Topic: Super Monkey Ball 1 & 2 coming for PS2

[joeamis]

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?

[Mario]

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. There's blind money-hungry business men, and there's smart ones.

Imagine playing Super Monkey Ball with only two players, using an analog stick without notches! eeeeeeeeeeek

[KDR_11k]

farfel: Only partially true. Else every game would be either multiplatform or PS2 exclusive. Some companies have enough intelligence to realize that overfavouring Sony might lead to a monopoly next round and iron fist rule. Sony can already reject games without scaring away third parties, Sony can make demands without facing backlash, etc.

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).

[Caillan]

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?

[odifiend]

"The userbase alone will ensure the games sell well."
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.

[joeamis]

KDR: There are many great games on all 3 platforms that have not sold well.  I'm saying given the userbase of the PS2, most likely that will ensure that SMBC sells as well as it did on Gamecube.  Ofcourse there's a chance that will not happen, but the userbase gives them a safety net that they will atleast sell enough to make profit.  

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...  

[Mario]

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.  

[odifiend]

"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?"
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.

[joeamis]

Ofcourse it won't sell those numbers, and I bet people will try to say it should sell the numbers of SMB1 and 2 combined which is just ridiculous.  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, the same cannot be said for it compared to the 3rd party games available on PS2.  So it probably won't reach the sales of the Cube versions, atleast not SMB1.  But it will sell well, and when I say it will sell well I mean it will sell in terms of being a budget title compilation without a long history, meaning it shouldn't be compared to Mega Man Collection or Streetfighter 2 collection anniversary games.

[odifiend]

So what you're saying is that the larger user base won't really account for much in terms of sales contradicting say, this:

"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.
 

[joeamis]

Like I just stated above you, the game will sell well in terms of how well budget priced compilations of games that have already been released sell.  The userbase will make this possible.  If it had been released as a compilation on GC or XB, with the lower userbase it would not sell as well (also because it already is available on GC).

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.    

[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?  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.

[KDR_11k]

A pro pos Billy Hatcher, is that game worth the 15 Euros Karstadt is asking for?

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.

[Renny]

According to Shrine of Data; 511,485 in the US and 31,232 in Japan.

[odifiend]

Mario already listed that here:
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.

[Uncle Rich AiAi]

I'd be surprised if the PS2 version sells more than 200k in the US.

[joeamis]

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.

[odifiend]

I got my sales figures from Mario, and since that is his 'thing', I'm more ready to except his results than yours, especially because you have no source.  Also I find it incredibly hard to believe that almost everyone who bought monkey ball one, bought monkey ball two...

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.  

[joeamis]

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...

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.

[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.

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?

[ib2kool4u912]

Quote
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.

I 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.

So, yeah, I basically jusst repeated joe while saying how that's even more true for a game like Super Monkey Ball

[odifiend]

Quote
Originally posted by: ib2kool4u912

Quote
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.

I 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.

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).

[joeamis]

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.

[odifiend]

When I said define well, I meant numbers because I already read your fluff several times.
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.

[joeamis]

fluff...  same to you my friend.  Spitting out numbers is really not a good idea for any game to be released.  But for your amusement, I'd say SMB Collection will sell atleast half as many copies as SMB1, by the time the game is as old as SMB1 is when SMB1's sales drop off to zilch (it's gonna keep selling for awhile on GC).  And I'd say that would be "well" for a compilation of a 2 and 3 year old game without a long history.....  You might not though.