All purpose Sales and Sales Rumors and Anecdotes [2017 Edition]

[Shifty Geezer]

It could become the number 1 console this generation for Japan, despite coming out years after the PS4.

Unsurprising given the local culture. The number one gaming device in Japan was clearly 3DS. I'd expect a next-gen portable from Nintendo to carry on that. I have a feeling, though perhaps misinformed, that Switch's shortcomings as a handheld (size, battery life) are less impactful in Japan where more folk carry bags and mobile-device-maintenance stuff to keep their phones going longer. For 'number one console in Japan' I'd count number of hours played on a TV, which is still probably going to go to Switch rather than PS4, as comparing like-for-like as best we can.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Unsurprising given the local culture. The number one gaming device in Japan was clearly 3DS. I'd expect a next-gen portable from Nintendo to carry on that. I have a feeling, though perhaps misinformed, that Switch's shortcomings as a handheld (size, battery life) are less impactful in Japan where more folk carry bags and mobile-device-maintenance stuff to keep their phones going longer. For 'number one console in Japan' I'd count number of hours played on a TV, which is still probably going to go to Switch rather than PS4, as comparing like-for-like as best we can.

Versus the 3DS, the only shortcoming is size. It has similar battery life to the 3DS.

One thing I wish we could get numbers for, but never will. When all gameplay for all games is exactly the same in mobile and docked mode, are there certain genres of games that get played less in one mode than the other? And is that because people the gravitate towards TV gaming prefer certain genres more or less than people that like to take their gaming on the go? Or is it more that extended play with a "proper controller" is more enjoyable or less annoying with certain types of games? Or does the display size (small screen versus TV) factor in for a certain segment of the buying public? Etc.

Some of those seem like there'd be an obvious answer, but I wonder if actual numbers would back those up.

Regards,
SB

 

[Goodtwin]

If we are going to chalk up the Wii as an anomaly, they just how much of the Xbox 360 userbase are we willing to discredit because of the RROD? The first 10-15 million 360's sold had a terrible 5 year prognosis. If you played your launch 360 long enough, odds are it would die within 5 years. How many 360's were sold thanks to the Kinect? How many PS3's were sold thanks to the Move? If the majority of Wii sales are being removed to extrapolate what the console userbase really looked like last gen, then I think you must also remove a portion of 360s because of the high failure rate, and the gamers that bought it for the motion control add ons. Truth be told, the usebase of the console market is constantly evolving. Gamers are falling out of the market, and new gamers are born every day. A good percentage of people simply fall away from games over time. The userbase is not a linear growth of gamers. If it were, we would see nearly a billion consoles being sold per generation by now.

No surprise the Switch is doing very well in Japan. Even Wii U did pretty decent early on in Japan, and that market certainly gravitates towards mobile platforms. Basically, Switch is a Monster Hunter and Pokémon game away from outselling the lifetime PS4 sales there. It should do very well in the homeland.

There is a narrative often being driven. Actually, every poster on the forums typically comes with some sort of narrative. Its your underlying opinion that looks for statistics to validate ones opinion. Some people such as myself are an open book, its obvious I am a Nintendo fan and my opinion is skewed as such. The more dangerous narrative is the one that claims to be impartial, but actually is as impartial as they come. Then there are those who simply stoke the fire to see what happens. No skin in the game, so why not light the firecracker and watch the fun.

Because of the price, you would think it would be hard for Switch to match 3DS sales.

One thing to buy a $100-200 game device for the kiddies. But $300?

So parents aren't buying PS4 and X1 consoles for their kids? The value proposition to parents is far better with Switch. Little Jimmy now has a product that he can play anywhere. I do not see how the $300 price point is a huge blow to Switch while its perfectly fine for the less flexible PS4 and X1. I have always been of the opinion that Switch would really hit its stride once its $199 or less, but in the mean time I think its fair to see just how long the momentum can be maintained at $299. There is no factual data that suggest parents see $299 as a deal breaker, if it were, PS4 and X1 wouldn't be in the hands of children, and we know that is not the case.

 

[wco81]

Fewer parents are, the higher the price.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

If we are going to chalk up the Wii as an anomaly, they just how much of the Xbox 360 userbase are we willing to discredit because of the RROD?

That's true of every console, and to be absolutely fair, hardware failures should be deducted from the total sales. No idea how to get those figures.

The first 10-15 million 360's sold had a terrible 5 year prognosis.

Many would have been replaced under MS's extended warranty.

How many 360's were sold thanks to the Kinect?

I already mentioned that.

How many PS3's were sold thanks to the Move?

None.

There is a narrative often being driven. Actually, every poster on the forums typically comes with some sort of narrative. Its your underlying opinion that looks for statistics to validate ones opinion. Some people such as myself are an open book, its obvious I am a Nintendo fan and my opinion is skewed as such. The more dangerous narrative is the one that claims to be impartial, but actually is as impartial as they come. Then there are those who simply stoke the fire to see what happens. No skin in the game, so why not light the firecracker and watch the fun.

I strongly object. There are those of us with no stake in these discussions who are just interested in the logic of the debate and trying to make predictions.

Its your underlying opinion that looks for statistics to validate ones opinion.

What about when you have no opinion and you look at the statistics to try and see what's happening?? In this case, is the 'console market' really shrinking? There's a muddle of stats to try and interpret. The only clear data points IMO are the total sales last gen and the fact that on the whole the Wii was anomalous, so is better to discount when trying to compare this gen to last gen to the gen before to the gen before that. Beyond this simpler analysis, there's a whole load of fine-tuned adjustments we can make that I'm sure go above all our pay grades.

So parents aren't buying PS4 and X1 consoles for their kids? The value proposition to parents is far better with Switch. Little Jimmy now has a product that he can play anywhere. I do not see how the $300 price point is a huge blow to Switch while its perfectly fine for the less flexible PS4 and X1.

I agree in principle. However, history has shown people aren't willing to pay as much for handhelds. Maybe the argument is that $300 buys you best-graphics which is worth it to a console player, whereas weaker graphics in the handheld mean it should be priced as high as the 'proper' consoles? Or that a handheld is more like a 'kids toy' and needs to be pitched lower than a high-end device? But yes, if $300 is what people want to pay for Switch, it's worth it.

 

[Goodtwin]

That's true of every console, and to be absolutely fair, hardware failures should be deducted from the total sales. No idea how to get those figures.

We know the failure rate of the early 360 models was much higher than typical, and even later models had a pretty high failure rate beyond 5 years. If you were gaming on a 360 from 2005 to 2013, its not out of the question that you purchased 2-3 360 consoles over that 8 year cycle. Early PS3 consoles had a higher than typical failure rate, but nothing as extreme as the 360 RROD. The long life cycle along with a chunk of customers who purchased a replacement model certainly inflated the numbers last generation.

I strongly object. There are those of us with no stake in these discussions who are just interested in the logic of the debate and trying to make predictions.

You may think that, but I feel you are wrong. Life experience creates preconceived beliefs because of what you have experienced over the years. Basically, you cant follow something for decades, be passionate about it, and then claim your opinion is completely centered. Call it wisdom or whatever you like, but what you have learned and experienced over the years "will" have an impact on your opinion.

What about when you have no opinion and you look at the statistics to try and see what's happening??

Back to my assertion that I do not believe anyone who takes such an interest in these types of topics that they frequent forums related to said topic can claim to come into the discussion with no opinion at all. When you contribute with post, you are expressing your opinion. I'm not saying your opinion cant change as history plays out, but everyone passes some level of judgment on a topic as soon as they enter into the discussion.


Back to statistics. Last week for 4/24/17 to 4/30/17 the Switch sold 74,212 units in Japan according to Famistu. Nintendo must have gotten some extra stock out to retailers for the release of Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, a game that broke single day records for the series. I suppose the question I have was there enough supply for Nintendo to sell a million Switch units in April?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

We know the failure rate of the early 360 models was much higher than typical, and even later models had a pretty high failure rate beyond 5 years. If you were gaming on a 360 from 2005 to 2013, its not out of the question that you purchased 2-3 360 consoles over that 8 year cycle. Early PS3 consoles had a higher than typical failure rate, but nothing as extreme as the 360 RROD. The long life cycle along with a chunk of customers who purchased a replacement model certainly inflated the numbers last generation.

PS3 also had a very high failure rate. Of three people I know who had PS3's, all had to replace it at least once. However, we can't quantify this. there are extreme limits on how much meaningful interpretation we can bring before it becomes completely arbitrary guesswork.

You may think that, but I feel you are wrong. Life experience creates preconceived beliefs because of what you have experienced over the years. Basically, you cant follow something for decades, be passionate about it, and then claim your opinion is completely centered. Call it wisdom or whatever you like, but what you have learned and experienced over the years "will" have an impact on your opinion

What am I passionate about? I'm not at all passionate about gaming and consoles, that's for sure! It's a ho0bby. As I say, I'm on this board because I like the discussion and personalities mostly. I'm not trying to prove anything one way or another because I literally don't care about the outcome - whether the console industry has shrunk or not means absolutely nothing to me! I'm just trying to interpret and predict. My life experience will affect my interpretations, but they aren't making me see things to fit a narrative that I already adhere to before starting the investigation. If the evidence contradicts the current thinking, the current thinking is changed.

 

[Goodtwin]

What am I passionate about? I'm not at all passionate about gaming and consoles, that's for sure! It's a ho0bby. As I say, I'm on this board because I like the discussion and personalities mostly. I'm not trying to prove anything one way or another because I literally don't care about the outcome - whether the console industry has shrunk or not means absolutely nothing to me! I'm just trying to interpret and predict.

I find it hard to believe anyone frequents forums on a topic that is little more than a casual activity for them. The idea that you are perfectly centered on the topic is a fallacy. You have been reluctant to read too much into the early positive success Switch has enjoyed. This is perfectly reasonable, seeing as how a quick history lesson teaches us that products can start out with a bang and fall hard rather quickly. However, this does mean we are not simply looking at the numbers and extrapolating opinions and predictions based on that data, but instead are adding history into the equation. Your interpretation of history influences how you extrapolate the sales data, and the opinions and predictions you make.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I find it hard to believe anyone frequents forums on a topic that is little more than a casual activity for them.

The topic of posting is the activity. It's this kind of projection of theories that makes a mess of sane discussion. I game casually as down-time. During the day, I frequent B3D as short interludes from work. I own a PS4 because it was gifted me, although would game on something because gaming is my downtime - I don't watch TV nor read nor such. But gaming is not a passion by any stretch. It's more a habit I grew into. As such, I don't care whether a console company does well or badly. I'm not excited about any new console because it's the latest from my fave company - I'm interested in the tech and the solutions. I'll be neither bitterly disappointed nor over-the-moon if Switch goes on to be a world record breaking seller or a Wii U level dud. Nor will I be twisted up inside if it turns out I'm wrong. I'm here to discuss, logically, the sales trends, as an exercise in logic and discussion. There's a theory posited, that sales of consoles are down. I argue against that. But as long as everyone's deciding I'm partisan and reading layers of subtext into my opinions that just plain aren't there, it makes the discussion somewhat tiresome.

*shrug*

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I find it hard to believe anyone frequents forums on a topic that is little more than a casual activity for them. The idea that you are perfectly centered on the topic is a fallacy. You have been reluctant to read too much into the early positive success Switch has enjoyed. This is perfectly reasonable, seeing as how a quick history lesson teaches us that products can start out with a bang and fall hard rather quickly. However, this does mean we are not simply looking at the numbers and extrapolating opinions and predictions based on that data, but instead are adding history into the equation. Your interpretation of history influences how you extrapolate the sales data, and the opinions and predictions you make.

It shouldn't be hard to believe. I myself have had little interest in console gaming for quite a while now. The XBO briefly made me interested again due to the TV integration but that is not a thing anymore really (it's a shame).

However, I do find market performance interesting. I find market dynamics interesting. I find the views people have towards their hardware of choice and their competitors hardware interesting. Etc. And the discussion here is generally knowledgeable and respectful even if it can get heated at times.

There's value in discussion here even for people like me who don't give a rats arse who "wins" because I just don't care about who "wins" because I have no interest in that. For me, it's all just points of data. From that I can speculate on various things (thought exercises). Sometimes I'm right, sometimes I'm wrong. I don't care if I'm right or wrong, but generally tend to acknowledge it if I've felt someone has proven to me sufficiently that I was completely wrong about something. It's the conversation, and the thought process that it fuels that makes discussion here interesting.

And yes, everyone has opinions on things. But being open to discussion and engaging in discussion allows you to see opinions other than yours even if you disagree.

For example, Shifty and I differ somewhat over whether Wii numbers should be included by default or not. But we both share to some degree, the idea that the analysis of those numbers will be inaccurate to varying degrees if you choose to include them or to not include them. Neither of us is "right" or "wrong" as there is no way to determine exactly how many of those Wii owners have never and will never own another console again. I take a more analytical financial look at things which colors my view while he looks at it more from the viewpoint of how it affects the console industry and it's trends. We're both trying to arrive at a similar place, but with different ways of looking at the incomplete data available to us.

Regards,
SB

 

[Rangers]

That's true of every console, and to be absolutely fair, hardware failures should be deducted from the total sales. No idea how to get those figures.

Besides that how would one go about ascertaining that number,...many/most people with hardware failure probably get it repaired under warranty or even by paying out of pocket. Even in USA 1 year manufacturer's warranty on consoles, besides typical 90 day store return policies. Also for RROD MS extended the warranty to 3 years or something like that?

IIRC for Xbox if the warranty is out it's $90 flat fee for any repair (maybe somebody with recent experience knows?)? Or something like that to repair it, which basically includes up to them sending you back a completely new (refurbished) unit if needed. Not nothing, but a good deal cheaper than buying a replacement. I mean maybe if it's just a fan $90 is bad, but OTOH if the motherboard is bad and they basically send you back a new Xbox, it's quite reasonable.

So in theory the install base isn't necessarily deducted by one with a hardware failure.

 

[wco81]

If the Switch can keep up it's sales momentum, maybe Sony and MS will take a shot (again in the case of Sony) at a portable/mobile console.

Can they put together something with a nicer screen and better performance for $300 by Christmas 2018?

Can AMD provide a mobile chipset capable of X1/PS4 performance at a low enough price for a $300 device a year from now for ramp?

 

[Goodtwin]

If the Switch can keep up it's sales momentum, maybe Sony and MS will take a shot (again in the case of Sony) at a portable/mobile console.

Can they put together something with a nicer screen and better performance for $300 by Christmas 2018?

Can AMD provide a mobile chipset capable of X1/PS4 performance at a low enough price for a $300 device a year from now for ramp?

Unlikely. It typically takes years of R&D for a new piece of hardware. Sony failed so hard with the Vita and has had such enormous success with the PS4 that it seems more likely for them to double down on the home console market instead of fight an uphill battle with Nintendo in the portable market. In order to really push a portable system, Sony would have to dedicate some of their first party talent to making games for the platform. Does is make sense for Sony to split resources with a portable when they are better spent on their home console? Microsoft is in worse shape. Exactly what are they going to use to drive sales? They have so little first party content. I could see Microsoft bailing out on the mass market console gaming scene, and look to be the enthusiast level console manufacture. Instead of selling low profit $250-300 boxes, they could instead sell higher profit $500-700 consoles that offer the "premier" experience. Kind of like what Apple does. Why fight for pennies in the <$200 tablet market when they can make big profits selling high end tablets.

 

[bunge]

PS3 also had a very high failure rate. Of three people I know who had PS3's, all had to replace it at least once. However, we can't quantify this.

Years ago I thought we got data from a third party warranty company.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

https://www.squaretrade.co.uk/htm/pdf/SquareTrade_Xbox360_PS3_Wii_Reliability_0809.pdf

 

[Globalisateur]

https://www.squaretrade.co.uk/htm/pdf/SquareTrade_Xbox360_PS3_Wii_Reliability_0809.pdf

Unrelated but still interesting: About the fact that Wii was bought mainly by casuals (people that now usually play mobile games):

 

[Goodtwin]

Unrelated but still interesting: About the fact that Wii was bought mainly by casuals (people that now usually play mobile games):

That actually bodes pretty well for their being a pretty sizable number of people who played their Wii a lot. Coming in at roughly 50% is far higher than you would expect from a userbase that is strictly casuals. As the chart above shows, the 360 and PS3 userbase was averaging around 2.5 hours a day playing games or 17.5 hours a week. . With Wii it was much more likely that a decent chunk of those gamers played nearly as much as the PS3/360 gamers, and it is the casuals that dragged the average way down. Nintendo released a lot of really good games on Wii. Metroid Prime 3, two Mario Galaxy games, Smash Bros, Mario Kart, New Super Mario Bros, Donkey Kong Country Returns, and both Zelda TP and Zelda SS. When people think of Wii, they think of Wii Sports, and that was the fuel propelling the Wii to record breaking sales, but there was a lot of people who did embrace the more traditional offerings. When I look at sales figures for Nintendo's core gamer offerings, they generally sold better than those IP's did on Gamecube. I would bet that 30-35 million people were gaming on Wii for more than just Wii Sports. A lot of 360 and PS3 gamers also owned a Wii, creating a redundancy when calculating what the real world userbase looked like. I cant imagine much redundancy with PS4 and X1, but once again, I could see a lot of Switch gamers also owning another platform. For gamers open to purchasing multiple devices, Nintendo seems to do pretty well in that scenario.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I really shouldn't be taking the time to post this, much less look up sales information on anything right now (too much time commitments in RL), but there's just something I find oddly compelling about tracking how well Nintendo's gambit with the Switch plays out. Perhaps it's that I like hybrid devices, perhaps it's because I find the disconnect between the Switch's performance and console forum opinions interesting. Whatever the case.

New MediaCreate numbers are out and the Switch did particularly well during the last week of April moving 78,679 units with a strong performance from Mario Kart 8.

Not to be left behind Mario Kart 8 has also dominated the UK sales charts for the past 2 weeks. Also noteworthy is that in the UK, Nintendo for the latest tracked week sold more units than any other publisher.

Nintendo has said that there would be increased shipments for the Switch in May, so that should result in a WW sales increase for the console. Unfortunately, the Switch remains almost impossible to find in the US. Meaning my quest continues. I had hoped that the increased shipments would mean there'd be larger windows of opportunity for me to get one when a store got a shipment in. Unfortunately, while my hopes for that were already slim at best, the release of Mario Kart 8 certainly made sure I'd remain Switchless.

While it's way too early to make predictions as data is still too limited, it's fun to speculate about possibilities. Assuming Nintendo provides enough units and demand WW remains strong, it's possible for 1st year sales of the Switch to surpass lifetime sales of the Wii-U. Assuming sales and demand cools over the summer which should happen but isn't guaranteed to happen (no idea what the ceiling for Switch demand is yet), the Holiday quarter is going to be very interesting and key to whether that will happen or not.

Regards,
SB

 

[Rangers]

EA predicts 105 million PS4/Xbox One (according to dualshockers, we have to take their word) sold by the end of 2017. Up from 79 million at the end of 2016.

http://www.dualshockers.com/current...on-units-sold-2017-according-electronic-arts/

Trying to parse these, we know PS4 was at 53.4 million at the end of 2016. Leaving, according to EA, 25.6 million for Xbox.

Then they're saying 26 million more in calendar 2017. Sony predicted 18 million shipped (not sold) in FY 2017, which IIRC Sony's fiscal year ends in March, so that is through March 2018. But again remember shipped is not the same as sold.

But if we just say something like 18.0 PS4 sold in calendar 17, it leaves 8.0 for Xbox One. So you'd have 71.4 PS4 and 33.6 XBO at the end of 2017 by these estimates. Which are just that, estimates.

Seems fairly reasonable though, if a bit conservative on XBO. PS4 a little better than 2:1 worldwide by all figures, maybe. Although I highly doubt EA meant these figures to be taken all that specifically.

XBO sold ~4.7 in 2016 NPD, so 8.0 WW in 2017 is if anything probably low, but checks out as reasonable. That only leaves 3.3 everywhere else, and at least Canada and UK are fairly strong Xbox markets.

I hope Sony keeps giving us a sales number the first of the year and EA keeps doing these estimates. If so we can work out at least something kinda sort official.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

EA predicts 105 million PS4/Xbox One (according to dualshockers, we have to take their word) sold by the end of 2017. Up from 79 million at the end of 2016.

2 seconds of googling will net you the source in EA's filing (prepared comments).