NPD July 2007

Unfortunately it didn't.

Here's the numbers from 2004 leading up to and Halo 2's release from Odysseus over at Neogaf on the exact same subject

Code:

month	increase
1	17%
2	3%
3	20%
4	135%
5	76%
6	57%
7	47%
8	49%
9	54%
10	23%
11	45%

April was when the XBox received a pricecut and besides that you will notice after the price cut the increase in sales from the year before were pretty much the same showing it wasn't Halo 2 alone increasing sales since had been trending the same amount increase for several months before Halo 2 was released.

Game releases in the US just don't have a history for boosting console sales like they do in Japan.

 

Hi Natoma. I think that is being fairly charitable, especially after you labelled the 360 as essentially having a PC dominated library.

The Wii's library is pretty weak in the big picture (for us hardcore gamers) and is really floundering in a lot of genres. But it also has some really great strengths:

- It is affordable.
- It has killer apps (real ones that drive sales) from day 1 in Zelda and Wii Sports.
- It is unique and fresh, offering a new experience.
- It taps into social gaming at a cultural and casual level.

But I wouldn't go as far to say the Wii has a strong library -- and definately wouldn't say it is hitting all the genres, let alone with quality titles.

Do I have to list genres and the offerings Wii has? Please don't make me! Please!

As for the 360's library, I think the issue is perception and not reality. That should sound familiar to a Nintendo fan like you, Teasy, and myself. Nintendo only has kid games... egads!

I think beyond perception is the 360 lacks high level exposure for their mainstream games. MS has stuff like Kameo, Rayman, Cars, Harry Potter, Shrek, and Sonic for younger gamers. The 360 has party games and servicable GTA clones like Crackdown and Saint's Row. MS has a slew of sports, wrestling, and arcade racing games. Right now it looks like MS has the strongest RPG library (!!) and is the place to be for sports and racing at the moment. They also have Dance Dance Revolution, Guitar Hero as well as Rockband coming (which took center stage for them at E3). They have the Spidermans, Marvels, Fantastic 4s, Transformers, and Supermans of the market. Everything from Tomb Raiders to Dead Rising. Not all the games in all the genres are great -- but it does fill them all out, and there are great games in most of those genres. Far better than what the Wii is offering. And then there are arcade games, arcade classics, and card games.

But lets look at the Wii's strengths and apply that to MS's offering:

- It is affordable => The 360 isn't affordable.

- It has killer apps => First killer app was Gears of War, now maybe Bioshock. FPS, mature themed. Next up? Halo 3 and Mass Effect.

- It is unique and fresh, offering a new experience. => MS has live and does have a lot of fresh stuff (like Rockband) BUT MS's message is too broad without any diversity coming from them internally.

- It taps into social gaming at a cultural and casual level. => MS has tapped social gaming, but on the competitive hardcore bent.

The last point is significant. I was recently discussing class based MP in FPS and why I like them because a friend was trashing them. What he doesn't quite get is that in a competitive FPS only the top 10% really excell and the bottom 50% are cannon fodder. With classes you allow people to excell in different areas and be team players. With a team orientation to gameplay goals it becomes less "who is the best shooter" to "who can work the best as a team".

Now take that example and put it into the "Live" versus "Motion Gaming" paradigm. I think motion gaming, as a concept, is more approachable, more affordable, and connects with more real people, both gamers and non-gamers.

Live isn't bad, and of course MS offers a lot of various gaming experiences on their platform. But the message is broad -- and the stuff coming from MS (who sets the tone) is very "dark and gritty".

MS dropped the ball with Viva Pinata and Kameo didn't resonate for whatever reasons. Viva Party Animals looks weak and Scene It! even worse. MS has an image problem, just like Nintendo does. I think Viva Pinata was a big blooper, and the lack of a Banjo game to go along with Rock Band encourages the continued theme of, "MS is just shooters and PC games". It isn't true, but that is image. What can you do about it?

I think all 3 will sell well, but look at Metroid. In your post you discuss the hardcore coming over--but how? How is Metroid, that lacks online MP, going to do that? Just as Sony and MS have a difficult time catering to certain demographics, I don't see the Wii winning over a lot of "hardcore gamers" of certain genres -- FPS, Racing, RPGs, and certain sports.

Their gaming library reflects their own sentiments about the things a lot of gamers hold dear (online play, game length, graphics, game difficulty, buttons and interaction).

I don't see Nintendo catering to hardcore gamers at all at this point. Nintendo fans, yes. Gamers, yes. Hardcore gamers?

Do they even have 5 quality titles that appeal to hardcore gamers?

What is the attach rate for Nintendo titles versus 3rd party though?

Interesting enough, after 17 months the GCN had an attach rate of 5.2. (PS2 3.8; Xbox 4.3; 360 5.5). The GCN ended up with just over 9 per unit sold. So GCN software sales started off fast and finished ok, but it was slagged habitually because 3rd party games that did well on other platforms did poorly on Nintendo's box--even though it sold nearly as many units (and was ahead for a long time) as MS.

So it isn't just attach rate on the Wii, but how well 3rd parties do. And it cannot just be good games: a lot of average games sell ok on the 360 (like the NFS games sold very well).

Of course with a larger install base and lower development costs the Wii will continue to be enticing and publishers can afford the investment and risk--especially that of trying new game mechanics and controls (which is really risky as you never know what will work and resonate with consumers until you do it).

We agree here. Well, I don't think they had a great July, but yeah--I don't see the PS3 product successful on most levels (and definately not catching MS) unless Sony takes huge lumps on the retail cost... soon. Like now. If they don't show themselves to be a viable platform this fall publisher support is going to begin thinning out and at that point there will be now chance.

Consumers are fickle. Atari, Nintendo, and Sega are proof of this. While fans can keep a struggling platform afloat, past success doesn't guarantee future success.

 

The first month is usually always creates a blip but the PS3 should retain a level of sales higher than previous sales at the $600 price point. Ebbing sales of the pricecut should be counteracted by holiday season thats approaching so if <100K monthly sales figure pop up again, I would surmise that Sony has a problem on its hand especially with Lair and HS on the way.

Even if Lair and HS aren't going to be critically acclaimed as AAA games, they have had enough exposure that a strong marketing campaign for those titles should push PS3 sales at least a little.

 

When I look at the 360 library, I see shooter, shooter, racer, shooter, an rpg sprinkled here or there, shooter, shooter, shooter.

Roll off the major titles that people talk about for this year and they're practically all shooters or games with shooter elements, or racers. BioShock, Mass Effect, Lost Planet, Halo 3, Forza 2, etc.

And many articles that I read on the 360 bemoan it's limited library appeal, which is one reason why Viva Pinata is being touted so heavily by MS to try and capture the market segment that has worked so well for Nintendo.

Keep in mind this is coming from someone who's going to own a 360 once the 65nm variant hits the market.

Why not? I'm a traditional/hardcore gamer and I play and love those kinds of games, and I love the kinds of games you mentioned.

And you make that assessment how exactly? The Wii is selling for various reasons.

1) Media coverage
2) Motion control
3) Nintendo's titles
4) Price

Btw, the best selling Wii title to date that wasn't a pack-in? Zelda Twilight Princess. That game is certainly not what you would think would appeal to the "casual" gamer now is it?

To ascribe its current success to one item is to miss the bigger picture imo.

You made the statement that high-end big budget titles would solely be the purview of 360/PS3, and that they would battle for the hardcore/traditional gamer market. I disagreed with that for the reasons I stated above this quote.

As for graphics, I already conceded that point.

Point being, those games are gorgeous games. Are they on the same level graphically as 360/PS3 games? No. But they're not fugly. And as we know, graphics aren't everything to a game.

You place an artificial limit on the "hardcore/traditional" gaming segment by seeming to insist that we only want better graphics. And I say "we" because I consider myself a hardcore/traditional gamer. I've been heavily into gaming since the Colecovision days and owned over 20 GC titles last gen, and around 15 PS1 & PS2 titles. Not to mention the oodles of cartridges for N64, Jaguar, SNES, NES, Atari 7800, 2600, Colecovision, and all of the arcade gaming I participated in. Not to mention playing Genesis and Turbo-grafx 16 games all the time with friends and family.

And yet despite that, I am not so bent out of shape regarding graphics that I look at the 360/PS3 and go "I have to have that game even if it's just the same derivative gameplay with much prettier graphics!"

I want something different, and that's why the Wii really appeals to me. I'm looking at a 360/PS3 in part because there are a few games that interest me for sure, but not at those prices.

Am I not hardcore/traditional? Are there not many more just like me?

There's a reason for that. By and large the best titles have been 1st party. And yet titles that were high quality have sold extremely well. Ubisoft's release sales can attest to that.

It will be for a while unless they want to bleed even more money. I don't see the PS3 dropping into the $300-$400 range for another year or two at least. MS could drop the 360 into the $200-$300 range if they wanted to, and that will pretty much seal Sony's hopes of catching the 360.

 

If Metroid Prime 3 has solid review scores and has a challenging and well designed single player experience, people will buy it and play it, regardless of whether it has online. I LOVE online games, which is why I'm still mostly a PC guy, but that isn't going to prevent me from buying or playing Metroid Prime 3. There are also A LOT of people who are not interested in competitive gaming, even though they are hardcore gamers. Some people prefer a storyline and atmosphere to online.

Nintendo will have "hardcore" games, as it already does. I think if any genre is lacking, it will be realistic racing sims, because a lot of racing sim games seem to sell on graphics.

 

Ah.

Well, goodoh then.

 

People keep saying that the Wii's overlap competition with the 360/PS3 is small, but I'm not sure. To determine if the Wii is in competition with the other consoles, one can ask the question, if the Wii didn't exist, would people have bought the 360 or PS3 instead? I'm sure there is a large chunk of people who would not have bought a console at all had the Wii not existed and found their entertainment elsewhere outside of video games (casual gamer). But I bet there is also a large chunk of people who would have bought a 360 or PS3 had the Wii not existed since they want to play video games as entertainment. They just found the Zelda/Mario/controller/price/Nintendo brand combination more compelling than the PS3/360. For these folks, the Wii is in direct competition with the 360/PS3. It's for these folks that the Wii is eating into current or future 360/PS3 sales unless a lot of these folks do dual or triple consoles.

 

Really interesting analysis, I agree for the most part.
But I would be a little more cautious when it's come to your view a "splitted" market. Nintendo bring new to people to the market, nothing prevent editors to grap the more traditionnal gaming community who don't aim for top perf (or HD)

Wii still doesn't have games that can attract hardcore gamers :
1) this don't prevent hardcore gamers to buy (between you didn't state otherwize).
2) The game libary can expand hugely as editors support will catch with wii success
3) worse, bigN will soon I can be the leader ith a healthy marging, and as the leader they set the timing of hardware evolution
==> if demand start to going down nothing prevent to come with cheap HD system (as early as 2009) that still able to outclass older "top performance" systems.
Given its success and the substantial room for price cut, I can't see the Wii momentum break before 2009 (more at his time HD acceptance will be way higher). BigN timing in regard to HD is more "even" (sorry I can't express myself well enought ) with the global market acceptance, ie when HD will be really important MS and Sony could be stuck with "old weapons" (pretty long profitabilty plan)to fight a new nintendo system.

Anyway it's really open, One thing is sure, It seems that bigN will be in a f*****g confortable situation.

 

For me it was Wii vs 360/PS3/PC. I'm typically a PC guy, but Wii offered something new, so I went with it. I may still get a 360 or PS3 because there are a few titles that I don't think will end up on the Wii or PC is an uncrippled form (NHL200X, Fight Night Round X)

 

Not to be one to nitpick (but you did it twice): GameStop data reported by GameDaily != GameSpot data...

 

http://forum.pcvsconsole.com/viewthread.php?tid=11067

Monthly U.S. Console Hardware Sales
Xbox
Nov/2001 720,000
Dec/2001 700,000
Jan/2002 130,000
Feb/2002 140,000
Mar/2002 130,000
Apr/2002 80,000
May/2002 230,000 price cut to $199.00
Jun/2002 260,000
Jul/2002 160,000
Aug/2002 130,000
Sep/2002 170,000
Oct/2002 240,000
Nov/2002 470,000
Dec/2002 1,040,000
Jan/2003 160,000
Feb/2003 200,000
Mar/2003 160,000
Apr/2003 130,000
May/2003 120,000 price cut to $179.00
Jun/2003 170,000
Jul/2003 140,000
Aug/2003 150,000
Sep/2003 170,000
Oct/2003 170,000
Nov/2003 480,000
Dec/2003 1,100,000
Jan/2004 190,000
Feb/2004 200,000
Mar/2004 200,000 price cut to $149.00
Apr/2004 300,000
May/2004 220,000
Jun/2004 260,000
Jul/2004 200,000
Aug/2004 220,000
Sep/2004 270,000
Oct/2004 210,000
Nov/2004 700,000 Halo 2 release
Dec/2004 1,050,000
Jan/2005 240,000
Feb/2005 210,000
Mar/2005 230,000
Apr/2005 150,000
May/2005 130,000
Jun/2005 170,000
Jul/2005 130,000
Aug/2005 130,000
Sep/2005 130,000
Oct/2005 110,000
Nov/2005 200,000
Dec/2005 420,000

I don't no where his got his numbers, but this is where I got mine. If these numbers are inaccurate then I concede my point. But looking at the overall data, xbox holiday season sales (other than 2004) are relatively static through out the first four holiday seasons even though there were 2 other price cuts prior to the 2004 cut. Neither prior price cut in the spring had a dramatic impact on holiday sales. I don't understand why $149.00 price cut can be the sole motivator for the pickup of 2004 holiday sales. If anything price cuts helped insure that the xbox sold roughly around 1.4 mil each holiday season and one could surmise that the increase to 1.7 mil was heavily attributed to the presence of Halo 2. We're talking a $30.00 dollar price cut here not $100.00. The only time the Xbox had sales over 500K for the month of November was when Halo and Halo2 were newly available.

Using sales % increase in comparsion from the prior year hides the fact that increasing sells from 130K to 300K isn't the same as increasing from 480K to 700K. Plus the data points used to calculate 135% is inclusive of two price cuts not one.

 

6.2 is a pretty incredible attach rate at this point, and its only going to get better with their fall lineup.

 

I hate to dampen all this MS back patting, but did anyone notice the ratios? The 360 has what a 4x install base, but the NCAA sales ratio was only 2.4x. I guess PS3 owners do buy software.

 

His numbers appear to be to more places than those but I did a quick check and they work out to the same percent changes +/- a few percent.

If the percent change per month is holding fairly constant it seems hard to point to one game and claim thats the entire reason for the increase for that month. The reason you use percents is so you can compare different months and track trends of widely disparate numbers. Thats exactly why you can use flat numbers because November and December just sell so many more than other months.

Basically you should be showing there was an increasing trend in XBox sales that didn't exist before Halo 2 was released which there wasn't and as was pointed out in December there was no change at all due to apparently limited supply making it hard to tell what could have happened.

 

I'd say a bit of both from talking to the local game shops around here. Most places said after the price drop they either sold out that week or nearly sold out. From that point, sales declined to a level above pre-pricedrop, but well below the frenzy following the pricedrop.

Not too surprising really.

I predict 125k for August.

A good bump above their 80k/mo days, but only so many people are willing to spend $500 on a console, esp. when other options exist.

 

Is Aug a 5 week month? If so with price drop, I think 360 can hit 235k. Which is GREAT but a lot better than sub 200k.

 

Look at the % increase for the sales of just Nov and Dec in all prior years and you will see it relatively static in other words the holiday months' sales for the xbox bucks the trend seen by the other months of the year. December sales from 02-04shows relatively no change. Nov sales from 02-04 shows only 04 with a large increase in sales yet from 02-04 there was a price cut each spring every year. The biggest difference between 02, 03 and 04 is the presence of Halo2 in November 04.

A price cut to $199.00 and $179.00 produced no real change in the holiday sales. Yet, you seem to think the data from 2004 implies that the increase in holiday sales come from a $30.00 price cut.