Post by: joeamis on August 11, 2004, 11:37:18 AM
Post by: couchmonkey on August 11, 2004, 12:50:06 PM
And GameCube has produced some real success stories for Sega. Oh well. I'll still play the games.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 11, 2004, 01:49:51 PM
Wait, is it heading to Player's Choice now?
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on August 11, 2004, 04:55:19 PM
Post by: DrZoidberg on August 11, 2004, 05:01:03 PM
Post by: Infernal Monkey on August 11, 2004, 09:38:38 PM
Post by: 3rdrocket on August 11, 2004, 09:40:31 PM
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on August 12, 2004, 01:00:32 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on August 14, 2004, 12:35:13 PM
Quote
PS2:ICO, Twisted Metal Black
Good man.
Tell me what you think when you've finished it.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on August 15, 2004, 01:52:19 AM
AV Vision: Yeah hey what.
Sammy: It only sold three copies you... DOG POO STICKS.
AV Vision: ... Huh? Monkey Ball Delux? But it's... .. er, stores only opened like five minutes ago.
Sammy: God I hate that crappy GameCube! Why the hell did you go and release the Super Mario Balls on GameCube first?
AV Vision: Super.. Mario... What.
Sammy: YOU'RE FIRED.
AV Vision: We're going to Sizzler.
Sammy: *ALL ALONE*
....
Sammy: Cancel the release of every game for GameCube!
The rest of Sega: We can't cancel the games we don't make, dicks.
Sammy: WHAT ARE WE PAYING YOU FOR THEN?
Sega: TO MAKE GAMES.
Sammy: CANCEL GAMECUBE.
To be continued? No, not really.
Post by: Shift Key on August 15, 2004, 02:11:58 AM
Post by: Uncle Rich AiAi on August 15, 2004, 05:06:26 PM
Post by: SgtShiversBen on August 16, 2004, 12:29:47 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on August 17, 2004, 02:42:21 AM
Post by: nickmitch on August 17, 2004, 12:14:27 PM
Fudge.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 17, 2004, 01:27:34 PM
Post by: Infernal Monkey on August 19, 2004, 02:30:24 AM
"Port Super Mario Sunshine to Atari Lynx!"
Post by: KDR_11k on August 19, 2004, 10:55:17 AM
Post by: odifiend on August 19, 2004, 12:33:59 PM
SEGammy: Made money on the cube? of course it will make money on the PS2 and Xbox! PS2 is more multiplayer because more people play it!
Yesman: Watertight reasoning your highness.
Reasonableguy: what about games that start on the ps2 and xbox that make money, should we port them to the cube?
SEGammy: I like your lack of originality but it doesn't work both ways. You're demoted to fired.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 19, 2004, 01:21:23 PM
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on August 19, 2004, 03:52:56 PM
Post by: joeamis on August 23, 2004, 09:23:39 PM
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on August 27, 2004, 11:18:59 AM
Quote
since when does Sammy have a hatred to Nintendo?
Home console wise since the N64 but what 3rd party company did like the N64.
Post by: joeamis on August 27, 2004, 04:18:47 PM
Post by: odifiend on August 27, 2004, 04:23:55 PM
Post by: joeamis on August 27, 2004, 04:32:17 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: odifiend
But it is upsetting when previous exclusives go multiplatform even though they will likely not sell on the new platform. Especially when two games are for the price of one on their original system. >=\. Also the cube made monkey ball pretty damn successful, where the hell is our reward?
Likely not sell on the new platform? The userbase alone will ensure the games sell well. And especially when it's two games for the price of $29.99. Wait a second, Cube consumers receive an award because the Cube made SMB successful? Even if that was the case, that doesn't mean Cube consumers deserve an award. I guess the Cube also made other games successful, a good example, another game made by Sega, Billy Hatcher infact. The Cube made that game successful didn't it? Nope. What made SMB successful is SMB, the game. Not the console. Besides isn't SMB 3 a reward enough? It's like you said, business. It wouldn't make much business sense for them to release the games together for GC, a second time, rather than release them together on another console. If what you wanted for a reward was both of them on GC?
Post by: Mario on August 27, 2004, 11:06:37 PM
Imagine playing Super Monkey Ball with only two players, using an analog stick without notches! eeeeeeeeeeek
Post by: KDR_11k on August 27, 2004, 11:47:14 PM
joe: The userbase alonedoesn't make every game on there a success. Many companies had to learn this the hard way (and ICO still doesn't sell).
Post by: Caillan on August 27, 2004, 11:53:17 PM
Quote
Actually i'm willing to bet the GC version will outsell the PS2 version, by a lot. It seems as though Sammy just look blindly at the userbase numbers and base their decisions on that, rather than actually doing research and finding out what types of games sell more on what console.
Maybe you're right, but no company in existance will start a project - even one of such a small size - without some market research first.
The PS2
a) has a large user base, and
b) has had plenty of successful niche/obscure titles in the past
What makes you think they will sell so porrly on the PS2?
Post by: odifiend on August 28, 2004, 07:52:04 AM
So all games sell great on the PS2. Right... How much did Sonic Heroes on PS2? I'm willing to bet not as much as it did on GCN, regardless of userbase.
Reward and award are different. Use a dictionary. A reward I'd expect from monkey ball success are less games left off the gamecube when Sega/sammy decides to port to multiple platforms. I am SO unreasonable.
Post by: joeamis on August 28, 2004, 01:00:38 PM
Odifiend: words aren't simply strickened to their definitions in a dictionary, and it also depends on how they're used in the context of a sentence. And the way I used it in the sentence gives the same meaning as to what i was referring to. So the reward you expect from Sega/Sammy is for a game not to be left off the GC (that's already on the GC) when they decide to port to multiple platforms? I don't know why you whine so much about Nintendo getting the fist, in this case it was great for Nintendo they got 2 exclusives that were not ported to another system for multiple years. And yet you still find reason to complain about it. Especially when the sequel is still supposed to be coming for GC...
Post by: Mario on August 28, 2004, 04:08:09 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: farfel
Okay let's watch the numbers then.
How much did the Cube versions sell?
Super Monkey Ball - 511,385
Super Monkey Ball 2 - 343,490
That's total US sales. I don't think the PS2 version will sell more than 500,000.
Also, Sonic Heroes on GCN has sold 414,516, the PS2 version 248,710, and the Xbox version 110,325.
Post by: odifiend on August 28, 2004, 08:44:18 PM
reread:
"A reward I'd expect from monkey ball success are less games left off the gamecube when Sega/sammy decides to port to multiple platforms."
Meaning I wasn't specifically talking about monkey ball. I have no beefs with monkey ball being ported per se, but when Sega/Sammy decides to release another game, they seem to foget about the gamecube. Therefore my stance is: if you have to port our stuff, let us try some of their stuff.
Post by: joeamis on August 28, 2004, 08:46:32 PM
Post by: odifiend on August 28, 2004, 08:55:30 PM
"Likely not sell on the new platform? The userbase alone will ensure the games sell well."
"The Cube made [SMB] successful didn't it? Nope."
"SMB filled a gap in Nintendo's lineup, and SMB Collection is not doing that. While SMB was one of the best 3rd party games on the Cube."
So the cube's game drought made SMB successful. I'm not saying it was intentional but you yourself apparently agree with me now but not then.
Post by: joeamis on August 28, 2004, 09:25:49 PM
What I'm saying about it selling well because it filled a gap in the GC lineup is that, that helped it sell even better. If it wasn't a great game, it wouldn't have mattered, it would've sold poorly. Again, look at another Sega game, Billy Hatcher. That didn't do as well simply because it wasn't a good game. So I'm not contradicting myself. SMB wouldn't have sold well, even with filling the gap in the lineup, if it wasn't a good game... That only gave it a small boost. Anyways the point from the previous post really is that the PS2 has alot of better third party games than SMB upon when it will be releasing, while at the time of when it released on GC years ago the same cannot be said.
Post by: odifiend on August 28, 2004, 09:39:15 PM
I agree that Billy Hatcher was a weak attempt but while SMB was good, it practically monopolizing the lineup didn't just give it a 'small boost'. It's sequel sold 150,000 less (in America) as more games became available. That was after it became a sleeper hit. What if the original was released in more competitive times? But I'm preaching to the choir, aren't I joe? This is what you're saying will happen on the PS2. Among stiffer competition, SMB DX, two games in one won't match the success of not even the first monkeyball.
So how was Gamecube's drought or Nintendo's [insert negative noun here] not responsible for SMB's success?
"Anyways the point from the previous post really is that the PS2 has alot of better third party games than SMB upon when it will be releasing, while at the time of when it released on GC years ago the same cannot be said."
While that was the point, you still contradicted yourself in the process. 'Tis the beauty of debate.
Post by: KDR_11k on August 28, 2004, 10:52:35 PM
Either way I think those XB/PS2 games are annoying, it clearly shows that the game would be able to run on the GC but doesn't because the publisher wanted to save the few bucks it would have costed to port the game to the GC as well.
Post by: Renny on August 29, 2004, 03:28:13 AM
Post by: odifiend on August 29, 2004, 05:27:35 AM
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: farfel
Okay let's watch the numbers then.
How much did the Cube versions sell?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Super Monkey Ball - 511,385
Super Monkey Ball 2 - 343,490
That's total US sales. I don't think the PS2 version will sell more than 500,000.
Also, Sonic Heroes on GCN has sold 414,516, the PS2 version 248,710, and the Xbox version 110,325.
and that's when joe started contradicting himself.
Post by: Uncle Rich AiAi on August 30, 2004, 02:25:56 AM
Post by: joeamis on August 30, 2004, 11:07:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: odifiend
Yeah, I know because another Sega game, Fzero didn't do as well either, that must naturally be because oh wai...
I agree that Billy Hatcher was a weak attempt but while SMB was good, it practically monopolizing the lineup didn't just give it a 'small boost'. It's sequel sold 150,000 less (in America) as more games became available. That was after it became a sleeper hit. What if the original was released in more competitive times? So how was Gamecube's drought or Nintendo's [insert negative noun here] not responsible for SMB's success?
F-Zero did okay, alot better than Billy Hatcher. The difficulty turned alot of gamers away anyways... I don't know where you get your sales figures because here's the sales figures I've just seen as of January of this year for the US:
Super Monkey Ball - 299,391
Super Monkey Ball 2 - 289,870
So like I said I didn't contradict myself, like I said before SMB 1 got a boost in sales because it filled a gap in the lineup, but that boost in no way helped sell as many units than the fact that it was a good game did. Oh, and another thing... SMB1 has been out 9 months longer than SMB2, and it was more available being a launch title. Also the fact that F-zero had to compete head to head with Soul Calibur 2 with Link in it, didn't help F-zero's sales either. Finally, by the time F-zero is as old as SMB 1 or 2 is now, it will have sold close to or as many copies as each individual SMB.
Post by: odifiend on August 30, 2004, 01:28:34 PM
Oh, and another thing... SMB1 has been out 9 months longer than SMB2, and it was more available being a launch title.
So are you saying that SMB2 is going to a catch a second wind after being out for a year and sell a million copies? Otherwise the nine months probably won't make too much of a difference.
"Also the fact that F-zero had to compete head to head with Soul Calibur 2 with Link in it, didn't help F-zero's sales either."
Agreed, but isn't that your point? SMB DX can't possibly do as well on PS2 due to all the high profile titles? But please correct me, if I'm getting what you're saying wrong.
"F-zero is as old as SMB 1 or 2 is now, it will have sold close to or as many copies as each individual SMB. "
Well I hope so for Fzero's sake but you know, you'd have to take into account Fzero's new price of 11.99 which ruins the comparison.
Post by: joeamis on September 02, 2004, 08:02:31 PM
Heres the source:
Sega's US sales at the bottom
Who said anything about SMB2 selling another million copies lol. 9 months more time would equate into some thousands more sales, and going by the numbers I got, it would take less than 10,000 more sales of the game to overtake SMB1. And I didn't even include the information that SMB2 shipped on the same day as Super Mario Sunshine...
Also heres more sales figures for both games: Pretty Close
So who knows, but these results are also better for SMB2 vs SMB1 compared to Marios.
I never said SMB Collection would sell better than the titles did on GC. You seem to think I did, in every post you write. But for 3 or more times now I've said the game will sell well given the userbase in terms of it being a budget priced compilation release, of older games, without a long history.
F-Zero is still $20 nearly everywhere, especially where the majority of people shop. So it doesn't ruin the comparison. SMB1 + 2 have been $20 for years longer than F-zero... The fact that you're trying to compare a game that's 3 years old and another that's 2 years old, with a 1 year old game in terms of sales, RUINS the comparison.
Post by: odifiend on September 02, 2004, 08:55:35 PM
But most are purchased by returning customers.
As for your numbers, they seem to have significant contradictions. Also i was sure that SA2:B sold a million copies so they are quite possibly out of date.
joe, you seemed to imply in an earlier post that PS2 user base will ensure the game would do well. Then yes, you said it would not do as well as the first one did on GCN. Then you start pushing numbers suggesting that the first one sold less than 300,000 in 3 years. Define well because obviously we have two different concepts. Your whole semantic/conditional argument arose when i said porting SMB, it would not sell on the PS2. It seems to me, by implementing all your conditions (will sell ok, for a series with no long history), you're agreeing with me...when I made the statement I knew that Monkeyball had no long history and that out of the box it would only have 2 players. That's a de-hanced port...I'm suprised SCEA isn't vetoing...
"SMB1 + 2 have been $20 for years longer than F-zero..."
SMB2 was 29.99 maybe a month longer than fzero(its price shot down pretty damn fast around where i live), has [SMB2] even made the drop to 19.99?
Post by: ib2kool4u912 on September 02, 2004, 09:26:13 PM
QuoteI just want to add odifiend that while many sequels are purchased by returning customers, it could have been very different with a game like SMB. I'll bet that there were many people who played the first the first one, and had had their Monkey ball fill from that and didn't buy the sequel because it had essentially the same gameplay. By that same token, there were probably many people who, like joe said, just bought the sequel. Since SMB basically has no story, people wouldn't be worried about getting the original to understand it.
Originally posted by: odifiend
"First thing, because a title sells just as well as the game before it, doesn't mean that every owner of the first title has to buy the 2nd for that to happen. Infact many sequels are purchased by people who never played the predecessors..."
But most are purchased by returning customers.
So, yeah, I basically jusst repeated joe while saying how that's even more true for a game like Super Monkey Ball
Post by: odifiend on September 03, 2004, 07:08:06 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ib2kool4u912QuoteI just want to add odifiend that while many sequels are purchased by returning customers, it could have been very different with a game like SMB. I'll bet that there were many people who played the first the first one, and had had their Monkey ball fill from that and didn't buy the sequel because it had essentially the same gameplay. By that same token, there were probably many people who, like joe said, just bought the sequel. Since SMB basically has no story, people wouldn't be worried about getting the original to understand it.
Originally posted by: odifiend
"First thing, because a title sells just as well as the game before it, doesn't mean that every owner of the first title has to buy the 2nd for that to happen. Infact many sequels are purchased by people who never played the predecessors..."
But most are purchased by returning customers.
So, yeah, I basically jusst repeated joe while saying how that's even more true for a game like Super Monkey Ball
Well, if you looked at joe's first numbers, SMB1 sold 290k. Are you trying to tell me that 280k different cube players picked up the sequel? Even 140k different consumers? What with Gamecube's fan base being 'so small' especially in those first couple years that is pretty unlikely. I picked up both Monkey Ball 1&2, I doubt I am the only one...
ib2kool, I agree with what you are saying though, that many people who bought the original probably would not have bought the second, b/c the fundamentals are identical, and that is why I doubted joe's numbers (10k difference).
Post by: joeamis on September 04, 2004, 03:07:05 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: odifiend
"
But most are purchased by returning customers.
As for your numbers, they seem to have significant contradictions.
joe, you seemed to imply in an earlier post that PS2 user base will ensure the game would do well. Then yes, you said it would not do as well as the first one did on GCN. Then you start pushing numbers suggesting that the first one sold less than 300,000 in 3 years. Define well because obviously we have two different concepts.
Yes, most are returning customers, but that doesn't mean there weren't alot new adapters for the 2nd game, not to mention the much larger user base by the time SMB 2 was released. As for my numbers, I provided two different sources, I didn't find any more links regarding the sales, so those are the best possible sources I could find. Define well? I already have. I first said it would sell well based on the ps2 userbase. Then people kinda blew that out of proportion, so I clarified the fact that the game is a compilation of 2-3 year old games without a long history like Mega Man Collection. The game will sell well related to that criteria. SMB has been $19.99 for a very long time around here, much longer than Fzero. SMB2 has been $19.99 for a while too. I reiterate that comparing games in terms of sales for games 2 and 3 years old, compared to a 1 year old game, ruins the comparison.
Post by: odifiend on September 04, 2004, 05:58:47 PM
No, need to reiterate, I agree that was a bad comparison. Though price does matter and around where I live Fzero was 19.99 BEFORE SMB2. Pretty sad but true.
Post by: joeamis on September 05, 2004, 06:47:54 PM
Post by: odifiend on September 05, 2004, 09:20:32 PM
Post by: Mario on September 05, 2004, 11:41:24 PM
I've kind of lost track on what you guys are arguing about and what points you're trying to make...
Also, there is no info or screens on this PS2 SMB game yet is there? Maybe it's not what we think it is?
Post by: joeamis on September 06, 2004, 08:59:25 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: odifiend
A ballpark is all I wanted. So when you say half do you mean 250k, according to mario, 200k, according to your second source, or 145k according to your first source? 200k on GCN is pretty respectable but 145k on any system is getting close to sub-par sales.
I'd say SMB Collection could sell between 75k-150k by the time it's as old as SMB1, so like 3 years. 145k for a compilation title is good sales. Even 50k is good, especially when it's really just a port of a 3 year old and 2 year old game.
Mario true, so it could end up being something different. I found out about it's release from Game Informer, who stated that the game had shown up on Gamespot's or EB's online retail page, and once word leaked out it was quickly taken off, I think it was Gamespot's.
Post by: Mario on September 06, 2004, 04:52:33 PM
Quote
Bananarama.
Super Monkey Brains
So far Sega's comedy monkey puzzler has only seen release on Gamecube, but Sega has confirmed to Official Xbox Magazine that the chimp's coming to Xbox in Super Monkey Ball Deluxe. The new title will feature 300 stages: 114 from Super Monkey Ball, 140 from Super Monkey Ball 2 and 46 Deluxe-exclusive boards. Thats a lot of bananas to collect.
But thats not all you get. Deluxe will also include a new Challange mode, integrated varying skill settings (beginner, advance, expert) into one fluid learning curve rather then breaking them up into independant settings. You also get an enhanced story mode, featuring stages from the two Gamecube games. All 12 Party games from Super Monkey Ball 1 & 2 will also be included.
Amusement Vision, the team responsible for the original arcade releases, is supervising development and a release is penned for early 2005
//Official Xbox Magazine
F*ck you too Sega.
Post by: odifiend on September 06, 2004, 05:29:20 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 06, 2004, 11:19:39 PM
Sega, redickulus.
Post by: joeamis on September 07, 2004, 07:59:26 PM
Post by: Mario on September 08, 2004, 12:10:34 AM
EDIT
Oh, duh. They're paving the way for a multiplatform release of Super Monkey Ball 3 -__-
And why is this thread broken? There is no page 4?
Post by: Uncle Rich AiAi on September 08, 2004, 03:47:01 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: MarioQuote
Amusement Vision, the team responsible for the original arcade releases, is supervising development and a release is penned for early 2005
//Official Xbox Magazine
Then who is the actual developer if AV is supervising?
I JUST DON'T GET IT. What will it take for Sega to understand these types of games don't sell on the xbox (and no, I cannot see MS giving them $$$ for monkey ball)? *points to JSRF, Shenmoo II and Panzer Dragoon Orta*Hey Sega, if you are giving PS2 and Xbox pretty much all our used-to-be exclusive games, I WANT JSRF, Shenmoo II and Panzer Dragoon Orta ported to the GC. Because it's turning into this: nearly all Sega games are on PS2 and Xbox, and not GC. Nevermind if they sell well or not.
This calls for Seto-sama to get to the bottom of this, and frighten the living daylights out of Sega managers.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 09, 2004, 03:32:11 PM
OMG TEH FANTOM 4TH PAGE....!!!!!
Post by: joeamis on September 09, 2004, 06:14:23 PM
EDIT: DOH! The phantom is no longer phantom, err... weird. I wanted a page 3 that had page 4 on it too, aww poo.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 09, 2004, 06:45:09 PM
WHY -nya
Post by: Ian Sane on September 10, 2004, 02:41:10 PM
Seriously what the hell? Why do we Cube owners still have to pay for these titles individually while Xbox fans get to buy BOTH of them together with extra content for less money? Sega should release SMB Deluxe on the Cube as well so that those of us who don't have the games already can buy them bundled together and with the extra content (like how MGS2: Substance was also released on the PS2). Super Monkey Ball started off as a Cube franchise and now the definitive version of the game is going to be on every console BUT the Cube. Why doesn't Sega see the problem with this?
It's like no matter what happens third parties sh!t on us. Why should we ever buy ANY third party games when a superior version of the game is going to go to all the other consoles later? At least when the Xbox lost Splinter Cell's exclusivity the best version was still on the Xbox.
And more importantly why doesn't Nintendo do more to prevent this stuff? We lose virtually all of our exclusives and there are TONS of games that come out for the PS2 and Xbox (and sometimes the GBA) but not the Cube. The console maker should be on the ball about this kind of stuff and should make sure it rarely happens. Sony and MS are grabbing our games so why aren't we grabbing theirs?
Post by: KDR_11k on September 10, 2004, 09:25:58 PM
Post by: Artimus on September 11, 2004, 10:38:18 AM
I ahte how IGN is spinning this. "Monkey Ball on XBOX - The Gamecube Favorite Gets a new Home" as if it was anythign besides a port.
Post by: ib2kool4u912 on September 11, 2004, 10:59:26 AM
Post by: Uncle Rich AiAi on September 11, 2004, 06:59:23 PM
For PS2, I understand.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 11, 2004, 09:44:16 PM
Besides, I was referring to the "Why doesn't Nintendo do some payoff?" question.
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on September 12, 2004, 06:17:13 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on September 12, 2004, 11:17:49 PM
Post by: MaleficentOgre on September 13, 2004, 06:54:57 PM
Post by: joeamis on September 14, 2004, 09:04:09 PM
Post by: MaleficentOgre on September 15, 2004, 04:51:54 AM
Post by: joeamis on September 16, 2004, 06:43:45 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on October 05, 2004, 08:42:18 PM
It might be in the works.
