General Gaming Sales/Charts Discussion

[Serebii]

This is bullshit in its purest form.

 

Read my post above, if other companies can do it successfully, how come Nintendo can't? The only response I usually hear to this is "because retailers hate/have a bias towards Nintendo", which makes no fucking sense.

Only Steam manages to get away with it. Sony and MS don't and they do the same.

 

Outside of sales (which also happen on the eShop funnily enough), the games stay at RRP. Yes, there is now the Plus scheme that gives free, old, games, but that's not relevant in regards to the topic at hand.

 

Nintendo do sales, they do special offers, just like the others. I find it ridiculous that Nintendo get slated when the others do the exact same thing, but they instead give older games for free to convince people to get into their ridiculous multiplayer paywalls.

[Debug Mode]

Only Steam manages to get away with it. Sony and MS don't and they do the same.

 

Outside of sales (which also happen on the eShop funnily enough), the games stay at RRP. Yes, there is now the Plus scheme that gives free, old, games, but that's not relevant in regards to the topic at hand.

 

Nintendo do sales, they do special offers, just like the others. I find it ridiculous that Nintendo get slated when the others do the exact same thing, but they instead give older games for free to convince people to get into their ridiculous multiplayer paywalls.

 

Sony gets away with it. They have some very competitively priced games and they offer a lot more discounts than Nintendo do, so why aren't they in the state of MUST APPEASE THE RETAILERS.

 

Nintendo fanboys are full of shit and they know it. "Retailers shunning Nintendo? MUST BE BIAS, TYPICAL, EVERY ONE HATES NINTENDO".

 

..Because Nintendo can do nothing wrong right?

[Sheikah]

Only Steam manages to get away with it. Sony and MS don't and they do the same.

 

Outside of sales (which also happen on the eShop funnily enough), the games stay at RRP. Yes, there is now the Plus scheme that gives free, old, games, but that's not relevant in regards to the topic at hand.

 

Nintendo do sales, they do special offers, just like the others. I find it ridiculous that Nintendo get slated when the others do the exact same thing, but they instead give older games for free to convince people to get into their ridiculous multiplayer paywalls.

 

Hey Serebii a lot of the information here isn't correct. Sony actually prices games pretty well online (apart from immediately released retail games). Compared to the eShop the prices are very good.

[Rowan]

Nintendo have been pretty creative with working around retailer demands with the early eShop releases, Luigi U being cheaper as DLC as well as the Pikmin W101 bundle. Likewise, along with permanent price drops on both PSN & eShop, the games free on Plus are getting better and newer with AC3, Remember Me, Far Cry 3 all released in the past year. Then there's games free near to release like Thomas Was Alone, Resogun & Drive Club which is great value. The Xbox sales & USA PSN sales are generally quite good that given the circumstances I think they're doing the best they can.

 

Sure we'd like to see all release games at least at same pricing as disc or a tad cheaper but the reality is there are far more retailers to please and the likelihood that one of them will price them cheaper. I'm hoping with the start of the next gen more retailers will opt to selling download codes to bring digital prices down. I think they'll have to as one day it'll be a disc less future.

[Serebii]

Hey Serebii a lot of the information here isn't correct. Sony actually prices games pretty well online (apart from immediately released retail games). Compared to the eShop the prices are very good.

Really? Everything I have seen, outside of sales and later price reductions, has been the games listed at RRP which is identical to Nintendo. Nintendo have sales on it. They have permanent price reductions. The only thing they don't do that Sony does is the gift for accepting the paywall.

 

The difference is, Sony games lose their value quicker than Nintendo ones, and that's why first party games stay at RRP longer.

[liger05]

liger PSN just give the titles away as part of Plus, which is even better than cheap.

 

Steam is often cheap.

 

Nintendo are definitely far behind here. Games mostly stay at RRP.

 

Thats not the argument. I'm saying new games on day 1 which are on PSN or Live to download will be the same price as the retailers package price or more expensive just like Nintendo's games are. All the publishers are in the same boat.

 

I cant see how that can even be denied unless someone has example of when this isnt the case.

[Hero-of-Time]

Thats not the argument. I'm saying new games on day 1 which are on PSN or Live to download will be the same price as the retailers package price or more expensive just like Nintendo's games are. All the publishers are in the same boat.

 

I cant see how that can even be denied unless someone has example of when this isnt the case.

 

Puppeteer was launched on the PSN store for £24.99. Shops were selling it for £30. Tearaway is for preorder on PSN with special DLC for £19.99. Shops are selling this for £22-£30.

 

EDIT: Sly Raccon Thieves in Time may have been cheaper on PSN as well but I can't be certain.

Edited November 3, 2013 by Hero-of-Time

[Debug Mode]

The difference is, Sony games lose their value quicker than Nintendo ones, and that's why first party games stay at RRP longer.

 

Although this is technically fact, it's a slippery slope of an argument as seen here.

[liger05]

Puppeteer was launched on the PSN store for £24.99. Shops were selling it for £30. Tearaway is for preorder on PSN with special DLC for £19.99. Shops are selling this for £22-£30.

 

Thank you for the examples but you know as well as I do there are plenty games from publishers up on PSN which are more expensive than retail.

 

Cod Ghosts for example will be more expensive to download than buy from a retailer. I'm not saying its right but I understand why that's the case and its simply because the retailers cannot be undercut to the extent where they lose a huge proportion of sales to download.

 

Even old games generally stay very expensive. I can go on Live right now and see Saints Row IV for example for £39.99 to download. The game is £29.99 on amazon to buy.

 

Rayman Legends £34.99 to download, GTA V 49.99 and so on.

Edited November 3, 2013 by liger05

[Hero-of-Time]

Indeed there is. My point is that Sony are releasing games cheaper on PSN than at retail, so it can be done.

[Serebii]

Even if that is the case, Nintendo isn't exactly in a position to risk pissing off retailers at the moment

[Sheikah]

Thats not the argument. I'm saying new games on day 1 which are on PSN or Live to download will be the same price as the retailers package price or more expensive just like Nintendo's games are. All the publishers are in the same boat.

 

I cant see how that can even be denied unless someone has example of when this isnt the case.

 

Why would Day 1 games be cheaper in any format? Even Steam don't usually sell a game just released at a considerable discount.

 

What I was really getting at was that most first party Nintendo games hover at or around RRP even for years after release. Not true with Sony though - in fact Sony's games often find their way onto Plus giveaway content rather quickly.

 

Even if that is the case, Nintendo isn't exactly in a position to risk pissing off retailers at the moment

 

It sure is with the 3DS. It's doing very well with the 3DS, so in that respect it's in just as good a postion as Sony are with the PS3 who do it already.

 

Heck, even look at the Vita. That thing is not doing well commercially, yet often has heavily discounted games on PSN or giveaway content in Plus.

 

It's more a case of Nintendo won't than can't.

 

Although this is technically fact, it's a slippery slope of an argument as seen here.

 

I actually disagree with that Nintendo games keep their value - it's more that Nintendo choose not to lower their prices. Sony could do exactly the same if they really cared to. The argument that the games themselves keep their value cannot be true - game stores are littered with copies. It's not a case of there being limited copies of their games (e.g. like Twilight Pricness Gamecube) thus they retain a high price. Nintendo just choose to keep the price high since they still sell enough of them to be 'content'.

 

I prefer Sony's strategy because surely a year or so after the release of a game, the sales of the title are hardly going to be spectacular. Even timed sales to get bumps in sales would be a good idea (often Sony does do this kind of thing). Just leaving a game for years at a price just seems really unambitious to me.

Edited November 3, 2013 by Sheikah
Automerged Doublepost

[liger05]

Why would Day 1 games be cheaper in any format? Even Steam don't usually sell a game just released at a considerable discount.

 

What I was really getting at was that most first party Nintendo games hover at or around RRP even for years after release. Not true with Sony though - in fact Sony's games often find their way onto Plus giveaway content rather quickly.

 

Because thats what I thought the original point was. Nintendo software being too expensive to download when in fact its no different to how any other publishers price there games digitally and as I showed with examples digital downloads do not come down in price like they do @ retail. They generally stay more expensive regardless of how old the game is.

 

 

I actually disagree with that Nintendo games keep their value - it's more that Nintendo choose not to lower their prices. Sony could do exactly the same if they really cared to. The argument that the games themselves keep their value cannot be true - game stores are littered with copies. It's not a case of there being limited copies of their games (e.g. like Twilight Pricness Gamecube) thus they retain a high price. Nintendo just choose to keep the price high since they still sell enough of them to be 'content'.

 

I prefer Sony's strategy because surely a year or so after the release of a game, the sales of the title are hardly going to be spectacular. Even timed sales to get bumps in sales would be a good idea (often Sony does do this kind of thing). Just leaving a game for years at a price just seems really unambitious to me.

 

I'm very critical of Nintendo but any other publisher with the Ip's Nintendo have knowing they can still sell at such high prices would do the same. COD doesnt really reduce in price before the next game comes out, neither does Fifa.

[Sheikah]

I think most games are reduced in price when sales fall below a certain threshold. I'm sure Nintendo game sales fall below that threshold, just that they aren't as bothered by it. I mean, it's not like a lot of Nintendo games still around full price even chart each week/month/whatever.

[liger05]

I think most games are reduced in price when sales fall below a certain threshold. I'm sure Nintendo game sales fall below that threshold, just that they aren't as bothered by it. I mean, it's not like a lot of Nintendo games still around full price even chart each week/month/whatever.

 

No but they tend to be evergreen titles. I.e. If someone buys a 3ds or wii u its very very likely that at least one of the games they purchase with the hardware will be one of those core ip's regardless of how old the title is at the time of purchase.

 

Now of course we all want to see games get reduced in price overtime but rightly or wrongly Nintendo pretty much don't need to it.

[Debug Mode]

I actually disagree with that Nintendo games keep their value - it's more that Nintendo choose not to lower their prices. Sony could do exactly the same if they really cared to. The argument that the games themselves keep their value cannot be true - game stores are littered with copies. It's not a case of there being limited copies of their games (e.g. like Twilight Pricness Gamecube) thus they retain a high price. Nintendo just choose to keep the price high since they still sell enough of them to be 'content'.

 

I didn't really word my point very well, but I'm agreeing with you. It's technically correct because the prices do stay higher for longer, but it's also incorrect because the points presented in the thread I linked to.

[liger05]

Pal Week 44, 2013 - Individual Formats (Units)

 

01 (NE) 360 ASSASSIN'S CREED IV: BLACK FLAG (UBISOFT)

02 (NE) 360 BATTLEFIELD 4 (ELECTRONIC ARTS)

03 (NE) PS3 ASSASSIN'S CREED IV: BLACK FLAG (UBISOFT)

04 (NE) PC FOOTBALL MANAGER 2014 (SEGA)

05 (NE) PS3 BATTLEFIELD 4 (ELECTRONIC ARTS)

06 (04) 360 FIFA 14 (ELECTRONIC ARTS)

07 (03) 360 GRAND THEFT AUTO V (TAKE 2)

08 (01) 360 BATMAN: ARKHAM ORIGINS (WARNER BROS. INTERACTIVE)

09 (NE) 360 WWE 2K14 (TAKE 2)

10 (05) PS3 GRAND THEFT AUTO V (TAKE 2)

11 (02) PS3 BATMAN: ARKHAM ORIGINS (WARNER BROS. INTERACTIVE)

12 (06) PS3 FIFA 14 (ELECTRONIC ARTS)

13 (NE) PS3 WWE 2K14 (TAKE 2)

14 (NE) PC BATTLEFIELD 4 (ELECTRONIC ARTS)

15 (09) 360 MINECRAFT: XBOX 360 EDITION (MICROSOFT)

16 (08) 3DS POKÉMON Y (NINTENDO)

17 (07) 3DS POKÉMON X (NINTENDO)

18 (13) WII JUST DANCE 2014 (UBISOFT)

19 (12) 360 SKYLANDERS SWAP FORCE (ACTIVISION BLIZZARD)

20 (14) WII SKYLANDERS SWAP FORCE (ACTIVISION BLIZZARD)

21 (18) 3DS ANIMAL CROSSING: NEW LEAF (NINTENDO)

22 (30) 360 TOMB RAIDER (SQUARE ENIX EUROPE)

23 (19) 360 F1 2013 (CODEMASTERS)

24 (10) NDS MOSHI MONSTERS: KATSUMA UNLEASHED (MIND CANDY)

25 (17) PS3 SKYLANDERS SWAP FORCE (ACTIVISION BLIZZARD)

26 (37) 360 HALO 4 (MICROSOFT)

27 (15) PS3 BEYOND TWO SOULS (SONY COMPUTER ENT.)

28 (28) 360 TOM CLANCY'S SPLINTER CELL: BLACKLIST (UBISOFT)

29 (21) 360 DISNEY INFINITY (DISNEY INTERACTIVE STUDIOS)

30 (39) 360 SAINTS ROW IV (KOCH MEDIA)

31 (24) PS3 F1 2013 (CODEMASTERS)

32 (26) WII DISNEY INFINITY (DISNEY INTERACTIVE STUDIOS)

33 (11) NDS LEGO THE LORD OF THE RINGS (WARNER BROS. INTERACTIVE)

34 (32) 360 LEGO BATMAN 2: DC SUPER HEROES (WARNER BROS. INTERACTIVE)

35 (16) PC THE SIMS 3: INTO THE FUTURE (ELECTRONIC ARTS)

36 (34) 360 MAX PAYNE 3 (TAKE 2)

37 (20) PS3 THE LAST OF US (SONY COMPUTER ENT.)

38 (36) 3DS LUIGI'S MANSION 2 (NINTENDO)

39 (23) PS3 MAX PAYNE 3 (TAKE 2)

40 (31) PS3 GRAN TURISMO 5 ACADEMY EDITION (SONY COMPUTER ENT.)

 

Wii Play U gone already.

 

Did anyone actually see a Wii Play U advert on tv? I never saw one!!

Edited November 4, 2013 by liger05

[Wii]

Wii Play U gone already.

 

Did anyone actually see a Wii Play U advert on tv? I never saw one!!

 

Don't you mean Wii Party U? Nope. Haven't seen any Wii U ad full stop nevermind Wii Party U. The last ad I seen was Pikmin 3 and that was back in July. Wii Party U is a junk game, the only good thing about it is the bundled Wii remote.

[liger05]

Don't you mean Wii Party U? Nope. Haven't seen any Wii U ad full stop nevermind Wii Party U. The last ad I seen was Pikmin 3 and that was back in July. Wii Party U is a junk game, the only good thing about it is the bundled Wii remote.

 

Yes Wii Party U. The Wii one could be considered 'junk' as well but still sold like crazy. I think the performance of wii party U again is just more confirmation that that audience from the Wii has vanished and trying to get them back is pointless.

 

I saw the Zelda ad quite a few times and last week I was watching Disney channel a lot with my son and the Sonic lost world ads would come on all the time.

 

In a way I am glad wii party U is bombing as it seems that seeing the wii_ titles bomb is the only way Nintendo HQ are going to accept that people have moved on and its time they did as well.

[Serebii]

Yes Wii Party U. The Wii one could be considered 'junk' as well but still sold like crazy. I think the performance of wii party U again is just more confirmation that that audience from the Wii has vanished and trying to get them back is pointless.

 

I saw the Zelda ad quite a few times and last week I was watching Disney channel a lot with my son and the Sonic lost world ads would come on all the time.

 

In a way I am glad wii party U is bombing as it seems that seeing the wii_ titles bomb is the only way Nintendo HQ are going to accept that people have moved on and its time they did as well.

Why the frak would you be glad something is bombing?

[liger05]

Why the frak would you be glad something is bombing?

 

Because Nintendo can do so much better and it seems like no matter what the market trends indicate they continue to ignore them.

[Rummy]

He even kind of explained it right there after he said it.

 

Don't you mean Wii Party U? Nope. Haven't seen any Wii U ad full stop nevermind Wii Party U. The last ad I seen was Pikmin 3 and that was back in July. Wii Party U is a junk game, the only good thing about it is the bundled Wii remote.

 

I've seen/noticed less adverts recently - either oblivious to them or it feels to me that they only have them when stuff's coming out(saw a couple for WWHD/bundle). Sure someone mentioned not seeing any for w101, and I can at least concur with that myself - however my TV consumption isn't very much or focused these days.

[Sheikah]

Why the frak would you be glad something is bombing?

 

Weird, if a game wasn't good (well, according to him) why would you want it do well? If it doesn't do well then they won't spend time and resources making a sequel and maybe spend it on better things.

[Wii]

More news of Sonic Lost World's lackluster debut in Japan

 

We already knew that Sonic Lost World didn't have a good debut in Japan, but that was focusing in on the sub-5,000 copies the 3DS version sold at launch. Now info has come in for the Wii U version, putting it at 2,076 copies sold. Sonic games really don't seem to do all that hot in Japan, and unfortunately that trend seems to be continuing.

 

http://gonintendo.com/?mode=viewstory&id=216238

[Blade]

It's just a continous flow of bad news for the Wii U.