Support NeoGAF

[Primethius]

It's not the benefit of hindsight... The fact that sales of halo games didn't increase with Xbox installed base shows a decline in the titles strength.

No I can't say I predicted a 50% decline. Never gave it that much thought... But given the installed base of the Xbox 1, THE ONLY WAY it could possible do H3 numbers is if it garnered a similar amount of excitement t as H3. The installed bases are nearly identical. The excitement levels aren't even close. Expectations need to consider those facts...



Oh so the fact that there is a lot more competition in the FPS market is irrelevant... Ok.

I'm going to drop this. I've already talked about the upper limits of a titles sales before hand in this thread. And even though you say you're not using the benefit of hindsight, you quite clearly are. The entire argument is premised on the sales numbers we have. This isn't a discussion we are having about sales numbers that have yet to be released.

If that was the case, we'd be discussing these numbers before the games release. Or discussing numbers for Halo 5's NPD release.

 

[Kenzodielocke]

Is is really hard to accept for some, that a Halo game didn't sell as much as it's previous entries, because franchise fatigue and a greater selection of fps games ?

The denial is real.

 

[Synth]

In my very reply, I mention 300k.

And again, now we're just arguing decline percentages with the benefit of hindsight. And that's cool and all. But it's with the benefit of hindsight.

Umm yes... but in my post (that you replied to, remember) I clearly state Halo 3... and you called THAT post revisionist history. I did not say anything about percentages, and predicting 50% drops or whatever... You came at me about revising history for saying essentially that Halo today is clearly not was Halo 3 was in 2007, and that there were plenty of things to suggest this prior to these stats... I mean, sure... you predicted it be 300k+ because you think a growing install base wouldn't have helped Halo games after Halo 3, and that there has been no significant decline over the years since (despite every Halo since failing to top Halo 3's sales overall), and that switching to a new gen with the console as the underdog would have no effect, and that prior games getting mixed or poor receptions wouldn't change anything...

but... don't take it out on me because I'd have guessed less wrongly than you apparently did.

 

[Trup1aya]

I'm going to drop this. I've already talked about the upper limits of a titles sales before hand in this thread. And even though you say you're not using the benefit of hindsight, you quite clearly are. The entire argument is premised on the sales numbers we have. This isn't a discussion we are having about sales numbers that have yet to be released.

If that was the case, we'd be discussing these numbers before the games release. Or discussing numbers for Halo 5's NPD release.

All I'm saying is that I personally noticed a lack of hype surrounding halo 5 when compared to H3. I was there when Halo 3 launched. I don't think it takes a crystal ball to see that H5 can't do H3 numbers in this climate.

If that makes me a revisionist or whatever, so be it. If MS analysts thought they could do H3 numbers without generating H3 hype, then they are stupid.

 

[GnawtyDog]

So we're going to get numbers today right?

 

[Dash_Riprock]

So we're going to get numbers today right?

For the US? We should at least get something from MS. If not...

 

[Primethius]

All I'm saying is that I personally noticed a lack of hype surrounding halo 5 when compared to H3. I was there when Halo 3 launched. I don't think it takes a crystal ball to see that H5 can't do H3 numbers in this climate.

If that makes me a revisionist or whatever, so be it. If MS analysts thought they could do H3 numbers without generating H3 hype, then they are stupid.

Alright, cool.

Umm yes... but in my post (that you replied to, remember) I clearly state Halo 3... and you called THAT post revisionist history. I did not say anything about percentages, and predicting 50% drops or whatever... You came at me about revising history for saying essentially that Halo today is clearly not was Halo 3 was in 2007, and that there were plenty of things to suggest this prior to these stats... I mean, sure... you predicted it be 300k+ because you think a growing install base wouldn't have helped Halo games after Halo 3, and that there has been no significant decline over the years since (despite every Halo since failing to top Halo 3's sales overall), and that switching to a new gen with the console as the underdog would have no effect, and that prior games getting mixed or poor receptions wouldn't change anything...

but... don't take it out on me because I'd have guessed less wrongly than you apparently did.

I mean, not really? I called the notion of the game not hitting those numbers (above 300k) revisionist. Halo 3 had great numbers. Reach peaked even larger. 4 did above 300k. You're sticking on this whole idea of not hitting Halo 3 numbers but ignoring the rest of what I'm saying. It's not as if MS expected Halo 5 to hit exactly Halo 3's numbers. Like, there's going to be some variation, yes? Given the data we have, the easy expectation is 300k+ which I mentioned in the reply. Comparing them to Sega suggests that MS should've expected these sales in a way (150k) rather then 300k. That's what I'm calling revisionist.

So we're going to get numbers today right?

It's looking less and less likely.

 

[EzekelRAGE]

For the US? We should at least get something from MS. If not...

At this point you can probably expect something like "Globally, the Halo brand made more than most of the Top 5 movies of the US box office on Halloween weekend." Then we can argue whether they meant most as in the top 3 or bottom 3 of the top 5. Or whether they are talking revenue of the movies w/o IMAX. etc. Or since they said brand, they will write that off as a mistype or use other metrics ppl grasp at straws to defend the title doing poorly compared to previous ones.

 

[Trup1aya]

Alright, cool.



I mean, not really? I called the notion of the game not hitting those numbers (above 300k) revisionist. Halo 3 had great numbers. Reach peaked even larger. 4 did above 300k. You're sticking on this whole idea of not hitting Halo 3 numbers but ignoring the rest of what I'm saying. It's not as if MS expected Halo 5 to hit exactly Halo 3's numbers. Like, there's going to be some variation, yes? Given the data we have, the easy expectation is 300k+ which I mentioned in the reply. Comparing them to Sega suggests that MS should've expected these sales in a way (150k) rather then 300k. That's what I'm calling revisionist.

Smh, why do you keep ignoring installed base as a relevant variable?

H4 did less than H3 numbers with 4x the installed base...

And now we expect H5 to do H4 with 1/4 the installed base?

And to expect otherwise is to be revisionist. Ok let ignore all the pertinent variables, and base our entire expectations on a single constant...

That would make the job of an analysts really easy

 

[Primethius]

Smh, why do you keep ignoring installed base as a relevant variable?

H4 did less than H3 numbers with 4x the installed base...

And now we expect H5 to do H4 with 1/4 the installed base?

And to expect otherwise is to be revisionist. Ok let ignore all the pertinent variables, and base our entire expectations on a single constant...

That would make the job of an analysts really easy

Title's have upper limits. Like, it's not as if there's a 1 to 1 correlation between hardware sales and software sales. Userbases do have limits. Some titles break away from the mold and are much bigger but not most.

And that's why I said earlier, this is all speculative. What I am proposing and what you are proposing in regards to prior game sales data. But you keep ignoring that.

 

[Synth]

I mean, not really? I called the notion of the game not hitting those numbers (above 300k) revisionist. Halo 3 had great numbers. Reach peaked even larger. 4 did above 300k. You're sticking on this whole idea of not hitting Halo 3 numbers but ignoring the rest of what I'm saying. It's not as if MS expected Halo 5 to hit exactly Halo 3's numbers. Like, there's going to be some variation, yes? Given the data we have, the easy expectation is 300k+ which I mentioned in the reply. Comparing them to Sega suggests that MS should've expected these sales in a way (150k) rather then 300k. That's what I'm calling revisionist.

So basically you're saying my post is revisionist based on things I didn't say, but rather the blanks that you fill in with numbers such as 300k, 50%, etc, and what I apparently suggested by invoking Sega's name (I mean.. is that what did it for you? Really?).

Yes I'm sticking with the bloody Halo 3 numbers, because that was what was in the post that you responded to in the first place! If you didn't disagree with that metric specifically, then we shouldn't be having this conversation... holy shit...

I need a GAF-break. Later.

 

[Trup1aya]

Title's have upper limits. Like, it's not as if there's a 1 to 1 correlation between hardware sales and software sales. Userbases do have limits. Some titles break away from the mold and are much bigger but not most.

And that's why I said earlier, this is all speculative. What I am proposing and what you are proposing in regards to prior game sales data. But you keep ignoring that.

No there isn't a 1 to 1 correlation, but there IS a correlation. Why else do publishers consider installed base when deciding to support a platform?

To expect H5 to sell like H4 suggests there is no correlation at all...

To suggest H5 to sell like H3 suggests that interest in a product has less of an effect on sales than brand name.

Both of those things are known to be false. Doesn't matter what your brand is, if there is less interest in your product, it will sell less.

What information leading into H5's launch would lead anyone to believe that H5 would reach the franchises upper limit? H3 did it because of an before unseen amount of hype. H4 had a much larger pool of potential buyers. What did H5 have going for it other than being a Halo title?

 

[Three]

There's nothing wrong with ascribing reasons to why the game fell. I've done that too. What I'm arguing about is how ridiculous the notion is that people predicted the franchise would decline 50%. And hey, I already stated, if you predicted this decline, more power to you. But it comes as a surprise to the vast majority of people in the sales threads (and I'm sure MS included).

Totally agree. Too easy say this AFTER the numbers are out. I ALWAYS made predictions numbers.

Not to blow my own trumpet or anything but I actually did predict a considerable drop. Enough to make it one of the lowest selling in the series but that financially it would be ok.
http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=183701474&postcount=338

 

[Primethius]

So basically you're saying my post is revisionist based on things I didn't say, but rather the blanks that you fill in with numbers such as 300k, 50%, etc, and what I apparently suggested by invoking Sega's name (I mean.. is that what did it for you? Really?).

Yes I sticking with the bloody Halo 3 numbers, because that was what was in the post that you responded to in the first place! If you didn't disagree with that metric specifically, then we shouldn't be having this conversation... holy shit...

I need a GAF-break. Later.

You're post said that Microsoft was like Sega if they expected Halo 3 numbers. There's a range for that. I said it was revisionist to look at it that way because of the data we currently with all the other Halo titles. And I even clarified it by including the 300k part in the my initial reply (as in that's the range that MS was likely expecting it above).

I'm not sure what else to say. I don't think I suggested you said anything you actually didn't. Like, isn't that the general, overall point? That sales expectations on the level of Halo 3 are pretty much in line with 3/4/Reach?

No there isn't a 1 to 1 correlation, but there IS a correlation. Why else do publishers consider installed base when deciding to support a platform?

To expect H5 to sell like H4 suggests there is no correlation at all...

To suggest H5 to sell like H3 suggests that interest in a product has less of an effect on sales than brand name.

Both of those things are known to be false. Doesn't matter what your brand is, if there is less interest in your product, it will sell less.

What information leading into H5's launch would lead anyone to believe that H5 would reach the franchises upper limit? H3 did it because of an before unseen amount of hype. H4 had a much larger pool of potential buyers. What did H5 have going for it other than being a Halo title?

...I think you're actually ignoring my posts at this point. I never suggested, once, that it would reach the upper limits of the franchise. But rather that MS likely had expectations for it to sell above 300k, which is in line with the series accounting for a small drop. Then you brought in a bunch of speculative stuff that can easily be countered by other speculative stuff which is why I suggested we don't dabble in that.

Not to blow my own trumpet or anything but I actually did predict a considerable drop. Enough to make it one of the lowest selling in the series but that financially it would be ok.
http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=183701474&postcount=338

I can respect this. Props to you.

 

[Trup1aya]

You're post said that Microsoft was like Sega if they expected Halo 3 numbers. There's a range for that. I said it was revisionist to look at it that way because of the data we currently with all the other Halo titles. And I even clarified it by including the 300k part in the my initial reply (as in that's the range that MS was likely expecting it above).

I'm not sure what else to say. I don't think I suggested you said anything you actually didn't. Like, isn't that the general, overall point? That sales expectations on the level of Halo 3 are pretty much in line with 3/4/Reach?



...I think you're actually ignoring my posts at this point. I never suggested, once, that it would reach the upper limits of the franchise. But rather that MS likely had expectations for it to sell above 300k, which is in line with the series accounting for a small drop. Then you brought in a bunch of speculative stuff that can easily be countered by other speculative stuff which is why I suggested we don't dabble in that.



I can respect this. Props to you.

You had chosen to expect Halo will always do 300,000, because Halo, ignoring ALL of the variables that lead each installment to reach those numbers...

When you are attempting to ANALYZE something with the intent of giving a PROJECTION. the entire point is to try to anticipate what effect different variables will have on the end result. The entire process is inherently speculative. But it isn't blind speculation. One can make informed estimations given what we know IN ADDITION to the initial sales of other installments. If you are content with ignoring all variables altogether, then your expectations will always be shitty.

300,000 is extremely close to the franchises upper limits... Given the current climate, The amount of interest in H5 would have had to be very near that of H3 to get that type of reception on launch week.

Like, I said, I was there in the build up to H3, the built up to H5 doesn't remotely compare. So the drop off isn't all that surprising.

I'd bet my house that MS' likely very well paid analysts are actual expected to consider variables in the market place when making sales projections... If they didn't, and assumed that the Halo name alone would net them 300,000 in UK in one week, then they just aren't good their jobs... They'd be better if hiring a poster from GAF.

 

[hawk2025]

Ok, we need to clear the air here a bit on just one point:

One can't just claim a whole lot about how people should or shouldn't be making projections and should have seen this coming, and then use as evidence something akin to "I wasn't really seeing the hype like with Halo 3".

You want to be objective, data-driven, go for it. But using as evidence a crazy mix of the anecdotal + subjective "hype meter" is just way out there. Stick with the line that competition is stronger in 2015 then it was back then. But you have no earthly clue how to measure the "hype".

 

[pixelation]

Is is really hard to accept for some, that a Halo game didn't sell as much as it's previous entries, because franchise fatigue and a greater selection of fps games ?

The denial is real.

I had been saying that Halo ain't the giant that it used to be for a while now... no one believed me.

 

[Primethius]

You had chosen to expect Halo will always do 300,000, because Halo, ignoring ALL of the variables that lead each installment to reach those numbers...

When you are attempting to ANALYZE something with the intent of giving a PROJECTION. the entire point is to try to anticipate what effect different variables will have on the end result. The entire process is inherently speculative. But it isn't blind speculation. One can make informed estimations given what we know IN ADDITION to the initial sales of other installments. If you are content with ignoring all variables altogether, then your expectations will always be shitty.

300,000 is extremely close to the franchises upper limits... Given the current climate, The amount of interest in H5 would have had to be very near that of H3 to get that type of reception on launch week.

Like, I said, I was there in the build up to H3, the built up to H5 doesn't remotely compare. So the drop off isn't all that surprising.

I'd bet my house that MS' likely very well paid analysts are actual expected to consider variables in the market place when making sales projections... If they didn't, and assumed that the Halo name alone would net them 300,000 in UK in one week, then they just aren't good their jobs... They'd be better if hiring a poster from GAF.

It's clear you're not reading what I'm saying at all and at this point, it's basically like we're talking past each other.

So, you have my congratulations for predicting what MS analysts could not alongside many on this very board.

Bravo. I'm out.

 

[Trup1aya]

Ok, we need to clear the air here a bit on just one point:

One can't just claim a whole lot about how people should or shouldn't be making projections and should have seen this coming, and then use as evidence something akin to "I wasn't really seeing the hype like with Halo 3".

You want to be objective, data-driven, go for it. But using as evidence a crazy mix of the anecdotal + subjective "hype meter" is just way out there. Stick with the line that competition is stronger in 2015 then it was back then. But you have no earthly clue how to measure the "hype".

I don't think we need concrete data to know that the general public was less interested in h5 than h3. Lower pre-orders. Fewer midnight releases. Much less media attention, cheaper commercial spots.

Don't need to have a hype ruler see that the atmosphere surrounding the two launches are very different.

And any analysis is going to take some speculation along with the data interpretation. There is no exact science to figuring out how a given variable is going to effect sales... That's the nature of estimates. There is a bit of guess work involved

 

[Obliterator]

Stop getting caught up on "the upper limits"

Its about performing "in line" with the franchises traditional sales.

 

[hawk2025]

I don't think we need concrete data to know that the general public was less interested in h5 than h3. Lower pre-orders. Fewer midnight releases. Much less media attention, cheaper commercial spots.

Don't need to have a hype ruler see that the atmosphere surrounding the two launches are very different.

What were the pre-order numbers?
How many midnight releases were there?
How much was the marketing budget?
How much less media attention?

 

[Trup1aya]

What were the pre-order numbers?
How many midnight releases were there?
How much was the marketing budget?
How much less media attention?

All less than H3 for sure.

 

[hawk2025]

All less than H3 for sure.

Ok, carry on. I've made my point.

 

[Synth]

You're post said that Microsoft was like Sega if they expected Halo 3 numbers. There's a range for that. I said it was revisionist to look at it that way because of the data we currently with all the other Halo titles. And I even clarified it by including the 300k part in the my initial reply (as in that's the range that MS was likely expecting it above).

I'm not sure what else to say. I don't think I suggested you said anything you actually didn't. Like, isn't that the general, overall point? That sales expectations on the level of Halo 3 are pretty much in line with 3/4/Reach?

How can you sit there and claim that you never suggested I said anything I didn't... you read:

"If they thought they were gonna pull a Halo 3 in 2015... then they're slowly turning into Sega."

somehow translated that internally into:

"There's no way a 50% drop should come as a surprise to anyone. MS are like Sega, and just for clarification, Sega means that they expect 300k rather than 150k. Everyone could have predicted the exact percentage disparity."

and then claim MY post is revisionist history based on all the additional fiction you added to it... You know what IS revisionist history? Your account of my post.

It doesn't even matter what numbers you gave in that post. Your response started by calling my post revisionist history ("at best" even)... you can't do that, and then start establishing the criteria after the fact. How the hell does the name "Sega" have a range? How does that definitely mean they should have guessed 150k, rather than maybe 250k? If I had said Nintendo instead, would you have read that as a completely separate fictional value? I threw Sega in there as a light-hearted quip... and then you go extracting "ranges" and all other sorts of deep and meaningfuls from it. I'm fucking stunned tbh.

You're not sure what else to say? How about nothing, which would seemingly have been the correct course of action to have started out with if you were just going to make up what I said and/or meant from the outset.

I had been saying that Halo ain't the giant that it used to be for a while now... no one believed me.

Primethius still doesn't believe you. It's all hindsight.

 

[Trup1aya]

Stop getting caught up on "the upper limits"

Its about performing "in line" with the franchises traditional sales.

Inline with traditional sales if you are content with ignoring all of the variables that went along with the launch of each title in the franchise.

Analysts don't get paid to ignore variables. They are paid to determine what impact these variable will have. Assuming a halo title will sell like previous halo titles simply because it's a halo title is not good marketplace analysis.

 

[Obliterator]

Inline with traditional sales if you are content with ignoring all of the variables that went along with the launch of each title in the franchise.

Analysts don't get paid to ignore variables. They are paid to determine what impact these variable will have. Assuming a halo title will sell like previous halo titles simply because it's a halo title is not good analysis.

Also going in and assuming your game is going to drop off considerably isnt good analysis.

Expectations are also set far before release.

Edit: MS may be more than happy with current numbers that's possible. I'm not trying to say they aren't. Expectations can be revised. It happens all the time

 

[Trup1aya]

Also going in and assuming your game is going to drop off considerably isnt good analysis.

Expectations are also set far before release.

I'm not saying you set the bar low. Surely you don't aim for a drop-off. But I don't think an analysts job is to paint a picture rosier than the reality. If MS woke up 5 days after launch and were absolutely surprised That they didn't hit 300,000 then someone didn't do their job.

I believe they had a better idea what sell through would be leading up to launch...

Edit: well then. We may have been arguing semantics the whole time. When you entered the thread saying MS expected sales like the other games, I and many others took it to mean MS was caught off guard by the live numbers. I think maybe at some point in the planning phases, MS would have been targeting 300k+. But in the build up to launch, there's no way they were expecting that many sales. surely they noticed they didn't generate enough interest for that kind of success, prior to these numbers being posted.

 

[Obliterator]

I'm not saying you set the bar low. Surely you don't aim for a drop-off. But I don't think an analysts job is to paint a picture rosier than the reality. If MS woke up 5 days after launch and were absolutely surprised That they didn't hit 300,000 then someone didn't do their job.

I believe they had a better idea what sell through would be leading up to launch...

I dont disagree with any of that really.

But when the game was budgeted and was being developed the expectation would have been different.

 

[Primethius]

How can you sit there and claim that you never suggested I said anything I didn't... you read:

"If they thought they were gonna pull a Halo 3 in 2015... then they're slowly turning into Sega."

somehow translated that internally into:

"There's no way a 50% drop should come as a surprise to anyone. MS are like Sega, and just for clarification, Sega means that they expect 300k rather than 150k. Everyone could have predicted the exact percentage disparity."

and then claim MY post is revisionist history based on all the additional fiction you added to it... You know what IS revisionist history? Your account of my post.

It doesn't even matter what numbers you gave in that post. Your response started by calling my post revisionist history ("at best" even)... you can't do that, and then start establishing the criteria after the fact. How the hell does the name "Sega" have a range? How does that definitely mean they should have guessed 150k, rather than maybe 250k? If I had said Nintendo instead, would you have read that as a completely separate fictional value? I threw Sega in there as a light-hearted quip... and then you go extracting "ranges" and all other sorts of deep and meaningfuls from it. I'm fucking stunned tbh.

You're not sure what else to say? How about nothing, which would seemingly have been the correct course of action to have started out with if you were just going to make up what I said and/or meant from the outset.



Primethius still doesn't believe you. It's all hindsight.

Is this some sort of joke? Or do you actually ignore context and what I've iterated time and time again just push whatever the hell kind of narrative this is?

And then you go and put words in my mouth? You know what? This isn't even worth it.

Like with Trup1aya, I give up. You are absolutely right. Congrats and peace out.

 

[Spaghetti]

anecdotally, i think the mainstream star of halo has fallen a little in the UK.

i've known a lot of halo fans in my time but it doesn't seem like they've been particularly interested in 5 for whatever reason. a lot of them are in the early to mid 20s where maybe interest in gaming in general starts to drop off though, so who really knows.

 

[Trup1aya]

I dont disagree with any of that really.

But when the game was budgeted and was being developed the expectation would have been different.

I mentioned it in an edit, but yeah I think we just got off on the wrong foot regarding the word expectation.

Your were more or less talking about an initial target, from 3-4 years ago, where I'm talking about projections based on what MS should know about the market now. seeing this misunderstanding maybe we never disagreed...

Primethius, wtf where you ever talking about bro? Coming into a thread about reality vs speculation, suggesting that anyone who didn't thing H5 should do H3 numbers is a revisionist? Leading up to launch if anyone should have known it wouldn't hit 300k it was MS. Personally, I didn't see it either. If that's beyond belief for you, who cares really? If your gonna leave do so, but keep my name out of your mouth.

 

[Obliterator]

I mentioned it in an edit, but yeah I think we just got off on the wrong foot regarding the word expectation.

Your were more or less talking about an initial target, from 3-4 years ago, where I'm talking about projections based on what MS should know about the market now. seeing this misunderstanding maybe we never disagreed...

I wasn't talking as far back as 3-4 years ago. Much more recently than that.

I'm just saying I doubt that they are surprised currently at what it has sold. But thats not the expectation, its a revised one

 

[Synth]

Is this some sort of joke? Or do you actually ignore context and what I've iterated time and time again just push whatever the hell kind of narrative this is?

And then you go and put words in my mouth? You know what? This isn't even worth it.

Like with Trup1aya, I give up. You are absolutely right. Congrats and peace out.

lol... context...

You replied to a single line post, and called it revisionist history. My post is the context. My post was the narrative. And yes, I am absolutely right about what I myself posted.

Bye.

 

[slavesnyder]

Arguing with the low install base is lazy.
Halo was sent out to drive console sales.
If with the biggest franchise of the platform the install base does not go up significantly, well...

 

[Obliterator]

Arguing with the low install base is lazy.
Halo was sent out to drive console sales.
If with the biggest franchise of the platform the install base does not go up significantly, well...

There is already pretty definitive proof install base doesnt effect Halo launch volume

 

[Trup1aya]

I wasn't talking as far back as 3-4 years ago. Much more recently than that.

I'm just saying I doubt that they are surprised currently at what it has sold. But thats not the expectation, its a revised one

How much more recently then? Your saying it would have been an expectation from when it was budgeted... Hell from E3 on, I think it was clear this game couldn't come close to replicating H3... Probably even before that.

 

[JaggedSac]

What were the pre-order numbers?
How many midnight releases were there?
How much was the marketing budget?
How much less media attention?

Good questions

 

[Trup1aya]

Arguing with the low install base is lazy.
Halo was sent out to drive console sales.
If with the biggest franchise of the platform the install base does not go up significantly, well...

After Halo 3, none of the Halo's had a significant impact on console sales... The series was just coasting on 360.

There is already pretty definitive proof install base doesnt effect Halo launch volume

What proof do you have that installed base isn't what previously kept launch volume from dropping?

 

[Chobel]

Here's your problem Trup1aya, you're practically arguing why it did happen, while most of us are discussing what it could have happened. I mean this part

What were the pre-order numbers?
How many midnight releases were there?
How much was the marketing budget?
How much less media attention?

All less than H3 for sure.

You have no idea about this, you only answer it with certainty here because it did happen.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

What proof do you have that installed base isn't what previously kept launch volume from dropping?

What are you talking about here? His point is simple: Halo can sell huge even with limited install base. See Halo 2 and Halo 3.

 

[Trup1aya]

Here's your problem Trup1aya, you're practically arguing why it did happen, while most of us are discussing what it could have happened. I mean this part



You have no idea about this, you only answer it with certainty here because it did happen.

Yeah ok.

I think it's fair to take a small sample and extrapolate to a conclusion that is representative of a larger trend.

No I have exact numbers on any of this. But I do know that on when halo 3 launched, there was hardly a Best Buy, GameStop or EB games in my large metropolitan home town that didn't have a midnight launch. People pitched tents over 24hrs in advance. Shopping malls opened up at midnight to sell the game. News cameras were everywhere. Even national news had headlines about it. There were quite a few high profile cross promotions. The following morning, there was coverage of mini-riots, robberies, and injuries all pertaining to people trying to get their hands on a copy.

There was a distinct lack of any of that this time around. Sure this is all anecdotal evidence, but h5 didn't garner anything close that from where I sit. Coupled with what I take to be clear data-driven indications of weakening brand strength, I'd have been surprised if this wasn't a symptom of a larger trend. That's why I suspected H5 would fall well short of H3. So if you think I'm only saying that because of the posted number oh well... I just thought it was obvious, given the current atmosphere than H5 wouldn't be close to that.

What are you talking about here? His point is simple: Halo can sell huge even with limited install base. See Halo 2 and Halo 3.

Yes Halo HAS sold huge with limited installed base... But just because it did it in the past, doesn't Make it safe to assume H5 would repeat that .there were leading indicators prior to the release of those 2 games that suggested such success would happen. Those Indicators that were not present with the launch of 5. And each of those game had a high attach rates and drove hardware sales...

Each subsequent game had lower attach rates, and were less effective at driving hardware sales... To me, those facts are trailing indicators of weakening brand strength. Which is something that should have been considered when making estimates...

 

[CLEEK]

I say this as someone who has Halo as my all time favourite game series. But it's a good thing if MS and Ubisoft have seen weakened sales for Halo and AC this year. It shows that their customers have reacted to their short term fuckery of last year, where they rushed out unfinished games to the market, then took months upon months to patch them into shape.

It's not like 343 or Ubisoft will go bankrupt is they sell 50% less than previous entries. Nor is the franchise itself at real risk of failing. But a bloodied nose is exactly when these two - and the wider industry - needed. Short term gouging of your customers will only pay off in a small window of time, but have a negative impact on the mid- and long term.

 

[IvorB]

I say this as someone who has Halo as my all time favourite game series. But it's a good thing if MS and Ubisoft have seen weakened sales for Halo and AC this year. It shows that their customers have reacted to their short term fuckery of last year, where they rushed out unfinished games to the market, then took months upon months to patch them into shape.

It's not like 343 or Ubisoft will go bankrupt is they sell 50% less than previous entries. Nor is the franchise itself at real risk of failing. But a bloodied nose is exactly when these two - and the wider industry - needed. Short term gouging of your customers will only pay off in a tine window of time, but have a negative impact on the mid- and long term.

Yeah I'm more than happy to see the chickens come home to roost for publishers that push out broken, unfinished games.

 

[L4nnist3r]

As long as they have this franchise in a year to year basis, sales will continue to decrease. people already showing Halo fatigue.

 

[DarthWalden]

I dont disagree with any of that really.

But when the game was budgeted and was being developed the expectation would have been different.

The game would have had to set it's budget probably 2-3 years ago, before XB1s and MCCs disastrous launches.

Of course expectation have been revised since then so when you say they didn't meet you expectations based on a pre-xb1 launch figure then that's not really saying a whole lot.

 

[super6646]

7.7 million pounds in revenue for the first day in UK. Not bad. If we assume the average selling price is 50 pounds (with all the limited editions and everything) that gives us 154k first day with digital. So it did at least 200k first week, not Halo 3 numbers, but not bad.

 

[crazyprac]

if no pr at 8est, don't think well get any till NPD which like BGamer noted will be telling.

 

[MrCookiepants]

Nobody should be surprised. There was no hype for this. Only the hardcore fans were talking about it.

 

[Bishop89]

Nobody should be surprised. There was no hype for this. Only the hardcore fans were talking about it.

I have only seen one commercial for it, and that was probably a week or two ago. Whereas I'm being flooded with asscreed ads non stop (Australia)

 

[super6646]

With digital, I could see 200-250k (as revenue was reported at 7.7 million pounds day 1). But its clear with no sales figures from NA, Halo 5 surely didn't do as well as hoped. Add the fact that the Xbox One may have lost this month's NDP, its clear that making exclusives isn't working. Phil is a great guy, but its becoming clear he can't fix the sales problem the Xbox has. He's unwilling to cut the price, and bundling games is a losing strategy. Microsoft blew it out of the water last year, it seems you get LESS value as an Xbox owner if you jump in this year. Perfect storm for Sony, perfect reck for Microsoft.

 

[ethomaz]

First week sales revenue for Halo 2 and 3.

Halo 2 - £9.7 million / 260,000 units
Halo 3 - £16.9 million / 370,000 units
Halo 5 - £7.7 million (day one)

It is fair to say that first week sales revenue at least matched Halo 2 even taking into account that sales were possibly frontloaded. There is also the fact that Halo 5 was released on Tuesday so it had 5 days of tracking.

For me that just shows they are including hardware on Halo 5 revenue if it did 150k retail week 1.