing fee every time someone wants to print a retail disc for your console.

However, since you're charging people for the privilege of releasing games on your platform, you're expected to make that platform incredibly appealing to release games on, because otherwise why would you pay to do it?

This is before we even get to the cost and opportunity cost of porting the game over to the platform.

 

[sörine]

The Wii U also has a bit of an awkward situation in that it seems to be a DirectX 10 class GPU which means it's technically compatible with DirectX 11, but some of the ways in which DX10 hardware handles things like compute shaders is by dynamically recompiling them down to pixel shaders which makes them run significantly worse.

I feel they could have a lot more middlware success if they simply meet the hardware feature set expectations of developers even with a less powerful system next generation because most engines are already built around scaling tremendously in terms of hardware power, but are significantly less flexible in terms of feature set requirements, since modern mobile hardware often has leading edge feature sets with notably less raw power.

Like what's really hamstringing the 3DS in terms of mobile ports and indie games is that it uses an OpenGL ES 1.1 hardware set, which is not even semi-compatible with OpenGL ES 2.0 in the same way DX10/DX11 are, thus causing major middleware and engine issues.

I don't disagree with the idea that Nintendo undershot regarding hardware spec and it's added to their downfall but this seems like a peripheral issue when we're talking about Japanese 3rd parties. Konami, Capcom and Square Enix all have custom inhouse engines that already run on DX9 class and in some cases even lower hardware while nearly every other major commercial engine (UE3, CryEngine, Unity, Gamebyro, Gameware, etc) is Wii U compliant.

Vita managing a good amount of 3rd party support in Japan also sort of works against this idea given it's significantly more limited hardware and that it struggles with some commercial engines (UE3) and isn't even supported by others (CryEngine). This really seems like small issue in the context of Japan.

 

[crinale]

I don't disagree with the idea that Nintendo undershot regarding hardware spec and it's added to their downfall but this seems like a peripheral issue when we're talking about Japanese 3rd parties. Konami, Capcom and Square Enix all have custom inhouse engines that already run on DX9 class and in some cases even lower hardware while nearly every other major commercial engine (UE3, CryEngine, Unity, Gamebyro, Gameware, etc) is Wii U compliant.

Vita managing a good amount of 3rd party support in Japan also sort of works against this idea given it's significantly more limited hardware and that it struggles with some commercial engines (UE3) and isn't even supported by others (CryEngine). This really seems like small issue in the context of Japan.

Doesn't Sony's PhyreEngine support PSP/3/4/V and DirectX? The only Japanese rather large third party supporting Vita in full force is KT (they already said their in-house engine scales to support Vita port). Other mid-sized Japanese devs are still satisfied with PhyreEngine I guess because you can develop games using it at your PC by DirectX.
And as for price of that engine, as long as the game stays exclusive to Playstation, it is free of charge IIRC.

 

[sörine]

Doesn't Sony's PhyreEngine support PSP/3/4/V and DirectX? The only Japanese rather large third party supporting Vita in full force is KT (they already said their in-house engine scales to support Vita port). Other mid-sized Japanese devs are still satisfied with PhyreEngine I guess because you can develop games using it at your PC by DirectX.
And as for price of that engine, as long as the game stays exclusive to Playstation, it is free of charge IIRC.

PhyreEngine is a good asset but as far as I'm aware only Falcom, NIS, Gust and Alvion have used it for Vita projects. It doesn't seem too widespread really.

Wii U offers free Unity Pro (as do PS3/4/Vita just recently) but that engine isn't too widespread in Japan yet either. Still I think it's hard to make the case that hardware spec and engine support are responsible for Wii U's lacking Japanese 3rd party support when Vita seems more lacking in those areas.

 

[Nirolak]

I don't disagree with the idea that Nintendo undershot regarding hardware spec and it's added to their downfall but this seems like a peripheral issue when we're talking about Japanese 3rd parties. Konami, Capcom and Square Enix all have custom inhouse engines that already run on DX9 class and in some cases even lower hardware while nearly every other major commercial engine (UE3, CryEngine, Unity, Gamebyro, Gameware, etc) is Wii U compliant.

Vita managing a good amount of 3rd party support in Japan also sort of works against this idea given it's significantly more limited hardware and that it struggles with some commercial engines (UE3) and isn't even supported by others (CryEngine). This really seems like small issue in the context of Japan.

The Vita is largely inheriting from a mix of mobile (it has basically the same parts as the iPhone the year it released in, just with more cores) and Sony's firmware level library support for porting in house PS3 technology (for example, IIRC any PSGL shaders written for PS3 will also work on Vita without modification).

I feel we actually do see blockades on the front you mention though. We don't see many Unreal Engine 3 games on the system, and Western developer support outside of indie arenas (where they're using technology like Unity or GameMaker) is pretty low.

That said, I agree with you that if Japanese developers wanted there wouldn't be tremendous issues in terms of getting their games running on Wii U. I've often suggest that Sony has been directly incentivizing Vita development from Japan and also suggested I believe in either this thread or the last that they've started incentivizing mobile ports to Vita.

Like if Nintendo just starts splashing around cash like mad (well, you know, the equivalent of sending over engineers for free to help port titles, dropping licensing fees, paying promotional costs, and doing this not just for big titles or exclusives but for almost anything on the system) I think they could have garnered more support.

It's something that definitely erodes at margins, sometimes heavily, but if Sony can sit there and get a bunch of Vita support and then proceed to get a bunch of PS4 support despite both systems being nigh-dead at the time with next to no games announced, I feel there's definitely something Nintendo isn't doing behind that scenes that they should be if they want this support.

Once you have enough momentum it's something you can ease up on, but the investment can be crucial both between making the system as easy to work with as possible when designing it to greasing the wheels with as much technical and financial support as you can.

 

[crinale]

PhyreEngine is a good asset but as far as I'm aware only Falcom, NIS, Gust and Alvion have used it for Vita projects. It doesn't seem too widespread really.

Wii U offers free Unity Pro (as do PS3/4/Vita just recently) but that engine isn't too widespread in Japan yet either. Still I think it's hard to make the case that hardware spec and engine support are responsible for Wii U's lacking Japanese 3rd party support when Vita seems more lacking in those areas.

Well those mid-sized devs are pretty much only ones supporting Vita actively anyway (I may add Idea Factory, Compile Heart and such) so I think we aren't even disagreeing about this issue. Small-sized ones that sells VN and such are all using PhyreEngine I'm assuming, even though they won't disclose their development environment.

The Vita is largely inheriting from a mix of mobile (it has basically the same parts as the iPhone the year it released in, just with more cores) and Sony's firmware level library support for porting in house PS3 technology (for example, IIRC any PSGL shaders written for PS3 will also work on Vita without modification).

I feel we actually do see blockades on the front you mention though. We don't see many Unreal Engine 3 games on the system, and Western developer support outside of indie arenas (where they're using technology like Unity or GameMaker) is pretty low.

That said, I agree with you that if Japanese developers wanted there wouldn't be tremendous issues in terms of getting their games running on Wii U. I've often suggest that Sony has been directly incentivizing Vita development from Japan and also suggested I believe in either this thread or the last that they've started incentivizing mobile ports to Vita.

Like if Nintendo just starts splashing around cash like mad (well, you know, the equivalent of sending over engineers for free to help port titles, dropping licensing fees, paying promotional costs, and doing this not just for big titles or exclusives but for almost anything on the system) I think they could have garnered more support.

It's something that definitely erodes at margins, sometimes heavily, but if Sony can sit there and get a bunch of Vita support and then proceed to get a bunch of PS4 support despite both systems being nigh-dead at the time with next to no games announced, I feel there's definitely something Nintendo isn't doing behind that scenes that they should be if they want this support.

Once you have enough momentum it's something you can ease up on, but the investment can be crucial both between making the system as easy to work with as possible when designing it to greasing the wheels with as much technical and financial support as you can.

This pretty much said everything I wanted to add, wow.

 

[sörine]

The Vita is largely inheriting from a mix of mobile (it has basically the same parts as the iPhone the year it released in, just with more cores) and Sony's firmware level library support for porting in house PS3 technology (for example, IIRC any PSGL shaders written for PS3 will also work on Vita without modification).

I feel we actually do see blockades on the front you mention though. We don't see many Unreal Engine 3 games on the system, and Western developer support outside of indie arenas (where they're using technology like Unity or GameMaker) is pretty low.

That said, I agree with you that if Japanese developers wanted there wouldn't be tremendous issues in terms of getting their games running on Wii U. I've often suggest that Sony has been directly incentivizing Vita development from Japan and also suggested I believe in either this thread or the last that they've started incentivizing mobile ports to Vita.

Like if Nintendo just starts splashing around cash like mad (well, you know, the equivalent of sending over engineers for free to help port titles, dropping licensing fees, paying promotional costs, and doing this not just for big titles or exclusives but for almost anything on the system) I think they could have garnered more support.

It's something that definitely erodes at margins, sometimes heavily, but if Sony can sit there and get a bunch of Vita support and then proceed to get a bunch of PS4 support despite both systems being nigh-dead at the time with next to no games announced, I feel there's definitely something Nintendo isn't doing behind that scenes that they should be if they want this support.

Once you have enough momentum it's something you can ease up on, but the investment can be crucial both between making the system as easy to work with as possible when designing it to greasing the wheels with as much technical and financial support as you can.

I agree with a lot of what you've said here. Hardware spec seems to be a stumbling block for western publishers but isn't really much of an issue in Japan. Even if Wii U were a DX10 class platform my guess is it still wouldn't be getting games like FFXV or KH3.

I also agree Sony must be doing some major backroom dealing to get the level of support they're enjoying given both Vita and PS4 bombed spectacularly out the gates, worse even than Wii U sold. Sony doesn't seem to be paying out large amounts of cash either, at least in Japan, so my guess is more in the form of technical support and royalty breaks.

Nintendo also should be doing more to court beyond the established Famicom era big publishers, since those publishers seem predisposed to ignoring them anyway these days. NCL seems totally asleep at the wheel regarding indies in particular by totally ignoring local developers and walling Japan off from western indies. Contrast that with SCEJA, who just had a rather successful showing at TGS showcasing indies both local and foreign.

I would like to note though that PSGL is Sony's custom API and it goes back to PS2. They've also broken with it for PS4 so perhaps the lifespan of easy Vita cross-porting dies with PS3.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

I know it makes sense, but it breaks my heart at the same time D:

Good

Interesting, it's possible for it to reach 100,000 sales then for it's 1st week?

Try a fifth of that and you're getting close.

 

[Nirolak]

I also agree Sony must be doing some major backroom dealing to get the level of support they're enjoying given both Vita and PS4 bombed spectacularly out the gates, worse even than Wii U sold. Sony doesn't seem to be paying out large amounts of cash either, at least in Japan, so my guess is more in the form of technical support and royalty breaks.

Yeah, one thing I should note is that it's actually very rare for someone to just write a check and send it to a developer as cash tends to be considered extremely valuabe.

Sending engineers over to a developer (which is already a regular operating expense), paying for marketing that you can help dictate, making bundles where the console vendor buys X copies of your game to sell as an add-on to their system, or charging reduce (or no) licensing fees are the usual forms of support and "moneyhats".

I would like to note though that PSGL is Sony's custom API and it goes back to PS2. They've also broken with it for PS4 so perhaps the lifespan of easy Vita cross-porting dies with PS3.

There were definitely some changes across the systems. I think they did stick with libGCM for their low level code though and I imagine they may have provided CG -> PSSL conversion toolkits.

Sony's dev environment used to be a total nightmare though until a little after the start of the PS3. After that disastrous launch, they bought a software development studio to just focus on making their tool chain actually good for both internal and external teams, including integrating with environments developers actually used like Visual Studio.

It took a long time for them to get remotely competitive with Microsoft on that front, but it seems to have paid off in the long run.

 

[Opiate]

Right, getting support for all the major middleware and successfully onboarding your customer base to using your digital store front is definitely something that helps tremendously with indies.

Nintendo has been having some success there, especially on Wii U, though only started somewhat recently on that front.

I believe Nintendo's digital sales went down last year. Digital sales going down in 2014 is a really, really bad sign.

 

[Nirolak]

I believe Nintendo's digital sales went down last year. Digital sales going down in 2014 is a really, really bad sign.

Oh sorry, I meant success in terms of starting to get indie developer support for the Wii U as opposed to the broader picture of driving up digital revenue on the whole.

Now, obviously it's not very widespread, but they do at least seem to be getting announcements which is better than the nigh-zero they were at before outside of like four studios whose philosophy appeared to be "Nintendo or bust".

 

[Mpl90]

I believe Nintendo's digital sales went down last year. Digital sales going down in 2014 is a really, really bad sign.

On Wii U, we're seeing the support increasing more and more in the most recent months, and Shovel Knight was definitely a success.

EDIT: I suppose the lower revenues (which were...just around 10% less though, IIRC) are probably due to Animal Crossing: New Leaf not being present this year: that title sold around 100,000 units through eShop on US alone.

 

[BriBri]

I believe Nintendo's digital sales went down last year. Digital sales going down in 2014 is a really, really bad sign.

Animal Crossing was an anomaly. Going down was expected.

 

[Nirolak]

Animal Crossing was an anomaly. Going down was expected.

While I agree with this in the narrow sense, in the broader sense we see most major companies going up every year on the digital front because digital is such a large component of every product they make.

Like even when EA's full price PC downloadable sales fall in an off-year for their PC line-up, we see their digital revenue rise through continued success in mobile or sports game IAP.

Nintendo is still at their core a very packaged goods focus company, which is why something like Animal Crossing getting a lot of download card sales can swing things very heavily.

 

[Opiate]

Oh sorry, I meant success in terms of starting to get indie developer support for the Wii U as opposed to the broader picture of driving up digital revenue on the whole.

Now, obviously it's not very widespread, but they do at least seem to be getting announcements which is better than the nigh-zero they were at before outside of like four studios whose philosophy appeared to be "Nintendo or bust".

On Wii U, we're seeing the support increasing more and more in the most recent months, and Shovel Knight was definitely a success.

EDIT: I suppose the lower revenues (which were...just around 10% less though, IIRC) are probably due to Animal Crossing: New Leaf not being present this year: that title sold around 100,000 units through eShop on US alone.

Yes, I understood that you meant support was increasing, not necessarily sales. I'm just pointing out that decreasing sales softens the impact that improving relations might have.

Put most starkly: it would have been way, way better for Nintendo to get indie-friendly circa 2008, when they had market power, rather than in 2014, when they don't.

Animal Crossing was an anomaly. Going down was expected.

It really shouldn't be. The digital tide is rising so rapidly that "anomalies" should be drowned out in that rising tide. Not every year has a mainline GTA release, but we still expect video game revenue to rise because the market is growing so rapidly that even a game like GTA should be a blip on the radar. The same basic concept applies to digital sales: we're seeing double digit (or even triple digit) growth across a wide variety of platforms in digital sales. That's the sort of growth which should smooth out anomalies like Animal Crossing.

 

[Scum]

I believe Nintendo's digital sales went down last year. Digital sales going down in 2014 is a really, really bad sign.

And you know what I find pathetic? The fact that Nintendo actually has a fair amount of good shit that would be great digitally but its humpered by their crap arse infracstructure and online store. :-/

 

[SwiftDeath]

I kind of feel like Minecraft not being on Wii U or being announced is the perfect example of Nintendo's poor culture of helping/supporting 3rd parties [at least western 3rd parties]

I think it's pretty obvious that Sony worked closely with Mojang and 4J to give them PS3/PS4/PSV versions of Minecraft, either through technical help or promotional offerings etc.

And as Minecraft is to come to Vita, a platform arguably in a worse position than the Wii U in some ways, I truly feel that Nintendo could've forced the issue and gotten Minecraft themselves but simply didn't provide whatever support was needed

I mean can you imagine if Minecraft never comes to the Wii U? The console that should by historic precedence be the most appealing to the age group that is buying Minecraft in spades

 

[Sandfox]

And you know what I find pathetic? The fact that Nintendo actually has a fair amount of good shit that would be great digitally but its humpered by their crap arse infracstructure and online store. :-/

I understand the issue people have with the infastructure, but what's wrong with the store?

 

[prwxv3]

Nintendo also should be doing more to court beyond the established Famicom era big publishers, since those publishers seem predisposed to ignoring them anyway these days. NCL seems totally asleep at the wheel regarding indies in particular by totally ignoring local developers and walling Japan off from western indies. Contrast that with SCEJA, who just had a rather successful showing at TGS showcasing indies both local and foreign.

Didn't Sony pay for the all the indie dev booths at TGS this year?

 

[Nintendojitsu]

Things I expect this week in Japan:

- A smaller than expected drop in Smash Bros. 3DS sales
- 40k minimum for 3DS
- Xbox One in triple digits
- Bayonetta 2 30k?
- PS4 back below 8k
- Destiny dropping -80%

 

[Nirolak]

Didn't Sony pay for the all the indie dev booths at TGS this year?

That would be a pretty good example of the type of co-marketing console vendors do for titles at that scale.

The other half is generally internet focused promotion on the digital storefront and/or console main menu screen, on corporate blogs or videos, and helping get press coverage for the games by bringing them to private press events.

Nintendo did do a good job with Shovel Knight on that front.

 

[metalslimer]

Things I expect this week in Japan:

- A smaller than expected drop in Smash Bros. 3DS sales
- 40k minimum for 3DS
- Xbox One in triple digits
- Bayonetta 2 30k?
- PS4 back below 8k
- Destiny dropping -80%

What's happening to cause a 3DS bump? And the sellouts are going to limit what that game does.

 

[prwxv3]

Sony must be doing something right because the current PS4 support from japan far outclasses what I thought they were going to get months before even if most of it is multiplatform with PSV/PS3.

 

[Takao]

Bayonetta 2's bomba isn't surprising, but it's gotta hurt Nintendo. They actually attempted to court an audience of character action game fans. It's just that no one cared.

 

[Opiate]

Bayonetta 2's bomba isn't surprising, but it's gotta hurt Nintendo. They actually attempted to court an audience of character action game fans. It's just that no one cared.

I feel like almost everyone (not just Nintendo) thinks too much about attracting a genre and not enough about attracting a demographic. The people who play games like Bayonetta are more or less the same people who play Metal Gear and Resident Evil (and GTA, etc. etc.) Yes, these may be different genres, but they all appeal to the same core demographic.

If you frame it as "Nintendo has the most character action games," it might seem like a mystery why they're failing to establish an audience for those titles on their platforms. If you frame it as "Nintendo has the least major games for the 16-35 male audience," then suddenly it all makes sense. It's not Bayonetta Wii U vs. Devil May Cry PS4; it's Bayonetta Wii U vs. Metal Gear PS4 and Resident Evil PS4 and Devil May Cry PS4 and all the rest. The first framing looks like a fair match; the second framing does not.

 

[prwxv3]

I feel like almost everyone (not just Nintendo) thinks too much about attracting a genre and not enough about attracting a demographic. The people who play games like Bayonetta are more or less the same people who play Metal Gear and Resident Evil (and GTA, etc. etc.) Yes, these may be different genres, but they all appeal to the same core demographic.

If you frame it as "Nintendo has the most character action games," it might seem like a mystery why they're failing to establish an audience for those titles on their platforms. If you frame it as "Nintendo has the least major games for the 16-35 male audience," then suddenly it all makes sense. It's not Bayonetta Wii U vs. Devil May Cry PS4; it's Bayonetta Wii U vs. Metal Gear PS4 and Resident Evil PS4 and Devil May Cry PS4 and all the rest. The first framing looks like a fair match; the second framing does not.

This is exactly Nintendo's problem.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

Bayonetta 2's bomba isn't surprising, but it's gotta hurt Nintendo. They actually attempted to court an audience of character action game fans. It's just that no one cared.

Bayonetta was already a game that did not do particularly well. Now have an iteration exclusive to a disastrous console like the WiiU and thats the result. I'm more curious on how the Western sales fare. Interesting to see how much of the original fan base actually thought the sequel warranted a WiiU purchase and how many just didn't care anymore. Obviously, I'm expecting the latter group to be larger.

 

[Scum]

I understand the issue people have with the infastructure, but what's wrong with the store?

The wasted opportunities. Nintendo have a fuck awesome gaming legacy in this industry but are useless at putting it to any good use. VC from Wii to WiiU is a prime example.

I feel like almost everyone (not just Nintendo) thinks too much about attracting a genre and not enough about attracting a demographic. The people who play games like Bayonetta are more or less the same people who play Metal Gear and Resident Evil (and GTA, etc. etc.) Yes, these may be different genres, but they all appeal to the same core demographic.

If you frame it as "Nintendo has the most character action games," it might seem like a mystery why they're failing to establish an audience for those titles on their platforms. If you frame it as "Nintendo has the least major games for the 16-35 male audience," then suddenly it all makes sense. It's not Bayonetta Wii U vs. Devil May Cry PS4; it's Bayonetta Wii U vs. Metal Gear PS4 and Resident Evil PS4 and Devil May Cry PS4 and all the rest. The first framing looks like a fair match; the second framing does not.

"Depressingly Realistic" indeed.

 

[ZSaberLink]

In more relevant news:

[WiiU] Fatal Frame 5 - 33pt (five days left)

Trailer approaching 1 million views: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1rv4GAZoho

[Wii] Fatal Frame 2 - 25pt (final) [ 24,804 ]
[Wii] Fatal Frame 4 - never charted, less than 39pt (final) [ 29,869 ]
[3DS] Spirit Camera - 15pt (final) [ 16,174 ]

Fatal Frame series:

WII : Fatal Frame II: Wii Edition ( Nintendo ) { 2012-06-28 } - 24,804 / 45,143
3DS : Spirit Camera: The Cursed Memoir ( Nintendo ) { 2012-01-12 } - 16,174 / 40,827
WII : Fatal Frame: Tsukihami no Kamen ( Nintendo ) { 2008-07-31 } - 29,869 / 73,449
PS2 : Fatal Frame III: The Tormented ( Tecmo ) { 2005-07-28 } - 46,671 / 69,147
PS2 : Fatal Frame II: Crimson Butterfly ( Tecmo ) { 2003-11-27 } - 42,006 / 64,450
XBX : Fatal Frame ( Tecmo ) { 2003-02-06 } - 2,481 / 6,565
PS2 : Fatal Frame ( Tecmo ) { 2001-12-13 } - 21,770 / 42,195

Btw, I found that Fatal Frame 4's trailer on youtube also had 1M views. However, that is after 6 years of being out, so I don't know how many views it had upon release. At the very least I'd say the trailer is a good sign so far, as it's at least as many views as the Wii game. It'd be cool to see this franchise to continue to grow, and also potentially have something to point to as a relative success on the Wii U. Nice to see that Fatal Frame V is comparing favorably on comgnet as well. Do any folks in Japan know whether the movie is generating any buzz/awareness? Or is it a low budget kind of deal?

Also to those who are saying Bayo 2 < 20K, I think it's a bit early to be that specific. It's probably anywhere 10K-40K at this point. Neither comgnet nor Tsutaya really give any sort of full picture when it comes down to sales. Destiny was clearly over represented on comgnet preorders for example. Keep in mind DKC:TF opened at 45K. If Bayo 2 manages to open over 30K considering how NCL didn't advertise the game, the mismatched market, and the fact that it's really really expensive, I think it did as well as it could have. Also technically Amazon JP had the exclusive Bayo 2 limited edition and it's a bunch cheaper there (7,176 instead of 8,316), so I'd assume more folks just went and bought it from Amazon where it was sitting at #12 around its release.

Fatal Frame has gained another preorder on comgnet - 34 pts now.

Here's a Google translate version of comgnet preorders as of 9/23 8AM.
[3DS] Monster Hunter 4G - 1816pt
[3DS] Pokemon Alpha Sapphire - 188pt
[3DS] Pokemon Ruby Omega - 156pt
[3DS] Pokemon Ruby Omega Alpha Sapphire Double Pack - 94pt
[3DS] Haikyuu!! Tsunage! Itadaki no Keshiki!!,- 80pt <-- This is has been doing pretty well in the preorders. Seems like it's based on an anime?
[PSV] absolute despair girl Dangan refute Another Episode (DanganRonpa?) - 55pt
[3DS] Tales of the World Reve Yunaitia - 52pt
[PS3] Kingdom Hearts - HD 2.5 Remix - - 50pt
[PS3] Psycho Break (PS3) - 40pt
[PS4] Psycho Break (PS4) - 40pt
Trajectory of II [PS3] The Legend of Heroes blende (Normal Edition) - 40pt
Trajectory II of [PSV] The Legend of Heroes blende (Normal Edition) - 39pt
[WiiU] zero ~ &#28641;&#40201; Bruno Miko ~ - 34pt
[PSV] Mahoukakoukounorettousei Out of Order (First Press Limited Edition) - 34pt
Trajectory II Limited Drama CD Bundle of [PSV] The Legend of Heroes blende - 34pt
[PSV] Phantasy Star Nova - 33pt
Trajectory II Limited Drama CD Bundle of [PS3] The Legend of Heroes blende - 31pt
[PS3] Tales of Zesutiria - 31pt
Views of the top! Connected [3DS] Haikyu! (Normal Edition) -! 26pt
[PS3] Shining Resonance (Limited Edition) - 26pt

 

[horuhe]

Here's a Google translate version of comgnet preorders as of 9/23 8AM.

Do you know if there is any thread here in GAF about COMG! points, I am really interested in following that kind of information.

 

[ZSaberLink]

Do you know if there is any thread here in GAF about COMG! points, I am really interested in following that kind of information.

Mpl90 posts them periodically typically on these media create threads. That's usually about it typically.

 

[Hero of Legend]

[3DS] Tales of the World Reve Yunaitia - 52pt

How did Abyss 3DS and the Vita remakes fare here?

 

[ZSaberLink]

How did Abyss 3DS and the Vita remakes fare here?

Found these #s somewhere
ToIR 3 weeks before release on Vita - ToI-R- 128 - 47,312 / 77,505

ToHR preorders day before - Tales of Hearts R - 58, actual sales - 102 - 48,178 / 73,324

So it's hard to tell honestly, but it's a whole month before release, so it's likely to do better than ToHR at least in preorders?

I've just been using this blog: http://nipponsalesage.blogspot.com/ - it also has a link to the comgnet preorders, which gets updated daily at 8AM in Japan. I think Mpl90 might be keeping a record elsewhere or something, since he seems to have ridiculously detailed #s.

 

[horuhe]

Mpl90 posts them periodically typically on these media create threads. That's usually about it typically.

Oh, thanks ZSaberLink. BTW, is the information wrong about Haikyu game? I have supposed that the SKU that has 80 points is the Limited Edition, and the other one is the normal SKU, but it is possible that the Limited Edition has more pre-orders than the normal SKU?

 

[Sammy Samusu]

First day blog is at it again, someone who can read JP should check his latest post!

 

[shinra-bansho]

I feel like almost everyone (not just Nintendo) thinks too much about attracting a genre and not enough about attracting a demographic. The people who play games like Bayonetta are more or less the same people who play Metal Gear and Resident Evil (and GTA, etc. etc.) Yes, these may be different genres, but they all appeal to the same core demographic.

If you frame it as "Nintendo has the most character action games," it might seem like a mystery why they're failing to establish an audience for those titles on their platforms. If you frame it as "Nintendo has the least major games for the 16-35 male audience," then suddenly it all makes sense. It's not Bayonetta Wii U vs. Devil May Cry PS4; it's Bayonetta Wii U vs. Metal Gear PS4 and Resident Evil PS4 and Devil May Cry PS4 and all the rest. The first framing looks like a fair match; the second framing does not.

Completely agree with this. And I'd probably add further that simply having the major games in itself isn't likely enough. The Wii U, for the most part, did have a lot of the major titles on the platform that could appeal to that demographic audience at least at launch; the likes of COD and Assassin's Creed and FIFA, from memory.

But that's just one aspect they need to address. Put simply Nintendo's brand and the product itself simply aren't positioned to attracting that audience.

 

[StevieP]

I kind of feel like Minecraft not being on Wii U or being announced is the perfect example of Nintendo's poor culture of helping/supporting 3rd parties [at least western 3rd parties]

I think it's pretty obvious that Sony worked closely with Mojang and 4J to give them PS3/PS4/PSV versions of Minecraft, either through technical help or promotional offerings etc.

And as Minecraft is to come to Vita, a platform arguably in a worse position than the Wii U in some ways, I truly feel that Nintendo could've forced the issue and gotten Minecraft themselves but simply didn't provide whatever support was needed

I mean can you imagine if Minecraft never comes to the Wii U? The console that should by historic precedence be the most appealing to the age group that is buying Minecraft in spades

From what I've gathered, Notch didn't want his product there.

 

[SwiftDeath]

From what I've gathered, Notch didn't want his product there.

Wow I have literally heard nothing about that. Was there an interview or tweets or something? I've been curious about the reasoning ever since Sony announced a PS3 version of the game