NPD January 2010

[Silent_Buddha]

Interesting. I'm guesstimating 29k, 34k, and 37k for Oct-Dec. So multiplied by number of titles.

Wii - 28,837,000
PS3 - 12,614,000
X360 - 20,498,000

That's a lot of 3rd party software sold in 3 months.

I was going to do the same with first party titles thrown in, but both Wii and PS3 saw more first party title releases in Oct-Dec than X360. So that's more additional unit sales... Oh heck why not. Guessing 47k, 37k, 37k...

Wii - 37,130,000
PS3 - 15,281,000
X360 - 22,237,000

Shows that while Nintendo does absolutely fantastic with regards to 1st party titles, that it still gets significant sales of 3rd party titles.

Of course, here I'm not exactly seeing the value of comparing unit sales for a small time frame (Oct-Dec for example) divided by total number of titles released during the entire lifetime of a console.

It would be far more enlightening and useful to see Unit sales for a time frame (Oct-Dec) divided by number of titles released for a time frame (Oct-Dec).

Regards,
SB

 

[Laa-Yosh]

I still think that people are overestimating GOW3's probable effect on PS3 hardware sales.
The game appeals mostly to Sony's hardcore userbase, people who have played the previous two games. These guys are more then likely to own the console already, at ~30 million units sold.

Sure, there probably are some other users out there who would buy the game and don't yet have a PS3; but they're waiting for a price cut instead, IMHO.


FFXIII is another dark horse in the race, the series' appeal has been declining in the West and now you can also buy it on the 360 (then again, I don't see much in the Xbox bundle either, some collectors will get it and the rest will remain uninterested).

 

[Scott_Arm]

I would rather have someone shit in my eyes and ears than play a Final Fantasy game. I hope the decline is dramatic.

 

[liolio]

I would rather have someone shit in my eyes and ears than play a Final Fantasy game. I hope the decline is dramatic.

 

[dobwal]

I'm surprised nobody seems to have clicked through the link because there is more data.

Someone explain the graphs, please. Are they looking at sales of the whole library of each console for just Q4 and December? Or are they dividing total number of sales from holiday 2009 and dividing it by the total number of games in the library?

I hard time see the relevancy of the data because the math behind it doesn't really make sense to me.

If total library for each console is
790 Wii
601 360
413 PS3

Total third party library
753 Wii
554 360
371 PS3

Total sales
180 million Wii
165 million 360
75 million PS3

Total 3rd party sales
110 million Wii
140 million 360
65 million PS3

then

The average unit sales per title for each console is 227K per Wii title, 275K per 360 title and 182K per PS3 title.

The average unit sales per third party title for each console is is 146K per Wii per title, 252K per 360 title and 175K per PS3 title.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Someone explain the graphs, please. Are they looking at sales of the whole library of each console for just Q4 and December? Or are they dividing total number of sales from holiday 2009 and dividing it by the total number of games in the library?

I hard time see the relevancy of the data because the math behind it doesn't really make sense to me.

The bolded part. I was questioning the use of that method myself. But I'm assuming it was used as it possibly shows Wii numbers in a better light.

For example, if there was say 40 titles released for Wii during that period but only 10-15 each for X360 and PS3 then suddenly the per title unit sales don't look nearly as good.

As well, when comparing to X360 it's especially unflattering as you're now dividing by an extra year+ of title releases.

It's basically Nintendo using numbers in creative ways to put them in the best light possible. NOTE - All companies including Sony and MS will likely be doing the same thing. Finding ways to present numbers to put their product in the best light possible.

Regards,
SB

 

[obonicus]

But the graph is only about 3rd party software. Since the beginning of time, no-one has ever denied or questioned Nintendo's ability to sell first party software.

But that's not the point. If excluding MW2 skews numbers by making game sales seem much lower than they actually are, because people who didn't buy MW2 would have bought something else, then excluding first-party sales when talking about Nintendo might have the same impact. I mean, one of the complaints you often hear about Nintendo systems is that it's particularly hard to compete with first-party offerings.

 

[eastmen]

But that's not the point. If excluding MW2 skews numbers by making game sales seem much lower than they actually are, because people who didn't buy MW2 would have bought something else, then excluding first-party sales when talking about Nintendo might have the same impact. I mean, one of the complaints you often hear about Nintendo systems is that it's particularly hard to compete with first-party offerings.

SO ms and sony didn't release any first party titles ?

Seems to me that not only did you take out a halo game and others from ms but you also took away mw2 . Sure you might have taken nintendo first party stuff out of the equation but you did the same for ms and sony and then took out the biggest 3rd party game to boot

 

[dobwal]

The bolded part. I was questioning the use of that method myself. But I'm assuming it was used as it possibly shows Wii numbers in a better light.

For example, if there was say 40 titles released for Wii during that period but only 10-15 each for X360 and PS3 then suddenly the per title unit sales don't look nearly as good.

As well, when comparing to X360 it's especially unflattering as you're now dividing by an extra year+ of title releases.

It's basically Nintendo using numbers in creative ways to put them in the best light possible. NOTE - All companies including Sony and MS will likely be doing the same thing. Finding ways to present numbers to put their product in the best light possible.

Regards,
SB

I find that ratio totally useless. How is the performance of holiday 2009 divided by the total library useful in anyway? Holiday 2009 sales divided by holiday 2009 releases would show how well third party titles are doing on each console currently.

Comparing the 360 data (ave. unit sales of 252K), the Wii data (ave. unit sales of 146) and the typical retail game price ($49.99 versus $59.99) would show that the average revenue (assuming no price cuts) for a third party title would be 15 million on the 360 versus 7.3 million on the Wii.

 

[Teasy]

The bolded part. I was questioning the use of that method myself. But I'm assuming it was used as it possibly shows Wii numbers in a better light.

For example, if there was say 40 titles released for Wii during that period but only 10-15 each for X360 and PS3 then suddenly the per title unit sales don't look nearly as good.

As well, when comparing to X360 it's especially unflattering as you're now dividing by an extra year+ of title releases.

It's basically Nintendo using numbers in creative ways to put them in the best light possible. NOTE - All companies including Sony and MS will likely be doing the same thing. Finding ways to present numbers to put their product in the best light possible.

Regards,
SB

Wii has almost as many third party games as both PS3 and 360 combined though. So the only way using these numbers could put it in a better light is if third parties released more titles for Wii between October and December 2009 then they did for PS3 and 360 combined. No way did that happen. I'd normally agree that companies use whatever puts them in the best light, but in this case it doesn't seem to be the case

 

[NathansFortune]

You have to remember that a lot of those third party titles will be mini-game collections from random publishers hoping to get lucky.

A third party game on PS3/360 is more likely to be a complete product than a third party game on Wii. I'm not saying it's a good or bad thing either way, if those mini-game collections can make money then great, but most won't.

Also Nintendo doesn't specify whether PSN/XBLA sales are taken into account, my guess is no, but I can't be sure. For sure XBLA and PSN have more sales potential than WiiWare/VC due to the poor online implementation on the Wii.

 

[obonicus]

SO ms and sony didn't release any first party titles ?

Not even remotely in the same scale as Nintendo's big first-party offerings or MW2. That's the whole point. The complaint is that removing MW2 skews the results dramatically. Sure, but so does removing Nintendo's first-party efforts.

 

[Teasy]

You have to remember that a lot of those third party titles will be mini-game collections from random publishers hoping to get lucky.

A third party game on PS3/360 is more likely to be a complete product than a third party game on Wii. I'm not saying it's a good or bad thing either way, if those mini-game collections can make money then great, but most won't.

Also Nintendo doesn't specify whether PSN/XBLA sales are taken into account, my guess is no, but I can't be sure. For sure XBLA and PSN have more sales potential than WiiWare/VC due to the poor online implementation on the Wii.

PSN/XBLA/WiiWare won't be included and that's the way it should be, if they want to look at those kinds of games they should look at them seperately IMO.

 

[NathansFortune]

Hmm, no one disputes how well Nintendo can sell software. Nintendo are the ones saying that third parties have a better time on Wii than PS3/360 but that's only true if MW2 is taken out of the equation.

It's like Sony saying they are a bigger first party publisher than Nintendo if Mario games are taken out of the equation. While that comparison may come out in Sony's favour, it doesn't make them a bigger publisher because Mario has amazing selling power.

 

[obonicus]

Hmm, no one disputes how well Nintendo can sell software. Nintendo are the ones saying that third parties have a better time on Wii than PS3/360 but that's only true if MW2 is taken out of the equation.

Because only Activision makes MW2? Is Activision's success supposed to comfort EA or Ubi? This is strangely parallel to the discussion Nintendo fans would have bragging about Nintendo's monstrous sales. Nintendo selling a hundred billion copies of MK:Wii wasn't a huge comfort to EA, either.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Not only does the chart tell us the Wii title movement is more spread out (due to the lack of presence in NPD charting top-20 on a regular basis) it also tells us the money is a lot thinner. The Wii has the most titles (over 700) and lower sale price for title. I wonder what sort of impact that has on publishers.

Less emphasis on quality most likely.

PS3/360 buyers would likely be considerably more saavy, publishers need to ensure their game gets an 80%+ review score, or it's probably game over. The lower quality games on these systems are probably far less likely to get decent sales, because of the informed userbase.

Wii buyers are more likely to buy a game based on the cover art, or simply name recognition of a specific brand, without ever checking the reviews. So publishers can spend less, make lower quality/cheaper games.

I think Wii does provide an ecosystem for 3rd parties. It's just not one that any hardcore gamer, or at least me personally, have any interest in. It's not one that encourages high production values, or any particularly strong innovations. Nintendo are basically the only ones that can spend a ton of money, and expect to make it back.

 

[dobwal]

What I find funny is that the removal of MW2 doesn't really affect the PS3/360 advantage. You're talking what 15 million in potential sales out of 200 million in overall third party sales.

925 titles with 200 million in unit sales means 216K per title per HD console. Meaning an average multiplat would have sales of 432K. Removing MW2 sales would reduce that to average to 194K or 389K per multiplat title. The dynamics in the market means that an average multiplat third party PS3/360 title can pull in revenue of 23 million versus 7 million on the Wii even when you discount the sales of MW2.

 

[thop]

It's not one that encourages high production values, or any particularly strong innovations.

We won't know until a third party publisher actually releases such a title for the platform.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Wii has almost as many third party games as both PS3 and 360 combined though. So the only way using these numbers could put it in a better light is if third parties released more titles for Wii between October and December 2009 then they did for PS3 and 360 combined. No way did that happen. I'd normally agree that companies use whatever puts them in the best light, but in this case it doesn't seem to be the case

Not quite. 753 Wii titles versus a combined 925. That's almost 23% more. But that doesn't address the situation, after all, Nintendo isn't comparing to combined numbers. And we still have 1 extra year of 3rd party releases supressing the Unit sales per title number for X360 for no other reason than marketing.

Now compare Wii versus X360. 753 vs 554. And that's with one year extra releases. In relation to Wii, X360 has been on the market over 25% longer, and while I'm sure released 3rd party titles isn't linear that's still a significant number of titles. Remove that year of releases and suddenly Unit sales per Title suddenly shoots up over 40k. Even removing MW2, X360 will end up with higher Unit Sales per Title thus spoiling somewhat the point Nintendo is making that 3rd party titles sell as well or better on Wii.

Now further restrict Unit sales per title to titles that only sold during Oct. - Dec. and you'll further erode the point they are making.

As I said, it's all marketing finding interesting ways to play with numbers to try to show their product in the best light possible.

Regards,
SB

 

[dobwal]

Not quite. 753 Wii titles versus a combined 925. That's almost 23% more. But that doesn't address the situation, after all, Nintendo isn't comparing to combined numbers. And we still have 1 extra year of 3rd party releases supressing the Unit sales per title number for X360 for no other reason than marketing.

Now compare Wii versus X360. 753 vs 554. And that's with one year extra releases. In relation to Wii, X360 has been on the market over 25% longer, and while I'm sure released 3rd party titles isn't linear that's still a significant number of titles. Remove that year of releases and suddenly Unit sales per Title suddenly shoots up over 40k. Even removing MW2, X360 will end up with higher Unit Sales per Title thus spoiling somewhat the point Nintendo is making that 3rd party titles sell as well or better on Wii.

Now further restrict Unit sales per title to titles that only sold during Oct. - Dec. and you'll further erode the point they are making.

As I said, it's all marketing finding interesting ways to play with numbers to try to show their product in the best light possible.

Regards,
SB

I agree but with the caveat thats its more PR than marketing as Im sure the majority of third party publishers are not going be persuaded by these figures.

The big pubs aren't going to drastically shift development to the Wii. For one the numbers aren't there and the big pubs (who have deep pockets) aren't going drastically refocus, restructure and fragment their teams to push out increase level of cheaper developed titles for the Wii over the 360/PS3. For what? There are no equivalent MW2, GTA5 or other AAA third party franchises on the Wii.