-
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.
NPD Sales Results for September 2009
- Thread starter EviLore
- Start date
Numbers that aren't in the OP so far...
September 09:
WII WII FIT W/BALANCE BOARD : ~135K
WII MURAMASA: THE DEMON BLADE: ~35K
WII DEAD SPACE: EXTRACTION: ~10K
PS3 THE BEATLES: ROCK BAND: ~130K
PS3 NINJA GAIDEN SIGMA 2: ~40K
360 BATMAN: ARKHAM ASYLUM: ~200K
NDS KINGDOM HEARTS 358/2 DAYS: ~200K
NDS SCRIBBLENAUTS: ~195K
PSP PERSONA: ~25K
PSP GRAN TURISMO: ~20K
-----
Rough LTDs:
WII WII FIT W/BALANCE BOARD : ~8 million
WII WII SPORTS RESORT: ~1.7 million
PS3 BATMAN: ARKHAM ASYLUM: ~500K
PS3 MADDEN NFL 10: ~915K
360 BATMAN: ARKHAM ASYLUM: ~505K
360 MADDEN NFL 10: ~1.2 million
-----
Hardware LTD:
PS2: ~44.6 million
NDS: ~33.3 million
Wii: ~21.6 million
360: ~16.3 million
PSP: ~15.7 million
PS3: ~8.7 million
September 09:
WII WII FIT W/BALANCE BOARD : ~135K
WII MURAMASA: THE DEMON BLADE: ~35K
WII DEAD SPACE: EXTRACTION: ~10K
PS3 THE BEATLES: ROCK BAND: ~130K
PS3 NINJA GAIDEN SIGMA 2: ~40K
360 BATMAN: ARKHAM ASYLUM: ~200K
NDS KINGDOM HEARTS 358/2 DAYS: ~200K
NDS SCRIBBLENAUTS: ~195K
PSP PERSONA: ~25K
PSP GRAN TURISMO: ~20K
-----
Rough LTDs:
WII WII FIT W/BALANCE BOARD : ~8 million
WII WII SPORTS RESORT: ~1.7 million
PS3 BATMAN: ARKHAM ASYLUM: ~500K
PS3 MADDEN NFL 10: ~915K
360 BATMAN: ARKHAM ASYLUM: ~505K
360 MADDEN NFL 10: ~1.2 million
-----
Hardware LTD:
PS2: ~44.6 million
NDS: ~33.3 million
Wii: ~21.6 million
360: ~16.3 million
PSP: ~15.7 million
PS3: ~8.7 million
Crumpet Trumpet
Banned
Wow, pretty good for Scribblenauts.
Opiate said:
The difference between what EA was doing previously and what they're doing now is a big deal in my opinion. Before when Catwoman and James Bond were huge bombs those were just huge bombs. Now, spending a crap load of money to develop new IPs like Dead Space, Mirrors Edge, Dante's Inferno, EA Sports Active etc, that's not just money out the window, this is money being invested in new properties that will pay out for years to come. This is building a fanbase that EA can improve on with subsequent titles and these are IPs that EA can spin off into movies, which is another thing they're doing.
As I said earlier I expect within the next quarter or the quarter after that for EA to start posting a profit again, because I think a lot of their losses have to do with a fundamental shift in their business. If they keep bleeding money well then there's additional problems that still aren't being solved but I think they're on the cusp of a huge turn around.
singularity
Member
poppabk said:
Here's the problem with this analogy. Most films, and indeed film studios, lose money. Let me say that again most films lose money. The entire studio model is dependent on the one big hit. Every year the studios try to create the one, big, blockbuster that'll make them enough money to pay for all their movie failures. It's the same with the videogame industry. It's the same with books. It's the same with every publishing media. Most things fail.
I love Harmonix, but remember the early Playstation 2 games? Frequency and Amplitude, I love them. Many other people did too. But they didn't sell well. Harmoix was just *surving* through the generation. Then they launched this little thing with a plastic guitar. No one bought it. Seriously. No one bought it. It was poorly distributed, hard to find, and in low stock. But the people that did get it loved it, talked about it, got their friend to play it, and it started to sell. And sell. And sell. And now they have two titles in the Top 10.
Sure, the videogame industry is much more reliant on franchises and sequels than film, but if that's not equivalent to the likes of Juno or whatever other quirky, independent film that makes many times its profit over its lifetime, I don't know what is.
John Dunbar
correct about everything
user_nat said:
considering it could have sold as much as 132,000 last month for all we know, it's impossible to say.
Opiate said:
Well, seeing as you ask...
In my experience, there are a lot of developers who have been struggling over the last year, certainly moreso than any time I can remember in the last decade. IMO the reasons for this are complex and vary from studio to studio, but it boils down to a few key factors including
- it is harder than ever for anything less than a great game with good day one marketing support to be successful at retail due to a crowded and splintered marketplace where retailers hold the "power"
- the credit crunch and recession has limited publishers' ability and willingness to fund development on an ongoing basis, causing the cancellation of a large number of projects in Q4 2008 and making publishers more cautious about signing new projects
- studio closures and layoffs have spawned a large number of startups who are also competing for the same publisher funding and licensed projects and in a lot of cases are bidding low, which on top of established developers is driving budgets and margins down
In summary, there are more studios competing for less projects in an environment where it is harder than ever for the average individual game to make money.
Certainly there will be those studios that aren't experiencing any issues, especially those at the top of their game. Mid tier developer seem to be the ones struggling the most (but that doesn't mean most mid tier developers are struggling).
I had expected to see publishers start to sign more projects en masse to fill 2010 and 2011 product gaps left by the cull last year. That didn't really happen. I'm not expecting that now until the end of Q1 2010 after publishers get Q4 2009 results.
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
singularity said:
Do you have any sources to back this up?
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
typically one doesn't need to cite common factFlying_Phoenix said:
John Dunbar
correct about everything
but if it is so common, it should be easy to citegrandjedi6 said:typically one doesn't need to cite common fact
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
grandjedi6 said:typically one doesn't need to cite common fact
I wasn't referring to the film part, but more so when he stated that all major media as well.
ksamedi said:
Coming into this generation, EA's strategy can be broken down into two things: new IPs and alternative revenue streams (i.e. digital distribution and DLC)
The biggest mistake they made was buying into the hype that the HD twins were going to be come of the best selling systems ever made with an influx of new customers (who would be receptive towards new IP). They spent a fortune in R&D for these consoles. A lot depended on new IPs becoming huge hits since old reliable franchises (most notably Need for Speed) were stagnating and the company was slowly ending its dependence on (costly) licensed properties.
They also spent a lot of money in the purchase of new studios, such as Mythic and Bioware/Pandemic. As you may know, those major purchases haven't made back the investment. Mythic's Warhammer Online has a dwindling subscriber count that is well below their target. While Bioware hasn't been put to the test, Pandemic failed to get a Dark Knight licensed game (you know, based the action movie that ended up as one of the biggest blockbuster hits) on time. We just have to look the overwhelming success of Arkham Asylum in order to see how much revenue EA lost when the aborted the game. There was also the failure of Spore, which did not become the Sim 2-expansion cash cow they expected it to be.
We also the EA Partners publishing deal. EA offers a very generous deal with this partnership. The problem is that if the game bombs, EA is saddled with a bunch of upfront costs but gets little in return. If the game succeeds (as in the case with Left4Dead), EA doesn't make too much money due to the terms of the deal. They offered this deal in order doors opened and to get the whole publishing system fast-tracked. We'll have to see if EA is able to improve this deal into a consistent success for themselves.
The second problem is their push toward alternative revenue streams, such as the "free to play/pay to win" model and DLC. This didn't necessarily go wrong since EA has some the biggest successes out of all publishers. The problem was that this lead to ignoring the PS2 (which had a ton of users) and the Wii (a fast-selling system that competitors Activision and THQ would cash on). This was especially bad with their distribution deal for Rock Band. They allocated the hardware to the HD twins since they had the most robust online functionality and it's very expensive to make and ship the hardware from China. It's only now that
So yes, they are a very inefficient company that made a number of critical errors when entering this generation. It remains to be seen if their past focus on alternate sources of revenue and new focus on the Wii will lead to a turn around. So far, the PC and EA Sports (especially on the Wii) have become EA's breadwinners.
However, whereas previous console owners are not necessarily buying games at any given time, it seems almost assured that someone who has just bought a console will definitely buy at least one game. Maybe even a fair bit more than that, if you believe there's this big glut of people that are all about the PS3's great exclusives and have just been waiting for the price to be right.DeadGzuz said:
I'm curious about this too. Last I heard (and it was quite a while ago), PS3 hardware was bonering the fuck out of the marketplace's pants, but software sales hadn't moved much. Any new data?
TunaMarshmallow
Member
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
If only that was actually true :lolJohn Dunbar said:but if it is so common, it should be easy to cite
Well, for example, television shows often fail to survive, let alone provide a profit. Thus the TV industry has to rely upon DVD sales, the few big hits and toy sales (for kid shows) in order to stay afloat.Flying_Phoenix said:
And, as singularity said, the same is true of video games. Except video games don't have DVD sales and such to help support them (though one could make the argument that downloadable content is becoming the industry's safety support). Also you have to remember that for every 1 game released, there's probably like 3-4 games that were canceled and never saw the light of day, yet still cost the company money and time to work on.
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
The film industry relies on its sure thing blockbusters like Transformers to pay the bills and pay for the smaller releases, the odd one of which will become a blockbuster like Juno or My Big Fat Greek Wedding providing massive returns.singularity said:
My Big Fat Greek Wedding brought in roughly a third of what Dark Knight brought in, does anyone really think that any game with 1/40th of Halo3's budget could bring in one third of Halo3's revenue? You are talking selling a million copies at the full $60 price with a budget of maybe a million dollars if we are being generous just to match Halo3's opening day.
PS Rumor has it that MTV were losing money on every copy of Rock Band 1/2 sold http://weblogs.variety.com/the_cut_scene/2009/02/rock-band-is-losing-money-for-mtv.html
John Dunbar
correct about everything
ZAK said:
the software sales from the ~500,000 new ps3 owners are divided between hundreds of games. combined with the fact that there really weren't many big releases this month, it's not really surprising there isn't any major shift in software sales against systems with userbases of many millions more (also note that it's not like 360 and Wii had no new owners this month).
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
grandjedi6 said:If only that was actually true :lol
Well, for example, television shows often fail to survive, let alone provide a profit. Thus the TV industry has to rely upon DVD sales, the few big hits and toy sales (for kid shows) in order to stay afloat.
And, as singularity said, the same is true of video games. Except video games don't have DVD sales and such to help support them (though one could make the argument that downloadable content is becoming the industry's safety support). Also you have to remember that for every 1 game released, there's probably like 3-4 games that were canceled and never saw the light of day, yet still cost the company money and time to work on.
Oh I wasn't referring to things like one film releases, but more so the system as a whole.
In short I wasn't referring to that most TV shows make a profit just on air, but more so after being on air on DVD, syndication, etc. Actually that would be a bad example because most TV shows don't see profit period, but I think you know what I mean (and keep in mind I was thinking of more mass media than film).
EDIT - I've taken Mass Comm. classes I know all about this. It's just that I misunderstood.
John Dunbar
correct about everything
grandjedi6 said:If only that was actually true :lol
aye. very few things are more dangerous than a "common fact" that isn't actually true*.
*i have no idea is this particular common fact true or not, just that people always say it and i've never seen a good source for it.
singularity
Member
OK. Here's a couple I could find in short notice.Flying_Phoenix said:
http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/btm/feature/2008/06/24/indie_death/index.html
Focuses mostly on "independent", but you can draw parallels to small to independent game developers quite easily
Here's a story about the book publishing business
http://www.printthis.clickability.c...//nymag.com/news/media/50279/&partnerID=73272
poppabk said:
It's actually far more common in video games than it is in films. Not only can can games with far smaller budgets match one third the revenue, they can match 1/1 the revenue: Nintendogs did exactly that. If Brain Age didn't, it came close.
The original Sims. Wii Sports. Wii Fit. Bejeweled.
And this is before we even begin to discuss the ascension of casual gaming on the PC and handheld gaming in general: without naming a specific game, both of these events mark the mass adoption of a gaming style that is universally lower budget in its approach. It's one of the reasons why the video game industry is so messed up: unlike the movie industry, there is not a clear path where larger budgets yield larger profits or revenue.
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
You haven't seen a good source on it because the best sources are offlineJohn Dunbar said:
John Dunbar
correct about everything
grandjedi6 said:You haven't seen a good source on it because the best sources are offline
pffft, if it ain't on wikipedia, it ain't true.
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
John Dunbar said:
I have taken mass comm classes and it's definitely true for the film medium. There's no way film companys' can only make a profit through the theater. You can't have something that was budgeted for $200 million and expect to recoup when you're only getting like (just pulling numbers out of my ass) 10 or 20% of $8 ticket sales. The profit comes when you release the DVD, video rentals, put it on HBO, and allow it to show on TNT three years down the line.
The same can be send with TV, especially with TV losing viewership to things such as the internet (Youtube, Facebook, MySpace), videogames (Nintendo DS, Nintendo Wii, iPhone, Farmville), etc.
The thing that's happening now is that these AAA games are getting so big that they can't really support themselves with one release. This is comparable to say if that films only had DVD to support them for example. I mean yeah it's the main source of income, but it's not enough. This is why publishers are pushing "downloadable content" (we've had them for years they're called mods and updates) so much because it's another form to make profit separate from the initial retail release.
Gaming use to have another form of profit called "the arcades", however gaming more so started on that and instead of publishers trying to find a way to keep both arcades and consoles afloat they decided to just jump on consoles full force (which at the time is understandable). I guess what people are trying to say is that for gaming to go forward it needs more ways to support itself. Then again, gaming /= films. Also is this what we really want in games?
singularity said:
I already knew about films but I guess you didn't see the edit. Also unless I'm reading it wrong that article states that the average book does pull a profit. Though that is all some very nice and informative information.
John Dunbar
correct about everything
Flying_Phoenix said:
now i'm no expert (although i do post on a video game message board), but i've been under the impression studios get at least 50% of box office. i've even seen mentioned that the studios' share for the opening weekend is as much as 90% (at least for the big releases) and cinemas make most of their money by selling popcorn and other crap.
singularity
Member
One more for good measure.Flying_Phoenix said:
http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/may2007/pi20070518_884011.htm
Then remember that Sony's profits feel the following year, partly because they didn't have a Spider-Man like blockbuster to buoy their loses in other divisions.
The keyword here is "tentpole".
CadetMahoney
Member
PistolGrip said:Not if you count worldwide
elrechazao said:
Definite meme potential that one (if it isn't one already)/ :lol
npd results. . . "but
Version 3.0
Member
Back on the hardware front...I was going to post these earlier, but didn't have internet access for a bit.
Launch aligned U.S. Sales:
You can see how much trouble the Wii is in: it's the best-selling system in US history at this point in its life, and even over the past few months during all the whining, it had not been trending any worse than the previous titans, the GBA and PS2.
And you can see the nice upward tick on the end of the PS3's line. The question is, can its new model turn around the business? It can be done--just look at the DS. It was a late bloomer here in the US.
Current Gen chart:
A real-time chart rather than a launch-aligned one shows the crossing streams as they actually occurred; the Wii shooting up the ranks, the 360 slowly moving past the PSP, and the epic DS-PSP battle that occurred before the DS found its stride.
Launch aligned U.S. Sales:
You can see how much trouble the Wii is in: it's the best-selling system in US history at this point in its life, and even over the past few months during all the whining, it had not been trending any worse than the previous titans, the GBA and PS2.
And you can see the nice upward tick on the end of the PS3's line. The question is, can its new model turn around the business? It can be done--just look at the DS. It was a late bloomer here in the US.
Current Gen chart:
A real-time chart rather than a launch-aligned one shows the crossing streams as they actually occurred; the Wii shooting up the ranks, the 360 slowly moving past the PSP, and the epic DS-PSP battle that occurred before the DS found its stride.
evilromero
Member
I didn't even think about Metroid Prime Trilogy till just now. But damn.
singularity
Member
Here's a good piece on movie financing (this is actually part 3 of the series, but this one mostly deals with revenue)John Dunbar said:
http://www.boxofficeprophets.com/column/index.cfm?columnID=8359
But yes, you're right. After box office, film has many other opportunities for revenue (home theatre, tv licensing, etc) that games don't so the comparison isn't perfect. The games industry is getting better (well, unless you're a consumer) at maintaining sales and revenue post launch (see Valve, Halo/bethesda DLC. I'm not going to cite WoW since that really is an aberration) but there are still growing pains. My point was that, regardless of the medium, most things lose money. Studios will come and go.
singularity
Member
As a side note, to be considered "successful" a non-fiction book has to sell 5000 copies (think about how much the average book sell)
With that in mind, seeing Scribblenauts at #13 makes me happy for 5th cell. I expect good things from them in the future. Because if Scribblenauts can be funded entirely on the non-charting Drawn to Life games, imagine what these profits can fund in the future.
With that in mind, seeing Scribblenauts at #13 makes me happy for 5th cell. I expect good things from them in the future. Because if Scribblenauts can be funded entirely on the non-charting Drawn to Life games, imagine what these profits can fund in the future.
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
Man, the Wii is doing so poorly that its not even charting on the legend. :'(Leondexter said:Launch aligned U.S. Sales:
kkaabboomm
Member
user_nat said:
i'm wrong - ignore me here.
a Master Ninja
Member
Wii Sports Resort does NOT come with a remote.kkaabboomm said:
kkaabboomm
Member
a Master Ninja said:
orly? shows how much i know about it...and i've planned on getting it for a while, too. i stand corrected. in that case...i have no idea.
akilshohen
Member
Those movies are damn near the same as the SAW movies. Madea Goes to Jail made almost if not 100mil+ at the box office.Boombloxer said:
manueldelalas
Time Traveler
They were well known before release because the companies behind them marketed them; which is not the case of EA games. EA games selling like shit is EA's fault (as I said before, they are not thinking of customers when making their games, no matter how great those are, and the marketing was insufficient...).JGS said:
JGS said:
Because Dead Space and Mirrors Edge were not well known? You had to live under a rock to not know those games were out with all the commercials, especially for Mirrors Edge. Dead Space even had a fucking DVD release tie in :lol
The commercials sucked ass though so it could be more of a question of bad advertising on EA's part
And EA Active got an insane amount of advertising in prime time, even sponsoring the Biggest Loser TV show. GAF might not have known it was coming but GAF is often ignorant to what actually goes on in the real world.
The point was that the gaffer was trying to say that its hard to launch a new IP (which is true) but claimed that was why Dead Space and Mirrors Edge were not well known and thats why they suffered or did not bust out with millions in the first two months