Dcubed Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 I wouldn't say that's really an achievement as a lot of casuals just bought a Wii for Wii sports, or perhaps only 1 or 2 other games too. Wii U has a much higher proportion of dedicated Nintendo fans...who still aren't buying that many games for it. Goes to show what you know... Wii had a tie ratio of roughly 9:1. That's one of the highest tie ratios that any console has ever had (when only counting consoles whose life cycles have "finished" - it's the third highest that any console has ever had, second only to the PS2 and the GCN, which were both around 10:1, with the GCN narrowly edging out the PS2). So yes, contrary to popular internet belief, the Wii was actually quite the software selling beast! (not to mention that the tie ratio also doesn't count digital software sales either, which would obviously push it even higher). And don't bother discounting Wii Sports, because those other consoles' tie ratios also count bundled software too (and both the PS2 and GCN featured bundled software galore throughout their respective lifecycles, so it's a perfectly fair comparison). Ultimately it just goes to show how useless a metric that tie ratios are in the grand scheme of things though. Lower selling consoles always have higher tie ratios because sales are more concentrated on that smaller audience. There are other metrics that are far more useful than the tie ratio (such as total software sales, seasonality, genre patterns etc) but the internet populace is totally fixated on tie ratios because that's the metric that Microsoft kept flaunting because it made the 360 look good in its early days when the Wii was kicking it's arse (people are easily conditioned it seems )
Sheikah Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) Ultimately it just goes to show how useless a metric that tie ratios are in the grand scheme of things though. Lower selling consoles always have higher tie ratios because sales are more concentrated on that smaller audience. There are other metrics that are far more useful than the tie ratio (such as total software sales, seasonality, genre patterns etc) but the internet populace is totally fixated on tie ratios because that's the metric that Microsoft kept flaunting because it made the 360 look good in its early days when the Wii was kicking it's arse (people are easily conditioned it seems ) And that's exactly the point I made. It's not even an achievement, or really even indicative of anything, because the people left supporting the Wii U are the ones likely to buy lots of Nintendo games, because they're core fans. And yet, it's not doing as well as it should; a lot of people with the console still aren't buying some of the top games, even though there's barely anything else to buy. I distinctly remember seeing articles about SM3DW having very low attach rates. Ultimately it doesn't matter if the Wii had a better ratio than some other consoles, because it'll still inevitably have had the people I mentioned (only buying it for Wii sports and perhaps a few other games) to bring that ratio down, by balancing out the fans who bought lots of games on it. The Wii U doesn't draw the same diverse crowd to bring the ratio down, yet there's still undeniably quite a low attach rate for some of its big hitter games. Edited January 28, 2015 by Sheikah
Wii Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) This weeks Japanese software and hardware sales. 1. [PS3] Tales of Zestiria – 340,891 / NEW 2. [3DS] The Legend of Legacy – 53,974 / NEW 3. [WIU] Kirby and the Rainbow Curse – 32,137 / NEW 4. [3DS] Youkai Watch 2: Shinuchi – 31,875 / 2,404,246 5. [3DS] Pokemon Omega Ruby/Alpha Sapphire – 17,035 / 2,474,658 6. [PSV] Atelier Escha & Logy Plus – 15,778 / NEW 7. [3DS] Monster Hunter 4 Ultimate – 12,318 / 2,440,373 8. [PSV] Ken no Machi no Ihoujin – Kuro no Kyuuden – 11,559 / NEW 9. [3DS] Super Smash Bros. for 3DS – 10,475 / 2,122,433 10. [3DS] Kenka Bancho 6 – 8,794 / 33,068 11. [WIU] Super Smash Bros. for Wii U – 8,728 / 569,714 12. [3DS] Youkai Watch 2 – 5,979 / 3,088,387 13. [WIU] Mario Kart 8 – 5,386 / 901,365 14. [3DS] Final Fantasy Explorers – 5,178 / 249,497 15. [3DS] LEGO Marvel Super Heroes – 5,052 / NEW 16. [3DS] Animal Crossing: New Leaf – 5,006 / 3,904,259 17. [PSV] Gundam Breaker 2 – 4,397 / 122,296 18. [WIU] LEGO Marvel Super Heroes – 4,207 / NEW 19. [PS3] Grand Theft Auto V New Price Version – 4,133 / 116,633 20. [PS4] Grand Theft Auto V – 3,831 / 154,713 New 3DS LL – 20,065 (25,299) Vita – 14,991 (16,823) PS4 – 13,793 (15,480) PS3 – 8,600 (7,036) New 3DS – 8,028 (9,916) Wii U – 7,088 (8,894) 3DS LL – 3,882 (4,776) 3DS – 3,287 (4,238) Vita TV – 589 (682) Xbox One – 259 (300) Very disappointing sales for Kirby and the Rainbow Curse. Disappointing numbers for Wii U too. We may be at the point now where the PS4 starts to leave the Wii U behind. Though there's very few games in the charts for PS4, it continues to get more new buyers each week. Edited January 28, 2015 by Wii
khilafah Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) Should have released Kirby and the rainbow curse on 3DS instead. 2nd worse opening for any Kirby game. Edited January 28, 2015 by khilafah
liger05 Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Should have released Kirby and the rainbow curse on 3DS instead. 2nd worse opening for any Kirby game. Yep big mistake to go with the wii u over the 3ds
Serebii Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Yep big mistake to go with the wii u over the 3ds You could argue that for any Wii U title that sells badly. The Wii U needs software. Will it always sell well? Probably not.
liger05 Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 You could argue that for any Wii U title that sells badly. The Wii U needs software. Will it always sell well? Probably not. You could indeed but the if its a choice between launching a game on a toxic platform or one which generates good software sales I would pick the latter. A Kirby title should never be opening with such low numbers.
Wii Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 It was never going to do well as say Kirby Triple Deluxe. It's not a traditional Kirby title and yes the graphics are beautiful but you spend your time looking at the gamepad. It could have been a 3DS easily, probably should have been. But still 32,000 for Kirby in Japan is pittance.
liger05 Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 While the 3ds attach rate is in line with the GBA is that what the benchmark should be? Surely the aim should be to better than that? The 3DS should sell more software and the dropping software prices would help. A new 3DS owner should be able to pick up the gems released many months ago for bargain prices.
Goafer Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) A new 3DS owner should be able to pick up the gems released many months ago for bargain prices. That's one thing that has always bothered me about the 3DS. I've wanted Fire Emblem for a long time, but I've never seen it cheaper than £35. To me, that's just too much for a game that's almost 3 years old and not exactly rare or collectible. Edited January 28, 2015 by Goafer
Hero-of-Time Posted January 29, 2015 Author Posted January 29, 2015 That's one thing that has always bothered me about the 3DS. I've wanted Fire Emblem for a long time, but I've never seen it cheaper than £35. To me, that's just too much for a game that's almost 3 years old and not exactly rare or collectible. It was £17 on Amazon before Christmas. I even posted the bargain in the Wii U/3DS bargain thread. I get what you're saying though, there's very rarely a general drop in Nintendo software prices.
liger05 Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 It was £17 on Amazon before Christmas. I even posted the bargain in the Wii U/3DS bargain thread. I get what you're saying though, there's very rarely a general drop in Nintendo software prices. I don’t understand the logic. They continue to miss SW sales forecasted projections yet never feel that a reduce in software prices would help. If people are not buying the amount of software they forecast and price isn’t the reason then what is? I would love Nintendo to explain why the 3DS does not meet software sales expectations.
Grazza Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 I don’t understand the logic. They continue to miss SW sales forecasted projections yet never feel that a reduce in software prices would help. Not to mention that a £20 Player's Choice range might actually make people think "I want a lot of those, I'll buy the console". Instead, Nintendo seems to prefer titles like Pikmin 3 to go out of print whilst never knowing how many copies they could really have sold.
liger05 Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 Not to mention that a £20 Player's Choice range might actually make people think "I want a lot of those, I'll buy the console". Instead, Nintendo seems to prefer titles like Pikmin 3 to go out of print whilst never knowing how many copies they could really have sold. I appreciate the whole not wanting to devalue their products but is software being sold at a discounted price a year or even longer after release really devaluing the product? I don’t think someone who picks up a game a year after release for £20 suddenly believes that any game Nintendo release is only worth £20.
Sheikah Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 You could argue that for any Wii U title that sells badly. The Wii U needs software. Will it always sell well? Probably not. Yeah, people say it about everything. I have heard people say that about Smash too, that it was great to go to 3DS first and whatnot. If they don't make the Wii U the flagship console for enough of their series then it's no wonder the console isn't doing as well as it could be.
liger05 Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 Yeah, people say it about everything. I have heard people say that about Smash too, that it was great to go to 3DS first and whatnot. If they don't make the Wii U the flagship console for enough of their series then it's no wonder the console isn't doing as well as it could be. Nintendo do no treat there handhelds as a secondary platform like Sony do. Games are shared between console and handheld with the handheld versions getting just as much priority as a console game. When has the Wii U or any console been flagship? The most important business for Nintendo is the handheld market. Look at how Nintendo responded to the lukewarm response the 3DS received at launch for evidence of that. I don't think anyone can deny that Smash going on the 3DS first was a smart move. The numbers do not lie.
Grazza Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 Nintendo do no treat there handhelds as a secondary platform like Sony do. Games are shared between console and handheld with the handheld versions getting just as much priority as a console game. When has the Wii U or any console been flagship? The most important business for Nintendo is the handheld market. Look at how Nintendo responded to the lukewarm response the 3DS received at launch for evidence of that. This is another reminder that handhelds and consoles used to be completely different - consoles would get the big, 3D masterpieces like Wind Waker, Mario Sunshine etc; handhelds would get more modest, 2D games. In that sense, I completely know what @Sheikah means. When they got OOT running on the 3DS, however, it was clear times had changed. Add to that the fact the 3DS is the first handheld to get Smash Bros, and the strategy Iwata has hinted at makes perfect sense. My personal hope is that the next handheld and console play exactly the same software, with it all being available on handheld if you're prepared to accept it lower res.
Sheikah Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) Nintendo do no treat there handhelds as a secondary platform like Sony do. Games are shared between console and handheld with the handheld versions getting just as much priority as a console game. When has the Wii U or any console been flagship? The most important business for Nintendo is the handheld market. Look at how Nintendo responded to the lukewarm response the 3DS received at launch for evidence of that. You being serious? When has any console from Nintendo been the flagship platform for certain titles? Since, like, the dawn of time? Look at the big Zelda games - they've always been on home console. The handheld Zelda games have always been different in scale to them. Just as it works the other way - main Pokemon titles never appear on home console (Pocket Monsters is the clue!). Until now, Smash has always been home console, which has also been the same for 3D mario games prior to 3D Land. You could argue that this has been down to technological limitations, but that doesn't change the fact that Nintendo's home consoles were the 'flagship' platforms for many of their series. That's not the point I was trying to make anyway. You could say "game X will do better on 3DS" as a reason to never bring a single game to Wii U, ever. It just means there's even less games released on Wii U, and less reason to buy it! It's a self-created problem. I don't think anyone can deny that Smash going on the 3DS first was a smart move. The numbers do not lie. I can deny it, because this line of thinking is absolutely stupid. The 3DS version, if anything, had a much higher chance of doing well without help. They should have launched on Wii U first so that the maximum number of people bought it as it was their 'only' way to get Smash at the time - bringing new customers along too. They would have done better to never announce it was coming to 3DS, causing people to buy the Wii U version, then release it on 3DS shortly after. Edited February 2, 2015 by Sheikah
liger05 Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 You being serious? When has any console from Nintendo been the flagship platform for certain titles? Since, like, the dawn of time? Look at the big Zelda games - they've always been on home console. The handheld Zelda games have always been different in scale to them. Just as it works the other way - main Pokemon titles never appear on home console (Pocket Monsters is the clue!). Until now, Smash has always been home console, which has also been the same for 3D mario games prior to 3D Land. You could argue that this has been down to technological limitations, but that doesn't change the fact that Nintendo's home consoles were the 'flagship' platforms for many of their series. That's not the point I was trying to make anyway. You could say "game X will do better on 3DS" as a reason to never bring a single game to Wii U, ever. It just means there's even less games released on Wii U, and less reason to buy it! It's a self-created problem. I can deny it, because this line of thinking is absolutely stupid. The 3DS version, if anything, had a much higher chance of doing well without help. They should have launched on Wii U first so that the maximum number of people bought it as it was their 'only' way to get Smash at the time - bringing new customers along too. They would have done better to never announce it was coming to 3DS, causing people to buy the Wii U version, then release it on 3DS shortly after. I didn't ask if games have been flagship on console? I asked when has the console ever been the flagship platform? It hasn't. No doubt technical limitations had a part to play and now handhelds can produce graphics which were accustomed to consoles the library will see titles shared between console and handheld. As for Smash going on wii u first. That would of been beyond silly. The wii u version is the definitive version and releasing it first on wii u would of hurt the 3ds version as it's the lesser game. Nintendo played the right move and whether one could argue that the 3DS version would of done relatively well regardless I don't think it would of done such great numbers if roles were reversed.
Sheikah Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 I didn't ask if games have been flagship on console? I asked when has the console ever been the flagship platform? It hasn't. Whuuut...are you saying? Are you freaking high? Home console has ALWAYS been the flagship for gaming, particularly with Nintendo! Handhelds have ever been the reserve for cheaper, generally lower wow factor games with a lower budget (again, talking about any time but the present here). Look at Ocarina of Time versus the handheld offerings, Super Metroid/Prime versus handheld games, the 3D Mario games versus the Mario Land/New Super Mario range (again, the latter is also on home console now). It's obviously changing now, because of the removal of technical limitations (and the decrease in home console popularity in Japan). But your questions are along the lines of "when has it ever", so I'm sure as hell bringing the past into this! As for Smash going on wii u first. That would of been beyond silly. The wii u version is the definitive version and releasing it first on wii u would of hurt the 3ds version as it's the lesser game. I know I've corrected you before, but this is a real pet hate of mine. It's "would have" not "would of". "I would have liked to have seen that feature included". As for that. I've literally no clue what you're saying here. The console that gets it first gets the biggest helping hand, because peeps be hungering for Smash. People don't need convincing to buy a 3DS. Many people have it already. It will sell. People need convincing to buy a Wii U. Nintendo played the right move and whether one could argue that the 3DS version would of done relatively well regardless I don't think it would of done such great numbers if roles were reversed. Oh god, you're trying to kill me.
liger05 Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 I Whuuut...are you saying? Are you freaking high? Home console has ALWAYS been the flagship for gaming, particularly with Nintendo! Handhelds have ever been the reserve for cheaper, generally lower wow factor games with a lower budget (again, talking about any time but the present here). Look at Ocarina of Time versus the handheld offerings, Super Metroid/Prime versus handheld games, the 3D Mario games versus the Mario Land/New Super Mario range (again, the latter is also on home console now). It's obviously changing now, because of the removal of technical limitations (and the decrease in home console popularity in Japan). But your questions are along the lines of "when has it ever", so I'm sure as hell bringing the past into this! I know I've corrected you before, but this is a real pet hate of mine. It's "would have" not "would of". "I would have liked to have seen that feature included". As for that. I've literally no clue what you're saying here. The console that gets it first gets the biggest helping hand, because peeps be hungering for Smash. People don't need convincing to buy a 3DS. Many people have it already. It will sell. People need convincing to buy a Wii U. Oh god, you're trying to kill me. You're preaching to the wrong person so I would say give up with the grammatical corrections already. You seem to be being confused with what I'm saying. I never said consoles were not the platforms where the titles would be the most premium. I'm saying Nintendo have never treated their handheld business as a secondary platform and the only reason we never saw titles that we see today on handhelds was down to technical limitations. Nintendo's home consoles will always be the most powerful but the handhelds now offer them the chance to get franchises which were always console games on the handheld and that's not a problem. Let me just flip it around. The PS4 is selling just fine while the Vita has bombed. Should Sony instead getting there A teams developing PS4 games get those titles on the platform that needs help in selling? The idea that smash was always going to sell like it has on the 3ds regardless is simply hindsight talking. Nobody was predicting that the game would sell as well as did on a handheld. It's been such a hit that now you expect the franchise to continue on a handheld.
Sheikah Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 (edited) That's a fucking rubbish comparison. Nintendo already were making Smash for both platforms at the same time, so saying it's akin to Sony completely diverting their development efforts from PS4 to Vita is wrong. It's simply a case of what should have released first - it should have been Wii U to give it a helping hand. You also just proved my point. You argued that the home console wasn't king, then argued that it actually was because of technical reasons. You literally just made the same case I made - that the home console was always the platform that had the most focus for Nintendo. Saying one format was never treated as secondary is frigging bonkers man, given one received so much more effort, money and attention than the other. That's why I had no clue why you were challenging such an obvious truth! Edited February 3, 2015 by Sheikah
Hero-of-Time Posted February 4, 2015 Author Posted February 4, 2015 Sony Q3 results are in and the PS4 has done the business, shipping 6.4 million in just one quarter! Computer Entertainment Systems (PS3, PS4): 7.5 million (6.4 million PS4)Portable Entertainment Systems (PSP, PSVita): 1.4 million Software (Sales): 147 million
Sheikah Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 Hot damn, it's good to see them doing so well. I love that its USP is basically making a console people want and getting good games for it, rather than focusing on gimmicks.
Recommended Posts