NPD January 2010
- Thread starter Rangers
- Start date
Well personally I would not buy a game when the devs clearly handled the version intended for my system poorly because it could be the start of a trend I don't want to see happen. From parity to thinking that xbox owners are not picky. The patch eased the issue but clearly I don't like what they did /end of the rant.
For me the game lacks a demo, blockbusters aside I'm iffy when it comes to buy games at full price when there is no demo available. They needed a DEMO imho.
Do you have any data for this, or is it just speculation? Reviews don't define quality; users do. The problem is that we have simply little or no data for any titles that don't appear in the top ten. But here are three variables that affect things:
1. Kids, especially kids under 14. There's a reason they keep making Spongebob and Ben 10 games. There are a lot of kids who play Wii.
2. Women. The average woman doesn't define Bayonetta or Call of Duty as "quality." As the sales of Wii Fit show, they define "quality" differently than your average unmarried, 23-year-old man.
3. There are far, far more users. Remember, those are sales per title, not the console attach rate. Wii's attach rate is lower, but not only are there more people with Wiis, but also the Wii is a "family" console that, in many cases, gets used by the whole household. Wii 3rd party titles actually sell fewer per console than the PS3. Third party sales per console instead of per title are:
Wii: 0.73
360: 0.66
PS3: 0.75
And what this really shows us is non-blockbuster performance. Nintendo blockbusters are almost all 1st party. In that time frame (October-December), the only real block buster on the HD Twins was Modern Warfare, which is excluded from the chart.
Last edited by a moderator:
scooby_dooby
Legend
I know, which is why I said OR, and not AND
Wii's ecosystem basically encourages shovelware for 3rd parties. There is no real point to innovate, as it is probably not going to be noticed by the uninformed casual userbase.
@fearsomepirate - This all speculation obviously. I think its funny though that you ask me for data, te proceed to throw out these big generalizations like "women buy wii" and "lots of kids buy wii..."
I actually agree with your sentiments, and don't think this requires any data, as it falls completely within the realm of common sense. Just like my observations do, there is absolutely no way that the Wii userbase is on the same level as PS3/360 in terms of their awareness of critical reviews of games (I'll use that term instead of "Quality" so we don't need to argue about the definition of quality
Seriously, have you ever shopped for games with a Woman? I mean, like, your typical woman? You would see my point...
I've heard many publishers in the past say that they must have an 80% review score to make money on the HD consoles. Review scores are absolutely criticial to success on those consoles, I don't think the same holds true for the Wii at all. Rather, on the Wii, your game is gonna sell shitty, regardless of the score, so why target a higher score? Examples: No more heroes, dead space, Zack Wiki etc...
They are also much more likely to purchase a title based on IP recognition, so I see publishers putting more emphasis on using an IP, slapping together some shovelware, and pushing it out.
Yeah, what's with the removing of MW2? Why not remove all games that have "E" in their titles, or titles with predominant blue on the covers? Or just remove WIi Sports, Wii Fit, and all the recycled retro Mario shit from Nintendo consoles? Call of Duty is an integral part of the 360/PS3 ecosystem.
Maybe this is because these critical reviews are written by so called hardcore gamers (avoiding the term fanboys here) who have no idea what games the so called expanded audience likes to play?Just like my observations do, there is absolutely no way that the Wii userbase is on the same level as PS3/360 in terms of their awareness of critical reviews of games (I'll use that term instead of "Quality" so we don't need to argue about the definition of quality
http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/wii/justdance
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B002MWSY3O/
scooby_dooby
Legend
I'm not really sure where you're goin with this, I dont view hardcore gamer as a negative term at all.
To me it's just someone who spends the time to research and know about the games available on any given system. Casuals don't read reviews, they rely on word or mouth or marketing, period. So, if we agree that Wii has more casual users, then I can't really see how my reasoning can be very far off base.
I'll admit though, the Just Dance sales do show that 3rd party innovation can be rewarded on the wii...though, maybe we should exclude that and redo the number for 2009, if we're gonna cut the biggest seller from 360/PS3, we should also do the same for Wii no?
They read Amazon reviews, because the critical reviews are not targeted towards them.
scooby_dooby
Legend
I have a hard time believing that a large portion of Wii owners are buying their games from online stores...more likely wal-mart, zellers, best buy, target, toys-r-us etc
You don't need to buy to read the reviews.
Also: http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/2009/videogames/
Also: http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/2009/videogames/
They already did that, that's the point. People are going 'wah, no fair, no call of duty skews the numbers', but so does removing 1st party Nintendo stuff. When one of the main complaints from 3rd parties is how Nintendo stuff overshadows everyone else, you can't pretend like removing Call of Duty is the only way the numbers are skewed.
Pointing out that separating 360 and PS3 software numbers is misleading is a more valid point, at least if the purpose of the chart is 'Hey, 3rd parties, you can sell as many copies on the Wii per game as you can on the other systems'. But otherwise, Nintendo software and MW2 are outliers.
Last edited by a moderator:
Looks at the current number 1 game in the UK
Just Dance 2 is just the beginning, the number sequels may even approach 10% of guitar hero's
Most of us have seen enough data on the age and gender distribution of gaming for that I figured I do not have to Google something and provide a link every time I mention it. I did not realize you had been out of the loop for the last few years! This is a good place to start:
http://toydirectory.com/monthly/article.asp?id=3350
Right, but why would a typical woman care about the game review websites? Gamespot gave Wii Fit a 70; what they're looking for makes their reviews useless to the sort of people that bought and loved it. They primarily look for graphics, story, cutscenes, action, and online competition. The gaming websites have the same problem the rest of the industry has...they don't know how to design and sell products to the "expanded market" (in the case of the websites, its their news and reviews). Look at who writes the reviews. They're writing for people like themselves. That's fine (which is why people like us check the review scores), but it doesn't mean you're not "savvy" if you don't care what they say. Maybe there's another reason they don't reach you.
30 3rd-party Wii titles have sold a million units: http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/newsArt.cfm?artid=17649
But I do think you are close to the complacency of the industry. The industry likes formulas. Look at how Activision milked every last drop of blood out of Guitar Hero, how EA is turning MoH into Modern Warfare, or how the bald space marine became a cliche before people had even beat the first Gears of War. If they can't find a simple formula for success (like space marines + FPS + online MP = profit), they blame the market, the customers, the stores, the console manufacturer...anyone but themselves for failing to put together a product that the targeted customers will want to buy and communicate it to the market effectively. And despite the fact that so many formula games fail (like Bayonetta and Borderlands), the successes (like Modern Warfare and GTA IV) propel them onward, searching for that formula that translates into automatic riches.
Look at what happened after RE:UC. It sold a million units, and HotD 2&3 did pretty well, too. Immediately, other publishers said, "Ah ha! We have a formula for success. Rail shooter + zombies = profit!" And so the industry cranked out HotD4 and Dead Space: Extraction, both of which failed miserably. In the industry's mind, if you can't succeed with a formula, you might as well crank out crap!
That was at the end of 2008. It's 54 currently.
FWIW, I think the window may have closed on the opportunity for publishers to make money on "hardcore gamers" on the Wii. They spent too many years offering up little more than broken PSP ports and half-finished PS2 ports in terms of action games (in other words, the Conduit should not have been the first competent, original FPS on the Wii). By now, the PS3 and 360 are not terribly expensive, so guys like me have lost interest in the Wii and are only buying the games that take $20+ million to develop. There was a huge opportunity lost there. Red Steel sold a million units based on little more than potential. I think it may be impossible to release a platinum-selling FPS on the Wii at this point.
Just right off the top of my head you can throw ODST in there. A late September release that pushed through millions in the October-December window--as well as Assassin's Creed 2 that also sold very, very well. Both qualify as blockbusters. Looks like FM3 after a horrible release October 22nd also pushed through now a couple million. And of course there were all those titles that chose to slide/take a pass due to the expected, and delivered, monster numbers from MW2. Mass Effect 2 would have easily been a multimillion seller bu EA chose to slide it back. Anyhow, these titles impact the numbers presented.
NathansFortune
Regular
I think it would be more comforting to EA or Ubisoft to see Activision do it than Sony or Microsoft (on their consoles). Seriously, a game like MW2 can happen on PS3/360 just like GTA can also happen, or Assassins Creed, or FIFA. There are a huge number of blockbuster 3rd party games on PS3/360. In fact Sony should be the ones getting worried as first party games (despite their quality) don't seem to do as well and they can't seem to figure out why.
That's my point, it being Activision rather than Microsoft/Sony means third parties are able to get massive success on the platform, while the only company that seem to have cracked the Wii are Nintendo.
You're missing the point. A chart that adds an outlier like MW2 to third party sales is no more indicative of the real performance of third party titles than a chart showing overall Wii software sales that includes Nintendo titles. No one complains when comparisons suddenly switch and go 'Well, only third party counts', but when they do it to MW2 people are going 'hold on, MW2 sales don't happen in a vacuum'. Well, guess what? Nintendo first party sales don't happen in a vacuum either; the software landscape without Nintendo third parties would be vastly different, for better or for worse, far more than if MW2 didn't exist.