Japan Sales Thread *renamed

[Shifty Geezer]

Clarification for the win

A lot of the arguments on this board that end up 'Can't you read? Go back and read. It's not my fault you don't know English,' are victims of the innate difficulties in (cross-cultural) English. I understood what nonamer was talking about, although he didn't phrase himself as clearly as possible. And for the past page or two of arguing, it seems they're all arguments of misunderstanding rather than disagreeing with an actual point! Mostly arguing semantics, although obviously with a use of English that's lost on your audience, wrong semantics means a wrong statement from you which they argue.

Can I suggest to people that when you've posted something and the response is one to which you want to reply 'Jeez man, go back and read what I said!' or similar, instead rewrite your argument in a different way so that when they do read it, they understand it this time. It's disingenuous to think people responding to your posts are illiterate! It's safe to say most people here are smart enough to follow the logic of an argument. If they can't see your logic, it's probably because they misunderstood.

 

[Readykilowatt]

You don't get it. We're not determining 5 or 6 years of sales from 2 months of data. What we're doing is writing off one of the many possibilities that remain: A dominant PS2-like performance.

PS3 can still come out #1, and even if not it may still come #2 and beat XB360. But irrespective of that, I guarantee you we will not see a PS2 repeat.

Too many things have happened:
A) XB360 sold well, especially during holiday 06 in the face of stiff competition.
B) Wii has fantastic demand
C) PS3 is doing horribly in Japan compared to PS2 in 2000
D) All this is in spite of better availability than Sony's ever had before

This is not just a couple coincidences or a hunch. It is a very logical assertion. The probability of dominance is reduced with just one of these factors, but will all four holding true it's next to impossible.

Before this gen started - heck even up to mid December last year - I was completely convinced that Sony would have a big lead by the end of this generation. Not quite PS2-esque, but still dominant. Now with these additional facts surfacing, it'll take a Sony miracle for that to happen.

Stop right there. Dont you realize that you are wasting your time arguing with some of these people. They have a vested interest in seeing the PS3 succeed, not because they are Sony employees or ******s, but because they invested a lot of money up front to purchase a PS3 and a HDTV to play their favourite games. Due to their massive upfront investment they will spin, mislead and ignore important data and instead rely on "faith" that the outcome of this generation will be the same as the outcome of last generation, because if not, thier initial investment would have all been wasted. They know that if the Wii succeeds the games they put up thousands of dollars to play will jump to a console that doesn't support high definition (like DQIX). This is why if two years from now the Wii is still outselling the PS3, they will say "wait for a price drop". As for my prediction... I'll just say that the console war will be decided in a year. So just sit back, grab the popcorn and watch the sales data.

 

[Teasy]

I understood what he was saying.

But I wouldn't be correcting others on this issue. This forum was (is?) based in the UK and attracts professions and participants from across the globe who have spent years learning proper English.

Broken Americanisms--that are literally incorrect to those reading--make it difficult for everyone to understand. It is difficult to blame others for reading what he wrote and taking what he wrote at face value instead of assuming what he intended to convey through his broken English.

A rose by another name is still a rose... unless you are in the habit of calling cow pies roses!

Its not difficult to understand when the person who made the original comment has explained what he meant by that comment. Instead of being accepted the thread was turning into a argument about proper English. I simply tried to calm the situation down by pointing out that regardless of what was said initially this was his actual meaning. I didn't try to correct anyone on the English language..

Incidentally I'm from England and very little annoys me more then Americanisms such as "I could care less" But taking a thread off topic into a discussion on the English language isn't really appropriate.

 

[TheChefO]

What I think he intended to say is this:

"There is nothing preventing the possibility of a PS1/PS2 repeat"

On the issue at hand, anything is "possible" but I think the discussion is "probable". I think this is the point nonamer should be namely addressing as I think that is the point of others (not "it could happen!!" in response to pigs flying... which is, well, possible).

How probable is it for a console to follow past sales ratios when:
- $499/$599 price vs. $299 price
- 1 year late (with the 360 being the lead SKU with many defacto exclusives and AAA titles already available, even cheap) vs. 1 year early and all that entails (defacto exclusives, large bargin bin library, Publisher support with titles in the works, etc)
- Weak launch lineup (few exclusives; most multiplatform games played better on the competition) vs. Had a strong library before the competition even launched
- Strong competition from cheaper consoles, one innovative and trendy and one targetting the same market vs. a weakened Nintendo with no Mario/Zelda/Metroid launch and an unproven MS, both with weak pub support
- Slipping software stranglehold with a marketwide shift to multiplatform develoment and a number of titles becoming unexpectedly multiplatform vs. gaining wide status as the target of exclusives due to install base
- Missing sales targets in the important holiday period vs. having 24M units to consumers before MS and Nintendo saw their first January
- Sony's big Playstation franchises like MGS, FF, GoW, GT, and so forth are all a year out, or more, from launch and MS and Nintendo filling in the channels vs. Key "AAA" Exclusives hitting fast and frequently across a HUGE variety of consumers with MS and Nintendo having few exclusives, fewer AAA titles, and not touching many markets
- BluRay hit consumer channels in mid/late 2007 and was very supply limited and locked in a format war with HD DVD, and the need for HD display and fewer selling points over DVD narrow the current market vs. DVD was the established winner and already making significant consumer headway and offered many, many advantages over VHS
- Sony PR has been wrong on many occassions and made quite a few strategic mistakes that have irriated consumers and the press vs. Sony PR destroying the Dreamcast before its launch and paving the way for a huge sales lead before MS and Nintendo could even register their first sale
- Sony estimated 4M units sold in 2006, didn't quite deliver 2M and there have been wide reports of availability vs. Sony saw HUGE demand that outstripped supply well past 6M units and well into 2001--in the face of new competition even.
- Sony's PS3 was expected to dominate its home turf in Japan yet Nintendo has clearly been outselling them by huge factors vs. Sony's Japanese cornerstone secured many exclusives and was the launching pad for aggressively pushing the brand as THE platform with Japanese developers almost exclusively pushing the platform

If Sony can hit 100M sales by the end of 2011, my hats are off to them. But for the above reasons I just don't see it as probably. Possible? Yes, many things are possible. MS could possibly buy Sony. Sony could possibly buy Nintendo. But these things are not probable or likely. How likely is it that Sony will sell 100M units in 5 years like the PS2? Just looking at units sitting in local stores here and the challenges facing them in the next couple years it does appear extremely likely they will ramp slower than the PS2. How much slower? I don't know. It could be 80M, it could be much less. I don't know... 2007 and 2008 will tell us a lot more.

All things are relative. e.g. "Bad" for Sony is often "Great" for MS and Nintendo. But the difference being is that the expecation is Sony=100M, Nintendo=20M & MS=25M (i.e. last gen).

When you overachieve the expectations you get praise, when you underachieve expectations, even if you beat the competitions, it is seen as negative.

But to take it out of the relative, I think the points above all paint a picture where the PS3 clearly won't exceed PS2 sales in the same 5 year window (launch-to-5 years). Just looking at what software Sony plans to ship in 2007 and the impact Wii is making as well as the lead MS has and the software MS has planned for 2007 make it highly unprobable outside of the norm (e.g. earthquate hitting the factories making MS chips, etc).

Thank you. Joshua you have a way of putting things into perspective and clearly cumminicating these thoughts that I aspire to achieve. This post sums up my feelings on the matter.

The only way PS3 has a shot at leading this generation is through killer apps. The question is, how many non-sony-publishers/developers are willing to risk sales of these multi-million dollar AAA titles on an underselling console with a userbase that has so far not been actively buying the available software?

 

[Paul_G]

Thank you. Joshua you have a way of putting things into perspective and clearly cumminicating these thoughts that I aspire to achieve. This post sums up my feelings on the matter.

The only way PS3 has a shot at leading this generation is through killer apps. The question is, how many non-sony-publishers/developers are willing to risk sales of these multi-million dollar AAA titles on an underselling console with a userbase that has so far not been actively buying the available software?

Agreed, I half wrote a response this morning to nonamers comments, but I couldn't put it down in words why i think what i think, but he pretty much covered it.

Thank you Joshua for explaining so clearly how a few of us are seeing the console landscape at the moment.

 

[Tap In]

What I think he intended to say is this:

"There is nothing preventing the possibility of a PS1/PS2 repeat"

On the issue at hand, anything is "possible" but I think the discussion is "probable". I think this is the point nonamer should be namely addressing as I think that is the point of others (not "it could happen!!" in response to pigs flying... which is, well, possible).

How probable is it for a console to follow past sales ratios when:
- $499/$599 price vs. $299 price
- 1 year late (with the 360 being the lead SKU with many defacto exclusives and AAA titles already available, even cheap) vs. 1 year early and all that entails (defacto exclusives, large bargin bin library, Publisher support with titles in the works, etc)
- Weak launch lineup (few exclusives; most multiplatform games played better on the competition) vs. Had a strong library before the competition even launched
- Strong competition from cheaper consoles, one innovative and trendy and one targetting the same market vs. a weakened Nintendo with no Mario/Zelda/Metroid launch and an unproven MS, both with weak pub support
- Slipping software stranglehold with a marketwide shift to multiplatform develoment and a number of titles becoming unexpectedly multiplatform vs. gaining wide status as the target of exclusives due to install base
- Missing sales targets in the important holiday period vs. having 24M units to consumers before MS and Nintendo saw their first January
- Sony's big Playstation franchises like MGS, FF, GoW, GT, and so forth are all a year out, or more, from launch and MS and Nintendo filling in the channels vs. Key "AAA" Exclusives hitting fast and frequently across a HUGE variety of consumers with MS and Nintendo having few exclusives, fewer AAA titles, and not touching many markets
- BluRay hit consumer channels in mid/late 2007 and was very supply limited and locked in a format war with HD DVD, and the need for HD display and fewer selling points over DVD narrow the current market vs. DVD was the established winner and already making significant consumer headway and offered many, many advantages over VHS
- Sony PR has been wrong on many occassions and made quite a few strategic mistakes that have irriated consumers and the press vs. Sony PR destroying the Dreamcast before its launch and paving the way for a huge sales lead before MS and Nintendo could even register their first sale
- Sony estimated 4M units sold in 2006, didn't quite deliver 2M and there have been wide reports of availability vs. Sony saw HUGE demand that outstripped supply well past 6M units and well into 2001--in the face of new competition even.
- Sony's PS3 was expected to dominate its home turf in Japan yet Nintendo has clearly been outselling them by huge factors vs. Sony's Japanese cornerstone secured many exclusives and was the launching pad for aggressively pushing the brand as THE platform with Japanese developers almost exclusively pushing the platform

If Sony can hit 100M sales by the end of 2011, my hats are off to them. But for the above reasons I just don't see it as probably. Possible? Yes, many things are possible. MS could possibly buy Sony. Sony could possibly buy Nintendo. But these things are not probable or likely. How likely is it that Sony will sell 100M units in 5 years like the PS2? Just looking at units sitting in local stores here and the challenges facing them in the next couple years it does appear extremely likely they will ramp slower than the PS2. How much slower? I don't know. It could be 80M, it could be much less. I don't know... 2007 and 2008 will tell us a lot more.

All things are relative. e.g. "Bad" for Sony is often "Great" for MS and Nintendo. But the difference being is that the expecation is Sony=100M, Nintendo=20M & MS=25M (i.e. last gen).

When you overachieve the expectations you get praise, when you underachieve expectations, even if you beat the competitions, it is seen as negative.

But to take it out of the relative, I think the points above all paint a picture where the PS3 clearly won't exceed PS2 sales in the same 5 year window (launch-to-5 years). Just looking at what software Sony plans to ship in 2007 and the impact Wii is making as well as the lead MS has and the software MS has planned for 2007 make it highly unprobable outside of the norm (e.g. earthquate hitting the factories making MS chips, etc).

[/debate]

 

[nelg]

The only way PS3 has a shot at leading this generation is through killer apps. The question is, how many non-sony-publishers/developers are willing to risk sales of these multi-million dollar AAA titles on an underselling console with a userbase that has so far not been actively buying the available software?

Though, looking at the long lead in times for games you would have to concede that there may be a number of AAA currently in production. Games like MGS and HS may be the 'kick start' that the PS3 needs and devs might share that view.

 

[AntShaw]

Games like MGS and HS may be the 'kick start' that the PS3 needs and devs might share that view.

Dev houses aren't sitting on the fence waiting to see what happens to HS and MGS.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Besides that, whats with the hype around HS? it looks nice, but for the rest its nothing more than a hack & slash game. What ive seen of the game I dont see why this would be a system seller. It doesnt seem to offer the things a AAA titel would offer.

 

[Skrying]

Besides that, whats with the hype around HS? it looks nice, but for the rest its nothing more than a hack & slash game. What ive seen of the game I dont see why this would be a system seller. It doesnt seem to offer the things a AAA titel would offer.

Its hard to judge around this forum about HS. Mainly because people working on the game are regular visitors and I often sense a "star shocked" reaction from people here.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Besides that, whats with the hype around HS? it looks nice, but for the rest its nothing more than a hack & slash game.

And Halo3 is nothing more than a FPS.

The HS hype comes from a mix of knowing the realtime quality of what's been showing, and fitting that in with the epic battle scenes shown. The scale, quality, diversity, and implementation of the combat, is first class. Perhaps the game isn't doing anything ground-breaking in the gameplay stakes, but then there's only so much you can do within a genre. Halo's still going to be running around shooting things, no matter what weapons and cover systems are implemented. Likewise HS is still going to be button-combo-chopping like many an other combat game.

To really answer this question, you have to ask what games do impress you about next-gen and why? Perhaps your criteria is very different to most, and to date precious few games warrant any excitement by your reckoning?

 

[Acert93]

Besides that, whats with the hype around HS? it looks nice, but for the rest its nothing more than a hack & slash game. What ive seen of the game I dont see why this would be a system seller. It doesnt seem to offer the things a AAA titel would offer.

I would agree, in that my sense of taste/likes are very limited. Mario Kart SNES favorite game all time anyone? Yeah, thought so.

But I do think Heavenly Sword is a major title for Sony and will be pushed like MS pushed GOW. Maybe not quite as heavily, but I do think it will get a strong push--and GOW did quite well with that sort of hype.

But one of the reasons I do see HS as a major title is because of general fan response. It isn't just people here, but as well as reading what game sites and other forums think. But most notably, to me, is walking into a casual electronics department. I asked a gentleman what games he wanted on the PS3 and he went crazy over Heavenly Sword (and Assassin's Creed). He was drooooooling to get HS. He raved about the fighting fluidity and the graphics and how the hair was stunning, and just the overall scope.

I was quite surprised to see a guy at the electronics section to know so much about a new IP, which convinced me that with the right marketing HS could be a huge selling title. It is hard to position a new IP as a system seller, but it is possible. Now putting it against titles like GTAIV may be a little bit harder.

 

[TheChefO]

I would agree, in that my sense of taste/likes are very limited. Mario Kart SNES favorite game all time anyone? Yeah, thought so.

But I do think Heavenly Sword is a major title for Sony and will be pushed like MS pushed GOW. Maybe not quite as heavily, but I do think it will get a strong push--and GOW did quite well with that sort of hype.

But one of the reasons I do see HS as a major title is because of general fan response. It isn't just people here, but as well as reading what game sites and other forums think. But most notably, to me, is walking into a casual electronics department. I asked a gentleman what games he wanted on the PS3 and he went crazy over Heavenly Sword (and Assassin's Creed). He was drooooooling to get HS. He raved about the fighting fluidity and the graphics and how the hair was stunning, and just the overall scope.

I was quite surprised to see a guy at the electronics section to know so much about a new IP, which convinced me that with the right marketing HS could be a huge selling title. It is hard to position a new IP as a system seller, but it is possible. Now putting it against titles like GTAIV may be a little bit harder.

Good point with other titles in the same time period. GTA4 is going to be big enough on its own. To add what will surely be a big push behind halo3 and the multitude of other titles coming late this year all vying for the valuable Christmass dollar and it will not be as easy to stick out as it was for gears.

Although I disagree with the notion HS cannot be a AAA title to sell the system. If those guys are given this time now to polish this title properly and tweak what needs tweaking adding production value out the wazoo I think this could easily be their "Gears" title next Christmas.

Personally I'd suggest the team spent a few good hours with Ninja gaiden as to me it is clearly the pinnacle of the genre gameplay wise.

 

[TheChefO]

Though, looking at the long lead in times for games you would have to concede that there may be a number of AAA currently in production. Games like MGS and HS may be the 'kick start' that the PS3 needs and devs might share that view.

I agree - HS could really help them kick start their platform - however i think the longer mgs is in development the more likely it is to be ported to xb360 or even wii as crazy as that sounds. To be ported to wii would obviously mean a graphics (and sound) downgrade but gameplay wise I doubt there is much that could not be done.

This title's budget is growing by the day and I doubt upper management is feeling rosey about the current ps3 situation. I'd be surprised if their internal teams were not looking into getting familiar with both wii and 360 and evaluating what it would take to get a port done.

Add a few things here or there ... take a few things out here or there ... maybe downgrade a thing or two and viola mgs4 substance etc.

re4 comes to mind.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Its hard to judge around this forum about HS. Mainly because people working on the game are regular visitors and I often sense a "star shocked" reaction from people here.

And than to think im one of the guys making sure you can do your groseries every day. Nobody gets star shocked about me hehe

And Halo3 is nothing more than a FPS.

The HS hype comes from a mix of knowing the realtime quality of what's been showing, and fitting that in with the epic battle scenes shown. The scale, quality, diversity, and implementation of the combat, is first class. Perhaps the game isn't doing anything ground-breaking in the gameplay stakes, but then there's only so much you can do within a genre. Halo's still going to be running around shooting things, no matter what weapons and cover systems are implemented. Likewise HS is still going to be button-combo-chopping like many an other combat game.

To really answer this question, you have to ask what games do impress you about next-gen and why? Perhaps your criteria is very different to most, and to date precious few games warrant any excitement by your reckoning?

Halo is indeed nothing more than a basic fps imo. Never liked that game either.

HS to me just seems boring. No matter how much enemies or how many gazzilion poly's you might see its still just hacking & slashing and imo thats boring. The whole concept behind hack & slash games is boring imo.

Something that impresses me is a game that makes me want to play the game. Like you want to keep reading a good book, thats what I want in a game. I want a game that makes me want to play it. If that is last, current or next gen doesnt matter for me. HL1 still impresses me more than most next gen games. I guess your right that there are only a few games I really like. Alot of games just dont manage to grasp my attention for very long because they dont offer me something to be interrested in.

He was drooooooling to get HS. He raved about the fighting fluidity and the graphics and how the hair was stunning, and just the overall scope.

I think you hit the nail on the head. They can market in on its good looks and all but actually how much fun is the game? How much fun will those animations and hair be after you spend a couple of hours only bashing 1 or 2 buttons as fast as you can?

 

[TheChefO]

I think you hit the nail on the head. They can market in on its good looks and all but actually how much fun is the game? How much fun will those animations and hair be after you spend a couple of hours only bashing 1 or 2 buttons as fast as you can?

Have you played Ninja Gaiden?

If you have you'll know where I'm seeing potential for HS. If not, well I'm not the best to put things into words so I'll just say check out a few reviews NG.

Of course it could end up being a mindless hack and slash like you said and judging from what I initially saw and heard of HS I thought the same thing. But reading up on it in the past few months I saw a potentially great and deep game that COULD prove to be one of the best this gen.

 

[Rolf N]

HS to me just seems boring. No matter how much enemies or how many gazzilion poly's you might see its still just hacking & slashing and imo thats boring. The whole concept behind hack & slash games is boring imo.

Have you tried a recent "Hack&Slash" though? H&S, if you ask me, refers to a genre of heavily simplified RPG games such as Dark Alliance, Untold Legends, Champions of Norrath et al.

I can only speak for Devil May Cry and God Of War -- I'm sure Ninja Gaiden does something similar though --, but these games aren't quite the mindless button mashers they look like when you just watch.

On the easiest difficulty setting it doesn't really work. This is true in particular for God of War, you may not get it when it's too easy, but on a harder difficulty level, the game will teach you, it will make you explore the depths of its combat system, and what you'll find is pretty complex and well thought-out.

For starters, blocks: engage a block at the correct time to make the enemy stagger, and you have your opportunity for a devastating counter-attack.
Then there are range vs strength tradeoffs to your attacks, to your combos, and also to enemy attacks. Some combos end in a guard-breaking attack, but leave you vulnerable to counter-attack yourself while you're pulling them off. God Of War lets you even strategize on the method of the kill: certain enemies, when killed in a specific way, will drop health refills, but less experience points.
There are special magic attacks that have better range and/or power and/or speed but deplete with use etc etc. These games can indeed be quite deep on the pure fighting aspect alone.
Then we have the canoncial button-combination mini-game, climbing walls, hanging off ropes, and whatever else they're coming up with right now.

Brushing the current developments in the genre off by calling them just "Hack&Slash" isn't quite fair IMO.

Something that impresses me is a game that makes me want to play the game. Like you want to keep reading a good book, thats what I want in a game. I want a game that makes me want to play it. If that is last, current or next gen doesnt matter for me. HL1 still impresses me more than most next gen games. I guess your right that there are only a few games I really like. Alot of games just dont manage to grasp my attention for very long because they dont offer me something to be interrested in.

Narrative in games is always a problem, you probably just expect too much. OTOH the fighting game genre lends itself quite well to strong narrative, as long as it involves a character that needs to fight a fight of course. But most stories have room for such characters.

(on a related note I've played the Return of the King action game lately. Frankly it's complete garbage IMO, and that despite its honest attempts at projecting a strong narrative into the game)

 

[Shifty Geezer]

HS to me just seems boring. No matter how much enemies or how many gazzilion poly's you might see its still just hacking & slashing and imo thats boring. The whole concept behind hack & slash games is boring imo.

I guess your right that there are only a few games I really like. Alot of games just dont manage to grasp my attention for very long because they dont offer me something to be interrested in.

Well then. Let's just say the people hyping HS have different tastes to you and can see reason to like it.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Probably but I am allowed to say I dont like it right? maybe im misinformed because i havnt been keeping track of the game very well so the impression I have of the game (bashing buttons, lots of enemies just keeping on coming) might be wrong.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

Its hard to judge around this forum about HS. Mainly because people working on the game are regular visitors and I often sense a "star shocked" reaction from people here.

I agree with this notion. I think more information on this game is needed before I get excited. I'm definately interested, but the bone needs to have wayyy more meat before this God of War with a chick talk is justified. The premise of the game is definately interesting and everything on paper sounds pretty good, but the proof is in the pudding.