what if it was a pure FPS set in the same jungle then. Would that sell it?
NPD October 2007
- Thread starter RobertR1
- Start date
what if it was a pure FPS set in the same jungle then. Would that sell it?
Carl,
If games are not selling because they don't have X appeal or a Y audience available, then Sony would be better off holding onto to them until conditions are favorable and moving other games forward (if possible). They'd even better off promoting a 3rd party game. Sure, you might not get the same money off it but if the genre is appealing, you have a better chance to push hardware. Right now, one game after another is being sent to die. It's the case of very poor foreshadowing if what you're stating is correct.
Don't know if you saw that list I posted earlier with NPD details but it was downright pitiful. Eye of judgement sold what 13k units? HS at 34k in just it's 2nd month. Lair and Warhawk not even on the top 10 which was rouned out by a title sellling 10k units! (jericho).
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it just depends on whether those people identify with it as a shooter or not, from the way it is advertised to them. Gears of War feels similar to a tactical first person shooter, where you might have the ability to lean around corners. It just has a slightly different view point, even though when you're aiming it's pretty superficial. The cover mechanics are different than what you'd find in an fps. If Uncharted has good shooting mechanics, and they can advertise it as an action packed shooter, I think it would do pretty well with the fps/shooter crowd.
Depends. I'd have to see it to say... I will say though that Crysis is in a jungle more or less, and I'm sure you'll see where it falls right in line with the 'themes' I'm talking about, and is nothing at all similar to Uncharted. It's not just jungles vs burnt-out cities and first-person vs third-person control schemes; these games have their market niche determined by how well they can communicate 'excitement' to the young male demographic in the year 2007. Gears and Crysis speak more directly to that than does Uncharted, which is more whimsical in theme.
If retailers make $10 per game, then
1. that's really cool business
2. breaking even is a lot harder, even for first party titles (no licence fee)
People should praise COD4 and AC for their PS3 versions, if sales won't go well then the effort invested in these titles may end up being the exception.
1. that's really cool business
2. breaking even is a lot harder, even for first party titles (no licence fee)
People should praise COD4 and AC for their PS3 versions, if sales won't go well then the effort invested in these titles may end up being the exception.
Well, Ratchet is not 1st party... that's something worth remembering. There's no disputing what you're saying, but once the gears are put in motion years in advance, they're hard to slow down for the sake of delay itself. It often makes more sense financially to launch the game in a worse environment than it does just to sit on it for months with nothing in its stead. I have no doubt R&C will make a killer $20 title if and when "greatest hits" type things start appearing, but holding onto it simply wasn't an option...
But again I don't disagree with anything in your post. I also don't see where you were disagreeing with me either though.
Not disagreeing just thinking out loud what Sony could have done to for better market appeal. It's weird though. Games like Dead Rising/Saints Row/Crackdown and even Lost Planet should not have sold as well as they did but somehow managed to. Outside of LP, they weren't highly promoted or anything. Just sold anyway.
Question for those in the business. How are contacts written in the gaming world for exclusives? Is X amount agreed on before the game goes into development and that money is used for the development process? or are there personal guarantee's made in which if the exclusive title does not hit X amount of units sold in the given timeframe the console maker would be forced to exercise the personal guarantee and pay the difference to the studio?
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
For starters, the marketing/sales discussion is the most ridiculous thing I've read in a very long time. I have never been in any company where the Marketing Department has any influence on pricing.
Marketing's job is to promote the product as best as they can with the constraints placed upon them by sales, which is in turn reflective of the relationship between production and accounting.
To say that console price is a marketing issue is to not understand the dynamics of a corporation of any magnitude.
I don't understand what's weird, Robert.
Dead Rising is probably the first game I will buy when I decide to purchase a 360. Followed by Halo 3 and the current Madden. Dead Rising is the same genre but an entirely different game than the RE series. Survival Horror is a huge genre and Dead Rising presented it in a new and unique way. I don't see anything odd about the large sales for that title, even with it being a new franchise.
Saints Row... I can't explain, a GTAIV-lite or appetizer? I'm not sure it even really sold that well, but I'll take your word for it that it did.
Crackdown was "bundled" with the Halo 3 beta memberships and that's a huge reason why it was such a success.
Also, all these games are M rated and incredibly violent action games. While not FPS, they directly target the market that is currently buying the consoles. Both the 360 and the PS3.
If you want to get to odd sales figures you'd have to look at Kameo (although that sold better than normal because it was a launch title) and Viva Pinata. But neither of those titles sold REALLY well despite a great deal of marketing and a huge push. Because the majority of 360 owners that purchased those games did so for their wives/girlfriends/children. The rest of the 360 base didn't buy those games.
The PS3 isn't selling hardware because its too expensive and its not the slightest bit more impressive than the less expensive 360.
The PS3 isn't selling software because of factors that have already been mentioned. A good majority of PS3 owners also have 360s and they are buying software for that platform instead. Because the games come out sooner on the 360, because the games look better on the 360, or because of the interaction that is provided by Live!
The other group of PS3 owners that don't also have a 360 aren't buying titles like R&C because that's not what they are interested in. Resistance sold well because it was a launch title, but also because that's what the current install base of the PS3 wants to play. UT15 (or whatever) will sell GREAT on the PS3. Games like R&C aren't going to sell well until the console is affordable for people to buy with their children in mind.
In essence, the exact same reason that R&C isn't selling on the PS3 explains the Wii's success. One is a family oriented, group experience console that is priced within easy access. The other is a designer piece of high end AV equipment.
Sony is struggling because they don't have any software for their high end AV equipment and because their performance hasn't come close to justifying their price premium.
Why spend $100 more on Harmon Kardon speakers when JBL's sound the same?
Marketing's job is to promote the product as best as they can with the constraints placed upon them by sales, which is in turn reflective of the relationship between production and accounting.
To say that console price is a marketing issue is to not understand the dynamics of a corporation of any magnitude.
I don't understand what's weird, Robert.
Dead Rising is probably the first game I will buy when I decide to purchase a 360. Followed by Halo 3 and the current Madden. Dead Rising is the same genre but an entirely different game than the RE series. Survival Horror is a huge genre and Dead Rising presented it in a new and unique way. I don't see anything odd about the large sales for that title, even with it being a new franchise.
Saints Row... I can't explain, a GTAIV-lite or appetizer? I'm not sure it even really sold that well, but I'll take your word for it that it did.
Crackdown was "bundled" with the Halo 3 beta memberships and that's a huge reason why it was such a success.
Also, all these games are M rated and incredibly violent action games. While not FPS, they directly target the market that is currently buying the consoles. Both the 360 and the PS3.
If you want to get to odd sales figures you'd have to look at Kameo (although that sold better than normal because it was a launch title) and Viva Pinata. But neither of those titles sold REALLY well despite a great deal of marketing and a huge push. Because the majority of 360 owners that purchased those games did so for their wives/girlfriends/children. The rest of the 360 base didn't buy those games.
The PS3 isn't selling hardware because its too expensive and its not the slightest bit more impressive than the less expensive 360.
The PS3 isn't selling software because of factors that have already been mentioned. A good majority of PS3 owners also have 360s and they are buying software for that platform instead. Because the games come out sooner on the 360, because the games look better on the 360, or because of the interaction that is provided by Live!
The other group of PS3 owners that don't also have a 360 aren't buying titles like R&C because that's not what they are interested in. Resistance sold well because it was a launch title, but also because that's what the current install base of the PS3 wants to play. UT15 (or whatever) will sell GREAT on the PS3. Games like R&C aren't going to sell well until the console is affordable for people to buy with their children in mind.
In essence, the exact same reason that R&C isn't selling on the PS3 explains the Wii's success. One is a family oriented, group experience console that is priced within easy access. The other is a designer piece of high end AV equipment.
Sony is struggling because they don't have any software for their high end AV equipment and because their performance hasn't come close to justifying their price premium.
Why spend $100 more on Harmon Kardon speakers when JBL's sound the same?
iceberg187
Regular
Saint's Row sold over 1 million and as far as Crackdown, it sold 1.5 million, but only 750k signed up for the beta, so at least 750k bought Crackdown for it's own merits.
Sales and Marketing have always been separate functions. No one in this thread is trying to combine them.
I am not changing goal post. It's defined by the business literature.
Since your job is pricing, then you should know that pricing is a marketing problem. Sometimes, the sales department, the product guy or even the CEO gets to define prices... but that just means that they are covering some marketing function(s).
In short, pricing is still a marketing problem.
There are many kinds of companies in this world, my friend. In practise, an entity structures itself differently based on the products, functions and regions they serve. As I mentioned, sometimes pricing may be performed by the sales people (even in the form of discounts), sometimes by the BD guy, sometimes by the product guy, sometimes by the CEO, and sometimes by the marketing proper. When these happen, it just means that these people are performing some level of marketing functions (with or without marketing background... that's another story altogether).
It is also possible for multiple people to decide pricing too (as the product shifts through the internal organizations or value chain).
Now, I am aware that in many companies, their marketing department are really marcom departments. They run trade shows, do events, schedule promotion and media slots. etc., These are marketing functions too (at more tactical level). But this does not mean that they are the only ones performing marketing functions in the company. For example, product marketing can still be performed by the product group in parallel.
The business community define pricing as a marketing issue for good reasons. It is tied inherently to the segment and products people try to sell. I am not the one defining it, and so I won't be the one apologizing for it (perhaps the business school professors will do so).
PARANOiA, it is correct and universally acceptable to say pricing is a marketing function/problem. For reference, please see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pricing
http://www.netmba.com/marketing/pricing/
Last edited by a moderator:
Robert1 said:
That was my same point a number of pages ago.
The arguement that R&C, HS, Lair, etc aren't selling well because of "appeal" ignores the fact that the Xbox 360 has had quite a few "average" titles in less-than-sexy genres that sell exceptionally well. Here are the 360 million sellers:
Halo 3 93%
Gears Of War 94%
Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion 94%
Tom Clancy Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 91%
Call of Duty 2 90%
Tom Clancy Rainbow Six: Vegas 89%
Call of Duty 3 83%
Madden NFL 07 81%
Guitar Hero II 92%
Fight Night Round 3 85%
Forza Motorsport 2 90%
Saints Row 82%
Dead Rising 85%
Lost Planet 80%
Bioshock 95%
Crackdown 83%
Madden NFL 08 83%
Project Gotham Racing 3 89%
Perfect Dark Zero 81%
Tom Clancy Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 87%
Need for Speed: Most Wanted 83%
Need for Speed: Carbon 78%
Tom Clancy Splinter Cell: Double Agent 85%
Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock 86%
Pro Evolution Soccer 6 79%
Dead or Alive 4 86%
I highlighted launch titles in red, 2006 titles in green, and 2007 titles are bold; score is Gamerankings average. The console is 2 years old and software sales have been consistantly high month-to-month. The only titles with a mean score (Gamerankings) 85% or above that haven't broken 1M copies are the following (bold are titles released in the last 3 months):
The Orange Box (96%)
Call of Duty 4 (95%)
Virtua Fighters 5 Online (92%)
Burnout Revenge (89%)
Skate (87%)
Project Gotham Racing 4 (87%)
NHL 08 (86%)
NBA 2K7 (85%)
Viva Pinata (85%)
While a couple of the recently released titles won't break 1M, putting those aside it is very telling that a total of 3 titles (Viva Pinata, NBA 2K7, and Burnout Revenge) are the only titles that didn't break 1M in sales. And two of those (Viva Pinata, 84.6, and NBA 2K7, 84.8) were rounded up
The Xbox 360 has 30 titles that rated 85% or above, and 27 broke 1M total sales (90%). ANd of the three that didn't make it one was a port (Burnout), another has had sales issues (2K, even when rated higher, has had troubles competing with EA's Live), and the other is a bipolar to the extreme (it looks like a kids game, but is a difficult sim that requires a lot of reading and time investment). No big surprises there.But you also have all the "average" titles that also sold well like Saints Row 82%, Dead Rising 85%, Lost Planet 80%, Crackdown 83%, and Need for Speed: Carbon 78%.
So, we could chip away at these titles (Halo beta bundle, marketing, more appealing) but this begs the question: Why doesn't Sony market better? Why aren't Sony's games more appealing? Why don't they do better promotions?
But I really do think those are all excuses.
A game like Heavenly Sword had a lot of buildup over a couple years and marketed strongly on the shoulders of being an exclusive title making good use of the PS3. The hardcore PS3 fans were very excited about the title, it has excellent art, extreme production values, and is in an appealing genre. And while 81% isn't off the charts, it remains a good game--and notably it scored in the same ballpark as the 5 titles I mentioned above.
And it isn't like PS3 owners are buying other software.
It is understandible if consumers are buying other software on the PS3. The difference on the 360 is night and day, as consumers bought the big titles (like Oblivion and Gears of War) but also bought the other titles.
They are finding excuses to buy games, not reasons to hold off. If it is remotely a good game, consumers are buying it on the 360. And this isn't purely a side effect of install base as the attach rate has been high from the launch, and as the install base grows the attach rate continues to rise.
We can try to explain "Zombie games sell well" (really? what non-RE games have broken 1M?), GTA clones sell well (True Crimes didn't) and so forth. The annual sequals (like Carbon) sell well, as do the Spring sequals like GRAW2 (which followed after the hot selling Lost Planet).
The reasons the 360 software sells well are multifold. The 360 has a large install base in NA (still bigger than the Wii in NA and 360 NA is larger than PS3 WW), and as can be seen a lot of those titles appeal in NA. Japan is trending differently in software (where MS is abysmal). Live, as noted above, gives (a) exposure to games and (b) incentive to pick up new titles on multiple levels. It doesn't hurt that the 360 has the perception among active gamers (notably those who would use a service like Live to communicate) of having higher quality titles/versions of software and the 360 appears to have captured a lion's share of the active gaming consumer.
The PS3 has 2M consumers in NA (how many own a 360?) and there has been a foul trend of (a) multiplatform titles being inferior (see GCN trend where non-exclusive/inferior ports typically received a stigma and suffered poor sales) and (b) many of their big exclusives have failed to live up to their hype and/or have been delayed.
While an excuse can be made for every title that doesn't sell well (install base, didn't live up to hype, inferior port, not the right genre, not enough marketing) but that misses the point that those same excuses could be used on the other side of the fence, yet they typically aren't weighing heavily with the consumer.
The clock is ticking. Sony has a short period of time to find titles that do appeal (MGS4 and KZ2 will, but what else?) and to buttress their install base to support third party titles. The $400 price drop should help, but the question is will this light a fire under software sales? And will the $400 price point allow Sony to overtake Xbox 360 sales this holiday and into 2008.
Sony really needs to see them gain ground in NA (i.e. eclipse 360 NA monthly sales) and begin seeing more activity among PS3 owners in regards to software adoption across the board. 2008 will see MS gain some price mobility that should result in increased sales so Sony needs to gain back momentum now.
And the biggest way to do that is to convince publishers their titles will sell great on their platform and to deliver killer apps at a reasonable price.
Right now they are faultering on all those points.
WOW 26 titles over 1m in 2 years and will grow by another 3-4 by the end of this year.
360 is a publisher/developers dream come true this gen. Imagine if 360 3rd party games sold like it does on the Wii/PS3. Where would the industry be at this time?
Unfortuntely we don't have a lot of firm numbers due to the fragmentation of European markets. In general (last month I did a bit of googling on this) it appears to be doing relatively better in Europe than in NA, with a number of territories it is doing better than the 360.
Which explains some of the differences in opinion as Sony is doing very well in some counties and the 360 tanking in a number of them as well. Overall it seems competitive with the 360 doing well in places like the UK and Australia, but Sony actually selling better in 2007 in most territories that I saw data on (which there isn't a lot) but the 360 having a small lead due to the early release.
Any analysis, armchair or otherwise, of Europe is pretty difficult. NPD and Media Create really open a window into their respective markets we never had before. It will be great when Europe can get on board.
The focus on NA here is multifold. Japan isn't interesting--360 is doomed there, the Wii is the phenom and the PS3 should gradually gain more and more traction. And Japan has for mainstream gaming become the "3rd" territory in importance. Most of us don't buy the software that is doing really well there, so there is a cultural disconnect. Europe is a fast growing market, but there is a lot of disparity in the territory. What is doing hot in the UK may not be so hot in Spain. None of the individual territories in Europe are huge either. Getting a pulse in Europe, with little substantial sales information over a prolongued period of time makes any sort of tracking (and educated summaries) difficult at best.
NA has the advantage of decent tracking data (even if NPD is inaccurate, the trends are meaningful in relation to eachother; even if data is +/- 10%, the same general error and error pattern would apply across all three) and isn't very fragmented. Sure, people in the south may like NASCAR better, but in general gaming tastes aren't segemented by state or other boundaries. NA is also the most wide open territory and the one with the most combined console sales. A huge portion of developers are here as well as titles targeting the audiance... oh, and this is an English speaking forum.
It would be GREAT if we had good European numbers so we could branch out our discussion. I think a lot of the themes of the discussion would be different as the dynamics and current sales situations is a lot different there. When you walk into the Japanese sales thread it is like a different world, and while not as divergent I think there would be some more tempered optimism and less pessimism all around in a European thread.
The difference of opinions among some posters can be related, to a degree, to where they are from. The influence of where you are from can be very subtle.
e.g. In NA we have one of the biggest soft drink brands (Mt. Dew) that is branded with Halo right now. A huge sports talk radio show on Thursday (Mike and Mike, with over 3M daily listeners) was talking about Guitar Hero III the other morning and of course the platform being discussed was the 360 (Golic's kids own a 360) and invariably Halo 3 was brought into the discussion. The ability to penetrate the consumer conscious, while difficult to measure, is an ellusive factor but has a lot of staying power long after initial spikes from price drops and "must have" software releases. There is more to momentum than single month sales. There are all sorts of tipping points and hitting critical mass to be self sufficient, notably for 3rd parties.
And I think that relates to this thread this way: those in NA not only are seeing the poor console/software sales, but also are seeing strong reinforcement in the media.
Those outside of NA, where the PS3 may be doing much better, may look at the numbers with hope (e.g. looking at the data as launch aligned and the potential for rapidly increasing sales as the product enters more consumer friendly pricing brackets, etc, although I don't fully agree with either approach) and won't have a feel for how these products are fairing in the court of public opinion.
This is where NPD is good for trending. Filter out the effects of single title releases or events (like price drops) and, because of the general uniformity of the region, you can see how the product is fairing in the NA market.
Japan is similar.
Europe isn't quite as simple. Each territory has its own "cap" and price sensativities as well as software/brand appeal.
I know a couple posters are quite mad at the assessment of the PS3 in NA by people in NA, but those feelings aren't exclusive to this board. Even analysts are noting that Sony's window is closing. I don't know how the $400/40GB SKU is going to be received to be quite honest. It is the holidays, and being a $400 Blu-ray player during the holidays where HDTV sales will be high it should get substantial action.
But the concern isn't really will it pass by Nintendo or Microsoft (that won't happen unless Ninny is supply constrained) but whether those hardware sales will translate to strong software sales. If Sony doesn't gain substantial traction this holiday the NA market (which is roughly 7M MS, 5M Nintendo, and 2M Sony) isn't going to become more friendly as MS and Nintendo make their first real pushes on price drops in 2008. Both will be hitting "critical mass" with substantial momentum. As I noted a couple months back Sony would have needed to outsell the competition by 100K a month to catch up by 2011 and right now they totally lack any momentum in NA.
They will get a bump in November and should see strong December sales and January has also been fairly strong. How they fair November/December to how the 360 did in 2006 (511K, 1.13M) and if it can gain parity in Feb-Mar-Apr with the Wii and 360, as well as any pricing mobility Sony may have up their sleeves, will put a pretty defining stamp on the potential the PS3 has in NA.
If they flounder this holiday and aren't able to continue retail price reductions in early 2008 the game is over for Sony in NA for market parity, let alone market leadership. 360 Oct-06 was at a 45% install base advantage over PS3 Oct-07 in NA (~2.8M to 2M, with the 360 having extremely strong Nov/Dec-06 sales), and the 360 has a 3.5x larger current install base. So the PS3 is lagging both in trending, launch aligned trending, and total market share in NA--so Sony needs to change course immediately.
Not a popular statement here (I know), but this is holiday number 3 and while a lot of "ball" is left to be played the table is set and publishers will be making their 2009/2010 bets now (if they haven't already).
I was thinking of a couple numbers I posted, and I think it may explain some of the negativity some of us have toward the PS3 in NA.
Total Install Base
Xbox 360: 7.121M
PlayStation 3: 1.981M
Difference: 359%
Launch Aligned
Xbox 360: 2.891M (October 2006)
PlayStation 3: 1.981M (October 2007)
Difference: 46%
2007 Console Sales
Xbox 360: 2.609M
PlayStation 3: 1.294M
Difference: 202%
Sony is getting beat launch aligned by nearly 50%, Sony is getting beat by over 200% in 2007 console sales, and LTD Sony is in over a 5M console hole. Sony isn't only in a hole from launching later, but their monthly sales aren't gaining them marketshare. And looking at their average monthly sales in NA (165K a month), Sony has been below that every month since January 2007 (Oct-121k; Sep 119k; Aug 131k; Jul 159k; Jun 99k; May 82k; Apr 82k; Mar 130k; Feb 127k; Jan 244k). Microsoft has had 1 month below Sony's monthly average (May 155k).
Sony lacks traction in console sales, the PS3 exclusives are not selling well, and multiplatform titles aren't selling well.
This is why many of us aren't overly positive. And I see a lot of people wanting to compare launch aligned numbers instead of LTD (I disagree with this, especially because 2007 trending isn't moving toward parity) but even then the software situation looks so bleak. Where titles like Heavenly Sword and R&C haven't took off, the 360 had a number of big sellers in 2006 and were able to generate 4M WW sales of Gears of War in a 4 month window.
People can poke holes in the relevance of my specific numbers (and vice versa) all day long, but the trends in NA are extremely dissappointing for Sony and don't bode well for solid market competition in NA between MS and Sony (which I think is a bad thing in the long run for consumers).
Does anyone have positive market spin for Sony in NA?
Total Install Base
Xbox 360: 7.121M
PlayStation 3: 1.981M
Difference: 359%
Launch Aligned
Xbox 360: 2.891M (October 2006)
PlayStation 3: 1.981M (October 2007)
Difference: 46%
2007 Console Sales
Xbox 360: 2.609M
PlayStation 3: 1.294M
Difference: 202%
Sony is getting beat launch aligned by nearly 50%, Sony is getting beat by over 200% in 2007 console sales, and LTD Sony is in over a 5M console hole. Sony isn't only in a hole from launching later, but their monthly sales aren't gaining them marketshare. And looking at their average monthly sales in NA (165K a month), Sony has been below that every month since January 2007 (Oct-121k; Sep 119k; Aug 131k; Jul 159k; Jun 99k; May 82k; Apr 82k; Mar 130k; Feb 127k; Jan 244k). Microsoft has had 1 month below Sony's monthly average (May 155k).
Sony lacks traction in console sales, the PS3 exclusives are not selling well, and multiplatform titles aren't selling well.
This is why many of us aren't overly positive. And I see a lot of people wanting to compare launch aligned numbers instead of LTD (I disagree with this, especially because 2007 trending isn't moving toward parity) but even then the software situation looks so bleak. Where titles like Heavenly Sword and R&C haven't took off, the 360 had a number of big sellers in 2006 and were able to generate 4M WW sales of Gears of War in a 4 month window.
People can poke holes in the relevance of my specific numbers (and vice versa) all day long, but the trends in NA are extremely dissappointing for Sony and don't bode well for solid market competition in NA between MS and Sony (which I think is a bad thing in the long run for consumers).
Does anyone have positive market spin for Sony in NA?
Similar threads
