Media Create Sales: Week 9, 2013 (Feb 25 - Mar 03)

FoneBone

Member
Jun 7, 2004
15,206
1
0
Philadelphia, PA
Let me ask you this, do you think Nintendo paid Capcom (money or other incentives such as marketing or help with dev costs) to bring MH3 and MH4 to 3DS exclusively? Yes or no.

Do you think Nintendo paid Square Enix (money or other incentives such as marketing or help with dev costs) to bring DQ X to Wii U? Yes or no.
That they provided incentives is likely; that there would be no reason for those games to appear on those platforms without those incentives is a dubious argument at best.
 

Road

Member
Jan 21, 2008
7,602
0
0
Brazil
sites.google.com
50k? Thought it was closer to 25k
The last number from the 2nd week was 22k, but Capcom had shipped at least 44k according to Famitsu sell-through on the 0~50% range.

So no news on Soul Sack yet? Very interested in seeing how that does.
As someone said, sold-out on Amazon. Also sold-out on many game shop owner blogs, being the 2nd best selling new release behind Diva f in the first day.

I guess it at least outdid the expectations of someone.
 

VXLbeast

Member
Dec 9, 2012
1,459
0
0
^^Well that's good to hear. Will be interested to see what sort of numbers that translates into.
 

lunchwithyuzo

Banned
Jun 20, 2010
11,040
0
0
I'm actually seeing what you're presenting on your posts.
What I'm presenting is an argument against the defensive notion that GE2/PSO2 were moved to Vita for creative reasons, as well as suggesting ports of both would make more business sense on other platforms. If you see anything else than that, it's simply your own projection.


I really don't care where GE or PSO goes, both are mediocre games IMO. If you're asking me if I were a business man for either company where I would put my game, I would go where the money is, be it from the console makers or from the public. Everything else being equal I would go where my audience is. A large userbase does not necessarily mean more money in my pocket. GE2, much like MH3, would probably make more sense as a PSP/PSV release last year to try and get the audience to upgrade to the new hardware while still selling to them. Not sure that would work right now as the psv is pretty dead and psp is a 9 year old platform. I don't have all the information they do have and maybe GE will sell better without having to compete with MH. I will say that if there was no incentives from Sony and if I wasn't sure where my audience was, I would go with the 3DS.

PSO2, much like DQX, should be on PC first and foremost, after that on a console with a good online framework, i.e. the PS3 or the 360. PSV kinda works because it also does have a decent online framework, though it wouldn't be my first choice.
So essentially you agree with me. I guess we're both port begging now?


Let me ask you this, do you think Nintendo paid Capcom (money or other incentives such as marketing or help with dev costs) to bring MH3 and MH4 to 3DS exclusively? Yes or no.

Do you think Nintendo paid Square Enix (money or other incentives such as marketing or help with dev costs) to bring DQ X to Wii U? Yes or no.
If course I do, I already said so. Why are you asking again?

It won't be a simple early Xbox era MS-style payoff though, what Nintendo offers are things like co-promotional, co-publishing, royalty reduction, dev support and bundling deals. And for MH they'll usually throw in a new controller. Money won't directly change hands though.
 

BadWolf

Member
Apr 15, 2010
26,126
3
0
As someone said, sold-out on Amazon. Also sold-out on many game shop owner blogs, being the 2nd best selling new release behind Diva f in the first day.

I guess it at least outdid the expectations of someone.
Happy to hear this, game looks so good.
 

staticneuron

Member
Jul 7, 2010
5,612
0
0
Florida
He isn't. Discussing platform appropriateness =/= port begging. And frankly it isn't all that difficult to discern the difference.
The only thing I am curious about is this...

3DS is better suited than Vita in fact, due purely to marketplace. Technically it's also just as capable of running a PSP port like GE2 (with platform specific enhancements) so that's a total nonissue.

How do you know this though? What are you basing this off of? The Vita is the PSP successor so I imagine Sony would have worked to make sure the Vita could be easily ported to from the PSP. But what makes the 3DS just as capable? If it takes the devs more amount of work to port the game to 3DS then to Vita, wouldn't the logical choice be the Vita?

That they provided incentives is likely; that there would be no reason for those games to appear on those platforms without those incentives is a dubious argument at best.
That's not what he was saying. If you read his entire post he is pointing out that it is logical to go after a larger base but that doesn't doesn't mean success. It seems to me that the pubs always tests the waters and watches how the market reacts. If SS and GE2 pulls some impressive numbers in relation to install base then Capcom obviously will revisit their options.
 

Alrus

Member
Apr 4, 2010
9,787
0
595
Belgium
No, I think. It will have LTD at 350-450k, i think it will sell 300k this week. I may be wrong and it only does 200k this week but I think it can reach between 350-450k LTD
That's a really high debut and LTD for a new IP on a struggling platform.
 

AranhaHunter

Banned
Mar 20, 2006
10,669
0
0
So essentially you agree with me. I guess we're both port begging now?
I said I don't know all the details, so no I don't agree with you. If it makes more sense to put it on psv/psp then NB and Sega's head executives have their reasons. Unlike you, I'm not going out of my way to say it should be on another platform because I do not know the details. I thought I was clear in my post that I would choose the 3DS if, and only if, a whole bunch of assumptions were or weren't met. You are going out of your way to say it makes more business sense to put it on 3DS because you think it makes more business sense. Like I said, a fine line between port begging and trying to make your case.

If course I do, I already said so. Why are you asking again?

It won't be a simple early Xbox era MS-style payoff though, what Nintendo offers are things like co-promotional, co-publishing, royalty reduction, dev support and bundling deals. And for MH they'll usually throw in a new controller. Money won't directly change hands though.
And how exactly you know this is the incentive and not a pay out? Unless you're an insider for either company, you can't say that.
 

lunchwithyuzo

Banned
Jun 20, 2010
11,040
0
0
How do you know this though? What are you basing this off of? The Vita is the PSP successor so I imagine Sony would have worked to make sure the Vita could be easily ported to from the PSP. But what makes the 3DS just as capable?
I'm not speaking to ease of porting, only overall system capability (and thus appropriateness) of running a port. There's literally nothing in GE2 that can't be fully realized on either 3DS or Vita, ob a technical level both are entirely suitable for the game as is.
 

AranhaHunter

Banned
Mar 20, 2006
10,669
0
0
Direct quote: "there's no case that could have been made for DQX on WiiU or MH on 3DS outside of money." How is that not what he was saying?
Maybe money is not just the right word, incentives would be better. I find it highly unlikely, especially in the case of DQ, that there weren't incentives involved.

But you are right, I shouldn't have made such a strong assertion and I stand corrected.
 

Spiegel

Member
Feb 20, 2007
7,957
0
970
Spain
"MH3G is a Nintendo console exclusive game because Capcom didn't want to fragment the userbase. Zero moneyhats were involved"

Now change MH3G for God Eater 2, 3DS/WiiU for PSP/Vita crossplay and Capcom for Namco
 

Cheebo

Banned
Sep 8, 2011
16,858
1
0
Maybe money is not just the right word, incentives would be better. I find it highly unlikely, especially in the case of DQ, that there weren't incentives involved.

But you are right, I shouldn't have made such a strong assertion and I stand corrected.
Why in the case of Monster Hunter? DS was not powerful enough to handle a full Monster Hunter game so for portables it went to PSP by default. 3DS can now more than handle it and it was already vastly outselling the Vita.

It makes plenty of sense for Capcom to pick 3DS.
 

staticneuron

Member
Jul 7, 2010
5,612
0
0
Florida
Direct quote: "there's no case that could have been made for DQX on WiiU or MH on 3DS outside of money." How is that not what he was saying?

Maybe money is not just the right word, incentives would be better. I find it highly unlikely, especially in the case of DQ, that there weren't incentives involved.

But you are right, I shouldn't have made such a strong assertion and I stand corrected.
Appearing on a console.... is dubious. Appearing on a console exclusively, certainly seems like incentives were involved. For MH, capcom "knows" they have a following on the Playstation hardware, to up and leave is illogical. For same can be said for SE. Thier games have been met with success on basically all Sony hardware, so to avoid it entirely raises questions.


I'm not speaking to ease of porting, only overall system capability (and thus appropriateness) of running a port. There's literally nothing in GE2 that can't be fully realized on either 3DS or Vita, ob a technical level both are entirely suitable for the game as is.
I really don't know about the details of the game (I have never played it) but I just assume the decision to port was simply one of convenience and testing the market not solely on capabilities of target hardware.


Why in the case of Monster Hunter? DS was not powerful enough to handle a full Monster Hunter game so for portables it went to PSP by default. 3DS can now more than handle it and it was already vastly outselling the Vita.

It makes plenty of sense for Capcom to pick 3DS.
Sure but to the point of making it exclusive? Within two weeks of MHP3rd release Capcom not only described it as “the fastest selling PSP title ever in Japan” they also stated it was “the fastest selling game in Capcom's history.” To go from that to..... meh, lets make the next entry "exclusive to Nintendo Hardware" doesn't seem like the most logical course of action. Logical would be to "expand" not to drop one segment for another.
 

lunchwithyuzo

Banned
Jun 20, 2010
11,040
0
0
I said I don't know all the details, so no I don't agree with you. If it makes more sense to put it on psv/psp then NB and Sega's head executives have their reasons. Unlike you, I'm not going out of my way to say it should be on another platform because I do not know the details. I thought I was clear in my post that I would choose the 3DS if, and only if, a whole bunch of assumptions were or weren't met. You are going out of your way to say it makes more business sense to put it on 3DS because you think it makes more business sense. Like I said, a fine line between port begging and trying to make your case.
You came to identical conclusions, yet you don't think you agree with me. Amazing.

I think 3DS makes more business sense because the genre king is driving a userbase on it. Also, I try to pay attention in these threads. If you do as well, how could you not think 3DS makes more business sense?

Also, can you please explain to me how exactly I'm port begging? Because that sincerely isn't the intent and frankly I just don't see it. Spell it out for me.


And how exactly you know this is the incentive and not a pay out? Unless you're an insider for either company, you can't say that.
Again, I pay attention. It's not hard. You don't have to be an insider to make an informed analysis.

Besides which, you literally just asked me this. Was it suppossed to be a trick question or something?
 

hiska-kun

Member
Mar 9, 2012
3,567
0
445
Spain
Media Create Sell-through:

01./00. [PS3] Dynasty Warriors 8 # <ACT> (Koei Tecmo) {2013.02.28} (¥7.560) - 203.224 / NEW <68,23%>

03./00. [PSV] Senran Kagura Shinovi Versus: Otome Shoujotachi no Shoumei # <ACT> (Marvelous AQL) {2013.02.28} (¥6.980) - 94.324 / NEW <93,37%>

07./00. [PSV] Phantasy Star Online 2: Special Package <RPG> (Sega) {2013.02.28} (¥5.229) - 61.227 / NEW <89,39%>

Ice Silver Vita 15k.

http://www.m-create.com/ranking/

---

In my town there's plenty of stock for Senran Kagura and Phantasy Star Online 2, so the new shipment has arrived.

http://i1342.photobucket.com/albums/o763/hiska-kun/P1000650_zps331c3bd7.jpg

No stock for Animal Crossing though.

http://i1342.photobucket.com/albums/o763/hiska-kun/P1000657_zpsa16eeb09.jpg
 

Cheebo

Banned
Sep 8, 2011
16,858
1
0
Appearing on a console.... is dubious. Appearing on a console exclusively, certainly seems like incentives were involved. For MH, capcom "knows" they have a following on the Playstation hardware, to up and leave is illogical. For same can be said for SE. Thier games have been met with success on basically all Sony hardware, so to avoid it entirely raises questions.
DQ 1-6 (and now 9 & 10 as well) were on Nintendo hardware, only 7 & 8 were on Sony. Nobody associated Dragon Quest with Sony. Not to mention DQ is always on the best selling hardware, Sony hasn't been known for that in Japan since PS2. It doesn't raise any questions at all.
 

Kandinsky

Member
Jun 8, 2004
10,138
0
1,305
Media Create Sell-through:

03./00. [PSV] Senran Kagura Shinovi Versus: Otome Shoujotachi no Shoumei # <ACT> (Marvelous AQL) {2013.02.28} (¥6.980) - 94.324 / NEW <93,37%>

07./00. [PSV] Phantasy Star Online 2: Special Package <RPG> (Sega) {2013.02.28} (¥5.229) - 61.227 / NEW <89,39%>

Ice Silver Vita 15k.
Man, what a come back for Vita, grats to Sony. Nintendo must be nervous right now.
 

AranhaHunter

Banned
Mar 20, 2006
10,669
0
0
You came to identical conclusions, yet you don't think you agree with me. Amazing.

I think 3DS makes more business sense because the genre king is driving a userbase on it. Also, I try to pay attention in these threads. If you do as well, how could you not think 3DS makes more business sense?

Also, can you please explain to me how exactly I'm port begging? Because that sincerely isn't the intent and frankly I just don't see it. Spell it out for me.
I'm not gonna repeat myself, read my previous posts.


Again, I pay attention. It's not hard. You don't have to be an insider to make an informed analysis.

Besides which, you literally just asked me this. Was it suppossed to be a trick question or something?
So you don't know and you're assuming no money was exchanged. Great, thanks for clarifying that you really don't know.
 

BishopLamont

Banned
Apr 22, 2007
7,423
0
0
MH4 is a big game that will benefit from a bigger userbase, 3DS being the DS' successor, it makes perfect sense for Capcom to release it on the 3DS, with a little co-operation from Nintendo. Its not something you can easily money hat, they have a franchise to protect.

GE2 isn't as big and can be put on anything without really damaging many potential sales. It can be money hatted.

I think GE2 was more likely to be money hatted than MH4. Although I think everyone is just over blowing this whole thing and none were money hatted.

I'll also add that Capcom missed out on the DS/Wii train because of HD development and support for PSP. Considering their relationship over the generations, MH3G/MH4 is probably Capcom's way back to Nintendo.
 

extralite

Member
Jun 27, 2011
1,843
0
485
electrolit.net
I think 3DS makes more business sense because the genre king is driving a userbase on it. Also, I try to pay attention in these threads. If you do as well, how could you not think 3DS makes more business sense?
Spiegel already pointed out the cross play/non fragmenting of the user base aspect.

Moreover I think Namco wants to transition the already seizable GE user base to Vita to help their other Vita releases. And grab some of the PSP MH players that are disappointed with the lack of a great graphical leap on 3DS. Sure, they won't be many but if it means some extra 10 000 or even 100 000 players that will be good for GE.

Edit: To put it in other words, GE has probably more to gain from old PSP MH players than from new 3DS MH players.
 

tiku

Member
Mar 10, 2010
237
0
610
As Spiegel said, not fragmenting GE userbase could be quite important to Namco... and also not having a MH game in that platform could be another *quite* important reason.
 

Afrit

Member
Dec 7, 2012
325
0
0
MH4 is a big game that will benefit from a bigger userbase, 3DS being the DS' successor, it makes perfect sense for Capcom to release it on the 3DS, with a little co-operation from Nintendo.
.
yeah, it makes sense to go for the bigger userbase. but it doesn't necessarily means higher sales.
staticneuron made a compelling argument; it makes more sense to go after your fanbase also not just the largest userbase.

Sure but to the point of making it exclusive? Within two weeks of MHP3rd release Capcom not only described it as &#8220;the fastest selling PSP title ever in Japan&#8221; they also stated it was &#8220;the fastest selling game in Capcom's history.&#8221; To go from that to..... meh, lets make the next entry "exclusive to Nintendo Hardware" doesn't seem like the most logical course of action. Logical would be to "expand" not to drop one segment for another.
 
Jan 28, 2010
6,073
0
0
ITALY
graphmag.wordpress.com
Broccoli cannot stay on PSP forever. I wonder where they will move this IP. I would say 3DS, because it'd be cheaper and a lot of girls have the console now.

Man, what a come back for Vita, grats to Sony. Nintendo must be nervous right now.
Haha.

Amazing. Maybe Nintendo is preparing some more stocks for the Golden Week?
 

michaelius

Member
Jan 5, 2012
15,208
934
610
Let me ask you this, do you think Nintendo paid Capcom (money or other incentives such as marketing or help with dev costs) to bring MH3 and MH4 to 3DS exclusively? Yes or no.

Do you think Nintendo paid Square Enix (money or other incentives such as marketing or help with dev costs) to bring DQ X to Wii U? Yes or no.
First one obviously yes

Second one - nope - as long as they could have reused assets/code it seems like natural upgrade.
 

Mpl90

Two copies sold? That's not a bomb guys, stop trolling!!!
Mar 10, 2011
22,885
0
855
28
theflyingthoughtsblog.wordpress.com
Media Create Sell-through:

01./00. [PS3] Dynasty Warriors 8 # <ACT> (Koei Tecmo) {2013.02.28} (¥7.560) - 203.224 / NEW <68,23%>

03./00. [PSV] Senran Kagura Shinovi Versus: Otome Shoujotachi no Shoumei # <ACT> (Marvelous AQL) {2013.02.28} (¥6.980) - 94.324 / NEW <93,37%>

07./00. [PSV] Phantasy Star Online 2: Special Package <RPG> (Sega) {2013.02.28} (¥5.229) - 61.227 / NEW <89,39%>

Ice Silver Vita 15k.

ums/o763/hiska-kun/P1000657_zpsa16eeb09.jpg[/url]
So

Dynasty Warriors 8 first shipment - 297.851
Senran Kagura Shinovi Versus: Otome Shoujotachi no Shoumei first shipment - 101.021. This means it sold around 20k digital copies
Phantasy Star Online 2: Special Package first shipment - 68.494
 

BishopLamont

Banned
Apr 22, 2007
7,423
0
0
yeah, it makes sense to go for the bigger userbase. but it doesn't necessarily means higher sales.
staticneuron made a compelling argument; it makes more sense to go after your fanbase also not just the largest userbase.
When your fanbase is 4M+ targeting the highest userbase is a good idea. If MH3G can sell 2M, I'm sure most of the fanbase is willing to transition aswell. You can't only rely on your fanbase when your game sells millions upon millions, it's the mass/casual that you also want to target, and that is looking likely on the 3DS.

Also, this is the next-gen, it's not like MH jump shipped mid-gen from PSP to DS or something. Every game needs to establish the fanbase again with every generation.

Forget the potential of higher sales on the 3DS vs the Vita, if MH4 comes to Vita, there's the chance it'll sell even less than it previously did due to how small the Vita's userbase is.

staticneuron said:
Sure but to the point of making it exclusive? Within two weeks of MHP3rd release Capcom not only described it as &#8220;the fastest selling PSP title ever in Japan&#8221; they also stated it was &#8220;the fastest selling game in Capcom's history.&#8221; To go from that to..... meh, lets make the next entry "exclusive to Nintendo Hardware" doesn't seem like the most logical course of action. Logical would be to "expand" not to drop one segment for another.
Final Fantasy jumped ship to PS1 after how many generations of being on Nintendo hardware? Market conditions are a stronger force than the fanbase, at the end of the day it's the game that matters not the platform it's on to the gamer.

After all Capcom wants to make as much money as they can from MH4 while also keeping its popularity. 3DS made alot of sense in many ways more than the Vita.
 

serplux

Member
Dec 27, 2012
3,994
0
0
Sure but to the point of making it exclusive? Within two weeks of MHP3rd release Capcom not only described it as &#8220;the fastest selling PSP title ever in Japan&#8221; they also stated it was &#8220;the fastest selling game in Capcom's history.&#8221; To go from that to..... meh, lets make the next entry "exclusive to Nintendo Hardware" doesn't seem like the most logical course of action. Logical would be to "expand" not to drop one segment for another.
That's because Capcom's Monster Hunter titles were the only million sellers on the PSP in Japan. They'd rather build off of the Dragon Quest/Mario/Pokemon/Animal Crossing fanbase on the 3DS than build a fanbase themselves on the Vita. So why is it exclusive? Monster Hunter's a very social game. Let's say MH4 came out on the Vita and the 3DS. You have a Vita, I have a 3DS. We can't play with each other, and that fragments the userbase. But not only do I have a 3DS, 5 other people have one as well. That means you're going to have to either play with a smaller userbase (which is much less fun), or you're going to have to purchase a 3DS. Keep in mind that local multiplayer is a much bigger deal than online multiplayer. That's why Monster Hunter is exclusive to the 3DS.
 

Zen

Banned
Jun 24, 2005
13,050
0
0
That's because Capcom's Monster Hunter titles were the only million sellers on the PSP in Japan. They'd rather build off of the Dragon Quest/Mario/Pokemon/Animal Crossing fanbase on the 3DS than build a fanbase themselves on the Vita. So why is it exclusive? Monster Hunter's a very social game. Let's say MH4 came out on the Vita and the 3DS. You have a Vita, I have a 3DS. We can't play with each other, and that fragments the userbase. But not only do I have a 3DS, 5 other people have one as well. That means you're going to have to either play with a smaller userbase (which is much less fun), or you're going to have to purchase a 3DS. Keep in mind that local multiplayer is a much bigger deal than online multiplayer. That's why Monster Hunter is exclusive to the 3DS.
That doesn't make sense for why it's exclusive.
 

serplux

Member
Dec 27, 2012
3,994
0
0
That doesn't make sense for why it's exclusive.
You can't fragment the userbase by letting them choose between a Vita and 3DS version of the game. One of them is going to be left out, and the 3DS is a lot more attractive because Capcom can build off of the other big franchises' userbase instead of being the only big franchise on the Vita. If the Vita were more attractive to Capcom, it would be the same way. That's not saying that spinoffs won't happen on the other platform, but since the Vita has literally not gotten any Capcom games since launch; I doubt that any Monster Hunter games are in development.
 

holysan

Member
Aug 4, 2012
968
0
395
Let's say MH4 came out on the Vita and the 3DS. You have a Vita, I have a 3DS. We can't play with each other, and that fragments the userbase. But not only do I have a 3DS, 5 other people have one as well. That means you're going to have to either play with a smaller userbase (which is much less fun), or you're going to have to purchase a 3DS. Keep in mind that local multiplayer is a much bigger deal than online multiplayer. That's why Monster Hunter is exclusive to the 3DS.
Call of Duty comes out on PS360U, i have a PS3, you have a 360 and Guy X has a U, we can't play together. Too bad.

That doesn't make sense. Most games don't support crossplatform MP at yet they are still multi.
 

serplux

Member
Dec 27, 2012
3,994
0
0
Call of Duty comes out on PS360U, i have a PS3, you have a 360 and Guy X has a U, we can't play together. Too bad.

That doesn't make sense. Most games don't support crossplatform MP at yet they are still multi.
We're not talking about online multiplayer. We're talking about local multiplayer, since that's much integral to Monster Hunter than online is. When three of us get the 3DS version of the game, and you get the Vita version, you won't have anyone to play with.
 

squall23

Member
Jun 27, 2007
4,470
0
0
Call of Duty comes out on PS360U, i have a PS3, you have a 360 and Guy X has a U, we can't play together. Too bad.

That doesn't make sense. Most games don't support crossplatform MP at yet they are still multi.
4 guys are on a daily commute on a train, 3 of them are playing MH on their 3DS while the 4th guy with the Vita has nothing. The main flaw with your argument is that MH has essentially become a social game.