NPD December 2016 Sales Results, Results Ranked by Revenue (Hardware Now, Software Later)

[mpg1]

I could see Microsoft have aggressive trade-in deals for Xbox One's towards Scorpio. Microsoft Store was offering $120 CAD trade in for my 360 S model just this past fall ffs...

Say Scorpio launches at $399 USD (which I am beginning to think is a possibility)...then there are trade in deals with $200 for an Xbox One...

 

[iroboto]

I agree with that post that says Pro should become more attractive over time, too, though.

Yup, well the assumption is that when the general population continues to adopt more 4K sets, this is positioned for that exact market.

It's $100 more but not $100 better in most people's minds.

Yup, for many folks buying this late into the game, it's not about performance, it's about accessibility; and price is the limiting factor for whether they can afford to play or not.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

This machine's performance is artificially hampered.

Sure it is. For one it's hampered by Sony's policy of not allowing PS4 Pro exclusive games which means games released on PS4 Pro have to run on PS4 and, often, the Xbox One. Even if that wasn't Sony's developer policy it would still remain a fundamental economical policy for developers because that's where the bulk of prospective customers are in terms of hardware performance.

Speaking of, I remember a lot of posts when Xbox beat PS4 a few months this year that people were waiting for Pro instead of buying PS4 as the reason. Now Pro isn't attractive at all? Ok...more hypocrisy.

Me too, I wasn't one of them. My position as far back as I've posted here is that performance doesn't sell consoles Perhaps because I am actually old enough for the Atari 2600 to have been my first gaming machine and I remember Atari introducing the 5200, which was the first 'premium' (ala Pro/Scorpio) console proposition and which bombed. I remember the amazing performing NeoGeo which bombed. High performance, higher price has been a successful strategy for exaxctly nobody.

Anyways, I can admit (again) I was wrong (so far) about Pro. I literally thought it would be 80-90% of PS4 sales immediately.

And every time you post this view a bunch of people, myself included, point out that there is no evidence for performance selling hardware volume in the gaming market.

I didn't see why people would choose the worse console for just $100 less (when you are talking 300 vs 400).

And that is the problem here. You seem incapable of accepting that the mass market have different priorities to you despite the fact that there is literally no market where the high-end product dominates volume sales. And if I might venture further, you expect the mass market to adopt a position you "don't see" / understand whereas you yourself chose to purchase an Xbox One instead of a PS4 even though the relative performance difference was established before launch. If you don't have the conviction to make a performance-based decision based on the priorities you think are so important, why do you think the mass market will?

I guess I underestimated the brakes put on the Pro' performance's effects, and consumers.

This is you trying to find a reason for why a mass market is not following your prediction. You are trying to identify a rationale for what is really a simple concept: cheaper is preferable for most. It's a basic economic principle. When you bought an Xbox One you spent more money on a less powerful piece of hardware. Most people will not and not many more will spend more on a more powerful piece of hardware when the cheaper alternative offers acceptable experience. The mass market is, and always has been, content with 'good enough'.

 

[bunge]

I picked up a PS4 Slim with Uncharted 4 for USD $212.50 instead of a PS4 Pro. The holiday price difference was just too great.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I didn't see why people would choose the worse console for just $100 less (when you are talking 300 vs 400).

Just means you don't quite understand the average consumer buying patterns. But that's fairly normal on a tech forum. People the frequent tech forums, gaming forums, console forums, etc. aren't your average consumer.

For example. A GTX 1060 3 GB card is less then 90 USD more expansive than a GTX 1050. The GTX 1060 3 GB card performs quite a lot better than the GTX 1050, it's not even close. Plenty of people buy the GTX 1050.

Regards,
SB

 

[Rangers]

Top ten of 2016 (the whole year) http://www.gamespot.com/articles/2016s-best-selling-games-in-the-us-revealed/1100-6447090/

1. COD IW
2. BF 1
3. The Division
4. NBA 2K17
5. Madden 17
6. GTA V
7. Overwatch (no battle.net sales)
8. COD BLOPS 3
9. Fifa 17
10 . Final Fantasy XV

Takeaways: FFXV actually seems to be doing quite well, making tenth for 2016 in a single month. The time definitely seemed right for a new FF. There was another note it's performance was up over FF 13. However I still wonder if it's enough to pay for it's long troubled development.

The Division did extremely well. That's weird since the game didn't seem to have near the longevity or community of Destiny. I dont think Destiny was 3rd in it's release year although I dont recall. Ubi's marketing did well and I suspect a lot of people got The Division and played it like a single player game for a few hours then shelved it.

Publishers...the entire top ten except FFXV is the big 4 oligopoly of EA, Activision, Ubisoft, and Take Two. Sony, MS, Nintendo did not make the list. Uncharted 4 did not make the list. Other than that, franchises, sports, and shooting. Consoles is definitely a very mature market, few surprises anymore.

2016 December only

1. COD IW
2. BF1
3. FF XV
4. Madden 17
5. NBA 2K17
6. Watch Dogs 2
7. GTA V
8. Pokemon Sun
9. Fifa 17
10. Pokemon Moon

They also published the December top ten by platform. For all the talk about exclusives I noticed only one each made the top ten on XB/PS. And it was 9th place on both. Forza Horizon 3 for Xbox and The Last Guardian for PS4. Mostly the same franchises in the other lists dominated.

General notes

With that in mind, we have gotten more information than usual. In addition to the typical list of top-selling games (in terms of dollar sales) across all platforms, it's also provided platform-specific lists for December. This shows that, while Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare and Final Fantasy XV were the top two games overall, the latter was No. 3 on Xbox One, but No. 1 on PS4. Infinite Warfare and Battlefield 1 (the No. 3 game on PS4) were the top two games on Xbox One.

The report also includes a look at the top-selling games for the entire year in the US, and Infinite Warfare--even with its sales dip--unsurprisingly came out on top. What might stand out most in this list are the two games to make the top 10 that released prior to 2016: Grand Theft Auto V (No. 6) and Call of Duty: Black Ops III (No. 8).

Total video game sales--combining hardware, software, and accessories--were down 15 percent year-over-year from $3.2 billion to $2.7 billion in the US during December. Hardware saw the biggest drop, going from $1.24 billion in December 2015 to $994.9 million in December 2016.

NPD noted hardware units was down slightly and add to that price was down a lot (more discounts on aging hardware), combine for a substantial revenue decline.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

They also published the December top ten by platform. For all the talk about exclusives I noticed only one each made the top ten on XB/PS. And it was 9th place on both. Forza Horizon 3 for Xbox and The Last Guardian for PS4. Mostly the same franchises in the other lists dominated.

Not surprising, the vast majority of people don't buy a console because of the exclusives, but because they want something to play games on. And for most consumers, the best games aren't the exclusives. Sales figures show this time and again. There are some exceptions, like with the earlier Halo games which were able to rival COD sales but on a single platform.

That said a not insignificant number of consumers will buy a platform due to the exclusives, which is fairly important.

Exclusives are high profile titles that get talked about a lot. Regardless of whether a console buyer is interested in an exclusive, they'll view a platform more highly if it has high profile exclusives on it. The more exclusives a platform has, the more desirable the platform (assuming it has access to the same 3rd party high profile games as the competition), even if the buyer will never buy a single exclusive. It shows a platform holders commitment and investment in a platform.

Regards,
SB

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Exclusives are only there to help consumers choose your box over your rivals. Sure, they both play Madden/FIFA and COD, but only ours plays Halo/Uncharted. Pick your poison. Dreams may not sell many millions, but it was enough to sell me a PS4 over any other console (and there's sooo much choice! ). Meanwhile I'm playing third party multiplats.

 

[zed]

If you didnt have Exclusives then you wouldnt have a lot of the 'arguably' best games, eg heres the last decade of GOTY winners from both of the major awards

DICE GOTY.
2006 Gears of War
2007 Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
2008 LittleBigPlanet
2009 Uncharted 2: Among Thieves
2010 Mass Effect 2
2011 The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
2012 Journey
2013 The Last of Us
2014 Dragon Age: Inquisition
2015 Fallout 4

GDCA GOTY.
2006 Gears of War
2007 Portal
2008 Fallout 3
2009 Uncharted 2: Among Thieves
2010 Red Dead Redemption
2011 The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
2012 Journey
2013 The Last of Us
2014 Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor
2015 The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Best is both subjective and objective.

Awards like those in the post above mine are highly subjective. It's a list based on the personal opinions of the people chosen to vote on those awards.

Sales are objective. What sells the best is what the average consumer has voted as the best. There is subjectivity in that each one of those people has their own opinions on what they like to play, much like the people voting on awards. However, it is objective in that more people have deemed it a good game than other games that didn't sell as well. This doesn't mean that many people won't disagree, as personal opinions vary by person.

Or to put it another way. Awards are given out based on the opinions of 10s of people, sometimes less. Sales rankings (awards) are given out based on the opinions of 10's of millions of people. Of course, one can always take the elitist attitude and discount the opinions of the average consumer.

For example, I only agree with 3 of the choices in the lists in the post above mine, but that's because my personal opinions on what makes a good game different from those people chosen to vote.

Regards,
SB

 

[Shifty Geezer]

However, it is objective in that more people have deemed it a good game than other games that didn't sell as well.

That's untrue. Unless people have played both games before choosing which to buy, choice of purchase has little to do with what game is better and everything to do with what game someone is influenced to buy. There may well be games that the masses would rate 10/10 but they'll never play because they stick to their known staples. eg. Many COD players may find Trico their favourite game ever, except they won't ever try it because they don't like the sound of it or would rather have the longer term payback of online play than a single playthrough experience no matter how glorious that experience. It's perhaps a result of everyone having finite time and money and choosing to invest in the safe choices rather than take a chance on an unknown that could be the best experience or could be boring.

Regards a good GOTY vote, the votes are at least from people one assumes have played a lot of games and pick a preferred option.

 

[zed]

What sells the best is what the average consumer has voted as the best.

So you think that the average consumer thought Star Wars : the phantom menace was the best film of 1999?, Must be the Jar Jar Binks effect

 

[Silent_Buddha]

That's untrue. Unless people have played both games before choosing which to buy, choice of purchase has little to do with what game is better and everything to do with what game someone is influenced to buy. There may well be games that the masses would rate 10/10 but they'll never play because they stick to their known staples. eg. Many COD players may find Trico their favourite game ever, except they won't ever try it because they don't like the sound of it or would rather have the longer term payback of online play than a single playthrough experience no matter how glorious that experience. It's perhaps a result of everyone having finite time and money and choosing to invest in the safe choices rather than take a chance on an unknown that could be the best experience or could be boring.

Regards a good GOTY vote, the votes are at least from people one assumes have played a lot of games and pick a preferred option.

Sure that's true to an extent, but there's word of mouth as to whether a game is good or not. There are reviews of games, some more in depth than others. And there are quite often livestreams and VODs of people playing games that sometimes go into quite a bit of depth about a game, both good and bad. Hell, Minecraft is the most watched thing by far of anything on YouTube. Of course, depending on the streamer/VODer, they can make a game either look better than it actually is or worse than it actually is. And some game genres just are viewer friendly (point and click adventure games, for example, with some exceptions like ones made by Telltale games).

Depending on a person that may or may not be enough to determine with relative accuracy whether a game is good to them or not. Saying that if a person had played the game, they'd think it was good/great is as large a fallacy as saying if someone pirates a game they would have purchased it if they hadn't pirated it.

So you think that the average consumer thought Star Wars : the phantom menace was the best film of 1999?, Must be the Jar Jar Binks effect

Yes, not for me, obviously, as I hated it. However, when you consider the target audience of the film, children, they, for the most part, absolutely loved it and thought it was a great film. And many of them as adults today still believe that.

Think of it another way. What music is best? Beethoven's best works or Metallica's best works? It's easy to know what the elite will say, but the common person who grew up listening to Metallica?

Regards,
SB

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Sure that's true to an extent, but there's word of mouth as to whether a game is good or not.

That's one of the influences that keeps people playing it safe. A few core gamers are faced with a choice of Space Shooter or Esoteric Psychological Adventure. They pick the former, not even bothering to watch videos and reviews of the latter despite hearing here and there that it's an incredible experience. the love Space Shooter and get all their mates to buy it. The online presence is large and encourages more adoption. Sales of Space Shooter outnumber Esoteric Psychological Adventure twenty to one. Meanwhile, of the few who have dared tried EPA, everyone one of them downs Space Shooter and gets utterly engrossed because it's the greatest gaming experience of their life and they keep lamenting the lack-lustre sales. Quite a few Space Shooter players are curious but unwilling to shell out another $60 on a game and are happy with Space Shooter anyway.

In the NPD, Space Shooter is top for four months in a row. EPA doesn't even feature.

At the industry GOTY awards, EPA, scored by people who have played dozens of games including Space Shooter, comes first. At the consume GOTY awards, EPA doesn't feature because no-one played it.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Still stunning how poor Pro is doing.

It's stunning how well the Pro sold, considering how it came in a single SKU without any bundles and sold for almost twice the price of a PS4 + Most-awarded-game-of-2016 Uncharted 4.

The right way to look at Pro sales isn't, "they're low," but "Sony just made a load of money reselling PS4s to their existing customers that they otherwise wouldn't have made."

Exactly.
I would bet the vast majority of PS4 Pro buyers were people who already had a PS4 but got a 4K / HDR TV and/or PSVR in the meantime.
Retail employees are probably being told to explain customers that the Pro is only for people with a 4K TV, otherwise the difference is marginal / non-existent.

 

[JPT]

It's stunning how well the Pro sold, considering how it came in a single SKU without any bundles and sold for almost twice the price of a PS4 + Most-awarded-game-of-2016 Uncharted 4.




Exactly.
I would bet the vast majority of PS4 Pro buyers were people who already had a PS4 but got a 4K / HDR TV and/or PSVR in the meantime.
Retail employees are probably being told to explain customers that the Pro is only for people with a 4K TV, otherwise the difference is marginal / non-existent.

The buyers of a PRO know what it is and why they want it. Mainstream buyers go with what seems to be the best PS4 deal. That is if they have already decided on buying a PS4 that is. This is like having meals that are expensive, medium and low prices on your menu. You feel you get more value for the medium prices, while the connoisseurs (that felt pompous to write) will go with Pro.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

The buyers of a PRO know what it is and why they want it. Mainstream buyers go with what seems to be the best PS4 deal. That is if they have already decided on buying a PS4 that is. This like having meals that are expensive, medium and low prices on your menu. You feel you get more value for the medium prices, while the connoisseurs (that felt pompous to write) will go with Pro.

Yes, but having (EDIT: 20%) 15% of PS4 owners knowing what the Pro is and why they want it is, by itself, quite the feat.

Sony didn't even market the Pro as a substantially better choice for PSVR, which it is!

 

[JPT]

Yes, but having 20% of PS4 owners knowing what the Pro is and why they want it is, by itself, quite the feat.

Sony didn't even market the Pro as a substantially better choice for PSVR, which it is!

Yes, but we have never known the breakdown of how many people usually upgraded to newer sku's, from the early adopter segment (I think).
As I wrote for my reason for buying a Pro, I usually buy a Slim when it's released, but instead of Slim I went Pro this time. Maybe us people with less brains than cash surplus, make up that 20%

How about PSVR vs Pro numbers? I assume we will see certain overlap, but possible supply constraints will of course affect.

 

[BRiT]

Yes, but having 20% of PS4 owners knowing what the Pro is and why they want it is, by itself, quite the feat.

Sony didn't even market the Pro as a substantially better choice for PSVR, which it is!

Were do you get 20% from? The NPD percentage of Sony sales was ~15% in December.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

How about PSVR vs Pro numbers? I assume we will see certain overlap, but possible supply constraints will of course affect.

At the Taipei game show this week Sony will have 3000 Pros and 1000 PSVRs. Probably not unreasonable to think that's the sort of sales ratio Sony are seeing, hence the choice of numbers, unless they are supply constrained on PSVRs.