I doubt it, DQIX had excellent longevity due to the social features and new maps, but we'll see.
It won't come to PC, the PC gaming market is barren in Japan. They put it on console for a reason. The west will likely never see the game.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Media Create Sales: Week 32, 2012 (Aug 06 - Aug 12)
- Thread starter donny2112
- Start date
I doubt it, DQIX had excellent longevity due to the social features and new maps, but we'll see.
I'm pretty pessimistic about the future of console MMOs in the west in general
Did Hotel Dusk really break 100k? That is impressive for a niche game.
The download cards probably are competitive with the cart versions but they aren't available on Amazon for example and then there still is the usual problems with a same priced digital game, like not being able to sell the game. Nintendo has done DD much better in the past with the Famicom Disc System and the flash rom carts for SNES. Both allowed to buy games at cheaper MSRPs than the cart versions and both were downloadable in stores. Why download cards aren't cheaper by default even though that's how Nintendo handled it in the past is hard to justify.
It's a major step backwards and comparing the 3DS to the PSP Go at this point, when it's already the only relevant console currently, isn't really a convincing angle.
The immediate flaw with your theory is that retailers are in no way "obligated" to carry these titles with the long tails. They carry them because they sell, not because they have to. Why would they want to lose a viable source of revenue to Nintendo in the long-run?
Edit:
If you download DLC for Fire Emblem, is it tied to the 3DS or downloaded to the game?
Allan Holdsworth
Member
Download cards are actually more expensive than the physical version.
Really? I thought it was common knowledge that part of reseller agreements for consoles is to carry 1st-party game content as specified by the platform holder. I mean, if they didn't do that, the whole concept of a loss-leader strategy being made up for in sales of games makes a whole lot less sense.
It also makes you wonder why retailers carry garbage 1st-party titles that don't sell if they "don't have to". I remember a lot of copies of Genji hitting the bargain bin, and any retailer should have been smart enough to see the E3 presentation and the reaction to and say "FUCK NO, I'm not carrying that, it's hardcore gamer POISON."
Those games also might still sell, but wouldn't having more copies of a new game on shelves sell more? That game is taking up space that could be occupied by a high-volume seller.
Yeah, the hardware sales are bad enough, but a 1:1 tie ratio?! That shit should be scaring Sony to DEATH.
Wouldn't it be a 2:1 (or higher) tie ratio since these numbers are for 2012?
Tie ratio is calculated by LTD hardware numbers, if I remember right. So unless 800,000 pieces of software were sold for Vita in 2011, we're still close to a 1:1 tie ratio in Japan, perhaps 1.5:1, which is still a HORRIBLE number.
terrisus
Member
But it's typically the same situation on the retailer side of things - they generally don't make much on the system, and make their profits on the games (and accessories and such). So they'll order/carry the games that are selling well (as Donny said), since that's where they're making the money.
As of the end of June:
Physical Software: 1.32 million
Hardware: 0.76 million
Ratio: 1.74
(Famitsu)
I still don't see how correcting the numbers after the decimal really improves the situation. By this time in hardware lifespan, the minimum tie ratio that a hardware maker should achieve is at LEAST 3:1. AT LEAST.
I mean, if you were just correcting to achieve pinpoint accuracy, so be it. But let's not give false hope that the tie ratio is good or anything.
Actually, the tie ratio isn't bad for a handheld at an early stage of its life. But people put WAY too much focus on tie ratios in general anyway.
The tie ratio itself is meaningless without taking into account the hardware sold. A good tie ratio means nothing with shit hardware sales. The total software sales will still be shit. Likewise, a somewhat poor tie ratio doesn't mean all that much with really strong hardware sales. The total software sales will still be strong.
It absolutely would not. Dragon Quest does not have that kind of fanbase in the west, and DQ10 itself looks incredibly outdated and inconvenient to play when placed against the western MMO juggernauts that everybody is familiar with.
How many high-volume sellers are there? Not that many.
Using Famitsu's Top 100 for 2011,
14 of the Top 100 games for 2011 were Nintendo titles which were released before 2011 (7 in 2010, 4 in 2009, 1 in 2008, 1 in 2006, 1 in 2005), all of which sold 120k+ during 2011. Five of the Top 25 for the year were Nintendo titles released before 2011. (In fact, the only games in the Top 100 which were released before 2010 were all Nintendo titles - and they had 7 of them!)
That's why retailers keep them on the shelves. They continue to sell. Oftentimes better than the new high-volume sellers.
do we know what games like DQMJ2 sold in the West?
Not sure about FE but in case of Theatrhythm it's tied to the 3DS.
I know that's up to the shops and should vary case by case but that's another thing going wrong with DD from the viewpoint of someone interested in buying the digital copy. Why does it end up with so many disadvantages, even the price being one of them?
Gotta keep retailers happy, y'know? The only alternative is the end to cheap consoles, so hardware makers can give huge margins to retailers. Cheaper prices on DD games leads to a (perhaps not as extreme) PSP Go scenario.
As for the DLC thing, I would figure that it's all academic to talk about it at the moment, as Nintendo will likely de-couple your purchases from hardware when the 3DS gets updated for the full Nintendo Network suite after WiiU launches.
AdventureRacing
Member
The loss leader strategy was never about moving 1st party. When sony and MS were employing this strategy they were mostly focusing on 3rd parties.
That just makes it even worse for the vita. It's selling badly and it has a bad attach rate.
Are people actually arguing that shops would stop stocking their best selling product?
Nintendo understands that it needs strong partnerships with retailers - because of the hardware. The big 3 (Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft) are in a very different place from the pure digital market. Steam doesn't need to worry about retailers - people buy PCs for a thousand different reasons. Ios/Android don't need to worry about retail - people buy the devices for a whole host of reasons.
That's not the case with dedicated gaming devices. The big 3 need to be able to move systems - which means they need retail to be good partners in the process. Retail plays a huge role in selling these systems. Throw Christmas into the mix (the holiday season is where all 3 sell a disproportionate amount of both hardware and software every year - and that massive chunk of sales every year comes mostly from people walking through retail outlets and grabbing something that looks like Timmy or Joe or Sue might like) and the reliance on retail becomes crucial even for software sales.
Nintendo is not going to risk pissing off its retail partners (and Microsoft has been very careful about protecting its retail partners as well). They can't survive with dedicated gaming devices without retail.
Nintendo realizes that there are people who now only buy digital. They don't want lose those sales, so they are now offering a digital solution at MSRP. Retailers won't fret about it, and the customers who want to purchase digital have that choice. The people who want to save an extra $5 or $10 can shop retail.
Sony has to be careful not to piss off its own retail partners. If digital sales become too strong on Vita, and retailers perceive the PSN pricing to be hurting their own software sales, then retailers will start to withdraw their support, and shift their shelf space to systems that still sell retail software. The hardware will be dropped or only carried in small numbers in a back corner somewhere. And Sony won't have a platform to sell anymore. It's a tricky balancing act. For now, Nintendo has chosen to stick pretty closely to MSRP for the most part so that the digital option is there, but so that retailers don't feel threatened by it.
Media Create now. 2012 software has put a distance over 2011 (thanks to Nintendo), but it's still behind 2009/2010. Probably already too behind to catch up.
Unless Nintendo shows at fall conference a 3DS mega seller or Wii U becomes an instant hit 2009 and 2010 are unreachable.
One step at the time is better than nothing. 2013 could outdo 2012 at software sales if Pokemon 3DS hits.
When they make little to no margin on hardware whatsoever? You bet that it's a concern. If they didn't stop selling it, they certainly would stop promoting or advertising it and would try to upsell a competitor's product that they continue to make higher games sales (and thus more revenue) on.
No idea. Only indication I can find is that DQMJ2 never appeared in the monthly top 10 DS games lists.
BishopLamont
Banned
The 3DS needs a core title akin to MH3G this holiday. Maybe that 7th remake game will appear. Either way I don't think AC is all Nintendo has planned for it, something else big will come, either first party or third party. Maybe Wii U will get that big game, it'll be interesting to see.
metalslimer
Member
Heh...useless fact but after this holiday all of Nintendo's E3 2010 3DS reveals will finally be out. No wonder Nintendo is going extremely slow with Wii U. 2 years later and and some of these games are finally coming out? It'll be very interesting to see whether there is another big wave of annoucements coming or Nintendo slows down a lot with the 3DS.
Ha ha - that's actually not all that bad.
FF Versus XIII was unveiled at E3 '06 before PS3 launched, and that game still isn't out.
Gran Turismo PSP was announced at E3 '04 before PSP launched, and that game didn't make it out until the end of 2009.
BishopLamont
Banned
That is pretty quick if you look at history, besides the 3DS was a rushed a bit to jumpstart the 3DS/Wii U's ecosystem before the competition get their next-gen systems out.
Count Dookkake
Member
Vita with the stability.
BishopLamont
Banned
Whens that?
Except for that statement I found your post very convincing (doesn't change the fact though that as a customer I'm not very interested in their retail DD effort). Just to confirm I understood you correctly: The two retail DD games (and whatever follows after that) are intended for a) people who only use the eShop on their 3DS and b) those who did hold off on buying a 3DS because they couldn't get their games digitally?
Edit: I guess it makes more sense with the Western market in mind. Same problem with Sony, the Japanese DD market is simpy underdeveloped compared to the West. So maybe retail DD was just launched in Japan because they'll be supporting it world wide.
In Japan it seems to openly torpedo DD and to strengthen the idea of DD being a rip off in the minds of people.
But the only competitor is pushing DD much more heavily.
Whens that?
Next week if there will be a ND ( as what happened previously hints at) if they decide to announce things there for 3DS in order to leave space for Wii U at the Fall Conference, or the Fall Conference directly.
For third parties, instead, next week we'll enter in pre TGS mode, right? So, lots of announcements from Famitsu.
electroplankton
Banned
Pokémon, Mario&Luigi, The Last Ranger, Golden Sun!
Donkey Kong Country Returns 2 instead of Mario&Luigi ( due to Paper Mario), add Zelda's teasing and it's perfect!
Well, I didn't mean for my statement to be taken 100% literally with no room for variation.
Not the best phrasing on my part.Obviously a group of consumers is developing who prefer shopping digitally. That doesn't mean they don't still go out shopping and ending up in malls or whatnot - where they could still pick up a game or two. But a group of people now exists which prefers impulse shopping digitally. For these consumers Nintendo is putting in place a system where if the impulse hits this customer, they can buy the game digitally. Without offering the digital option, Nintendo may lose that impulse sale to that consumer, and may not get that sale back at some future time in a retail shop once the impulse has passed.
I agree, sticking rigidly to MSRP pricing for the EShop is not ideal for consumers. But it isn't meant to be - it's meant to keep retailers happy. But the downside for consumers is pretty small - if they want the extra savings that retail gets, then they head out to the local shop and buy the game, or spend a minute online with Amazon and wait a couple days for the package to arrive. Or they pony up the extra few bucks and grab it off EShop.
For Nintendo, that's the balancing act that they're trying to strike between giving consumers options and keeping strong retail partnerships.
Sorry, I had just edited shortly before you replied. I agree with Nintendo trying to keep retailers happy. But that results in making their retail DD anti-consumer. As a consumer, that concerns me.
BTW, NSMB2 ranked 18 in the all time 3DS download software charts yesterday. That means 17 3DS DD games sold more than 40,000, among them Denpa Ningen no RPG and Pushblox. That isn't counting VC releases; if you add those NSMB2 still doesn't make the top 20. So eShop is doing well overall, most likely much better than Vita PSN.
BTW, NSMB2 ranked 18 in the all time 3DS download software charts yesterday. That means 17 3DS DD games sold more than 40,000, among them Denpa Ningen no RPG and Pushblox. That isn't counting VC releases; if you add those NSMB2 still doesn't make the top 20. So eShop is doing well overall, most likely much better than Vita PSN.
And look at how excited retailers are to sell that hardware, it's just FLYING off shelves. [/sarcasm]
You basically just made my point for me.
Granted, there are other problems with the Vita that need to be addressed on top of this one aspect, but retailers seem to be in no big rush to overly promote hardware that they're less likely to make money from in software sales, which is what is likely contributing to lagging sales numbers. Until Vita's other issues are rectified, we won't know just how much of a hit going cheaper on DD actually causes and what retailers would do when all other barriers on Vita sales are lifted.
How do you know it's the retailer's fault that the Vita isn't selling?
If you were a retailer, would you just accept that hardware stock you paid for isn't moving?
No, of course not, you'd push it hard, advertise the bejeezus out of it with as much point-of-sale marketing materials you can cram into the building and have your sales staff move aggressively to get the hardware moving out the door.
Notice how in most places that isn't happening? I can count.... 5 retailers I've visited that have Vita tucked away in a corner to be forgotten about. And if the situation is like that here, there's no reason to assume retailers in Japan would have a differing approach.
The 3G model which was overstocked was cleared with price reductions and memcard bundles. There's no reason to believe that retailers have a large stock of Vitas now they need to get rid off.
And no, I didn't make your point. Retailers have no alternative to the 3DS if their motive is to sabotage DD.
Exactly this.
And no, I didn't make your point. Retailers have no alternative to the 3DS if their motive is to sabotage DD.
Exactly this.
AdventureRacing
Member
I don't get it, in my experience retail shops usually shove the items that sell poorly to the back and don't push them at all. If you go into most games shops all they seem to push are the big sellers (like COD).
electroplankton
Banned
That's nice. If Nintendo keep releasing numbers for digital sales of retail games, we can understand how many units some eShop releases have sold so far.
Donkey Kong Country Returns 2 instead of Mario&Luigi ( due to Paper Mario), add Zelda's teasing and it's perfect!
Well, Mario&Luigi is handled by AlphaDream, so it's not unlikely to see it, maybe later on. But Zelda, yeah, that exists.
Opus Angelorum
Member
Most retailers have a form of buy-back for unsold stock, it's up to Sony to push it.
Chain retailers would have a fair bit of stock to move between all of their locations, yes. But it's not a matter of stock laying around somewhere, either.
It's a tricky scenario for retailers, they have to buy an amount that prevents an out-of-stock scenario but doesn't leave them with a surplus of units.
In retail, any stock that sits for any length of time becomes a strong liability. Bomba pricing on games happens because of this perceived liability, and hardware can't be moved in such a fashion typically because of slim-to-nil margin. That 3G model clearance you mentioned was likely done by selling the product at or below cost to get it out the door, since it's better to recover your costs than let a product sit on a shelf.
Since hardware makers RELY on retail to push a product, as TV and print marketing from the hardware maker only accounts for a percentage of purchasing motivation compared to retail promotion in the video games sector, the next time that retailer goes to Sony with smaller orders to fill on hardware, their Sony rep is going to say "sales are down, we NEED you to push this product".
THIS is where the difference is made.
The retailer will say "sales are slow, game sales are down because of that and you're undercutting us offering digital for cheaper than we can sell games where we make all our margins in this sector. What's in it for me to promote something that makes my company less money?" And the retailer would be completely within their right to do so.
So yeah, a lack of retailer incentive to push the product DOES get attributed to this issue. Vita is an example of a situation when retail partners are less willing to accommodate the needs of the vendor to sell the product because the hardware vendor is eroding their bottom line from the get-go.
If Nintendo went in the same direction, retailers would stop promoting EITHER handheld in that case and, in the case of major retailers that sell different products and make up the majority of game hardware sales, would say "I'd recommend a smartphone instead" and point them to that section of the retail outlet.
BassForever
Member
Why would I push the Vita (if I was in retail) when I can push a 3DS with MK7, M3DL, KH3D, MH3G, DQM, etc. These are all much easier sells to the general audience then the Vita and will make me more profit short and long term.
So it's been nearly a year since the Monster Hunter Betrayal and so far no potential big or interesting monster Hunter clone has been announced for 3DS. The following weeks and announcements should be interesting in that regard, will most 3rd Partys follow or could Sony still have convinced them that Vita is the right fit for their titles. After all PSO2, Soul Sacrifice and the rumored God Eater 2 port are on Vita.
Being on Vita would mean having less competition since MH isn't in the Plattform and also the possibility dual SKUs supporting PSP or even PS3.
Being on Vita would mean having less competition since MH isn't in the Plattform and also the possibility dual SKUs supporting PSP or even PS3.