One columnist finds himself playing XBLA more than Wii for his 'casual gaming fix', so he writes a column branching his feelings as the reality of the marketplace? Why is Zonk posting this 'column' anyway? It is all 100% of one person's feelings.
Here is some real information. Most casual games and gamers are on the PC. Most casual gamers are females. XBLA was not originally intended for what it became which is why the model for game releases cannot be met (there are weeks where there have been no releases or, worse, something worthless like Kameo Uno Theme Pack). People buy Xbox 360s for Gears of War, not to play UNO online. There is a reason why Gears of War has sold so much (which contradicts our "insightful" columnist).
It has been said that console companies were leaving much money behind on the table by failing to penetrate the huge casual gamers (on PCs). If a console ere to do that, it would sell and sell and sell. There is a current console out there that appears to be doing that. And, by looking at Japanese sales charts for the unbundled 'casual games', I see Wii Sports and Wii Play in the top ten weekly with the occasional first week of sales of a PS2/PSP game (which then immediately disapears from the chart). The rest of the top 30 are DS games.
Imagine if someone wrote a column where he "felt" that the PS3 was an 'incredible value' at its price. Would Zonk call it an 'article'? Sales data would refute the idea that most customers find the PS3 'an incredible value at its price' which is why no one would take seriously of such an opinion. So why is this story, which is one columnist's opinion, even linked on Slashdot?
A columnist can feel whatever he wants, but the market and sales data are the reality. Zonk linking to such opinion pieces is not helping readers understand what is really going on.
I suppose we can add Wii Sports to the list of horrible gimmick and novelty games along with...
-Nintendogs (sold around 9 million by now I believe) -Sims (best selling PC game) -Myst (second best selling PC game) -Brain Age (sold millions but not sure how much)
I remember when I first played the NES. The light gun was cool but the Duck Hunt game lost its appeal quick. That Super Mario Brothers game? Get big by eating mushrooms? Gimmick. And what was with that new controller with its 'D-pad'? I went back to the REAL controller of the joystick with my hardcore games on the Commodore 64 thinking exactly on the line of 'novelty' and 'gimmick'.
Twenty years later, I am a little wiser. I know hardcore gamers would be more accurately labeled as 'addicted' gamers. And watch the young kids as the younger generation breaks for the Wii. They will grow up with the Wii-mote and consider it standard while the 'omg hardcore' players become seen as old cranks touting how awesome the classic controller and 'epic games' are.
I know this because I am currently seen as an 'old crank'. I still think the joystick is awesome and that my 'epic games' went downhill to these awful JRPGs. The "hardcore" gamers believe they have a 'future'. They never did in previous generations.
Please, everyone, stop using VG Charts as a source for 'information'. The site uses other people's data and performs its own 'adjustments'. This would not be bad if VGCharts would tell us what these 'adjustments' were. Don't trust any sales information that doesn't reveal how it obtained its data. The maker of VG Charts is using other charts' data (such as Media Create, Famitsu, and NPD) and applying his own 'adjustments' to claim it his own. See all the advertising on that site? Yeah.
But the goal is to sell software, not hardware. If Blu-Ray becomes the successor to DVDs (low probability), PS3 MIGHT sell because it has a Blu-Ray player. But this does nothing to boost the software sales (where all the money is).
Look at the PSP. PSP's great selling point is a portable video player. Hardware is selling but the software sales are very low. By adding all these 'non-game' functions into the console, Sony has given incentive to consumers' entertainment time to be spent on something other than games.
The methodology is not published. Much of VGCharts data is taking Media Create and NPD numbers and adding or multiplying whatever the person (behind VG Charts) decides.
If you want real information, use what the industry uses. For Japan, there is Media Create and Famitsu which is public and published weekly. For United States, you have NPD each month which tracks 60% of stores and uses estimates for the other 40% (which includes Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is definately factored in). For Europe, it is harder since trackers seem varied for each country. UK's data is published as is France and Spain.
We'll know more when we get the NPD info for January and any European data for PS3's performance. But it is very grim for PS3 in Japan as it sells around 20,000 each week compared to Wii's 85,000. If Wii stopped selling today in Japan, the PS3 would catch up to Wii's yield sometime in October of 2007. DS yield is about to surpass the GBA yield in Japan. Wii's sales are so far matching the momentum of PS2 in Japan. If Wii keeps selling at its standard 80,000 a week, it will soon be outselling the PS2 at a similiar time in its lifestyle.
Anyway, please don't cite VG Charts. The guy behind it tries to advertise his site like mad and is probably trying to get money off it. Not that getting money off it is wrong, but that he is taking other sources' data like Media Create and adding in God knows what numbers (VG Charts methodology is not shared so therefore cannot be trusted).
Of all the retailers that are tracked, the ones that are not (40%) are estimated. Wal-Mart is definately included.
Microsoft measures its sales as shipped to retailers, not in consumer hands. There is not only a discrepancy in Microsoft's 360 hardware, but in its software as well. Gears of War has shipped 2.7 million copies, but this is not reflected in independent tracking. Why? These are shipped numbers. Microsoft is still a far way from getting 360s in ten million customers' hands.
Trust independent trackers before you trust a press release from any company...
"1.1 million sold in USA alone tells me that they probably didn't meet their 4 million target, but I don't think they would have been pretty close"
NPD multiplies the estimates differently for each console. The lowest multiplier is used for Nintendo's machines (why this is, I don't know).
The reason why people like Patcher or others who get the numbers are so scratching their heads is because the software numbers are too high for both DS and Wii, higher than normal. We knew the attachment rate of Zelda: Twilight Princess would be high, but it is absurdly high (Wii's high software sales are even more surprising considering the Wii comes with a pack in game). To be fair, it is probably a little higher on both the Wii and DS hardware count. PSP looks like it is overstated (you want to see bad software sales? Look at PSP).
I just wish there was an alternative to the NPD. It is bad for the games industry to just have ONE main tracker for all of United States. In Japan, there are several (such as Media Create and Famitsu). Without competition, NPD can be sloppy and get away with it.
Star Trek was one of the last refuges of classical theater on television (as well as with the movies). The actors were brilliant (even many of the guest actors). The scripts were very classical in nature (well, most of them). Star Trek did not insult your intelligence (with the exception of Voyager and Enterprise perhaps). I like how a Star Trek episode can openly start with discussions on shakespeare and have an episode just about that theme (ex: DS9: "Improbable Cause" / "The Die is Cast"). Star Trek also had a nice orchestra accompanying it.
People did not watch "Best of Both Worlds" to find insight on the "human condition". They did so because it was fantastic TV; it was awesome theater. While Star Trek I could be considered 'very sci-fi', Star Trek II and III were tragic operas (I am using 'Tragedy' in its classical sense. It is over-used today to refer 'something bad' which is not what tragedy means). ST IV was more comedic. (Let's pretend ST V didn't exist.)
Star Trek began to fail when it lost track of that sense of classic theater. No one would call Voyager or Enterprise great operas. The comedy parts of DS9 fell flat (ugh at the Ferengi episodes). What I'm saying is this:
The Original Series did not become great television because of 'philosophy', 'definition of life', or all that. It became great because of "City on the Edge of Forever" and "The Trouble with Tribbles". While the first movie was all sci-fi, full of philosophy and the 'definition of life', this was quickly dropped for what really made ST great: classical theater that we saw in Wrath of Khan (and following movies).
The Next Generation did not become great because of sermons on euthanasia or trouble between races. TNG became great because it became great theater with "Best of Both Worlds" and episodes like "Redemption".
While DS9 initially tried the TNG route at first, it abandoned it and found its best episodes in things that were totally possible outide regular sci-fi. "Duet", "The Visitor", "In the Pale Moonlight" etc.
The poster is correct when he says that 'new technology' was fun to watch in Star Trek. He is right because entertainment is dependent on surprise. If TNG or DS9 were 'retro' episodes (referring to the past like Enterprise), there would be no edge of our seat that "Best of Both Worlds" or the Dominion War had. We'd know the ending so the surprise would be ruined. Voyager at least could be surprising (Voyager had no ramifications, damn that reset button), but we knew how Enterprise would end. We want to see new technology because we want to be SURPRISED at new events, not re-living old events. We know how the Kirk and Spock saga ends, there is no surprise. Hence, any movie about it will not be entertaining.
My fear is that some ex-agent or swaggering ive league will get in control at Paramount and totally miss how Star Trek had classical theater at its core. Instead, they will think, "Ahh! Let's reduce Star Trek to only its icons: Kirk and Spock. Let's just talk about their 'relationships' as well as the early crew of the Enterprise. To spice this up, let us borrow from horror movies, action movies, and all since that is what the public likes to see. And, yes, TONS of special effects!"
This is tons of BS. There's always been this myth, by very defensive B5 fans for some reason, that Paramount had to steal everything from JMS because, apparently, no one had talent or creativity at Star Trek. It's funny that many of these same B5 fans have jumped on the Battlestar Galactica bandwagon when the showrunner, Ronald Moore, was a writer (and producer) for DS9.
DS9 was designed as a reaction to TNG. B5 was never in DS9's thoughts as DS9's 'competition' was from TNG the first two years and Voyager afterward. TNG writers were annoyed how the characters on TNG got along so nicely, how there were little repurcussions so DS9 was designed for friction and repurcussions. There was no actual planned 'story arcs' (like JMS did with B5) as DS9 was more spontaneous. For example, the Klingon War came from nowhere in the 4th season. When TNG went off the air, the DS9 writers 'owned' the Federation and would come up with things no one was expecting (Section 17, the Changeling Virus, etc).
The idea of story 'arcs' were nothing new. TNG was filled with several of them. Before B5 was on the air, DS9 was slowly building up story arcs starting with the Bajorans such as the Circle to subties of the Dominion in Season 2. Then, each season, the writers intentionally ramped the story arc higher and higher without fully knowing where it would go. The seeds for DS9 were already well planted in TNG in episodes like "Ensign Ro" or the episodes with the Cardassian War. But I suppose TNG miraculously stole those from B5 in the late eighties too.
One could point out that JMS copied from Star Trek more with B5. At the end of B5, JMS creates as Federation (*cough* I mean the Alliance *cough*) raises all the characters to almost near saint-like levels (*cough* the Blessed Sheridan *cough*), time-travel paradoxes (Valin) and ends the great war between Shadows and Vorlons with Picard like dialogue and diplomacy (talk about lots of speeches!). Babylon 5 was a good show. But there's a reason why it isn't aging so well.
(And why is it that JMS never makes a mistake? If there is a bad episode, bad plot move, or something a fan complains about, JMS seems to always point his finger at "the network" or some other entity messing up his 'Hamlet for the 21'st Century' or whatever. JMS does get a little full of himself...)
Star Trek was one of the last vestiges of classical theater you would see on TV. There were episodes that bested "The Best of Both Worlds" such as "The Visitor" and "In the Pale Moonlight". The major difference with B5 and DS9 is that JMS knew where he wanted B5 to end. To him, the show was all the 'interesting stuff in the middle'. But with DS9, the writers had no idea how the show would end which made it more spontaneous, less predictable, and, IMO, interesting. Very unique to DS9 was how the secondary characters (Garak, Dukat, etc.) grew so three dimensionally that they rivaled the main characters. You never saw that in B5 (since that show was plot based).
Even if B5 had bigger budgets, better production, etc. that would not have helped. As Voyager and especially Enterprise proved, big budgets are nothing without the writing. As Battlestar Galatactica has proven, good writing, despite the budget, can work wonders. DS9 went on for seven seasons, and is still being watched today, not because it stole from Babylon 5 but because there was talent behind the show (it helps when all the actors, except for Dax, were Shakepearan actors. One of the requirements to be a klingon, for example, was to be a shakespearan actor to have that 'intensity').
JMS is nowhere near as talented as his cultists wish to believe. You can find the same exact plot of Babylon 5 in the video game "Star Control 2" (including similiar uses of Hyperspace, Third Space, the 'great war', and so on). Is this because Reiche III and Fred Ford stole from JMS too? No! It is because both drew from the same SF stories. What a surprise!
Don't let the JMS Cultist mentality rob you from enjoying one of the best sci-fi... no, television shows... that came on television (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=274687315 2102171339).
The lawsuits against Lik-Sang are fairly petty. Copyright violation of putting parts of the PSP manual online. Trademark violation for shipping PSPs to the UK. And so on. The purpose was to keep suing as Lik-Sang could not afford all these expensive court battles. This is the same way Sony destroyed Bleem!. Looks like Sony learned something from the Immersion lawsuits.
The UK Courts went along with this, I suspect, more due to the taxation they lose on importers.
Sony's interest in all this:
-Price fixing (PS3s are cheaper in Japan than everywhere else. This price fixing alone should remove the 'region free' attitude Sony pretends to embrace. (Importing a Japanese PS3 would probably be cheaper than buying one locally.)
-Blu-Ray is not region free. Importers ruin the Blu-Ray Domination scheme.
You are confusing shipped versus sold. Microsoft has sold worldwide between 4-5 million. It is nowhere near 8 million. (Wii and PS3 will easily catch up to those numbers.) 360 has no competition yet which bodes ill for these current lackluster sales. If Microsoft keeps selling at this rate, it will be lucky to match the original Xbox sales (currently, Microsoft is behind the original Xbox numbers).
Also, Japan's game sales have been expanding at an insane level lately (thanks due to the DS). The total of Japanese hardware sold is ahead of the total hardware sold in the United States. So, no, Japan is no longer the smallest. It is currently the fastest growing market.
"If they start early, maybe they won't repeat the mistakes of the past? When it comes to hardware and consoles, i find that Microsoft is actually one of the only company that listens to it's user base and try to meet and improve on their expectations. They actually learn from past mistakes."
This is precisely the error. The entertainment business is dependent on surprise. How do you poll people asking, "What will surprise you?" This is why Xbox 360 sales are lackluster despite a few people 'absolutely loving' their 360s.
Almost two years ago if someone pointed to this dual screened mutant and said,
-It would lead a gaming renaissance in Japan, making the Japanese game market larger than America so far in the year 2006.
-It would outsell the PSP in all markets.
-It would be very popular among girls too.
-And popular among older people with a game called 'Brain Age'. This demographic the industry thought was impossible to reach.
-Animal Crossing Wild World would outsell Final Fantasy 12 in Japan (could Final Fantasy 3 outsell FF12?)
-A game called Nintendogs will outsell Halo and is set to outsell Halo 2.
-Companies like Electronic Arts will struggle on the system as they do not know how to deal with disruption technology. But smaller companies like Atlus shall rise.
-Let's not forget a new 2D Mario (after fifteen years) turning the markets on fire everywhere.
You would think the person had gone mad. And many people thought Nintendo had gone mad in late 2004 (just as many thought they had gone mad with the Wii)
Where is the PSP? Well, the software for the PSP is abysmal in Japan. The DS sales lead over the PSP in Japan is so gigantic that if you begin to combine PSP markets, the PSP still doesn't outsell the DS.
So what is different? Nintendo sees the DS's true competition of those who aren't interested in games at all. The company mission is taking affect: "Make as many gamers as possible."
Two years ago...
-Japan had been in a slow decline and analysts were wondering if it worth the effort to 'win' Japan anymore.
-Everyone predicted the PSP would do to the DS what Playstation did to the Nintendo consoles.
-America's game market was extremely healthy with blockbusters like GTA: SA and Halo 2.
-Nintendo was about to go third party.
Now...
-Japan's game market is now bigger than America's and is rapidly expanding.
-Everyone's lofty PSP predictions now have egg on their face.
-America's game market has been in free-fall since 2004. People are ignoring this issue and calling it a 'transition period' without mentioning that the next-gen systems out such as the PSP and Xbox 360 are not growing the market in any way.
-Nintendo swims in profits.
Anyone who believes the seventh generation of consoles will match the PS2 era is deluding themselves. Let the Seventh Generation of Consoles be known as the Fragmentation Era as the games market is dividing into seperate realms.
Why the above post, stuffed with a cliche, is labeled 'informative' I will never understand. But I do know the parent poster is incorrect.
Gaming is not and has never been mainstream (especially when you account for population growth). In North America, the console penetration has never exceeded 33% (which was achieved during the NES days). Most of the growth coming into the industry has been from multiple console ownership. Many gamers just got more 'hardcore'. And the best selling video game is still Super Mario Brothers 3.
Actually, the game industry is currently very sick. While it is true that in the 1980s, there were many smaller game companies. But what the parent poster does not say is that the industry was designer based. When production values skyrocketed (thanks Wing Commander), the industry shifted to a publisher based format. Now, developers work FOR the publishers, not for gamers. The ever increasing costs are why design oriented companies such as Origin had to be bought by Electronic Arts. These costs were already bad last generation and will just get worse now. There is a very large talent vacuum that is waiting to be filled. But with publishers controlling the industry, this is unlikely to change.
People believe the myth that gaming is now 'mainstream' mostly because the marketing budgets have EXPLODED. These marketers also want you to believe that gaming is 'mainstream' and that nerds are actually 'hardcore' gamers (notice the labels?). Do you think they want to tell you the truth that you are a bunch of nerds in an industry no one takes seriously? Of course not. With Sony moving into the industry as well as Microsoft, their vast influence has created the perception that 'gaming is now mainstream'. Even games such as GoldenEye 007 on the N64 sold more than the much vaunted Halo 2 ever did for the Xbox. But don't expect Microsoft to be honest with the numbers. Their marketing wouldn't allow it. For an example of such marketing, the Xbox sold only around 20 million consoles, most regionally. It is marketed as 'a wild success'. Many people are stunned when I show them the sales numbers. "What? Super Mario Sunshine outsold Halo?" Yep. My point here is to show how influential marketing has been on creating the perception that gaming and certain games (such as Halo) are more popular than they actually are.
This doesn't mean gaming has to stay niche. There are big moves to make gaming truly mainstream. The Sims is the best selling PC video game ever made (this isn't including expansions). World of Warcraft has expanded the MMORPG market to casual players. Nintendo's Nintendogs and Brain Age has pushed gaming more into untraditional demographics such as girls and, curiously, the elderly (who everyone said were impossible to reach).
The article does point out an important lesson between Ultima Underworld and the FPS: the simple, easy to learn game wins. The complicated hardcore game loses. Nolan Bushnell discovered this when Computer Space flopped and Pong became a huge success. In the same way, this is why games like World of Warcraft succeeded was by eliminating many of the 'hardcore' elements that kept away casuals from MMORPG games. The touch-screen of the DS broke down the interface wall between gamer and non-gamer to allow many people to play Brain Age or Nintendogs who wouldn't normally get into a game. The Wii resembling a TV remote control will be a step as a bridge in that direction.
But no, gaming is no where close to being mainstream. Stop believing the marketers and face the truth: you are a nerd.
If you're more interested in making excuses than actually creating entertainment, then you are right, it is impossible. But you do prove my point.
Why do you need 3d graphics and an orchestra sound track? There are many markets that are possible without these absurd production values. You have web-based games, you have the cell phone market, you will now have the Virtual Console and Xbox Live (Mutant Storm and Marble Blast are now currently on Xbox Live, they are better known than you think).
Nintendo created a massive best seller in the game of Brain Trainer made by a few people within three months. The game has no graphics. There is no soundtrack. There are no cinematics. Yet, the game is selling very strongly over all demographics throughout the world. This should be an inspiration.
The problem is not that it is impossible for a few people to make games. The problem is that today's gamers believe a game must be a cinematic experience. Also, indepedent game developers are woefully ignorant on salesmanship and working the market.
Is there a New York Times best written list of books? No! There is only a best SELLING list. While people can debate what is the 'best' game, in the end it comes to sales. It is more imporant for artists and developers to be able to SELL a game rather than have the 'talent' to create 'masterpieces'. This is true for writers, for musicians, and any one else in the creative field. You must know the business side.
In the old days, developers knew the business side. After all, they would make their game and have to tell the publisher how to do it! Now, game developers work more for the publisher instead of the other way around. With those high budget games, the developers need the publishers' money. I've noticed the early developers understand how the market works better than these new developers who are literally working for the publisher instead of the market itself.
There is absolutely nothing stopping you from making the next 'Tetris' or 'Brain Age'. Nothing except your pre-concieved conclusion that it is 'impossible'.
What! Who says it takes millions to make a video game? It actually doesn't take much money at all. The biggest barriers today are the ones we have created in our head.
I've worked with Garage Games and you can easily create a game even with their engine. Where do you think Marble Blast Gold and Mutant Storm came from? Even the Wii's development kit is cheap enough that a regular person can buy one.
The big problem with independent development is that they often try to compete with big publishers' games and/or they make games for themselves. Would you see them make games for girls or elderly like Brain Age? No. Nintendo has said they had a problem with new people because they want to make games because of "Final Fantasy, Zelda, and Mario." So Nintendo has to 'un-train' them and not have them think of games in those terms. There is much opportunity for game makers today. In fact, probably more now than ever since everyone says they are 'bored'.
But to the original post, we are already at the point where the market is regressing. This has been occurring for the past five years drastically in Japan and reversed only with the success of the DS there. In America, the market has begun to slide; transitional year my butt. Transitional year does not last several years!
...is in its library. The best selling consoles always have the largest libraries. Take any generation of any console or handheld, and you will find this to be true. Even the Gameboy, with four shades of green, outsold competitors like Atari and Sega with color handhelds. Why? Because the Gameboy had a superior gaming library.
The PS1 and PS2 outsold its competition due to its superior library. No one gives a damn about the hardware. If the PS2 broke down, people would buy another because of their gaming library.
The DS is outselling the PSP because... of its library. The PSP library is not exactly diverse or as interesting. More importantly, the DS's library hits more demographics than the PSP does (thanks to the Brain games, to Nintendogs, and the rest). PSP's software keeps hitting the same demographic. Since handhelds do not follow the console cycles, whoever wins the handheld war will be the victor for probably the next ten years.
The victor of the console war will be the one with the largest library? Which console had the most playable games at E3 this year? Nintendo. Which console will have the most available software upon launch? Most likely, Nintendo.
Nintendo's dirty little secret is that, not only has the company completely restructured in the last few years, Nintendo has been expanding their software development studios like crazy in both Japan and America. Nintendo intends to flood the market with quality content.
Xbox 360 and PS3 have a big strike against them with software creation. By jumping on the HD bandwagon, their games will take more time to be made, are riskier to make, require bigger teams, and are much more expensive. The Wii is extroadinarily cheap to develop for. The Wii's development kit costs around $2000, cheaper than even the PSP's.
The fact is that third parties are interested in making money, not playing fan boy. The Wii is very attractive to publishers as it represents a low cost revenue stream which is desperately needed today. The Wii is very attractive to developers because of the controller and the innovation it allows.
The Wii will end up putting out more software, on a faster basis, than either Sony and Microsoft's machiens. Even worse for them, the Wii attempts to have the largest gaming library ever with the NES, SNES, N64, Genesis, and Turbographix 16 games on the Virtual Console.
No one cares about the console itself. People care about the library. People buy the PS2 today not because they like Sony but because it gives them access to a large game library. Nintendo realizes that with the N64 and Gamecube, they were competing too much on a hardware basis. Now, Nintendo is focusing and investing heavily in the software.
Then, add in the vast price differences of a $600 machine, $400 machine, and a less than $250 machine. Nintendo is definately re-surging. The most comical part is if Nintendo does take the top spot, analysts will have so much egg on their faces. It was only a year or two ago when people were asking if Nintendo would leave the console business...
While this is true, people rely on the 'shipped' numbers only because it appears in the financial statements the companies send out to their shareholders. After all, these companies get their money from the retailers of where they shipped.
However, if someone took those financial statements at face value, they don't have a clue how those statements are to sell the company to the investors. In other words, those statements crafted for sales purposes. The bean-counters on GAF cannot tell the difference. One of the reasons why Sega was destroyed financially was because they believed those financial statements of shipped to retailers meaning actual sales. If a company does not find out how many systems are being sold to customers, they will have an accounting mess as occurred with the early days with the Saturn.
Here is the sales performance of the 7th Generation systems so far...
-Europe-
Xbox 360- Better than the original Xbox so far. This is the Xbox 360's true success so far in this region.
DS- Selling better in Europe than America. More popular in non-english speaking countries such as France. (Nintendogs is still in the top ten list there)
PSP- Selling well but behind the DS.
Conclusion- With Animal Crossing and Brain Age beginning to occupy the best seller lists (plus New Super Mario Brothers), and with the DS Lite coming out, the gap between the PSP and DS will only widen.
-America-
Xbox 360- Selling around the same number as the original Xbox so far. With only 1.7 million sold in America so far, Microsoft is wasting their year head start against Sony.
PSP- Sony has been very aggressive with the PSP in America with massive advertising, packaging the PSP with Daxter, and still the PSP sells around the same rate as the DS. The PSP software sold is about on par with most of the DS software.
DS- DS sales will, of course, go up due to the DS Lite. DS sales have been holding steady. The PSP versus DS war is actually very pathetic since both the PSP and DS are routinely outsold by the GBA. And to add insult to injury, both are outsold by the Gamecube. America is not very interested in handheld gaming apparently.
Conclusion: The DS and PSP are tied in America. However, Nintendo's handheld marketshare is around 70% due to the combination of the DS and GBA. If GBA owners upgrade to the DS, the DS will soundly sail past the PSP in this market.
-Japan-
Xbox 360- LOL. The Xbox 360 has flopped harder than the Xbox in Japan. Currently, it is battling it out with the Gamecube in sales there. The floppage of the Xbox 360 insures that Microsoft cannot win the console war.
PSP- Decent sales and beats the PS2. The software, however, has been atrocious. Japanese view the PSP as a media center, not as a games machine. The sales of Animal Crossing WW in Japan has outsold all the PSP software combined there.
DS- On fire. DS software dominates the best seller's list. DS hardware outsells the PSP from 10 to 1 to 5 to 1. Japan is where the handheld war is being won. The DS is the fastest selling system in Japan ever.
Conclusion: DS has reinvigorated the Japanese market. The American market is currently flat and stagnant. To give you an idea, last month, the Xbox 360 sold around 200,000 consoles in America. In Japan, 100,000 DSes were sold last WEEK. In the week before that, it was 300,000.
Obviously, the shipped of PSP and DS don't equal the number of sold. The DS is beating the PSP by miles in Japan. The DS is ahead of the PSP in Europe. In America, it is tied, but the American market right now is flat and the GBA sales are higher than either handheld.
NPD cannot track online sales (for last year it said PC gaming was dying but PC gaming market is actually healthy with MMORPGs and even digital distribution now for many games).
NPD does not track Wal-Mart, Target, and Toys R Us. Overall, I believe NPD is only able to track a little less than half of all the retailers (someone correct me if I'm wrong). I believe NPD attempts to account for this involving intresting uses of statistics. Places like Toys R Us and Target are some of Nintendo's biggest retailers.
NPD does not track bundles.
NPD numbers are generally leaked on the NeoGAF boards. However, the people there and many in this industry hold NPD numbers as the absolute authority. They are useful as an indication, but NPD has been majorly wrong before (November of 2005 they had to re-call the numbers they had and come up with new ones after reports of *errors*. Huh?).
I love how the NPD doesn't define how long a 'transitional year' is. When 2005 year sales fell, NPD also blamed it on the 'transition'.
So how long is that transition, NPD? Out of the 5 year console cycle, is it one year, two year, THREE years?
In business as in the military, you have to have what is called a contigency plan. What if the decline in sales is not a transition but an actual slowdown of the video game market? NPD is not serving its customers proper information when they keep insisting it is the 'transition'.
Keep in mind that Japan's market has been slowing down significantly for the last few years. Only with the phenomenon of the DS has Japan's slump reversed. Europe's market is soon going to be surpassing America's if NPD's 'transitional period' keeps going on for several more years.
Fact: The next-gen handhelds are already released and both the DS and PSP are selling flatly.
FACT: One next-gen console, the Xbox 360, is out, in stock everywhere, and cannot outsell the PS2 in America. With the lack of significant Xbox 360 software for all of this summer, Xbox 360 may actually fall in sales just as it did this month from last month. At this same time, the Xbox (having a price reduction) was outselling the Xbox 360 by this month. At this rate, the Xbox 360 will perform, at best, on the same level as the Xbox but most likely will sell less.
FACT: The sales numbers they using for the percentage increase (and percentage decrese) is total sales dollars, not sales units. Of course, sales went up in April with the expensive $400 Xbox 360 was in stock. All the prices are going up for next generation. The DS costs more than a Gamecube. The PSP costs like $200 with $50 games. The Xbox 360 is $400 with $60 games. The PS3 is going to be a whopping $600. The only system that will be the same (or less?) price wise is the Gamecube -> Wii at $200.
Of COURSE sales numbers will go up if prices go up. But are the number of gaming customers up? Are the number of software units sold going up? The answer is no. They are dropping down. And if the Xbox 360 and the new handhelds are any indication, it is not because of the 'transition'. It is because the market is...
1) Scared by the higher prices and/or waiting for them to drop (PS2 sales went up due to a price decrease. GBA is still outselling both the DS and PSP.)
2) The number of active gamers is decreasing due to getting bored (as opposed to growing leaps and bounds as has happened).
Compare the sales numbers of the US to Japan and Europe and you'll find that US is no longer as 'big' as it used to be. 2004 was the game industry's biggest year. Since then, its been in free fall.
Oh, Sony wanted to help the little indie developers! I was so mistaken! I thought Sony wanted Linux out so they could point at the PS2, call it a 'computer', and dodge EU taxes. Thank goodness Sony is thinking of the little guy!
One risk with trying to expand the console cycle past the five year mark is that consumer trends change. The PS3 is not a pretty machine. The PS3 seems large and ugly TODAY, how will it look five years from now? Or eight? The answer: not any prettier.
I am sure Sony could release new slim line models but then people have to go re-buy the same machine again. If the PS3 is going to be 'expanded', then won't it look the same ugly way for the next 5+ years?
The reason why I mention this is that in the 70s, the wood finishings on the Pong and Atari 2600 looked cool for its time. Today, they look ridiculous. The gray tone with the black lines of the NES looked cool then. After all, the console's design was to fit the taste of the 80s. The Super NES looks like an abomination today. I know Xbox players mad at the Xbox 360 lack of BC since they can't throw out their Xboxes. And I know Gamecube owners who can't wait for the Wii so they can remove the purple lunchbox away from their living room.
Even if the PS3 is upgradable, it still is an ugly fit. Over time, a console gets uglier in the living room, not prettier.
It actually is nothing about the graphics. He revealed it when he said that 'not many people really played video games'.
The big myth is that people like him believed gaming became 'mainstream' with the Playstation. The Playstation Generation believes that prior systems such as the NES, Atari, and computers such as the Commodore 64 had very few people playing them. But, behold, Sony appeared and suddenly gaming became 'mainstream'. This has been the most effective marketing technique I've seen in console gaming.
Gaming has never become mainstream when you account for population growth. Consoles have not penetrated past a third of households which was established during the NES days. Most of the growth in the industry has come from multiple console ownership. With Sony's introduction into the industry came huge marketing muscle. The huge marketing budgets keep telling gamers how 'cool' they now are. But sales numbers are stubborn things. If gaming is now 'mainstream', then why is Super Mario Brothers 3 still the best selling non-bundled game by a mile?
This myth is also believed by Xbox fans (or the Xbox Generation). They believe Halo and Halo 2 are some of the best selling games ever made. I sit them down and show them the numbers. Three games on the Gamecube practically matched Halo in sales: Super Smash Brothers Melee, Mario Kart Double Dash, and Super Mario Sunshine (which was seen as a disapointment). Goldeneye (for the N64) outsold Halo 2. Donkey Kong Country, Super Mario Kart (SNES and N64 version), Final Fantasy 7, all outsold Halo 2. In fact, Halo 2 doesn't even appear in the top 25 best selling console games. After seeing the numbers, almost every Xbox Generation member then says, "But Halo 2 had be biggest opening beating the movie Spiderman 2!" It's sad they don't realize that this doesn't show the popularity of Halo 2 but the power of Microsoft's marketing of super-hyped sales.
Xbox Live for the Xbox only had two million subscribers. Yet, the Xbox Generation believes that is 'mainstream'. Around 20 million Xboxes sold is an "amazing success". Around 20 million Gamecubes sold is a "horrible failure". Hilariously, the Xbox Generation thinks the Xbox 360 is much cheaper than the Playstation 3. But an Xbox 360 plus four years of Xbox Live costs the same as the $600 PS3.
Marketing has also been very effective with the word 'hardcore'. A 'hardcore gamer' is, essentially, a nerd gamer. (not mocking it, just saying what it is) In their view, if you play games such as Civilization, Zelda, or even World of Warcraft, you are a 'nerd gamer'. But if you play realistic war and sports games, then you are 'hardcore'. They believe 'hardcore' is synonymous with 'cool' where hardcore used to mean 'dedicated, nerd-like, obsessed, and skilled'.
Gaming now has to be mainstream, after all, Sony/Microsoft said so! Nintendo and Sega also have marketing but nothing that approaches the budgets of Sony and Microsoft. Anyone remember during the 16-bit days of kids preferring the Genesis not because of its games but because of its 'rebellious image'? This is the same sad story going on with these self-declared 'hardcore' gamers.
Marketing works... only for a little while. Then reality appears. The reality, for Xbox Generation, is that the Xbox 360 is only selling around the same level as the original Xbox (flopped just as hard in Japan) and to the same exact demographic. The Halo franchise has reached the tipping point similiar to what happened in the middle of the Metal Gear Solid franchise. Halo 3 will most likely not sell as much as Halo 2.
The reality for the Playstation Generation is that $600 price tag (no console can be mainstream with that price tag). Gran Turismo 4 sold considerably less than Gran Turismo 3. Metal Gear Solid 3 sold less than Metal Gear Solid 2. Final Fantasy has been selling less. Animal Crossing DS has outsold Final Fantasy 12 in Japan. Grand Theft Auto 3 sold only two million on the PSP. The Playstation's exclusive franchises are in decline.
Slashdot Mirror
One columnist finds himself playing XBLA more than Wii for his 'casual gaming fix', so he writes a column branching his feelings as the reality of the marketplace? Why is Zonk posting this 'column' anyway? It is all 100% of one person's feelings.
Here is some real information. Most casual games and gamers are on the PC. Most casual gamers are females. XBLA was not originally intended for what it became which is why the model for game releases cannot be met (there are weeks where there have been no releases or, worse, something worthless like Kameo Uno Theme Pack). People buy Xbox 360s for Gears of War, not to play UNO online. There is a reason why Gears of War has sold so much (which contradicts our "insightful" columnist).
It has been said that console companies were leaving much money behind on the table by failing to penetrate the huge casual gamers (on PCs). If a console ere to do that, it would sell and sell and sell. There is a current console out there that appears to be doing that. And, by looking at Japanese sales charts for the unbundled 'casual games', I see Wii Sports and Wii Play in the top ten weekly with the occasional first week of sales of a PS2/PSP game (which then immediately disapears from the chart). The rest of the top 30 are DS games.
Imagine if someone wrote a column where he "felt" that the PS3 was an 'incredible value' at its price. Would Zonk call it an 'article'? Sales data would refute the idea that most customers find the PS3 'an incredible value at its price' which is why no one would take seriously of such an opinion. So why is this story, which is one columnist's opinion, even linked on Slashdot?
A columnist can feel whatever he wants, but the market and sales data are the reality. Zonk linking to such opinion pieces is not helping readers understand what is really going on.
I suppose we can add Wii Sports to the list of horrible gimmick and novelty games along with...
-Nintendogs (sold around 9 million by now I believe)
-Sims (best selling PC game)
-Myst (second best selling PC game)
-Brain Age (sold millions but not sure how much)
I remember when I first played the NES. The light gun was cool but the Duck Hunt game lost its appeal quick. That Super Mario Brothers game? Get big by eating mushrooms? Gimmick. And what was with that new controller with its 'D-pad'? I went back to the REAL controller of the joystick with my hardcore games on the Commodore 64 thinking exactly on the line of 'novelty' and 'gimmick'.
Twenty years later, I am a little wiser. I know hardcore gamers would be more accurately labeled as 'addicted' gamers. And watch the young kids as the younger generation breaks for the Wii. They will grow up with the Wii-mote and consider it standard while the 'omg hardcore' players become seen as old cranks touting how awesome the classic controller and 'epic games' are.
I know this because I am currently seen as an 'old crank'. I still think the joystick is awesome and that my 'epic games' went downhill to these awful JRPGs. The "hardcore" gamers believe they have a 'future'. They never did in previous generations.
Please, everyone, stop using VG Charts as a source for 'information'. The site uses other people's data and performs its own 'adjustments'. This would not be bad if VGCharts would tell us what these 'adjustments' were. Don't trust any sales information that doesn't reveal how it obtained its data. The maker of VG Charts is using other charts' data (such as Media Create, Famitsu, and NPD) and applying his own 'adjustments' to claim it his own. See all the advertising on that site? Yeah.
VGcharts is NOT reliable.
But the goal is to sell software, not hardware. If Blu-Ray becomes the successor to DVDs (low probability), PS3 MIGHT sell because it has a Blu-Ray player. But this does nothing to boost the software sales (where all the money is).
Look at the PSP. PSP's great selling point is a portable video player. Hardware is selling but the software sales are very low. By adding all these 'non-game' functions into the console, Sony has given incentive to consumers' entertainment time to be spent on something other than games.
The methodology is not published. Much of VGCharts data is taking Media Create and NPD numbers and adding or multiplying whatever the person (behind VG Charts) decides.
If you want real information, use what the industry uses. For Japan, there is Media Create and Famitsu which is public and published weekly. For United States, you have NPD each month which tracks 60% of stores and uses estimates for the other 40% (which includes Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is definately factored in). For Europe, it is harder since trackers seem varied for each country. UK's data is published as is France and Spain.
We'll know more when we get the NPD info for January and any European data for PS3's performance. But it is very grim for PS3 in Japan as it sells around 20,000 each week compared to Wii's 85,000. If Wii stopped selling today in Japan, the PS3 would catch up to Wii's yield sometime in October of 2007. DS yield is about to surpass the GBA yield in Japan. Wii's sales are so far matching the momentum of PS2 in Japan. If Wii keeps selling at its standard 80,000 a week, it will soon be outselling the PS2 at a similiar time in its lifestyle.
Anyway, please don't cite VG Charts. The guy behind it tries to advertise his site like mad and is probably trying to get money off it. Not that getting money off it is wrong, but that he is taking other sources' data like Media Create and adding in God knows what numbers (VG Charts methodology is not shared so therefore cannot be trusted).
Of all the retailers that are tracked, the ones that are not (40%) are estimated. Wal-Mart is definately included.
Microsoft measures its sales as shipped to retailers, not in consumer hands. There is not only a discrepancy in Microsoft's 360 hardware, but in its software as well. Gears of War has shipped 2.7 million copies, but this is not reflected in independent tracking. Why? These are shipped numbers. Microsoft is still a far way from getting 360s in ten million customers' hands.
Trust independent trackers before you trust a press release from any company...
"1.1 million sold in USA alone tells me that they probably didn't meet their 4 million target, but I don't think they would have been pretty close"
NPD multiplies the estimates differently for each console. The lowest multiplier is used for Nintendo's machines (why this is, I don't know).
The reason why people like Patcher or others who get the numbers are so scratching their heads is because the software numbers are too high for both DS and Wii, higher than normal. We knew the attachment rate of Zelda: Twilight Princess would be high, but it is absurdly high (Wii's high software sales are even more surprising considering the Wii comes with a pack in game). To be fair, it is probably a little higher on both the Wii and DS hardware count. PSP looks like it is overstated (you want to see bad software sales? Look at PSP).
I just wish there was an alternative to the NPD. It is bad for the games industry to just have ONE main tracker for all of United States. In Japan, there are several (such as Media Create and Famitsu). Without competition, NPD can be sloppy and get away with it.
Star Trek was one of the last refuges of classical theater on television (as well as with the movies). The actors were brilliant (even many of the guest actors). The scripts were very classical in nature (well, most of them). Star Trek did not insult your intelligence (with the exception of Voyager and Enterprise perhaps). I like how a Star Trek episode can openly start with discussions on shakespeare and have an episode just about that theme (ex: DS9: "Improbable Cause" / "The Die is Cast"). Star Trek also had a nice orchestra accompanying it.
People did not watch "Best of Both Worlds" to find insight on the "human condition". They did so because it was fantastic TV; it was awesome theater. While Star Trek I could be considered 'very sci-fi', Star Trek II and III were tragic operas (I am using 'Tragedy' in its classical sense. It is over-used today to refer 'something bad' which is not what tragedy means). ST IV was more comedic. (Let's pretend ST V didn't exist.)
Star Trek began to fail when it lost track of that sense of classic theater. No one would call Voyager or Enterprise great operas. The comedy parts of DS9 fell flat (ugh at the Ferengi episodes). What I'm saying is this:
The Original Series did not become great television because of 'philosophy', 'definition of life', or all that. It became great because of "City on the Edge of Forever" and "The Trouble with Tribbles". While the first movie was all sci-fi, full of philosophy and the 'definition of life', this was quickly dropped for what really made ST great: classical theater that we saw in Wrath of Khan (and following movies).
The Next Generation did not become great because of sermons on euthanasia or trouble between races. TNG became great because it became great theater with "Best of Both Worlds" and episodes like "Redemption".
While DS9 initially tried the TNG route at first, it abandoned it and found its best episodes in things that were totally possible outide regular sci-fi. "Duet", "The Visitor", "In the Pale Moonlight" etc.
The poster is correct when he says that 'new technology' was fun to watch in Star Trek. He is right because entertainment is dependent on surprise. If TNG or DS9 were 'retro' episodes (referring to the past like Enterprise), there would be no edge of our seat that "Best of Both Worlds" or the Dominion War had. We'd know the ending so the surprise would be ruined. Voyager at least could be surprising (Voyager had no ramifications, damn that reset button), but we knew how Enterprise would end. We want to see new technology because we want to be SURPRISED at new events, not re-living old events. We know how the Kirk and Spock saga ends, there is no surprise. Hence, any movie about it will not be entertaining.
My fear is that some ex-agent or swaggering ive league will get in control at Paramount and totally miss how Star Trek had classical theater at its core. Instead, they will think, "Ahh! Let's reduce Star Trek to only its icons: Kirk and Spock. Let's just talk about their 'relationships' as well as the early crew of the Enterprise. To spice this up, let us borrow from horror movies, action movies, and all since that is what the public likes to see. And, yes, TONS of special effects!"
This is tons of BS. There's always been this myth, by very defensive B5 fans for some reason, that Paramount had to steal everything from JMS because, apparently, no one had talent or creativity at Star Trek. It's funny that many of these same B5 fans have jumped on the Battlestar Galactica bandwagon when the showrunner, Ronald Moore, was a writer (and producer) for DS9.
5 2102171339).
DS9 was designed as a reaction to TNG. B5 was never in DS9's thoughts as DS9's 'competition' was from TNG the first two years and Voyager afterward. TNG writers were annoyed how the characters on TNG got along so nicely, how there were little repurcussions so DS9 was designed for friction and repurcussions. There was no actual planned 'story arcs' (like JMS did with B5) as DS9 was more spontaneous. For example, the Klingon War came from nowhere in the 4th season. When TNG went off the air, the DS9 writers 'owned' the Federation and would come up with things no one was expecting (Section 17, the Changeling Virus, etc).
The idea of story 'arcs' were nothing new. TNG was filled with several of them. Before B5 was on the air, DS9 was slowly building up story arcs starting with the Bajorans such as the Circle to subties of the Dominion in Season 2. Then, each season, the writers intentionally ramped the story arc higher and higher without fully knowing where it would go. The seeds for DS9 were already well planted in TNG in episodes like "Ensign Ro" or the episodes with the Cardassian War. But I suppose TNG miraculously stole those from B5 in the late eighties too.
One could point out that JMS copied from Star Trek more with B5. At the end of B5, JMS creates as Federation (*cough* I mean the Alliance *cough*) raises all the characters to almost near saint-like levels (*cough* the Blessed Sheridan *cough*), time-travel paradoxes (Valin) and ends the great war between Shadows and Vorlons with Picard like dialogue and diplomacy (talk about lots of speeches!). Babylon 5 was a good show. But there's a reason why it isn't aging so well.
(And why is it that JMS never makes a mistake? If there is a bad episode, bad plot move, or something a fan complains about, JMS seems to always point his finger at "the network" or some other entity messing up his 'Hamlet for the 21'st Century' or whatever. JMS does get a little full of himself...)
Star Trek was one of the last vestiges of classical theater you would see on TV. There were episodes that bested "The Best of Both Worlds" such as "The Visitor" and "In the Pale Moonlight". The major difference with B5 and DS9 is that JMS knew where he wanted B5 to end. To him, the show was all the 'interesting stuff in the middle'. But with DS9, the writers had no idea how the show would end which made it more spontaneous, less predictable, and, IMO, interesting. Very unique to DS9 was how the secondary characters (Garak, Dukat, etc.) grew so three dimensionally that they rivaled the main characters. You never saw that in B5 (since that show was plot based).
Even if B5 had bigger budgets, better production, etc. that would not have helped. As Voyager and especially Enterprise proved, big budgets are nothing without the writing. As Battlestar Galatactica has proven, good writing, despite the budget, can work wonders. DS9 went on for seven seasons, and is still being watched today, not because it stole from Babylon 5 but because there was talent behind the show (it helps when all the actors, except for Dax, were Shakepearan actors. One of the requirements to be a klingon, for example, was to be a shakespearan actor to have that 'intensity').
JMS is nowhere near as talented as his cultists wish to believe. You can find the same exact plot of Babylon 5 in the video game "Star Control 2" (including similiar uses of Hyperspace, Third Space, the 'great war', and so on). Is this because Reiche III and Fred Ford stole from JMS too? No! It is because both drew from the same SF stories. What a surprise!
Don't let the JMS Cultist mentality rob you from enjoying one of the best sci-fi... no, television shows... that came on television (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=27468731
The lawsuits against Lik-Sang are fairly petty. Copyright violation of putting parts of the PSP manual online. Trademark violation for shipping PSPs to the UK. And so on. The purpose was to keep suing as Lik-Sang could not afford all these expensive court battles. This is the same way Sony destroyed Bleem!. Looks like Sony learned something from the Immersion lawsuits.
The UK Courts went along with this, I suspect, more due to the taxation they lose on importers.
Sony's interest in all this:
-Price fixing (PS3s are cheaper in Japan than everywhere else. This price fixing alone should remove the 'region free' attitude Sony pretends to embrace. (Importing a Japanese PS3 would probably be cheaper than buying one locally.)
-Blu-Ray is not region free. Importers ruin the Blu-Ray Domination scheme.
Playasia is next.
You are confusing shipped versus sold. Microsoft has sold worldwide between 4-5 million. It is nowhere near 8 million. (Wii and PS3 will easily catch up to those numbers.) 360 has no competition yet which bodes ill for these current lackluster sales. If Microsoft keeps selling at this rate, it will be lucky to match the original Xbox sales (currently, Microsoft is behind the original Xbox numbers).
Also, Japan's game sales have been expanding at an insane level lately (thanks due to the DS). The total of Japanese hardware sold is ahead of the total hardware sold in the United States. So, no, Japan is no longer the smallest. It is currently the fastest growing market.
"If they start early, maybe they won't repeat the mistakes of the past? When it comes to hardware and consoles, i find that Microsoft is actually one of the only company that listens to it's user base and try to meet and improve on their expectations. They actually learn from past mistakes."
This is precisely the error. The entertainment business is dependent on surprise. How do you poll people asking, "What will surprise you?" This is why Xbox 360 sales are lackluster despite a few people 'absolutely loving' their 360s.
Almost two years ago if someone pointed to this dual screened mutant and said,
-It would lead a gaming renaissance in Japan, making the Japanese game market larger than America so far in the year 2006.
-It would outsell the PSP in all markets.
-It would be very popular among girls too.
-And popular among older people with a game called 'Brain Age'. This demographic the industry thought was impossible to reach.
-Animal Crossing Wild World would outsell Final Fantasy 12 in Japan (could Final Fantasy 3 outsell FF12?)
-A game called Nintendogs will outsell Halo and is set to outsell Halo 2.
-Companies like Electronic Arts will struggle on the system as they do not know how to deal with disruption technology. But smaller companies like Atlus shall rise.
-Let's not forget a new 2D Mario (after fifteen years) turning the markets on fire everywhere.
You would think the person had gone mad. And many people thought Nintendo had gone mad in late 2004 (just as many thought they had gone mad with the Wii)
Where is the PSP? Well, the software for the PSP is abysmal in Japan. The DS sales lead over the PSP in Japan is so gigantic that if you begin to combine PSP markets, the PSP still doesn't outsell the DS.
So what is different? Nintendo sees the DS's true competition of those who aren't interested in games at all. The company mission is taking affect: "Make as many gamers as possible."
Two years ago...
-Japan had been in a slow decline and analysts were wondering if it worth the effort to 'win' Japan anymore.
-Everyone predicted the PSP would do to the DS what Playstation did to the Nintendo consoles.
-America's game market was extremely healthy with blockbusters like GTA: SA and Halo 2.
-Nintendo was about to go third party.
Now...
-Japan's game market is now bigger than America's and is rapidly expanding.
-Everyone's lofty PSP predictions now have egg on their face.
-America's game market has been in free-fall since 2004. People are ignoring this issue and calling it a 'transition period' without mentioning that the next-gen systems out such as the PSP and Xbox 360 are not growing the market in any way.
-Nintendo swims in profits.
Anyone who believes the seventh generation of consoles will match the PS2 era is deluding themselves. Let the Seventh Generation of Consoles be known as the Fragmentation Era as the games market is dividing into seperate realms.
Welcome to the new world.
Why the above post, stuffed with a cliche, is labeled 'informative' I will never understand. But I do know the parent poster is incorrect.
Gaming is not and has never been mainstream (especially when you account for population growth). In North America, the console penetration has never exceeded 33% (which was achieved during the NES days). Most of the growth coming into the industry has been from multiple console ownership. Many gamers just got more 'hardcore'. And the best selling video game is still Super Mario Brothers 3.
Actually, the game industry is currently very sick. While it is true that in the 1980s, there were many smaller game companies. But what the parent poster does not say is that the industry was designer based. When production values skyrocketed (thanks Wing Commander), the industry shifted to a publisher based format. Now, developers work FOR the publishers, not for gamers. The ever increasing costs are why design oriented companies such as Origin had to be bought by Electronic Arts. These costs were already bad last generation and will just get worse now. There is a very large talent vacuum that is waiting to be filled. But with publishers controlling the industry, this is unlikely to change.
People believe the myth that gaming is now 'mainstream' mostly because the marketing budgets have EXPLODED. These marketers also want you to believe that gaming is 'mainstream' and that nerds are actually 'hardcore' gamers (notice the labels?). Do you think they want to tell you the truth that you are a bunch of nerds in an industry no one takes seriously? Of course not. With Sony moving into the industry as well as Microsoft, their vast influence has created the perception that 'gaming is now mainstream'. Even games such as GoldenEye 007 on the N64 sold more than the much vaunted Halo 2 ever did for the Xbox. But don't expect Microsoft to be honest with the numbers. Their marketing wouldn't allow it. For an example of such marketing, the Xbox sold only around 20 million consoles, most regionally. It is marketed as 'a wild success'. Many people are stunned when I show them the sales numbers. "What? Super Mario Sunshine outsold Halo?" Yep. My point here is to show how influential marketing has been on creating the perception that gaming and certain games (such as Halo) are more popular than they actually are.
This doesn't mean gaming has to stay niche. There are big moves to make gaming truly mainstream. The Sims is the best selling PC video game ever made (this isn't including expansions). World of Warcraft has expanded the MMORPG market to casual players. Nintendo's Nintendogs and Brain Age has pushed gaming more into untraditional demographics such as girls and, curiously, the elderly (who everyone said were impossible to reach).
The article does point out an important lesson between Ultima Underworld and the FPS: the simple, easy to learn game wins. The complicated hardcore game loses. Nolan Bushnell discovered this when Computer Space flopped and Pong became a huge success. In the same way, this is why games like World of Warcraft succeeded was by eliminating many of the 'hardcore' elements that kept away casuals from MMORPG games. The touch-screen of the DS broke down the interface wall between gamer and non-gamer to allow many people to play Brain Age or Nintendogs who wouldn't normally get into a game. The Wii resembling a TV remote control will be a step as a bridge in that direction.
But no, gaming is no where close to being mainstream. Stop believing the marketers and face the truth: you are a nerd.
Damn you, Sony!!!
If you're more interested in making excuses than actually creating entertainment, then you are right, it is impossible. But you do prove my point.
Why do you need 3d graphics and an orchestra sound track? There are many markets that are possible without these absurd production values. You have web-based games, you have the cell phone market, you will now have the Virtual Console and Xbox Live (Mutant Storm and Marble Blast are now currently on Xbox Live, they are better known than you think).
Nintendo created a massive best seller in the game of Brain Trainer made by a few people within three months. The game has no graphics. There is no soundtrack. There are no cinematics. Yet, the game is selling very strongly over all demographics throughout the world. This should be an inspiration.
The problem is not that it is impossible for a few people to make games. The problem is that today's gamers believe a game must be a cinematic experience. Also, indepedent game developers are woefully ignorant on salesmanship and working the market.
Is there a New York Times best written list of books? No! There is only a best SELLING list. While people can debate what is the 'best' game, in the end it comes to sales. It is more imporant for artists and developers to be able to SELL a game rather than have the 'talent' to create 'masterpieces'. This is true for writers, for musicians, and any one else in the creative field. You must know the business side.
In the old days, developers knew the business side. After all, they would make their game and have to tell the publisher how to do it! Now, game developers work more for the publisher instead of the other way around. With those high budget games, the developers need the publishers' money. I've noticed the early developers understand how the market works better than these new developers who are literally working for the publisher instead of the market itself.
There is absolutely nothing stopping you from making the next 'Tetris' or 'Brain Age'. Nothing except your pre-concieved conclusion that it is 'impossible'.
What! Who says it takes millions to make a video game? It actually doesn't take much money at all. The biggest barriers today are the ones we have created in our head.
I've worked with Garage Games and you can easily create a game even with their engine. Where do you think Marble Blast Gold and Mutant Storm came from? Even the Wii's development kit is cheap enough that a regular person can buy one.
The big problem with independent development is that they often try to compete with big publishers' games and/or they make games for themselves. Would you see them make games for girls or elderly like Brain Age? No. Nintendo has said they had a problem with new people because they want to make games because of "Final Fantasy, Zelda, and Mario." So Nintendo has to 'un-train' them and not have them think of games in those terms. There is much opportunity for game makers today. In fact, probably more now than ever since everyone says they are 'bored'.
But to the original post, we are already at the point where the market is regressing. This has been occurring for the past five years drastically in Japan and reversed only with the success of the DS there. In America, the market has begun to slide; transitional year my butt. Transitional year does not last several years!
...is in its library. The best selling consoles always have the largest libraries. Take any generation of any console or handheld, and you will find this to be true. Even the Gameboy, with four shades of green, outsold competitors like Atari and Sega with color handhelds. Why? Because the Gameboy had a superior gaming library.
The PS1 and PS2 outsold its competition due to its superior library. No one gives a damn about the hardware. If the PS2 broke down, people would buy another because of their gaming library.
The DS is outselling the PSP because... of its library. The PSP library is not exactly diverse or as interesting. More importantly, the DS's library hits more demographics than the PSP does (thanks to the Brain games, to Nintendogs, and the rest). PSP's software keeps hitting the same demographic. Since handhelds do not follow the console cycles, whoever wins the handheld war will be the victor for probably the next ten years.
The victor of the console war will be the one with the largest library? Which console had the most playable games at E3 this year? Nintendo. Which console will have the most available software upon launch? Most likely, Nintendo.
Nintendo's dirty little secret is that, not only has the company completely restructured in the last few years, Nintendo has been expanding their software development studios like crazy in both Japan and America. Nintendo intends to flood the market with quality content.
Xbox 360 and PS3 have a big strike against them with software creation. By jumping on the HD bandwagon, their games will take more time to be made, are riskier to make, require bigger teams, and are much more expensive. The Wii is extroadinarily cheap to develop for. The Wii's development kit costs around $2000, cheaper than even the PSP's.
The fact is that third parties are interested in making money, not playing fan boy. The Wii is very attractive to publishers as it represents a low cost revenue stream which is desperately needed today. The Wii is very attractive to developers because of the controller and the innovation it allows.
The Wii will end up putting out more software, on a faster basis, than either Sony and Microsoft's machiens. Even worse for them, the Wii attempts to have the largest gaming library ever with the NES, SNES, N64, Genesis, and Turbographix 16 games on the Virtual Console.
No one cares about the console itself. People care about the library. People buy the PS2 today not because they like Sony but because it gives them access to a large game library. Nintendo realizes that with the N64 and Gamecube, they were competing too much on a hardware basis. Now, Nintendo is focusing and investing heavily in the software.
Then, add in the vast price differences of a $600 machine, $400 machine, and a less than $250 machine. Nintendo is definately re-surging. The most comical part is if Nintendo does take the top spot, analysts will have so much egg on their faces. It was only a year or two ago when people were asking if Nintendo would leave the console business...
While this is true, people rely on the 'shipped' numbers only because it appears in the financial statements the companies send out to their shareholders. After all, these companies get their money from the retailers of where they shipped.
However, if someone took those financial statements at face value, they don't have a clue how those statements are to sell the company to the investors. In other words, those statements crafted for sales purposes. The bean-counters on GAF cannot tell the difference. One of the reasons why Sega was destroyed financially was because they believed those financial statements of shipped to retailers meaning actual sales. If a company does not find out how many systems are being sold to customers, they will have an accounting mess as occurred with the early days with the Saturn.
Here is the sales performance of the 7th Generation systems so far...
-Europe-
Xbox 360- Better than the original Xbox so far. This is the Xbox 360's true success so far in this region.
DS- Selling better in Europe than America. More popular in non-english speaking countries such as France. (Nintendogs is still in the top ten list there)
PSP- Selling well but behind the DS.
Conclusion- With Animal Crossing and Brain Age beginning to occupy the best seller lists (plus New Super Mario Brothers), and with the DS Lite coming out, the gap between the PSP and DS will only widen.
-America-
Xbox 360- Selling around the same number as the original Xbox so far. With only 1.7 million sold in America so far, Microsoft is wasting their year head start against Sony.
PSP- Sony has been very aggressive with the PSP in America with massive advertising, packaging the PSP with Daxter, and still the PSP sells around the same rate as the DS. The PSP software sold is about on par with most of the DS software.
DS- DS sales will, of course, go up due to the DS Lite. DS sales have been holding steady. The PSP versus DS war is actually very pathetic since both the PSP and DS are routinely outsold by the GBA. And to add insult to injury, both are outsold by the Gamecube. America is not very interested in handheld gaming apparently.
Conclusion: The DS and PSP are tied in America. However, Nintendo's handheld marketshare is around 70% due to the combination of the DS and GBA. If GBA owners upgrade to the DS, the DS will soundly sail past the PSP in this market.
-Japan-
Xbox 360- LOL. The Xbox 360 has flopped harder than the Xbox in Japan. Currently, it is battling it out with the Gamecube in sales there. The floppage of the Xbox 360 insures that Microsoft cannot win the console war.
PSP- Decent sales and beats the PS2. The software, however, has been atrocious. Japanese view the PSP as a media center, not as a games machine. The sales of Animal Crossing WW in Japan has outsold all the PSP software combined there.
DS- On fire. DS software dominates the best seller's list. DS hardware outsells the PSP from 10 to 1 to 5 to 1. Japan is where the handheld war is being won. The DS is the fastest selling system in Japan ever.
Conclusion: DS has reinvigorated the Japanese market. The American market is currently flat and stagnant. To give you an idea, last month, the Xbox 360 sold around 200,000 consoles in America. In Japan, 100,000 DSes were sold last WEEK. In the week before that, it was 300,000.
Obviously, the shipped of PSP and DS don't equal the number of sold. The DS is beating the PSP by miles in Japan. The DS is ahead of the PSP in Europe. In America, it is tied, but the American market right now is flat and the GBA sales are higher than either handheld.
That is correct.
NPD cannot track online sales (for last year it said PC gaming was dying but PC gaming market is actually healthy with MMORPGs and even digital distribution now for many games).
NPD does not track Wal-Mart, Target, and Toys R Us. Overall, I believe NPD is only able to track a little less than half of all the retailers (someone correct me if I'm wrong). I believe NPD attempts to account for this involving intresting uses of statistics. Places like Toys R Us and Target are some of Nintendo's biggest retailers.
NPD does not track bundles.
NPD numbers are generally leaked on the NeoGAF boards. However, the people there and many in this industry hold NPD numbers as the absolute authority. They are useful as an indication, but NPD has been majorly wrong before (November of 2005 they had to re-call the numbers they had and come up with new ones after reports of *errors*. Huh?).
I love how the NPD doesn't define how long a 'transitional year' is. When 2005 year sales fell, NPD also blamed it on the 'transition'.
So how long is that transition, NPD? Out of the 5 year console cycle, is it one year, two year, THREE years?
In business as in the military, you have to have what is called a contigency plan. What if the decline in sales is not a transition but an actual slowdown of the video game market? NPD is not serving its customers proper information when they keep insisting it is the 'transition'.
Keep in mind that Japan's market has been slowing down significantly for the last few years. Only with the phenomenon of the DS has Japan's slump reversed. Europe's market is soon going to be surpassing America's if NPD's 'transitional period' keeps going on for several more years.
Fact: The next-gen handhelds are already released and both the DS and PSP are selling flatly.
FACT: One next-gen console, the Xbox 360, is out, in stock everywhere, and cannot outsell the PS2 in America. With the lack of significant Xbox 360 software for all of this summer, Xbox 360 may actually fall in sales just as it did this month from last month. At this same time, the Xbox (having a price reduction) was outselling the Xbox 360 by this month. At this rate, the Xbox 360 will perform, at best, on the same level as the Xbox but most likely will sell less.
FACT: The sales numbers they using for the percentage increase (and percentage decrese) is total sales dollars, not sales units. Of course, sales went up in April with the expensive $400 Xbox 360 was in stock. All the prices are going up for next generation. The DS costs more than a Gamecube. The PSP costs like $200 with $50 games. The Xbox 360 is $400 with $60 games. The PS3 is going to be a whopping $600. The only system that will be the same (or less?) price wise is the Gamecube -> Wii at $200.
Of COURSE sales numbers will go up if prices go up. But are the number of gaming customers up? Are the number of software units sold going up? The answer is no. They are dropping down. And if the Xbox 360 and the new handhelds are any indication, it is not because of the 'transition'. It is because the market is...
1) Scared by the higher prices and/or waiting for them to drop (PS2 sales went up due to a price decrease. GBA is still outselling both the DS and PSP.)
2) The number of active gamers is decreasing due to getting bored (as opposed to growing leaps and bounds as has happened).
Compare the sales numbers of the US to Japan and Europe and you'll find that US is no longer as 'big' as it used to be. 2004 was the game industry's biggest year. Since then, its been in free fall.
You realize the Gamecube was sold out at launch and, for a short period of time, had shortages?
Oh, Sony wanted to help the little indie developers! I was so mistaken! I thought Sony wanted Linux out so they could point at the PS2, call it a 'computer', and dodge EU taxes. Thank goodness Sony is thinking of the little guy!
One risk with trying to expand the console cycle past the five year mark is that consumer trends change. The PS3 is not a pretty machine. The PS3 seems large and ugly TODAY, how will it look five years from now? Or eight? The answer: not any prettier.
I am sure Sony could release new slim line models but then people have to go re-buy the same machine again. If the PS3 is going to be 'expanded', then won't it look the same ugly way for the next 5+ years?
The reason why I mention this is that in the 70s, the wood finishings on the Pong and Atari 2600 looked cool for its time. Today, they look ridiculous. The gray tone with the black lines of the NES looked cool then. After all, the console's design was to fit the taste of the 80s. The Super NES looks like an abomination today. I know Xbox players mad at the Xbox 360 lack of BC since they can't throw out their Xboxes. And I know Gamecube owners who can't wait for the Wii so they can remove the purple lunchbox away from their living room.
Even if the PS3 is upgradable, it still is an ugly fit. Over time, a console gets uglier in the living room, not prettier.
It actually is nothing about the graphics. He revealed it when he said that 'not many people really played video games'.
The big myth is that people like him believed gaming became 'mainstream' with the Playstation. The Playstation Generation believes that prior systems such as the NES, Atari, and computers such as the Commodore 64 had very few people playing them. But, behold, Sony appeared and suddenly gaming became 'mainstream'. This has been the most effective marketing technique I've seen in console gaming.
Gaming has never become mainstream when you account for population growth. Consoles have not penetrated past a third of households which was established during the NES days. Most of the growth in the industry has come from multiple console ownership. With Sony's introduction into the industry came huge marketing muscle. The huge marketing budgets keep telling gamers how 'cool' they now are. But sales numbers are stubborn things. If gaming is now 'mainstream', then why is Super Mario Brothers 3 still the best selling non-bundled game by a mile?
This myth is also believed by Xbox fans (or the Xbox Generation). They believe Halo and Halo 2 are some of the best selling games ever made. I sit them down and show them the numbers. Three games on the Gamecube practically matched Halo in sales: Super Smash Brothers Melee, Mario Kart Double Dash, and Super Mario Sunshine (which was seen as a disapointment). Goldeneye (for the N64) outsold Halo 2. Donkey Kong Country, Super Mario Kart (SNES and N64 version), Final Fantasy 7, all outsold Halo 2. In fact, Halo 2 doesn't even appear in the top 25 best selling console games. After seeing the numbers, almost every Xbox Generation member then says, "But Halo 2 had be biggest opening beating the movie Spiderman 2!" It's sad they don't realize that this doesn't show the popularity of Halo 2 but the power of Microsoft's marketing of super-hyped sales.
Xbox Live for the Xbox only had two million subscribers. Yet, the Xbox Generation believes that is 'mainstream'. Around 20 million Xboxes sold is an "amazing success". Around 20 million Gamecubes sold is a "horrible failure". Hilariously, the Xbox Generation thinks the Xbox 360 is much cheaper than the Playstation 3. But an Xbox 360 plus four years of Xbox Live costs the same as the $600 PS3.
Marketing has also been very effective with the word 'hardcore'. A 'hardcore gamer' is, essentially, a nerd gamer. (not mocking it, just saying what it is)
In their view, if you play games such as Civilization, Zelda, or even World of Warcraft, you are a 'nerd gamer'. But if you play realistic war and sports games, then you are 'hardcore'. They believe 'hardcore' is synonymous with 'cool' where hardcore used to mean 'dedicated, nerd-like, obsessed, and skilled'.
Gaming now has to be mainstream, after all, Sony/Microsoft said so! Nintendo and Sega also have marketing but nothing that approaches the budgets of Sony and Microsoft. Anyone remember during the 16-bit days of kids preferring the Genesis not because of its games but because of its 'rebellious image'? This is the same sad story going on with these self-declared 'hardcore' gamers.
Marketing works... only for a little while. Then reality appears. The reality, for Xbox Generation, is that the Xbox 360 is only selling around the same level as the original Xbox (flopped just as hard in Japan) and to the same exact demographic. The Halo franchise has reached the tipping point similiar to what happened in the middle of the Metal Gear Solid franchise. Halo 3 will most likely not sell as much as Halo 2.
The reality for the Playstation Generation is that $600 price tag (no console can be mainstream with that price tag). Gran Turismo 4 sold considerably less than Gran Turismo 3. Metal Gear Solid 3 sold less than Metal Gear Solid 2. Final Fantasy has been selling less. Animal Crossing DS has outsold Final Fantasy 12 in Japan. Grand Theft Auto 3 sold only two million on the PSP. The Playstation's exclusive franchises are in decline.
Thes