Media Create Sales: Week 05, 2011 (Jan 31 - Feb 6)

Feb 21, 2007
46,805
0
0
Texas
viciouskillersquirrel said:
Opportunity cost.

They could make a grab for that money, but it would mean teaching people that if they wait long enough, that games will go down in price. This compromises their ability to sell you another $50 piece of software later on (or even instead of the software you were considering). You'll just wait a little while and get it for cheaper. Maybe they worked out that selling software at full price nets them higher profits than going after the cut-price market.

Iwata talked about this during an interview around the beginning of the gen.
He did. He made it clear that Nintendo was very much against dropping the price of games when they get older. However, isn't this what all developers ideally would prefer? To never drop the price of their games would mean more money! However, it doesn't work that way. And even though Nintendo's reasoning behind not price dropping games is to "train" a consumer to learn that the price on their games won't drop, how many people are actually going to learn when developers like SEGA, Capcom, Activision etc. do drop prices of their games, rather quickly even. I just don't think the consumer will look at a game and say "oh, this one is made by Nintendo so the price won't drop on this one" I think the consumer will look at games generally and think more on the lines of "well, most of the time the price of games drop after a while so I'll wait"
 
Oct 14, 2006
18,101
0
1,155
perfectchaos007 said:
He did. He made it clear that Nintendo was very much against dropping the price of games when they get older. However, isn't this what all developers ideally would prefer? To never drop the price of their games would mean more money! However, it doesn't work that way. And even though Nintendo's reasoning behind not price dropping games is to "train" a consumer to learn that the price on their games won't drop, how many people are actually going to learn when developers like SEGA, Capcom, Activision etc. do drop prices of their games, rather quickly even. I just don't think the consumer will look at a game and say "oh, this one is made by Nintendo so the price won't drop on this one" I think the consumer will look at games generally and think more on the lines of "well, most of the time the price of games drop after a while so I'll wait"
The difference is that thanks to brand power (for things like Mario etc.) people want Nintendo's games. On the Wii, at least, most of the games worth having are published by Nintendo, so when a customer is faced with a choice between two games, it's often a choice between Game A published by Nintendo and Game B published by Nintendo.

Nintendo is perfectly happy to sell them Game A even though Game B is newer, as long as they don't leave money on the table in doing so. If Game A had dropped in price, then Nintendo would lose that opportunity to sell them Game B at full price. If Game A is full price and Game B is also full price, then no matter who loses, Nintendo wins.
 
Jun 7, 2004
30,398
1
0
37
Orange County, CA
Chris1964 said:
I guess when Disgaea 4 doesn't sell 200k stock will plummet?


I'm very late again but Disgaea 3 had shipped 80k at first week.
D3 sold 55k first week. So they're saying they want D4 to sell 100k first week.

Which I think it's very unrealistic and most likely it'll do 50-75k.
 
Dec 18, 2004
1,611
1
1,295
Bebpo said:
D3 sold 55k first week. So they're saying they want D4 to sell 100k first week.

Which I think it's very unrealistic and most likely it'll do 50-75k.
What I find even stranger about the whole situation is that in their 3rd quarter reports, they reported they were lowering their estimated forecast for the year due to lower then expected D4 Pre-orders, did investors just ignore that fact? Or perhapses investors are just happy NIS isn't losing that much money anymore?
 

HK-47

Oh, bitch bitch bitch.
Oct 24, 2007
49,170
0
1,010
viciouskillersquirrel said:
AAI2 doing less than the previous one isn't surprising, to be honest. AAI2 just wasn't up to the quality set by the first three mainline AA games.

Also, did TLS get a restock? If so, how big?
Then again neither was AJ and thats the best selling one.
 
Jun 7, 2004
114,759
1
0
37
FINALFANTASYDOG said:
What I find even stranger about the whole situation is that in their 3rd quarter reports, they reported they were lowering their estimated forecast for the year due to lower then expected D4 Pre-orders, did investors just ignore that fact? Or perhapses investors are just happy NIS isn't losing that much money anymore?
N1 asked investors to help artificially raise the price of their shares by promising them Etna's used panties.
 
Oct 18, 2007
1,561
0
0
taking out the GBA slot from the DSi gave them room to slim down the system even more. i don't think they could slim the Wii since the disc drive caps the size and the GC stuff wouldn't make a difference. at most, they could chop a bit from the rear but that's it. after all, the Wii is a big GC redesign at the core with several new things added to it.

better hope they don't make the sucessor that small to give room for more powerful hardware.
 
Feb 21, 2007
46,805
0
0
Texas
viciouskillersquirrel said:
The difference is that thanks to brand power (for things like Mario etc.) people want Nintendo's games. On the Wii, at least, most of the games worth having are published by Nintendo, so when a customer is faced with a choice between two games, it's often a choice between Game A published by Nintendo and Game B published by Nintendo.

Nintendo is perfectly happy to sell them Game A even though Game B is newer, as long as they don't leave money on the table in doing so. If Game A had dropped in price, then Nintendo would lose that opportunity to sell them Game B at full price. If Game A is full price and Game B is also full price, then no matter who loses, Nintendo wins.
Well they left plenty of money on the table in my case. I can think of 3 Wii games I would have bought if they were players choice priced. That un-spent money did not go toward any other Nintendo game I purchased.
 
Oct 18, 2007
1,561
0
0
they should at least make a player's choice lineup when the sucessor rolls. they usually stop making games for the old systems before everyone else so they wouldn't be cutting in their new game's sales and end-of-generation software doesn't reach sales as high as the ones that came in the middle or early often because people are focusing on the new system. also, it's not like most people will wait all those years and play last gen stuff just to save a buck and those who wait wouldn't have bought at the higher price anyway.
 
Oct 14, 2006
18,101
0
1,155
perfectchaos007 said:
Well they left plenty of money on the table in my case. I can think of 3 Wii games I would have bought if they were players choice priced. That un-spent money did not go toward any other Nintendo game I purchased.
Anecdotal and since you post on GAF, you're clearly an outlier.

On the large, it works out that it's more profitable over the long term to keep prices high, especially if you have a monopoly or a near-monopoly. It's what every monopoly does and it works.



In this (very simple) example, notice how the profit curve reaches a maximum somewhere to the left of where the supply and demand curves cross? This is important, because the x-axis is the number of units sold and the place where the supply and demand curves cross is what the price and quantity sold would be under perfect competition. Thing is, a monopoly can charge whatever price they want and because they want to make the most amount of money they can, it's actually in their interest to sell less but make more money on each unit.

Yes, less software is consumed than the free market would dictate as optimal (i.e. marginal revenue < price), but the monopoly makes more money. Let's face it, on the Wii, inasfar as quality software goes, Nintendo is a de-facto monopoly.

EDIT: Just so you know, the profit curve is derived from the other two curves.

Profit = Units sold x (Sale price on the Demand Curve - Cost on the Supply Curve)
 
Oct 14, 2006
18,101
0
1,155
Sage00 said:
Neoclassical/orthodox economic theory is not applicable to real world scenarios.
It's a model used to approximate real-world behaviour and history has borne this particular maxim out time and again - monopolies have a vested interest in keeping prices high. I was using the model to try to explain why that's the case.

It's like saying that Newtonian physics isn't applicable to the real world because it doesn't describe what's really going on. No, it doesn't always give you the exact answers you need, but it's good enough for most purposes (like getting to the moon).
 
Feb 21, 2007
46,805
0
0
Texas
Although a lot of the titles sold on Wii are first party and made by Nintendo, I believe at last press by Nintendo it was declared that more than half of all Wii titles sold were 3rd party. So I have a hard time accepting that Nintendo's games control a monopoly. Maybe monopolistic competition, but I think it's more of an oligopoly right now.
 

Sage00

Once And Future Member
Oct 29, 2006
6,485
0
0
Japan
viciouskillersquirrel said:
It's a model used to approximate real-world behaviour and history has borne this particular maxim out time and again - monopolies have a vested interest in keeping prices high. I was using the model to try to explain why that's the case.

It's like saying that Newtonian physics isn't applicable to the real world because it doesn't describe what's really going on. No, it doesn't always give you the exact answers you need, but it's good enough for most purposes (like getting to the moon).
Look, I didn't want to go too far into it because it feels like we're going off topic (since the arguments you've presented are hardly relevant to anything in this thread), but you shouldn't be talking down to people, like the poster you quoted originally, while posting content from an introduction to microeconomics textbook someone would read in high school. It looks ridiculous.

The worst thing about this is that even if we take it down the lane you've been going, with pure neoclassical monopoly theory and allowing its 500 unrealistic assumptions to hold, you couldn't even apply that to this situation because Nintendo is not anywhere near a 'de facto monopoly' for software on the platform. That's what your analysis hinged on and you tried to hide it away in a single sentence on the bottom of your post.

Moving to critique of the theory, the major assumption it hinges on is the goal of any firm is to maximize profit, and that those in a monopoly position have a unique ability to maximize that.

Going through that sentence in turn, the first part implies that profit is the single and absolute goal: This is clearly absurd. People watching the videogame industry probably know this more than anyone. You just have to look at, in particular, Microsoft or Sony's decisions over the past 2 generations to see that. Secondly, it implies Nintendo have the ability to shift prices away from the level of perfect competition. The monopoly position relies on this space called 'perfect competition' to exist so it can show that the price is higher and less units are produced than it, therefore supply is artificially withheld and resources are misallocated by the monopolist. The problem is it doesn't. There is no such thing as perfect competition, and it's basic common sense that proves it. What does competition imply? That firms are all employing cutthroat policy trying to sell their product whatever it takes, employing everything. Yet perfect competition requires all products are exactly the same(really, if you wanted to be competitive you wouldn't innovate? Err, Wii..), no one advertises since they spend all money on production (really, it's not competitive to advertise? Not according to this theory), etc etc.

So all your graph shows is that a monopolist prices things higher than something that doesn't actually exist. We've learned nothing.

For every one of your 'real world examples' that prove it (and I'd have gone for a better one, like OPEC), there's a counterexample that disproves it. Artificially lowering prices to create barriers to entry for maintenance of the monopoly is the most common one we see.

No one these days uses any of these methods for even approximation (except maybe the most hard-headed Chicago schoolers of the Reagan era, but even they are a dying breed). It really just doesn't produce anything close to realistic (well, sometimes it does, but only through pure chance, like curing a disease with prayers). The real reason Nintendo's prices are the way they are is simply because they set them like that. It has zero correlation with the level production, and that's easily proven by saying the law of diminishing marginal returns is bunk as well (but we'll leave that for another day).

Never try to prove a point with a theory that is discredited. You worked backwards because it supported your results and tried to use it to discredit other posters' points. Surely you must've expected to get called out on that?
 
Oct 14, 2006
18,101
0
1,155
Sage00 said:
Look, I didn't want to go too far into it because it feels like we're going off topic (since the arguments you've presented are hardly relevant to anything in this thread), but you shouldn't be talking down to people, like the poster you quoted originally, while posting content from an introduction to microeconomics textbook someone would read in high school. It looks ridiculous.

The worst thing about this is that even if we take it down the lane you've been going, with pure neoclassical monopoly theory and allowing its 500 unrealistic assumptions to hold, you couldn't even apply that to this situation because Nintendo not anywhere near a 'de facto monopoly' for software on the platform. That's what your analysis hinged on and you tried to hide it away in a single sentence on the bottom of your post.

Moving to critique of the theory, the major assumption it hinges on is the goal of any firm is to maximize profit, and that those in a monopoly position have a unique ability to maximize that.

Going through that sentence in turn, the first part implies that profit is the single and absolute goal: This is clearly absurd. People watching the videogame industry probably know this more than anyone. You just have to look at, in particular, Microsoft or Sony's decisions over the past 2 generations to see that. Secondly, it implies Nintendo have the ability to shift prices away from the level of perfect competition. The monopoly position relies on this space called 'perfect competition' to exist so it can show that the price is higher and less units are produced than it, therefore supply is artificially withheld and resources are misallocated by the monopolist. The problem is it doesn't. There is no such thing as perfect competition, and it's basic common sense that proves it. What does competition imply? That firms are all employing cutthroat policy trying to sell their product whatever it takes, employing everything. Yet perfect competition requires all products are exactly the same(really, if you wanted to be competitive you wouldn't innovate? Err, Wii..), no one advertises since they spend all money on production (really, it's not competitive to advertise? Not according to this theory), etc etc.

So all your graph shows is that a monopolist prices things higher than something that doesn't actually exist. We've learned nothing.

For every one of your 'real world examples' that prove it (and I'd have gone for a better one, like OPEC), there's a counterexample that disproves it. Artificially lowering prices to create barriers to entry for maintenance of the monopoly is the most common one we see.

No one these days uses any of these methods for even approximation (except maybe the most hard-headed Chicago schoolers of the Reagan era, but even they are a dying breed). It really just doesn't produce anything close to realistic (well, sometimes it does, but only through pure chance, like curing a disease with prayers). The real reason Nintendo's prices are the way they are is simply because they set them like that. It has zero correlation with the level production, and that's easily proven by saying the law of diminishing marginal returns is bunk as well (but we'll leave that for another day).

Never try to prove a point with a theory that is discredited. You worked backwards because it supported your results and tried to use it to discredit other posters' points. Surely you must've expected to get called out on for that?
I didn't, as a matter of fact, expect to be "called out" for using a "discredited theory". We're armchair analysts here, and we make extrapolations and guesses (mostly guesses) from what scant data we have. We can't take into account they myriad factors that go into a full econometric analysis - all we can do is examine basic trends and debate possible reasons the numbers are the way they are.

You talk about perfect competition not existing (and you're right - it doesn't, not in this market and not in any market dealing in non-fungible commodities), but then neither does an ideal voltage source, a perfect vacuum or an ideal bandpass filter - they're asymptotes, rules of thumb, approximations of what really goes on. They're useful in that they can help explain why something is in one ballpark instead of another and when they don't, you know that you've missed something - that there's other factors at play.

Now, to use more subtle methods of predicting what's going on with what scant data we have isn't appropriate either, especially when trying to explain something simple like "Why would a company keep their prices high when doing so means they sell less units?" I gave one example of why that might occur and illustrated my thinking with a graph. You may agree or disagree with my underlying assumptions or even the method I use and you have every right to say so, but to arc up and blast me for not using something more sophisticated in the face of what information we have (and what point I was trying to make) strikes me as pedantic.

It might be a general disgust you have with classical economics that elicited this reaction or something, but I don't see why it's appropriate. We're not trying to set public policy here, or even running a company. We're trying to make sense of numbers and squiggly lines from Japan by telling ourselves stories we can understand. We do it in our spare time and probably don't spend too much effort thinking about it beyond wet-finger-to-the-wind guesses.

Also, I posted the graph and explained it in the simplest of terms because not everybody took basic economics in high school or intuitively knows that it's possible to profit more by selling less units. You need to speak to your audience regardless of where you are. On GAF, I wouldn't assume that everybody has the prerequisite knowledge to even see such a graph and immediately know what it represents. If I were writing for (say) The Economist, I'd probably do a lot more work.

So no, Nintendo doesn't actually have a monopoly on Wii software. They do however, have a 40% share of the pie (one that's no doubt comparable to the next few players' combined shares) and a history of domination on their own platforms. They also currently have a policy of keeping their prices at the level they launched at. I see one as being connected to the other. If you don't, I'd love to hear why.

perfectchaos007 said:
Although a lot of the titles sold on Wii are first party and made by Nintendo, I believe at last press by Nintendo it was declared that more than half of all Wii titles sold were 3rd party. So I have a hard time accepting that Nintendo's games control a monopoly. Maybe monopolistic competition, but I think it's more of an oligopoly right now.
You may be right about that, but I still think that Nintendo have decided that keeping prices at their current level is more profitable than selling more software at lower prices.

Bottom line, their corporate culture and general strategy are currently geared toward big margins and maximised ROI. They tried to compete on price during the Gamecube era and they decided "Never again". After all, nobody wins in a price war,
except the consumer,
and I believe that their unique market-leader position this gen has given them the luxury of not having to compete on price.
 
Feb 21, 2007
46,805
0
0
Texas
viciouskillersquirrel said:
Bottom line, their corporate culture and general strategy are currently geared toward big margins and maximised ROI. They tried to compete on price during the Gamecube era and they decided "Never again". After all, nobody wins in a price war,
except the consumer,
and I believe that their unique market-leader position this gen has given them the luxury of not having to compete on price.
So what I get from what you're saying is that you believe that Nintendo keeps their game prices at a set level that never gets discounted because they believe this strategy will net them more profit than if they did lower the price of their games after a period of time. I understand that. What I'm questioning is Nintendo's logic behind the strategy. Is it based on statistics or principal? If it's based on statistics and studies that prove they are indeed maximizing their profits from consumers by keeping a set price then thats fine. However, from what it looks like from my prespective is that Nintendo won't lower their prices of games simply because of principal. And because Iwata believes strongly that games shouldn't diminish in value and consumers should always pay the original issued price. Like the poster above you said, some companies don't always make sure they are maximizing profits, and I'm thinking this could be an example of just that. And now that they are finally back on top of the home console market for the first time since SNES, they can do that.

/armchair
 
Dec 18, 2004
1,611
1
1,295
perfectchaos007 said:
However, from what it looks like from my prespective is that Nintendo won't lower their prices of games simply because of principal. And because Iwata believes strongly that games shouldn't diminish in value and consumers should always pay the original issued price.
/armchair
If you want I can bring out examples(Mario kart ads a year after release etc) But Nintendo's shown pretty well that using that money on commercials instead of price-cuts is effective for them

My perspective is Nintendo can get away rather well with keeping prices high so they happy with that.

You also have the problem that gamer's have limited time, lowering the price of a very good Nintendo game, means they might not even have time to buy the more expensive Nintendo product.
 
Feb 21, 2007
46,805
0
0
Texas
FINALFANTASYDOG said:
If you want I can bring out examples(Mario kart ads a year after release etc) But Nintendo's shown pretty well that using that money on commercials instead of price-cuts is effective for them

My perspective is Nintendo can get away rather well with keeping prices high so they happy with that.

You also have the problem that gamer's have limited time, lowering the price of a very good Nintendo game, means they might not even have time to buy the more expensive Nintendo product.
Yes thats very true. Nintendo can go a long time selling a game at the original price. However, what is unexplainable is why after that long period of time is over when the game stops selling at the original price, that instead of a price-cut they discontinue the game altogether instead of squeezing out extra money from the people who were willing to pay a lower price for the game.
 
Dec 18, 2004
1,611
1
1,295
From Warner brothers press conference about them starting game publishing in Japan

Comes this graph which they claim is from Enterbrain and gameage data showing the numbers of sales of western games in Japan.


.54 Mil in 2001 2.23 mil in 2009. No idea how they determined the data though.
 

Chris1964

Sales-Age Genius
Dec 17, 2008
11,738
0
0
21. / 20. [PSP] AKB1/48: If I loved an Idol (Bandai Namco) {2010.12.23}
22. / 28. [WII] Mario Sports Mix (Nintendo) {2010.11.25}
23. / 23. [WII] Wii Sports Resort (w/ Remote Plus) (Nintendo) {2010.11.11}
24. / 24. [WII] Wii Fit Plus (Nintendo) {2009.10.01}
25. / 27. [NDS] Magician's Quest: The Merchant’s Store of Sorcery (Konami) {2010.11.11}
26. / 30. [WII] Mario Kart Wii (Nintendo) {2008.04.10}
27. / 00. [PS3] WWE Smackdown Vs. Raw 2011 (Yuke's) {2011.02.03}
28. / 00. [360] DoDonPachi Resurrection: Black Label (Cave) {2011.02.03}
29. / 29. [WII] Taiko Drum Master Wii 3 (Bandai Namco) {2010.12.02}
30. / 25. [WII] Momotaro Railway 2010: Sengoku Ishin no Hero Daishuugou! no Maki [Everyone's Recommendation Selection] (Hudson) {2011.01.20}
31. / 31. [WII] New Super Mario Bros. Wii (Nintendo) {2009.12.03}
32. / 34. [NDS] Super Fossil Fighters (Nintendo) {2010.11.18}
33. / 36. [WII] Super Mario All-Stars (Nintendo) {2010.10.21}
34. / 00. [PSP] Death Connection Portable (Idea Factory) {2011.02.03}
35. / 39. [PS3] Call of Duty: Black Ops (Dubbed Edition) (Square Enix) {2010.12.16}
36. / 37. [NDS] Eigo de Tabisuru: Little Charo (Nintendo) {2011.01.20}
37. / 40. [NDS] New Super Mario Bros. (Nintendo) {2006.05.25}
38. / 26. [NDS] Monster Busters: Powered (Bandai Namco) {2011.01.20}
39. / 41. [NDS] Mario Vs. Donkey Kong: Miniland Mayhem (Nintendo) {2010.12.02}
40. / 50. [PS3] Resident Evil 5: Gold Edition [PlayStation 3 the Best] (Capcom) {2010.11.11}
41. / 49. [NDS] Momotaro Railway: World (Hudson) {2010.12.02}
42. / 38. [PS3] Arcana Heart 3 (Arc System Works) {2011.01.13}
43. / 45. [NDS] Friend Collection (Nintendo) {2009.06.18}
44. / 48. [WII] Shape Boxing 2: Enjoy the Diet on Wii! (Rocket Company) {2010.12.16}
45. / 00. [NDS] One Piece: Gigant Battle (Bandai Namco) {2010.09.09}
46. / 13. [360] Gal Gun (Alchemist) {2011.01.27}
47. / 00. [WII] Super Smash Bros. Brawl (Nintendo) {2008.01.31}
48. / 00. [PSP] Dangan-Ronpa (Spike) {2010.11.25}
49. / 00. [NDS] Taiko Drum Master DS: Dororon! Battle With the Ghouls!! (Bandai Namco) {2010.07.01}
50. / 00. [PS3] Gran Turismo 5 (SCE) {2010.11.25}

00. / 00. [ALL] Software Sales 2011 (All Publishers) {2011.01.31} - 860.681 / 4.801.238 (-21%)


NDS - 15
PSP - 13
WII - 13
PS3 - 7
360 - 2
3DS - 0
PS2 - 0
 
Jan 21, 2008
7,602
0
0
Brazil
sites.google.com
Dengeki Sales, Jan 31 - Feb 06, 2011:

01. / 00. [NDS] Gyakuten Kenji 2 (Capcom) - 128,537 / 128,537
02. / 00. [PSP] Macross Triangle Frontier (Bandai Namco) - 52,589 / 52,589
03. / 00. [PSP] White Knight Chronicles Episode.Portable: Dogma Wars (SCE) - 39,180 / 39,180
04. / 06. [PSP] Monster Hunter Freedom 3 (Capcom) - 35,656 / 4,220,544
05. / 00. [NDS] Dragon Ball Kai: Ultimate Butoden (Bandai Namco) - 30,490 / 30,490
06. / 04. [PSP] Kenka Banchou 5: Otoko no Housoku (Spike) - 23,713 / 88,283
07. / 01. [WII] The Last Story (Nintendo) - 23,600 / 131,843
08. / 02. [PSP] Valkyria Chronicles III (SEGA) - 19,200 / 121,541
09. / 08. [WII] Donkey Kong Country Returns (Nintendo) - 17,333 / 805,844
10. / 07. [PS3] Dragon Age: Origins (Spike) - 13,807 / 53,530
11. / 03. [PSP] Ore no Imouto ga Konna ni Kawaii Wake ga Nai Portable (Bandai Namco) - 13,713 / 109,128
12. / 16. [PSP] Pro Evolution Soccer 2011 (Konami) - 11,150 / ?
13. / 05. [PSP] Toaru Majutsu no Index (ASCII Media Works) - 10,747 / 68,650
14. / 09. [PSP] Kingdom Hearts: Birth by Sleep Final Mix (Square Enix) - 8,510 / 108,970
15. / 17. [WII] Wii Party (Nintendo) - 8,360 / 1,742,692
16. / 23. [PS3] Pro Evolution Soccer 2011 (Konami) - 7,712 / ?
17. / 14. [NDS] Inazuma Eleven 3: Sekai e no Chousen! The Ogre (Level 5) - 7,544 / 393,471
18. / 13. [PSP] AKB1/48: Idol to Koishitara... (Bandai Namco) - 7,333 / 374,776
19. / 19. [WII] Wii Sports Resort (Nintendo) - 7,187 / 2,286,402
20. / 24. [NDS] Pokemon Black (Pokemon Co.) - 7,006 / ?


Other software (first week / LTD):
2008-03-27 [PSP] Monster Hunter Freedom Unite [all prices] (Capcom) - 868,000 / 4,190,000
2009-05-28 [NDS] Ace Attorney Investigations: Miles Edgeworth (Capcom) - 209,000 / 333,000
2008-10-09 [PSP] Macross: Ace Frontier (Bandai Namco) - 98,000 / 174,000
2009-10-01 [PSP] Macross: Ultimate Frontier (Bandai Namco) - 73,000 / 151,000


Sell-through
[NDS] Gyakuten Kenji 2 ~65%
[PSP] Macross Triangle Frontier ~60%


1) 2010 Fiscal Year 2010-03-29~2011-01-30 (compared to 2009)

Units:
- Hardware: 7.58 million (-18.9%)
- Software: 54.41 million (-10.0%)

Value:
- Hardware: 149.6 billion yen (-23.3%)
- Software: 282.9 billion yen (-9.7%)
- Total: 432.5 billion yen (-14.9%)


Code:
Hardware |  This Week |  Last Week |   YTD    |    LTD
------------------------------------------------------------
PSP      |     28,871 |     32,471 |    268,172 | 16,568,497
NDS      |     21,096 |     22,459 |    285,464 | 32,172,839
PS3      |     20,631 |     24,473 |    234,498 |  6,326,121
WII      |     13,347 |     17,494 |    202,684 | 11,476,811
360      |     	2,115 |      2,942 |     19,613 |  1,465,193
PS2      |     	1,287 |      1,527 |      9,736 | 	
------------------------------------------------------------
Total    |     87,347 |    101,366 |  1,022,544 |
http://news.dengeki.com/elem/000/000/345/345529/
http://ascii.jp/elem/000/000/588/588665/
http://megalodon.jp/2011-0211-2210-22/news.dengeki.com/soft/ranking/ranking.html



Week 5 - 2011-01-24~2011-01-30
Week 4 - 2011-01-17~2011-01-23
Week 3 - 2011-01-10~2011-01-16
Week 2 - 2011-01-03~2011-01-09
Week 1 - 2010-12-27~2011-01-02
 

Chris1964

Sales-Age Genius
Dec 17, 2008
11,738
0
0
Kurosaki Ichigo said:
So there's Catherine and MVC duos next week, should we predict for all four (both of both systems), something else or skip the week?
I vote for break in preparation for the huge next week.

Can you reserve a 3DS in Japan right now or are preorders closed?
 

boiled goose

good with gravy
Oct 30, 2007
12,843
1
0
perfectchaos007 said:
Yes thats very true. Nintendo can go a long time selling a game at the original price. However, what is unexplainable is why after that long period of time is over when the game stops selling at the original price, that instead of a price-cut they discontinue the game altogether instead of squeezing out extra money from the people who were willing to pay a lower price for the game.
My guess is so that they buy another game at full price instead.
The problem is that people will buy third party discounted shovelware instead, which is bad for everyone.

Value is very important. Sometimes you get what you can afford.
 
Dec 18, 2004
1,611
1
1,295
Chris1964 said:
I vote for break in preparation for the huge next week.

Can you reserve a 3DS in Japan right now or are preorders closed?

You can pre-order for future shipments, but obviously no go for the first day.

Also if we are doing predictions: I really feel like Two worlds 2 ps3 will rather fairly outsell MVC3 360.
 
Dec 18, 2004
1,611
1
1,295
Wow Oricon came out with thier report for January for the Japanese number's and actually seeing it compared to last year is depressing:. Psp is particullary sad.


Entire Market&#12288;48.34 Billion Yen&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;74.26 Billion Yen&#65288;-34.9&#65285;&#65289;
Software&#12288;30.38 Billion yen&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;41.05 Billion Yen&#65288;-26.0&#65285;&#65289;
Hardware&#12288;17.97 Billion Yen&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;33.22 Billion Yen&#65288;-45.9&#65285;&#65289;


(Hardware sales 2011 <- 2010)
NDS&#12288;305,840&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;535,735&#65288;-42.9&#65285;&#65289;
Wii&#12288;214,729&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;390,461&#65288;-45.0&#65285;&#65289;
PS3&#12288;200,001&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;296,630&#65288;-32.6&#65285;&#65289;
PSP&#12288;194,669&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;483,808&#65288;-59.8&#65285;&#65289;
360&#12288;20,122&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;28,280&#65288;-28.8&#65285;&#65289;

Software sales(2011 <- 2010)
5,851,768&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;8,280,567&#65288;-29.3&#65285;)
 
Apr 18, 2005
18,797
0
0
viciouskillersquirrel said:
So no, Nintendo doesn't actually have a monopoly on Wii software. They do however, have a 40% share of the pie (one that's no doubt comparable to the next few players' combined shares) and a history of domination on their own platforms. They also currently have a policy of keeping their prices at the level they launched at. I see one as being connected to the other. If you don't, I'd love to hear why.
Because they didn't on NES, SNES, N64, or GameCube. Wii is a big experiment and keeping the games (and the system) as high as possible for as long as possible is part of that. It is, therefore, not some intrinsic goal of Nintendo carried out for generations. This is the first time they've tried it.

And by the way, profit in the long-term for the series is very likely negatively affected by unnecessarily reducing the # of people to play the game at any point in the series lifetime. As has been mentioned numerous times for the U.S., God of War 2/3 wouldn't have done near as well if God of War 1 hadn't taken off big time at the Greatest Hits pricing. Animal Crossing probably would not have done near as well if not for the GameCube version selling well for so long at its Players Choice pricing. If God of War 1 and AC had stayed at $50 forever, their sequels would've very likely sold significantly less overall. Obviously that's a supposition, but I don't think it's an unreasonable one.

You picked out one theoretical example of why someone would keep a game high for a long time. Great. Unfortunately, it seems to ignore most of the real-world long-term effects, which would probably be a good part of Sage00's point.

I do appreciate the discussions, though. :)
 

Chris1964

Sales-Age Genius
Dec 17, 2008
11,738
0
0
FINALFANTASYDOG said:
Wow Oricon came out with thier report for January for the Japanese number's and actually seeing it compared to last year is depressing:. Psp is particullary sad.

...
What's the link at oricon site for this info?

EDIT: Also, bttb had posted many months ago a table with software and hardware value for previous quarters and years. Has anyone saved them or has a link to them? If my memory is not wrong the data were taken from YSO.
 
Aug 3, 2009
685
0
0
FINALFANTASYDOG said:
Wow Oricon came out with thier report for January for the Japanese number's and actually seeing it compared to last year is depressing:. Psp is particullary sad.


Entire Market&#12288;48.34 Billion Yen&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;74.26 Billion Yen&#65288;-34.9&#65285;&#65289;
Software&#12288;30.38 Billion yen&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;41.05 Billion Yen&#65288;-26.0&#65285;&#65289;
Hardware&#12288;17.97 Billion Yen&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;33.22 Billion Yen&#65288;-45.9&#65285;&#65289;


(Hardware sales 2011 <- 2010)
NDS&#12288;305,840&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;535,735&#65288;-42.9&#65285;&#65289;
Wii&#12288;214,729&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;390,461&#65288;-45.0&#65285;&#65289;
PS3&#12288;200,001&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;296,630&#65288;-32.6&#65285;&#65289;
PSP&#12288;194,669&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;483,808&#65288;-59.8&#65285;&#65289;
360&#12288;20,122&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;28,280&#65288;-28.8&#65285;&#65289;

Software sales(2011 <- 2010)
5,851,768&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;8,280,567&#65288;-29.3&#65285;)
Meanwhile DeNA have record revenue and profits.

Gaming is moving big-time onto mobile.
 
Dec 18, 2004
1,611
1
1,295
Chris1964 said:
What's the link at oricon site for this info?

EDIT: Also, bttb had posted many months ago a table with software and hardware value for previous quarters and years. Has anyone saved them or has a link to them? If my memory is not wrong the data were taken from YSO.
I realized oricon is just quoting famitsu figures from here(Doesn't make it less accurate though): and using media create for total software sales.

http://www.morningstar.co.jp/portal/RncNewsDetailAction.do?rncNo=411722

donny2112 said:
I do appreciate the discussions, though. :)

This would take a ton of data work to prove, but Donny what do you say for idea that this generation Nintendo has taken to the belief that spending money on more commercials-extremly long drawn out ad campaigns, even so much as to commercials more then a year after the game is released-(mario-kart) rather then reducing the price is more effective tactic.
 
Apr 17, 2005
6,476
0
1,200
Spiegel said:
Danb&#333;ru Senki/The Little Battlers (PSP) has been delayed.

New release date is May 26th
Weird, anime debut is March 2nd, so basically 3 months before the game arrives. Certainly this franchise hasn't been handled as well as Inazuma, so I hope they don't expect as much success. It misses the crowded March but misses Golden Week and anime debut as well...and May is quite a slow month. They should still get rid of the nonsense game+figure bundle forever, retailers are going to drop its price because of its size if it doesn't go hot from the start.
 

Chris1964

Sales-Age Genius
Dec 17, 2008
11,738
0
0
FINALFANTASYDOG said:
I realized oricon is just quoting famitsu figures from here(Doesn't make it less accurate though): and using media create for total software sales.

http://www.morningstar.co.jp/portal/RncNewsDetailAction.do?rncNo=411722
That link doesn't work for me. Do you know how long they keep doing this? I have monthly market value for 2005, 2007 and 2008.

Since we started with Level 5, Unazuma Eleven Strikers is set for April 28.
 
Jan 21, 2008
7,602
0
0
Brazil
sites.google.com
Chris1964 said:
That link doesn't work for me. Do you know how long they keep doing this? I have monthly market value for 2005, 2007 and 2008.
I've been keeping track of that site (I have to use a US proxy, btw) and could only find data from the middle of 2009 on, but not for every month: http://npshare.de/files/92e6c0e6/JAPAN FAMITSU-TEMP.xlsx

You can find most of them here: http://www.google.com/search?q=&#12456;&#12531;&#12479;&#12540;&#12502;&#12524;&#12452;&#12531; site:morningstar.co.jp
 

Chris1964

Sales-Age Genius
Dec 17, 2008
11,738
0
0








Code:
Media Create sotware

Game 1: [ALL] Software Sales 2009 (All Publishers) {2008.12.29} - 2.797.057 / 68.556.398
Game 2: [ALL] Software Sales 2010 (All Publishers) {2010.01.04} - 1.766.699 / 65.527.996
Game 3: [ALL] Software Sales 2011 (All Publishers) {2011.01.03} - 1.370.314 / 4.801.238

---------------------------------------------------------------------
|    |       Game 1       |       Game 2       |       Game 3       |
|----|---------|----------|---------|----------|---------|----------|
|Week|  Weekly |    LTD   |  Weekly |    LTD   |  Weekly |    LTD   |
|----|---------|----------|---------|----------|---------|----------|
|  1 |2.797.057| 2.797.057|1.766.699| 1.766.699|1.370.314| 1.370.314|
|  2 |1.209.711| 4.006.768|1.195.503| 2.962.202|  794.821| 2.165.135|
|  3 |1.114.565| 5.121.333|  961.643| 3.923.845|  680.485| 2.845.620|
|  4 |  940.943| 6.062.276|1.932.790| 5.856.635|1.094.937| 3.940.557|
|  5 |1.378.293| 7.440.569|1.217.094| 7.073.729|  860.681| 4.801.238|
|  6 |  896.998| 8.337.567|  976.672| 8.050.401|         |          |
|  7 |1.167.144| 9.504.711|  935.583| 8.985.984|         |          |
|  8 |1.067.665|10.572.376|1.144.290|10.130.274|         |          |
|  9 |1.467.549|12.039.925|1.095.707|11.225.981|         |          |
| 10 |1.288.366|13.328.291|  922.882|12.148.863|         |          |
| 11 |  953.587|14.281.878|1.227.612|13.376.475|         |          |
| 12 |1.078.598|15.360.476|1.447.298|14.823.773|         |          |
| 13 |1.051.816|16.412.292|1.048.568|15.872.341|         |          |
| 14 |  790.499|17.202.791|  674.803|16.547.144|         |          |
| 15 |  671.208|17.873.999|  584.454|17.131.598|         |          |
| 16 |  703.770|18.577.769|  661.111|17.792.709|         |          |
| 17 |  825.335|19.403.104|1.916.602|19.709.311|         |          |
| 18 |1.078.877|20.481.981|1.071.699|20.781.010|         |          |
| 19 |  864.912|21.346.893|  630.889|21.411.899|         |          |
| 20 |  567.267|21.914.160|  739.831|22.151.730|         |          |
| 21 |  573.589|22.487.749|1.121.885|23.273.615|         |          |
| 22 |1.224.865|23.712.614|  674.082|23.947.697|         |          |
| 23 |  701.587|24.414.201|  729.218|24.676.915|         |          |
| 24 |  556.694|24.970.895|  617.269|25.294.184|         |          |
| 25 |  621.673|25.592.568|  967.422|26.261.606|         |          |
| 26 |1.082.099|26.674.667|1.306.705|27.568.311|         |          |
| 27 |  835.473|27.510.140|1.125.460|28.693.771|         |          |
| 28 |2.891.934|30.402.074|1.239.750|29.933.521|         |          |
| 29 |1.254.521|31.656.595|  954.520|30.888.041|         |          |
| 30 |1.026.466|32.683.061|1.444.713|32.332.754|         |          |
| 31 |1.593.748|34.276.809|  973.222|33.305.976|         |          |
| 32 |1.476.314|35.753.123|  941.960|34.247.936|         |          |
| 33 |1.183.723|36.936.846|  881.604|35.129.540|         |          |
| 34 |  800.909|37.737.755|  909.161|36.038.701|         |          |
| 35 |  848.940|38.586.695|  712.936|36.751.637|         |          |
| 36 |  933.631|39.520.326|  678.266|37.429.903|         |          |
| 37 |2.068.093|41.588.419|3.196.673|40.626.576|         |          |
| 38 |1.624.686|43.213.105|1.540.856|42.167.432|         |          |
| 39 |  901.145|44.114.250|1.346.096|43.513.528|         |          |
| 40 |1.774.446|45.888.696|1.127.543|44.641.071|         |          |
| 41 |1.101.866|46.990.562|  838.752|45.479.823|         |          |
| 42 |1.004.733|47.995.295|1.051.689|46.531.512|         |          |
| 43 |  849.885|48.845.180|1.286.742|47.818.254|         |          |
| 44 |1.292.657|50.137.837|  736.923|48.555.177|         |          |
| 45 |1.094.545|51.232.382|  828.892|49.384.069|         |          |
| 46 |  940.357|52.172.739|  910.229|50.294.298|         |          |
| 47 |  754.473|52.927.212|1.479.110|51.773.408|         |          |
| 48 |1.103.204|54.030.416|3.276.244|55.049.652|         |          |
| 49 |2.723.462|56.753.878|2.223.541|57.273.193|         |          |
| 50 |2.165.545|58.919.423|2.838.151|60.111.344|         |          |
| 51 |3.945.539|62.864.962|3.505.441|63.616.785|         |          |
| 52 |3.267.504|66.132.466|1.911.211|65.527.996|         |          |
| 53 |2.423.932|68.556.398|         |          |         |          |
|----|---------|----------|---------|----------|---------|----------|
|Year|   YTD   |    LTD   |   YTD   |    LTD   |   YTD   |    LTD   |
|----|---------|----------|---------|----------|---------|----------|
|  1 |         |          |         |          |         |          |
|  2 |         |          |         |          |         |          |
|  3 |         |          |         |          |         |          |
|  4 |         |          |         |          |         |          |
|  5 |         |          |         |          |         |          |
|  6 |         |          |         |          |         |          |
|----|---------|----------|---------|----------|---------|----------|
| LTD|         |68.556.398|         |65.527.996|         | 4.801.238|
---------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a funny rumor at esuteru for the reason Little Battlers got delayed again.
 
Jun 7, 2004
30,398
1
0
37
Orange County, CA
FINALFANTASYDOG said:
Wow Oricon came out with thier report for January for the Japanese number's and actually seeing it compared to last year is depressing:. Psp is particullary sad.


Entire Market&#12288;48.34 Billion Yen&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;74.26 Billion Yen&#65288;-34.9&#65285;&#65289;
Software&#12288;30.38 Billion yen&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;41.05 Billion Yen&#65288;-26.0&#65285;&#65289;
Hardware&#12288;17.97 Billion Yen&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;33.22 Billion Yen&#65288;-45.9&#65285;&#65289;


(Hardware sales 2011 <- 2010)
NDS&#12288;305,840&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;535,735&#65288;-42.9&#65285;&#65289;
Wii&#12288;214,729&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;390,461&#65288;-45.0&#65285;&#65289;
PS3&#12288;200,001&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;296,630&#65288;-32.6&#65285;&#65289;
PSP&#12288;194,669&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;483,808&#65288;-59.8&#65285;&#65289;
360&#12288;20,122&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;28,280&#65288;-28.8&#65285;&#65289;

Software sales(2011 <- 2010)
5,851,768&#12288;&#8592;&#12288;8,280,567&#65288;-29.3&#65285;)
Somebody needs to save gaming in Japan before it dies :(
 
Feb 20, 2007
7,957
0
970
Spain
So MHP3 is the best selling third party game ever? Not counting budget re-releases

slaughterking said:
And would you share that rumor with us? :p

3DS port I'm guessing.

But if it were to happen I think it would have been announced at the same time as the delay.
 

Chris1964

Sales-Age Genius
Dec 17, 2008
11,738
0
0
Code:
Famitsu software share

System 1: 2011 [OTH]
System 2: 2011 [PS2]
System 3: 2011 [360]
System 4: 2011 [PS3]
System 5: 2011 [WII]
System 6: 2011 [PSP]
System 7: 2011 [NDS]

--------------------------------------------------------------
|Week| Sys 1 | Sys 2 | Sys 3 | Sys 4 | Sys 5 | Sys 6 | Sys 7 |
|----|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
|  1 |  0,1% |  0,4% |  1,4% |  9,8% | 33,4% | 28,0% | 26,9% |
|  2 |  0,1% |  0,4% |  1,6% | 10,1% | 32,3% | 23,7% | 31,6% |
|  3 |  0,2% |  0,5% |  4,0% | 13,4% | 23,6% | 33,4% | 24,9% |
|  4 |  0,1% |  0,6% |  2,9% | 11,5% | 20,3% | 37,9% | 26,7% |
|  5 |  0,1% |  0,4% |  6,6% | 10,4% | 21,5% | 46,4% | 14,8% |
|  6 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
|  7 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
|  8 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
|  9 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 10 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 11 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 12 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 13 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 14 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 15 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 16 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 17 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 18 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 19 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 20 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 21 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 22 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 23 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 24 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 25 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 26 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 27 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 28 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 29 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 30 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 31 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 32 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 33 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 34 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 35 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 36 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 37 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 38 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 39 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 40 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 41 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 42 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 43 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 44 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 45 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 46 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 47 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 48 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 49 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 50 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 51 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| 52 |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
--------------------------------------------------------------
 
Dec 18, 2004
1,611
1
1,295
My lord chris, I love your work, please if possible keep up thoese software comparison charts!. Just out of curiosity, is your day job related to the type of statistics? or is your amazing skill in this area just comes from being a hobby.
 
Sep 23, 2006
5,149
0
1,020
perfectchaos007 said:
However, what is unexplainable is why after that long period of time is over when the game stops selling at the original price, that instead of a price-cut they discontinue the game altogether instead of squeezing out extra money from the people who were willing to pay a lower price for the game.
They might think that dropping the price also devalues the brand involved. If they never drop the price and after some time the game becomes highly sought after they can then easily do a full price reprint or port. That would at least partly explain why they e.g. can get away with selling a repackaged SNES ROM on the Wii.


FINALFANTASYDOG said:
Comes this graph which they claim is from Enterbrain and gameage data showing the numbers of sales of western games in Japan.
Am I the only one who laughed at the fact that they overlaid a decrease in the last two years with a thick fat upward arrow? =P


JoshuaJSlone said:
But what could be the Wiii's version of DSi's cameras, larger screen, and DSiWare to be the tradeoff for the loss of BC?
They could significantly increase the internal flash memory size. Also they could add an HDMI port, if that's actually usable for SD video that is. =P