NPD Sales Results for March 2014 [Up4: FFX/X-2 HD]

Damn, my projections which I considered hugely terrifying for gaming still only amounted to a loss of 60 million units gen on gen with home consoles. shinra is over there telling me I'm being optimistic.

We start getting into the losses of hundreds of millions and we are talking literal market crash material. Like game budgets needing to be shaved by 1/3rd to 1/2 to ensure any profitability bad.
It depends what's dropping no?

If the 3DS, Vita, and Wii U sold a grand total of zero units this generation, it wouldn't impact what the vast majority of Western third party publishers put out.
 

Guevara

Member
Jul 27, 2009
24,816
0
0
I think one thing people are missing with the Xbox One here is that the price promotions are working.

The thing is actually selling. Are they having to add value to get it to do that? Yes, but they're offering the notably worse base value proposition anyway, yet still are seeing healthy demand.

This implies a product that actually has an audience, but with a price point that's too high.

The problem the Wii U has on the other hand is that even when Nintendo pulls the soft-price-cut levers (and pulled the hard price cut lever) they didn't actually get a notable improvement, implying their demand issues related to their core product instead of their price point.

This is a very fundamental difference.
I don't know, how long can they pack in Forza and Titanfall before that stops looking like added value?

Pretty soon everyone who wants those games will have gotten them. At that point we'll have to go to either new pack-ins (and it's not obvious what those would be this summer) to add value, or an honest-to-god price drop. That is what should be scary to Microsoft: packing a Forza and Titanfall code in the box doesn't cost much, dropping the retail price would be painful.
 

prag16

Member
Jul 12, 2012
10,382
1,544
500
I don't really see either of the bolded occurring. I think multi-system ownership is going to decrease; given the option between multiple systems or one system, I really don't think the general consumer wants multiple consoles.

As for the those who gamed on the Wii, if a significant portion of them do transition to the PS4 and XBO then I would consider that a sizable increase in the "core" audience. I don't really want to get into a semantic discussion, but I'm simply using the term as short-hand for "consumers who buy games like Assassin's Creed, Halo, Uncharted, FIFA, Madden, Call of Duty etc. etc." And I don't think that's what we're seeing. Just Dance has kept some audience going, but whatever has been sustained of the Wii's expansion is probably a small fraction. And it doesn't really seem like its transitioning, given the sales of that title for instance are still overwhelmingly on the Wii.

I think there'll be a pretty substantial contraction, or perhaps more aptly correction, as the motion bubble has completed its pop. Almost 110M 7th gen systems were sold. Just very rough ballpark guestimate but I expect this next gen to top off around 70M or so, (depending of course on how long until we see successors.)

It would be nice if that did happen though.
I think 70mm is a realistic target. 100mm or so as Thunder Monkey's talking about seems pretty far fetched from where we stand now.

I don't see xbone matching 360 nor do I see PS4 doubling PS3. Wii U may be lucky to hit 10mm.
 
I don't know, how long can they pack in Forza and Titanfall before that stops looking like added value?

Pretty soon everyone who wants those games will have gotten them. At that point we'll have to go to either new pack-ins (and it's not obvious what those would be this summer) to add value, or an honest-to-god price drop. That is what should be scary to Microsoft: packing a Forza and Titanfall code in the box doesn't cost much, dropping the retail price would be painful.
That's kind of the core idea with going with a SoC though.

It's both cheaper to initially make and easier to price drop.

If they're not on the right timeline they can always do things like tear Kinect out of the box as well to stopgap.
 

TechnicPuppet

Nothing! I said nothing!
May 14, 2013
4,963
0
0
Scotland
Personally I see MS's priorities as the following

  1. Sell 2.5 games per console
  2. Sell XBL Gold Sub
  3. Sell secondary services [Xbox Fitness Sub, Xbox Video]
  4. Sell More Games
Sony's shouldn't be too different either imo
Sony seem to care more about selling consoles than games/services at this point. MS seem the opposite.

I worked for Dell until recently and every year or so the company would completely change focus from going after marketshare to maximising profit. Going after marketshare can result in a race the bottom.
 

Saucycarpdog

Member
Nov 3, 2013
6,129
0
0
Holy sheet! 10k for the vita? I don't have any numbers but that has to be around the GameCube numbers before it was discontinued.
 
Jul 31, 2007
24,446
1
0
35
Kansas, USA
It depends what's dropping no?

If the 3DS, Vita, and Wii U sold a grand total of zero units this generation, it wouldn't impact what the vast majority of Western third party publishers put out.
In the strictest sense no. But it is safe to say they had a much larger pool this prior generation to sell their wares too and a few took up the challenge to varying results, CoD did well on Wii. It never reached the heights of PS3/360 versions (the first of it's immense popularity surge missing Wii for years). But they had potentially 100+ million gamers to sell too.

This gen you're looking at a contraction from that at the start. If it starts eating into the "traditionalist" gamer arena there's no telling what we'll see. I'm hoping they have a minimum of 70 million to sell too. I do think the maximum is a drop from last gen, but it was almost always assuredly going to be with Nintendo's WiiU foibles.

There cannot be a contraction in every gaming market this generation. The "core" gamer demo must grow if the casual gamer has left consoles altogether. Otherwise we are literally going to be looking at a console market within a generation that can only support a few hundred titles.

And we've already seen a huge consolidation of play styles and themes over the course of the last generation anyway. Further contraction would just cement those underlying issues. Maybe I'm just being a chicken little.
 

Guevara

Member
Jul 27, 2009
24,816
0
0
That's kind of the core idea with going with a SoC though.

It's both cheaper to initially make and easier to price drop.

If they're not on the right timeline they can always do things like tear Kinect out of the box as well to stopgap.
I actually think they can't drop Kinect. Or to put it more accurately, I think Microsoft corporate has a larger plan that will force the Xbox team to keep Kinect in the box, at least until all the Windows apps baloney launches. But this is firmly into conspiracy theory territory.

I agree about the system on a chip though, it's a good plan let's see how well they can execute because they will have to drop the price this year. (And as you said, it's not all bad news: obviously people are willing to buy the Xbox One just not at $499).
 
In the strictest sense no. But it is safe to say they had a much larger pool this prior generation to sell their wares too and a few took up the challenge to varying results, CoD did well on Wii. It never reached the heights of PS3/360 versions (the first of it's immense popularity surge missing Wii for years). But they had potentially 100+ million gamers to sell too.

This gen you're looking at a contraction from that at the start. If it starts eating into the "traditionalist" gamer arena there's no telling what we'll see. I'm hoping they have a minimum of 70 million to sell too. I do think the maximum is a drop from last gen, but it was almost always assuredly going to be with Nintendo's WiiU foibles.

There cannot be a contraction in every gaming market this generation. The "core" gamer demo must grow if the casual gamer has left consoles altogether. Otherwise we are literally going to be looking at a console market within a generation that can only support a few hundred titles.

And we've already seen a huge consolidation of play styles and themes over the course of the last generation anyway. Further contraction would just cement those underlying issues. Maybe I'm just being a chicken little.
Well, I mean, I feel we're kind of at this point already.

Just taking a gander at the upcoming retail game list shows us a bunch of multiplayer heavy FPS titles, a bunch of open world third person action-adventure games, and a variety of pseudo-MMOs. Then there are a couple of b-projects that probably won't wheel around for another go.

Beyond that is a bunch of downloadable games and f2p titles which both Sony and Microsoft (and even Nintendo) have vastly ramped up their attention on, because they realize that's their main hope for filling in the gaps between mega games both in terms of release dates and genres/gameplay models. A lot of this stuff is inherited from the PC and/or mobile as well.

We're currently four months into the year and here's a grand total list of the AAA retail games announced for PS4/XB1:
-Alien Isolation
-Evolve
-Batman: Arkham Knight
-Assassin's Creed: Unity
-If we really want to count them, there were a couple of licensed games like Transformers, but I'm not sure I'd consider them AAA by modern standards.

It's not exactly overflowing.

I actually think they can't drop Kinect. Or to put it more accurately, I think Microsoft corporate has a larger plan that will force the Xbox team to keep Kinect in the box, at least until all the Windows apps baloney launches. But this is firmly into conspiracy theory territory.

I agree about the system on a chip though, it's a good plan let's see how well they can execute because they will have to drop the price this year. (And as you said, it's not all bad news: obviously people are willing to buy the Xbox One just not at $499).
Yeah, if they see Kinect as core to their end game strategy, then it probably will never leave.

Ultimately I do think their positioning is going to cause them to not win the generation by unit count, but overall coming in second (as long as that's a decent number) can still be a profitable business.

Once they reach a certain price range the cost no longer becomes a notable factor, so their real challenge will be managing the transition speed down to that point without bleeding profits.
 

Hydrargyrus

Member
Feb 3, 2009
4,151
0
0
Zaragoza, Spain
I think one thing people are missing with the Xbox One here is that the price promotions are working.

The thing is actually selling. Are they having to add value to get it to do that? Yes, but they're offering the notably worse base value proposition anyway, yet still are seeing healthy demand.
Well, I would wait at least two months after titanfall release.
I'm not saying it's not selling at all but, at least for me, seems like One is still in the match (in the US) thanks to Titanfall push these months.
The promotions are a plus, but if there isn't Titanfall... well, the promotions wouldn't have worked even near.
 
Sep 6, 2007
4,443
0
0
Wow that gap is increasing. That attach rate is a major problem for sony - selling software is way more important than hardware numbers where you arent even making a profit on the sale.
Sony seem to care more about selling consoles than games/services at this point. MS seem the opposite.
The NPD software attach rate and sales comparisons are only taking physical retail into account, so they're inaccurate. This gen has a lot of gamers going digital-only, including myself.

The best numbers we currently have to work with are Sony's and Microsoft's own internal WW numbers which Sony and Microsoft gave us the day before and the day of NPD, respectively. Sony said they sold 7m PS4s and 20.5m software. I know the software number includes an extra week, but that won't make a huge difference when talking about LTD numbers. But let's go ahead and assume Sony sold 250K PS4s that week, since they sell about 1m per month. 20.5m/7.25m = 2.83 attach. Pretty damn close to Microsoft's 2.9 attach.

Microsoft said they sold-in 5m Xbones. GAF estimates put it closer to 4m.

4m x 2.9 = 11.6m software
5m x 2.9 = 14.5m software

So, Xbone sold anywhere from 11.6m-14.5m software.

PS4 sold 20.5m software.

20.5m -11.6m = 8.9m software
20.5m -14.5m = 6m software

So, PS4 sold anywhere from 6m - 8.9m more software overall than Xbone. If Xbone is selling more software at retail, then that can only mean that PS4 is selling significantly more digital titles to give them a 6m - 8.9m software lead.
 

theprodigy

Member
Aug 25, 2013
24,331
0
0
I don't think the 2.9 figure was from Microsoft, it was from NPD, which means it doesn't include digital.
not to mention US!=world, even for Microsoft and their US-heavy lean
 

TechnicPuppet

Nothing! I said nothing!
May 14, 2013
4,963
0
0
Scotland
The NPD software attach rate and sales comparisons are only taking physical retail into account, so they're inaccurate. This gen has a lot of gamers going digital-only, including myself.

The best numbers we currently have to work with are Sony's and Microsoft's own internal WW numbers which Sony and Microsoft gave us the day before and the day of NPD, respectively. Sony said they sold 7m PS4s and 20.5m software. I know the software number includes an extra week, but that won't make a huge difference when talking about LTD numbers. But let's go ahead and assume Sony sold 250K PS4s that week, since they sell about 1m per month. 20.5m/7.25m = 2.83 attach. Pretty damn close to Microsoft's 2.9 attach.

Microsoft said they sold-in 5m Xbones. GAF estimates put it closer to 4m.

4m x 2.9 = 11.6m software
5m x 2.9 = 14.5m software

So, Xbone sold anywhere from 11.6m-14.5m software.

PS4 sold 20.5m software.

20.5m -11.6m = 8.9m software
20.5m -14.5m = 6m software

So, PS4 sold anywhere from 6m - 8.9m more software overall than Xbone. If Xbone is selling more software at retail, then that can only mean that PS4 is selling significantly more digital titles to give them a 6m - 8.9m software lead.
Where do you get MS software sold figures from? Sony numbers include everything. Did MS give an up to date figure for total software sold?
 

TomShoe

Banned
Oct 27, 2013
7,712
0
0
Hampton Roads, VA
I don't know, how long can they pack in Forza and Titanfall before that stops looking like added value?

Pretty soon everyone who wants those games will have gotten them. At that point we'll have to go to either new pack-ins (and it's not obvious what those would be this summer) to add value, or an honest-to-god price drop. That is what should be scary to Microsoft: packing a Forza and Titanfall code in the box doesn't cost much, dropping the retail price would be painful.
I don't understand. Does Microsoft have to cover the full cost of the game being bundled per unit? Or do they work out a contract with the publisher for a fixed amount?
 

SwiftDeath

Member
May 31, 2013
23,628
0
0
Hmm I thought Attach Rate was used for how many console owners bought a specific title?

Like Titanfall's attach rate on XB1 is insane at around 40%

Whereas Tie Ratio was used to describe the number of software sales per hardware sale a console has like 2.9 for XB1 [maybe in the US]
 

Raitosaito

Member
Jun 12, 2011
3,767
0
0
California
I went all digital with PS4 so far, and while it's anecdotal evidence I feel my friends have opt in for digital a lot more on the playstation side just because PS+ already got them hook on having a small library digitally on the system.

Wonder how microsoft's digital sales are in relative to Sony.
 
Sep 6, 2007
4,443
0
0
Where do you get MS software sold figures from? Sony numbers include everything. Did MS give an up to date figure for total software sold?
MS PR stated 2.9 attach. I assume that's WW since it comes from the same PR of 5m sold-in. Unless I'm getting quotes mixed up. I searched this thread for "2.9." Then you just multiply that by how many consoles MS sold which we know has an upper limit of 5m.
 
Sep 6, 2007
4,443
0
0
Hmm I thought Attach Rate was used for how many console owners bought a specific title?

Like Titanfall's attach rate on XB1 is insane at around 40%

Whereas Tie Ratio was used to describe the number of software sales per hardware sale a console has like 2.9 for XB1 [maybe in the US]
Hmm. Maybe you're right. I used tie and attach interchangeably. If that's the case, I'm really talking about the tie ratio since I never mentioned any specific titles.
 

SwiftDeath

Member
May 31, 2013
23,628
0
0
MS PR stated 2.9 attach. I assume that's WW since it comes from the same PR of 5m sold-in. Unless I'm getting quotes mixed up. I searched this thread for "2.9." Then you just multiply that by how many consoles MS sold which we know has an upper limit of 5m.
Pretty sure you're thinking of US NPD data

http://news.xbox.com/2014/04/xbox-one-march-npd

Highlights from March 2014 NPD Group results include:

  • Xbox One continues to see impressive software sales with an average of 2.9 games sold per console.
 
Sep 6, 2007
4,443
0
0
It looks like you're right. First search result for "2.9" in this thread was a post by Aquamarine.

Microsoft PR:

http://news.xbox.com/2014/04/xbox-one-march-npd

The team and I had the honor of joining thousands of you in Austin, Texas at SXSW this past March as you waited in line for the Titanfall launch on Xbox One. We were blown away by your passion and enthusiasm on launch night and since then, it’s been exciting to see gamers around the world playing “Titanfall” on Xbox Live. Today, we congratulate our friends at Respawn Entertainment, and Electronic Arts, as “Titanfall” for Xbox One was named the number one selling game in March, according to NPD Group figures released today.

We’re also happy to share today that more than 5 million Xbox One consoles have been sold-in to retailers since our launch. The new generation is off to a strong start, with global Xbox One sales outpacing Xbox 360 by more than 60 percent at the same point in time, a true testament to your love of console gaming. Even more important to us is how much fun you are having on Xbox One. It’s amazing that Xbox One fans are spending an average of five hours per day on Xbox One and collectively have totaled more than one billion hours of time spent in games and apps on the console. We’re also thrilled to see your use and enjoyment of the latest features and apps we have released as part of our regular system updates. In particular, we broke new usage records with the number of unique Twitch broadcasters in the first week of availability.

Of course, we’re just getting started with this generation and the months ahead will bring several announcements we think you’ll love. The team will continue to deliver regular improvements and new features based on your feedback through frequent system updates. Many more games are on the way with titles like “Sunset Overdrive” and “Project Spark,” many new games coming to Xbox One through the ID@Xbox program, and many more entertainment experiences. We can’t wait to share more games with you in June at E3.

We are grateful for your support on Xbox One and the continued popularity of Xbox 360. We’re going to continue working hard to earn your loyalty and making Xbox the best place to play games.

Yusuf

Highlights from March 2014 NPD Group results include:

Xbox One continues selling at a strong pace with 311,000 units sold in the U.S. in the month of March, surpassing Xbox 360 sales by more than 60 percent at the same point in time.

Xbox 360 continues to grow its install base with 111,000 units sold in March in the U.S., more than any other seventh generation console.

Xbox One continues to see impressive software sales with an average of 2.9 games sold per console.

With Xbox One and Xbox 360 combined, the Xbox platform sold the most games across all console platforms with 4.1 million games sold. Xbox One sold 1.4 million games in March and Xbox 360 sold 2.7 million, totaling 49 percent of the total software market share (Xbox 360 and Xbox One combined).

During the month of March, Xbox One and Xbox 360 games in the top 10 title lists were as follows:

Xbox One held four top titles in the generation eight top 10 console game title list in the U.S. including: “Plans vs. Zombies: Garden Warfare,” “Call of Duty: Ghosts,” “Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes,” “ Titanfall.”

Xbox 360 held six top titles in the generation seven top 10 console game title list in the U.S. include: “Minecraft,” “Dark Souls II,” “The Lego Movie Video Game,” “Plants vs. Zombies: Garden Warfare,” “Call of Duty: Ghosts,” “South Park: The Stick of Truth.”

Data from NPD Group, March 2014

*Internal Microsoft data"
Both the 5m and 2.9 figure came from the same MS PR, but it looks like the 2.9 figure was just MS quoting NPD.
 
Jul 31, 2007
24,446
1
0
35
Kansas, USA
Well, I mean, I feel we're kind of at this point already.

Just taking a gander at the upcoming retail game list shows us a bunch of multiplayer heavy FPS titles, a bunch of open world third person action-adventure games, and a variety of pseudo-MMOs. Then there are a couple of b-projects that probably won't wheel around for another go.

Beyond that is a bunch of downloadable games and f2p titles which both Sony and Microsoft (and even Nintendo) have vastly ramped up their attention on, because they realize that's their main hope for filling in the gaps between mega games both in terms of release dates and genres/gameplay models. A lot of this stuff is inherited from the PC and/or mobile as well.

We're currently four months into the year and here's a grand total list of the AAA retail games announced for PS4/XB1:
-Alien Isolation
-Evolve
-Batman: Arkham Knight
-Assassin's Creed: Unity
-If we really want to count them, there were a couple of licensed games like Transformers, but I'm not sure I'd consider them AAA by modern standards.

It's not exactly overflowing.
You guys are destroying my optimism.

The situation seems much more dire than I let myself realize. If it holds true for the entire generation I wonder if either matches their predecessors unit tallies. I've been running on the assumption that the market for core gamer wares will continue to grow like they have every generation. But if we're already seeing such significant contraction of releases I see nowhere for it to go but down.

Someone hold me... I think "traditional" gaming is dead after this generation. Thanks for that you two. I need to see the floor for One and PS4 sales before I'll let myself truly believe though.
 
You guys are destroying my optimism.

The situation seems much more dire than I let myself realize. If it holds true for the entire generation I wonder if either matches their predecessors unit tallies. I've been running on the assumption that the market for core gamer wares will continue to grow like they have every generation. But if we're already seeing such significant contraction of releases I see nowhere for it to go but down.

Someone hold me... I think "traditional" gaming is dead after this generation. Thanks for that you two. I need to see the floor for One and PS4 sales before I'll let myself truly believe though.
I think you're thinking about this a bit too extreme in either direction.

Gaming is becoming a lot like Hollywood, where you have major $200 million blockbusters, and then some notably cheaper movies.

The blockbusters, while not super plentiful, don't actually disappear. However, they do overwhelmingly tend to be a from a few sub-genres like superhero movies, centerpiece CG animated films, and various sci-fi/fantasy action/adventure films. These are akin to modern day AAA games.

Then there's still a lot of smaller stuff like art house films, romantic comedies, or smaller action films that don't cost nearly as much to make and are satisfied with a notably lower performance. These are akin to digital games.

Just because people can watch TV for free, it ultimately hasn't stopped them from going to the theater, because the content they want still exists there. They just don't go to the theater and much as they might have back in the days of Gone With The Wind. Despite this, the biggest movies still make an astronomical amount of money.

What we've lost is more akin to the type of serial programming that used to run before a movie like Flash Gordon, because that's obviously a much better fit for something like television (since the format is effectively the same) and a variety of movies that now are delivered as direct to video, when they might have been in theaters if we turn the clock back 60-80 years. This is most akin to casual gaming moving to video or certain types of mid-tier titles disappearing or getting even lower budget renditions as digital games.

If your hope is for healthy variety among AAA games, then yeah, overall you're going to be disappointed. However, I don't think you need to fear most of the remaining types of blockbusters drying up.
 

SwiftDeath

Member
May 31, 2013
23,628
0
0
What were Dark Souls 1's sales?

I'm surprised the split isn't more in favor for PS3.
I don't think we ever got Dark Souls sales at launch in the US either officially or unofficially

NPD October 2011 Sales Results

Dark Souls ranked sixth overall though at release and Dark Souls II ranked fifth but impossible to compare without numbers

As for the split

Close.

360 LTD: 41.3 million

PS3 LTD: 25.8 million
360 has a 60% advantage install base wise

Although apparently Dark Souls 1 sold about 30k more on PS3 at launch than 360
 

TheRealTalker

Banned
Mar 29, 2013
19,234
0
0
I expect MS to show a lot of third party exclusives this E3 but the following years it will become harder for MS to relay on third party/2nd party titles
 

Tookay

Member
Oct 26, 2011
9,987
0
0
I think you're thinking about this a bit too extreme in either direction.

Gaming is becoming a lot like Hollywood, where you have major $200 million blockbusters, and then some notably cheaper movies.

The blockbusters, while not super plentiful, don't actually disappear. However, they do overwhelmingly tend to be a from a few sub-genres like superhero movies, centerpiece CG animated films, and various sci-fi/fantasy action/adventure films. These are akin to modern day AAA games.

Then there's still a lot of smaller stuff like art house films, romantic comedies, or smaller action films that don't cost nearly as much to make and are satisfied with a notably lower performance. These are akin to digital games.

Just because people can watch TV for free, it ultimately hasn't stopped them from going to the theater, because the content they want still exists there. They just don't go to the theater and much as they might have back in the days of Gone With The Wind. Despite this, the biggest movies still make an astronomical amount of money.

What we've lost is more akin to the type of serial programming that used to run before a movie like Flash Gordon, because that's obviously a much better fit for something like television (since the format is effectively the same) and a variety of movies that now are delivered as direct to video, when they might have been in theaters if we turn the clock back 60-80 years. This is most akin to casual gaming moving to video or certain types of mid-tier titles disappearing or getting even lower budget renditions as digital games.

If your hope is for healthy variety among AAA games, then yeah, overall you're going to be disappointed. However, I don't think you need to fear most of the remaining types of blockbusters drying up.
While I think this analogy is pretty good, where it deviates is in the method of consumption. The price of entry into a blockbuster film cost is the price of a movie ticket. Blockbuster games cost you $60 and an initial upfront cost of a console. With a narrowing of genre diversity, I think consoles are going to entice less and less people - especially those on the fence - to jump into their ecosystems... which will in turn bring less diversity as developers double down on the few genres that still sell to the mass audience to sustain their bloated budgets. And, with development costs seemingly increasing and gamer expectations perhaps unfairly increasing as well, I can't see this ending well.

Are people going to continue to spend $400-500 to buy consoles that have fewer games than ever, in fewer genres than ever, concentrated around a couple key months of the year?
 

spekkeh

Banned
Apr 18, 2011
14,647
0
0
www.neogaf.com
On a slightly related topic I really don't know why people are expecting a WiiU like situation from XBone. Even if it only sells 50% of PS4's lifetime sales you are still talking in the region of 40 - 50 million sales even at the worse end of hardware sales predictions for the entire generation.
Because I expect Xbone to sell a lot less than 50% of PS4's lifetime sales. I think part of why Wii U was bombing (apart from being way too expensive for a 'last gen' console of course), was because people were waiting for 'real next gen' to make a decision. Xbone shot out of the gate due to brand recognition and the start of the gen, but I think the value proposition is not there with respect to PS4. The only way they can mitigate it if MS is wanting to make a loss again and significantly undercut the PS4, which I guess we just have to wait if they want to go there. It of course also depends on whether Nintendo wants to keep supporting their system. If they do, then at the end of this year people (PS4 owners mostly) might start looking for a second console, and with a few new gamers Nintendo could limp to 20 million consoles by 16/17. If they don't, it's going to be 10 million. Xbone I could see limp to about 30 million. PS4 90-100 million.

Of course the source of this is mostly my ass, but still.
 

John Harker

Definitely doesn't make things up as he goes along.
Feb 26, 2005
17,582
0
0
Santa Destroy
I think one thing people are missing with the Xbox One here is that the price promotions are working.

The thing is actually selling. Are they having to add value to get it to do that? Yes, but they're offering the notably worse base value proposition anyway, yet still are seeing healthy demand.

This implies a product that actually has an audience, but with a price point that's too high.

The problem the Wii U has on the other hand is that even when Nintendo pulls the soft-price-cut levers (and pulled the hard price cut lever) they didn't actually get a notable improvement, implying their demand issues related to their core product instead of their price point.

This is a very fundamental difference.
Price promotion is an effective tool to convert SHOPPERS to PURCHASERS.

What price promotion isn't as efficient at, is converting CONSUMERS to SHOPPERS.

The product itself, to add to your point, has to have a baseline group of 'shoppers' - i.e. people who actively want information about the product, but are still in the 'browsing' phase - maybe they are waiting for software, maybe they are waiting for a different value proposition, maybe they think the cost is too high... but they are actively seeking information about the product, they have indicated interest in becoming a PURCHASER.

That is the audience price programs target.

If you suddenly drop the price and don't have people who are currently in the 'shopper position' for said product, you basically are pissing money away. Because it's that much harder to bring the price back up to a profitable number if you eventually turn around the product into something consumers want.

There's just not enough baseline interest for a massive Wii U price drop to be affect at this point. They have to re-target it and build up demand for it's native offering. They'll come back with a heavy family positioning, I imagine, which Iwata admitted they deviated too far from initially. Kids kids kids kids.
 

theprodigy

Member
Aug 25, 2013
24,331
0
0
Because German assassin's are super efficient
better than Nintendo ninjas, apparently :p

Because I expect Xbone to sell a lot less than 50% of PS4's lifetime sales. I think part of why Wii U was bombing (apart from being way too expensive for a 'last gen' console of course), was because people were waiting for 'real next gen' to make a decision. Xbone shot out of the gate due to brand recognition and the start of the gen, but I think the value proposition is not there with respect to PS4. The only way they can mitigate it if MS is wanting to make a loss again and significantly undercut the PS4, which I guess we just have to wait if they want to go there. It of course also depends on whether Nintendo wants to keep supporting their system. If they do, then at the end of this year people (PS4 owners mostly) might start looking for a second console, and with a few new gamers Nintendo could limp to 20 million consoles by 16/17. If they don't, it's going to be 10 million. Xbone I could see limp to about 30 million. PS4 90-100 million.

Of course the source of this is mostly my ass, but still.
at least in the US, there's definitely plenty of demand, it's more of a price issue that's holding back the Xbox One
and 30 million LTD? it'll do more than that
 

Aquamarine

Member
May 24, 2012
18,812
119
500
How come there are no GfK leakers?
The complete set of GfK data is MUCH more expensive than NPD, so I presume fewer venues have access to the full set.


For example:

German retailers will subscribe to Media Control GfK data.

U.K. retailers will subscribe to GfK Chart-Track data.


Fewer venues = Fewer opportunities for leakers = Higher stakes for those who do decide to leak.

What's really nice about the USA market is how it's so influential in the overall video game sales sphere. As a representative sample of video game sales, NPD excels in that regard.
 

hawk2025

Member
Jan 20, 2013
15,489
0
0
Yet they are selling more games. Not the worst problem to have.


A higher attach rate does not imply selling more games, and you have yet to address why you believe the Xbox One sells more digital software, given that the only evidence that exists points to the contrary.
 
While I think this analogy is pretty good, where it deviates is in the method of consumption. The price of entry into a blockbuster film cost is the price of a movie ticket. Blockbuster games cost you $60 and an initial upfront cost of a console. With a narrowing of genre diversity, I think consoles are going to entice less and less people - especially those on the fence - to jump into their ecosystems... which will in turn bring less diversity as developers double down on the few genres that still sell to the mass audience to sustain their bloated budgets. And, with development costs seemingly increasing and gamer expectations perhaps unfairly increasing as well, I can't see this ending well.

Are people going to continue to spend $400-500 to buy consoles that have fewer games than ever, in fewer genres than ever, concentrated around a couple key months of the year?
I do think there is a point where you can spurn people away, yes.

The open question is if consumers widely find the other offerings on the platform interesting.

If there isn't a high conversion rate from people who only buy retail games to people who buy both retail and digital only games, then those people don't have much to do.

If they do convert however, they get a large array of content at notably cheaper prices than $60.

If the platforms can only sustain on an ever shrinking set of retail titles since that's all their customers are willing to purchase, then yes, I would expect a slow but steady decline.
 

theprodigy

Member
Aug 25, 2013
24,331
0
0
The complete set of GfK data is MUCH more expensive than NPD, so I presume fewer venues have access to the full set.


For example:

German retailers will subscribe to Media Control GfK data.

U.K. retailers will subscribe to Chart-Track GfK data.


Fewer venues = Fewer opportunities for leakers = Higher stakes for those who do decide to leak.

What's really nice about the USA market is how it's so influential in the overall video game sales sphere. As a representative sample of video game sales, NPD excels in that regard.
lameeee
surely there's enough people with access so that leaking one country's numbers won't be enough to catch them?
 

TechnicPuppet

Nothing! I said nothing!
May 14, 2013
4,963
0
0
Scotland
A higher attach rate does not imply selling more games, and you have yet to address why you believe the Xbox One sells more digital software, given that the only evidence that exists points to the contrary.
They are selling more games even though they are behind in console sales.

Considering bundle sales aren't counted I have no doubt the XB1 is ahead in digital sales, there is also there fact you get a lot of free games on the PS4 reducing the need to buy games.

There is no real evidence though either way.
 

moneal2001

Banned
Sep 13, 2013
350
0
0
They are selling more games even though they are behind in console sales.

Considering bundle sales aren't counted I have no doubt the XB1 is ahead in digital sales, there is also there fact you get a lot of free games on the PS4 reducing the need to buy games.

There is no real evidence though either way.
where did you get this?
 

hawk2025

Member
Jan 20, 2013
15,489
0
0
They are selling more games even though they are behind in console sales.

Considering bundle sales aren't counted I have no doubt the XB1 is ahead in digital sales, there is also there fact you get a lot of free games on the PS4 reducing the need to buy games.

There is no real evidence though either way.

I don't see the information that they are selling more games. Where did you find this?

And why? Why do you have no doubt for digital? What is it based on?


There absolutely is evidence, but the other way:

- Many more digital games available on the PS4
- Ability to pre-order
- Cheaper prices in general by more frequent sales and Amazon download codes
 
Mar 3, 2010
17,373
0
0
I think you're thinking about this a bit too extreme in either direction.

Gaming is becoming a lot like Hollywood, where you have major $200 million blockbusters, and then some notably cheaper movies.

The blockbusters, while not super plentiful, don't actually disappear. However, they do overwhelmingly tend to be a from a few sub-genres like superhero movies, centerpiece CG animated films, and various sci-fi/fantasy action/adventure films. These are akin to modern day AAA games.

Then there's still a lot of smaller stuff like art house films, romantic comedies, or smaller action films that don't cost nearly as much to make and are satisfied with a notably lower performance. These are akin to digital games.

Just because people can watch TV for free, it ultimately hasn't stopped them from going to the theater, because the content they want still exists there. They just don't go to the theater and much as they might have back in the days of Gone With The Wind. Despite this, the biggest movies still make an astronomical amount of money.

What we've lost is more akin to the type of serial programming that used to run before a movie like Flash Gordon, because that's obviously a much better fit for something like television (since the format is effectively the same) and a variety of movies that now are delivered as direct to video, when they might have been in theaters if we turn the clock back 60-80 years. This is most akin to casual gaming moving to video or certain types of mid-tier titles disappearing or getting even lower budget renditions as digital games.

If your hope is for healthy variety among AAA games, then yeah, overall you're going to be disappointed. However, I don't think you need to fear most of the remaining types of blockbusters drying up.
I vehemently disagree with this. Your previous post ignores games like Watch Dogs, the division, the crew, Destiny etc which are AAA and coming to consoles. We have barely started this gen and we have many AAA new IP which are different genres. The notion/theory that people will be disappointed by lack of variety of AAA releases is not supported at all, especially when companies are investing heavily on new AAA ip in different genres. Of course shooters will most likely be dominant but that did not stop last gen from having variety in AAA gaming.
 

Salex_

Member
Sep 13, 2013
3,836
0
0
A higher attach rate does not imply selling more games, and you have yet to address why you believe the Xbox One sells more digital software, given that the only evidence that exists points to the contrary.
I really don't understand why he always does this. It seems like he completely ignores specific information that goes against what he's thinking. It's even worse when the subject is talking about sales.

The many debates I've seen with him were trying to get him to understand some details.

Am I the only one noticing this?
 

EGM1966

Member
Aug 5, 2011
10,354
0
0
UK
I think one thing people are missing with the Xbox One here is that the price promotions are working.

The thing is actually selling. Are they having to add value to get it to do that? Yes, but they're offering the notably worse base value proposition anyway, yet still are seeing healthy demand.

This implies a product that actually has an audience, but with a price point that's too high.

The problem the Wii U has on the other hand is that even when Nintendo pulls the soft-price-cut levers (and pulled the hard price cut lever) they didn't actually get a notable improvement, implying their demand issues related to their core product instead of their price point.

This is a very fundamental difference.
While I agree the XB1 doesn't appear to be in nearly the trouble Wii U is the March NPD results aren't that encouraging either I'd argue.

At this point if the XB1 needs a game launching like TitanFall plus the huge number of excellent deals just to remain somewhat close to PS4 then that's clearly an issue because:


  • it strongly implies the baseline demand for the XB1 is way below baseline demand for PS4 at non-discounted pricepoints and even at discounted pricepoints its below PS4
  • it seems unlikely MS can maintain that level of effort/deals to keep the sales stable - they're either going to have to spend a fortune on lots of exclusive titles/DLC as well as probably fund a lot of retail promotions. That's not sustainable IMHO for the division and would soon attract concern from the senior suits
  • it means that if PS4 remains cheaper or even competitive on price and maintains decent level of software releases it will outsell XB1

The issue for MS is definitely price point related but its price point for the package offered, and just as for a long time Sony saw huge resistance in US to the PS3 price point as most purchasers did not see any extra value in Blu-Ray, so I believe that most potential purchasers do not see value in Kinect/TV services.

Sony stuck with Blu-Ray and had to work on hardware revisions/price point double time plus pump out plenty of content and they still never really recovered in US. MS is really going to have to sort out the price point / value equation as quickly if not quicker as I don't see how they can maintain the level of effort expended in March just to get decent unit sales.

They're either going to have to figure out how to sell/market the full package or find a way to scrap the full package and revert the price & package to a level consumers are interested in at enough volume to see decent sales IMHO. Basically I figure something's got to give, either sales start to dip if they can't maintain pace of exclusive content/deals or they need to get the price and package way down and soon.

Personally at this juncture I think they should stop focusing on Sony, specs, etc. and just focus on the XB1 itself and its marketing / positioning because I do agree that in US they should be able to find a way to see decent sales but I feel the clock is ticking for them in terms of having a set of market perceptions lock them into a trailing second place in US much as happened with the PS3 last gen.