Author Topic: No wonder M titles aren't selling  (Read 31121 times)

0 Members and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Ninja X

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #75 on: April 17, 2003, 04:05:00 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: Darc Requiem<br
""I concur Ninja X, PS2 is where you can theoritically make the most money. My problem is with third parties logic. If you are going to spend the time and money to produce a game, you should put forth your best effort to make sure its a success.  If you are not going to advertise a game at all, don't make the game. People can't buy what they've never heard about and if you are not willing to do whats necessary to make them aware of your product you are wasting your time and money.""



They do most of the time.  When companies spend money on a game, they are not going to spend in order for it to flop.  No, they want big profit.  Most companies do not put much effort into their games on the GCN besides Capcom.  And no, ports like SA2 do not count as ports are not very hard to make for the GCN.



""This isn't the NES or SNES days were producing a video game was inexpensive. Development teams aren't five and ten guys anymore. So its fiscally irresponsible to release a video game these days without some sort of advertising campaign. Yes ads cost money but so did the salary of 40 man development team that you paid over the last 18 months to make the game. I mean back in the NES/SNES when you had 5 guys working on a game for six months you could afford to not advertise and rely on word of mouth. I mean there are exceptions, Ikagura only had a 3 man develoment team. Treasure's development cost on Ikagura were probably at tenth of the average video game. You can drop a game like that on the shelves and sell a few thousand copies and still laugh all the way to the bank.""



I assume you're talking about the GCN.  Not many big projects exist that require a large development team for the Gamecube.  RE and RE0 is all I can think for now(Not counting future titles).  Some of the big third-party games on the Cube are ports, which don't require a big development team.  As for ads, money cannot be just thrown away.  Each step you make with each console must be well-thought out if you want to make the most profit possible, especially with the economy today.  Some developers do not bother to advertise(I'm talking about ports) for the GCN, thinking then they will not gain much profit if they have to pay off the marketing costs.  The other big third-party games for the GCN are multiplatform games, which can be advertised (for whatever systems that big multiplatform game appears on) in one campaign.  Not to mention multiplatform games are aided commercially by word-of-mouth and greater press coverage (multiplatform games appear on two or three consoles, thus, more previews, reviews, screenshots, etc.)



""If I'm gonna spend a million dollars on a video game development, I'm gonna have to sell at least 35 to 40,000 copies to break even. Now I can sit in my office and pray that a few hardcore gamers pick up my game and spread the word or I can take some initiative. I'm not saying have a 10 million dollar had campaign. You could do some web ads, they are inexpensive, and have a few 30 second TV spots. At least give your game the chance to do well.""


35 to 40,000 copies?  I don't think that's much profit.  I know you applied royalty fees and other taxes, but don't forget staff salaries(especially if the game takes more than several months to develop) production costs, and marketing costs.  All of a sudden, the cost of developing that game rises.  You need more copies to break even.  But of course, you also want to make profit, and a good amount to keep your investors happy.


""Now if that games bombs and you lose money, don't develop on the platform again. At least you'll have given it a fair shot and can make an assessment for future projects. Don't sit there and spout of some stereotypical diatribe without actually knowing anything. Developers assumed that GC was kiddie before the first system hit the shelves. Developers determine how a console is viewed. Now matter how many first party titles are released for a console they will be dwarfed by the third party offerings. Its just the like the Dreamcast. Third parties didn't support it because they said they thought it wouldn't be crushed by the PS2. Well without third support any console will fail. So by sitting back and doing nothing they guaranteed the PS2's success. Then the same developers bitch about Sony being to dominant, well its a product of their own doing.""


You MUST make good choices in business.  Unfortunately, not many companies have money to throw around.  They are not going to test new console waters by developing a superb game and giving it a great advertising campaign at the risk of it flopping.  No...they want the best chance possible for this superb game to succeed, and the best chance for it succeeding is to make it geared towards adults, who generally work and earn a good amount of money to spend, and develop it for a popular system that has a good amount of adults(i.e. PS2).  The GCN has the youngest user base, I assume.  And I doubt children carry around much money.  Most of them just ask their parents most of the time.  Therefore, more companies develop more kid-oriented games when developing for the GCN.  Right now, I see kid-oriented games on most of the store shelves for GCN.  They are the handiworks of third parties who do not want to risk much on the Cube.  Either that or ports.



""Third parties are always giving self fulfilling prophecy's. This console won't sell, these games don't sell on this console. Well if you don't put any mature games on a console people that like mature games aren't gonna buy it. My games don't sell on this platform, well if you game gets an average rating of 3.5 of 10 because of substandard framerates and an all around shoddy port its YOUR fault. Things don't just happen at random in retail, there are reasons for them.""


Indeed.


And one more thing...your grammar has improved from your last argument with me.  I sense two different people using one screen name?

 
I got some killaz on my payroll.

Offline Darc Requiem

  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #76 on: April 17, 2003, 05:10:00 PM »
Ouch Ninja X, two different people? I don't know whether to take that as a compliment or an insult. Nope just shaking off the rust. I used to love debating in forums but until recently I didn't have the passion to do so. Ian suggested that I use paragraphs and I took his advice. I usually just l go on a rant and type whatever comes to mind off the top of my head but with my last post I went back and organized the rant. Anyway back on topic.

"I assume you're talking about the GCN. Not many big projects exist that require a large development team for the Gamecube. RE and RE0 is all I can think for now(Not counting future titles). Some of the big third-party games on the Cube are ports, which don't require a big development team. As for ads, money cannot be just thrown away. Each step you make with each console must be well-thought out if you want to make the most profit possible, especially with the economy today. Some developers do not bother to advertise(I'm talking about ports) for the GCN, thinking then they will not gain much profit if they have to pay off the marketing costs. The other big third-party games for the GCN are multiplatform games, which can be advertised (for whatever systems that big multiplatform game appears on) in one campaign. Not to mention multiplatform games are aided commercially by word-of-mouth and greater press coverage (multiplatform games appear on two or three consoles, thus, more previews, reviews, screenshots, etc.)"

No I'm not talking about GCN in particular. I'm talking about the gaming industry in general. Yes not every project is big project, my point in general was that development cost are much higher than they used to be. I'm not suggesting anyone throw their money away. It takes money to make money. If you are going to invest the time and effort to produce a video game, you should also spend the time and money promoting to ensure that the game is successful. Yes multiplatform games can be advertised in one campaign but look at the recent Splinter Cell ad. Its a multiplatform ad in principle but in practice its a PS2 ad. The games availbility for PS2 is stressed and the GC isn't mention with the exception of the small GC logo at the end. Your argument about mult-platform games is quite valid but its more accurate when applied to multiplatform games with as similtaneous release. When there is a huge gap in between the release date on multiple platforms it doesn't apply. Why do you ask? Usually if a game hits say PS2 first, there is huge ad campaign but if its later ported to GC and/or X-box than game gets a much smaller ad campaign if it gets on at all. Plus if with a simultaneous release the game usually has better sales numbers on GC and X-box. Most gamers have a PS2 and if they prefer GC or X-box they will usually buy the PS2 version of the game because they don't feel like waiting on a version on their preferred platform. I'm in the minority if the game is gonna hit GC, I wait for the GC version. If the GC version is inferior....I just don't buy the game at all.

"35 to 40,000 copies? I don't think that's much profit. I know you applied royalty fees and other taxes, but don't forget staff salaries(especially if the game takes more than several months to develop) production costs, and marketing costs. All of a sudden, the cost of developing that game rises. You need more copies to break even. But of course, you also want to make profit, and a good amount to keep your investors happy."

I said you'll have to sell at least that amount. I wasn't implying that 35 to 40,000 copies was the goal 3rd parties are shooting for. Yes I did consider staff salaries, licensing fees, and the retailers cut. I purposely left out the cost of ads to illustrate a point. Most likely the company is not going to sell enough copies to break even without some sort of advertising campaign. The only way a developer could get away with no ad campaign, is if the game is just groundbreaking. Then word of mouth could possibly bail them out, but thats still not guaranteed. Sega made plenty of innovative games with groundbreaking groundplay that bombed and some of those games had a modest ad campaign. My point is how can a developer expect to even break even if they have to no ad campaign at all. And by ad campaign, I mean some sort of significant TV campaign. With the exception of Sega's Sports lineup, most 3rd parties that have complained of poor GC sales have no sort of TV ad campaign. They can't get away with this on X-box because MS is bending over backwards loosing billions to get the X-box exposure. Nintendo should do something similar as MickeyD suggested....although I don't think they can afford to match MS in scale because of monetary reasons.

"You MUST make good choices in business. Unfortunately, not many companies have money to throw around. They are not going to test new console waters by developing a superb game and giving it a great advertising campaign at the risk of it flopping. No...they want the best chance possible for this superb game to succeed, and the best chance for it succeeding is to make it geared towards adults, who generally work and earn a good amount of money to spend, and develop it for a popular system that has a good amount of adults(i.e. PS2). The GCN has the youngest user base, I assume. And I doubt children carry around much money. Most of them just ask their parents most of the time. Therefore, more companies develop more kid-oriented games when developing for the GCN. Right now, I see kid-oriented games on most of the store shelves for GCN. They are the handiworks of third parties who do not want to risk much on the Cube. Either that or ports."

Thats goes without saying Ninja X. You MUST make good business decisions. Producing a subpar game with minimal adverstising is not a good business decision. Giving GC owners an inferior version of a game six months after the original was released and not advertising its NOT a good business decision. If they aren't going to develop a superb game with a great advertising campaign, then they are going to lose money and they should lose money. You can't produce a half ass game with no ad campaign on console A, produce a superb game with a great ad campaign on console B, then state we can no longer support console A because of poor games sales. Thats flawed logic. You would setting yourself up to fail. Of course you would lose money if you are going to run your business this way. Thats like a parent giving one child $5000 to start a business and the one child $500 to do the same thing. Sure the child with the $500 could theoritically make the more successful business, but the likelyhood is that the child with $5000 will be more successful. If you are going to test the waters you are going to have to risk some money, because thats the only way to stand a chance of making any money. As far as the Gamecube user base, that's a myth pure an simple. Most kids have a Playstation, most Gamecube owners are adults that grew up on NES and SNES. Sony actually outsells Nintendo in the "kiddie" market 2 to 1.

I still can't believe that two different people on the same name comment.......I wasn't THAT rusty.

Darc Requiem
"Fiery words fuel debate and debate yields understanding."

Offline thecubedcanuck

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #77 on: April 17, 2003, 05:44:10 PM »
Quote

Yes multiplatform games can be advertised in one campaign but look at the recent Splinter Cell ad. Its a multiplatform ad in principle but in practice its a PS2 ad. The games availbility for PS2 is stressed and the GC isn't mention with the exception of the small GC logo at the end.


This is a matter of simple demographics and market statistics.
Why should they target ads to the cube, when the reality is that many cube owners wont even look at 3rd party titles.
The cube has the smallest installed user base and the worst demographic profile ( real young user base, percieved or real, the impact is exactly the same), 2 things that make it very unappealing to third parties and to retailers.
If you are a retailer with a limited amount of space and capital to stock games you will most likely start with the biggest system (PS2) and dwindle your stock in accordance to demand (usually based on past performance) for the the others.
The same goes with third parties and thier shipping policies, start with the biggest system and make sure their orders are filled because they are the bread abd butter, then worry about the smaller market, one that most likely wont buy your product anyways (again an assumption based on past performance).

It would be easy to blame this on bad avertising if so many other factors didnt just jump out at you right out of the gate.
How should ubi soft market splinter cell to the cube? With a costly 30 second spot on TV that will be seen by only a few cube owners?
With print ads in game magazines, but these would be generic and target all the systems.

In the case of splinter cell I dont think any of it would matter. The game wont sell well because it just doesnt fit the profile of what sells on the cube. I think ubi soft was simply throwing us a rushed port for the very few of us who actually want the game. Marketing or not, many here have never had any intention of buying this game in the first place.

So IMO dont blame retailers of developers, blame cube owners and nintendo for this dilema.  
Having sex when your 90 is like shooting pool with a piece of rope

Offline Stimutacs Addict

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #78 on: April 17, 2003, 06:01:39 PM »
moreover just blame Canada.. er... i mean Nintendo

[EDIT] Atrocious grammar... thats an American education for ya
I'll shut up now...

Offline Darc Requiem

  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #79 on: April 17, 2003, 08:17:38 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: thecubedcanuck
Quote

Yes multiplatform games can be advertised in one campaign but look at the recent Splinter Cell ad. Its a multiplatform ad in principle but in practice its a PS2 ad. The games availbility for PS2 is stressed and the GC isn't mention with the exception of the small GC logo at the end.


This is a matter of simple demographics and market statistics.
Why should they target ads to the cube, when the reality is that many cube owners wont even look at 3rd party titles.
The cube has the smallest installed user base and the worst demographic profile ( real young user base, percieved or real, the impact is exactly the same), 2 things that make it very unappealing to third parties and to retailers.
If you are a retailer with a limited amount of space and capital to stock games you will most likely start with the biggest system (PS2) and dwindle your stock in accordance to demand (usually based on past performance) for the the others.
The same goes with third parties and thier shipping policies, start with the biggest system and make sure their orders are filled because they are the bread abd butter, then worry about the smaller market, one that most likely wont buy your product anyways (again an assumption based on past performance).

It would be easy to blame this on bad avertising if so many other factors didnt just jump out at you right out of the gate.
How should ubi soft market splinter cell to the cube? With a costly 30 second spot on TV that will be seen by only a few cube owners?
With print ads in game magazines, but these would be generic and target all the systems.

In the case of splinter cell I dont think any of it would matter. The game wont sell well because it just doesnt fit the profile of what sells on the cube. I think ubi soft was simply throwing us a rushed port for the very few of us who actually want the game. Marketing or not, many here have never had any intention of buying this game in the first place.

So IMO dont blame retailers of developers, blame cube owners and nintendo for this dilema.


I will try to be brief, really I will. Your post makes no sense thecubedcanuck. I disagree with Ninja X, but he has some valid points. What you just posted is utter nonsense. Ubi Soft paid to port Splinter Cell, they paid for the TV ad, all they have to do is have the guy say "and Gamecube." They've already paid for the air time, that being the case they should use it efficiently. Most of the web ads, unless its a GC only site only Splinter Cell has been redefined for PS2. The web ads are worse because they don't even include the GC logo. Once again, they paid for the ad space. All they have to do is put "and Gamecube" and the logo. Their advertising cost remains the same, but by simply saying "and Gamecube" and adding the logo they would make more consumers aware of their product. Its not like they have to produce an all new spot for GC.....jeez.

As for you second point, which makes about as much sense as you first, its not our fault or Nintendo's that we don't wanna buy rushed or bad ports, its the fault of the developer. Not buying poor products lets the company know you are disatisfied. Example: Wrestlemania X8 was terrible, it sold poorly for wrestling title and THQ has made sweeping changes do the gameplay engine of Wrestlemania XIX. How is it our fault that developers are putting and bad titles for GC. Play Need For Speed for PS2 and then play it for GC or X-box abd tell anyone in here thats it our fault that EA made the game run worse on superior hardware. Do the same with Baldur's Gate or the multitude of other substandard ports. Now play Bloody Roar on PS2 and GC. You'll see why it sold better on GC than the first two ports I mentioned. Two paragraphs....told you I'd keep it brief. BTW I'd like to take the time to thank Ian for the paragraph suggestion again. Good looking out Ian.

Darc Requiem
"Fiery words fuel debate and debate yields understanding."

Offline Ninja X

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #80 on: April 18, 2003, 02:10:15 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: Darc Requiem
""Ouch Ninja X, two different people? I don't know whether to take that as a compliment or an insult. Nope just shaking off the rust. I used to love debating in forums but until recently I didn't have the passion to do so. Ian suggested that I use paragraphs and I took his advice. I usually just l go on a rant and type whatever comes to mind off the top of my head but with my last post I went back and organized the rant. Anyway back on topic.""


No, I actually assumed that screen name was used by two different people.  Your style of writing changed radically.  But I guess now you're in debate mode.


""No I'm not talking about GCN in particular. I'm talking about the gaming industry in general. Yes not every project is big project, my point in general was that development cost are much higher than they used to be. I'm not suggesting anyone throw their money away. It takes money to make money. If you are going to invest the time and effort to produce a video game, you should also spend the time and money promoting to ensure that the game is successful.


I repeat this, companies do, in general, spend time and money for games that required a good amount of time and money.  Some games are developed for the hopes of quick profit, and thus, do not require much time nor money to develop.  Capcom has 80 games scheduled so far for the future.  You think all 80 games are big games that they are going to push with advertising?  No, of course not.  Some are just for satisfying investors or making quick profit.


""Yes multiplatform games can be advertised in one campaign but look at the recent Splinter Cell ad. Its a multiplatform ad in principle but in practice its a PS2 ad. The games availbility for PS2 is stressed and the GC isn't mention with the exception of the small GC logo at the end. Your argument about mult-platform games is quite valid but its more accurate when applied to multiplatform games with as similtaneous release. When there is a huge gap in between the release date on multiple platforms it doesn't apply. Why do you ask? Usually if a game hits say PS2 first, there is huge ad campaign but if its later ported to GC and/or X-box than game gets a much smaller ad campaign if it gets on at all. Plus if with a simultaneous release the game usually has better sales numbers on GC and X-box. Most gamers have a PS2 and if they prefer GC or X-box they will usually buy the PS2 version of the game because they don't feel like waiting on a version on their preferred platform. I'm in the minority if the game is gonna hit GC, I wait for the GC version. If the GC version is inferior....I just don't buy the game at all.""


I guess the word "ports" didn't enter your mindset, huh?  The definition of a multi-platform game, at least to my knowledge, is a game that comes out for two or more systems at the same time.  Maybe another word suits that better, but that is the context it is being used in.  Games that appear on multiple systems, but with a huge gap in release dates, are ports.  Ports are cheap, and thus, don't require much marketing, or even any marketing at all.  They're made for quick profits, as I like to call it.  Ports do not often sell as much as the original version in most occasions, and you just explained why with third-to-last statement of that paragraph above.



""I said you'll have to sell at least that amount. I wasn't implying that 35 to 40,000 copies was the goal 3rd parties are shooting for. Yes I did consider staff salaries, licensing fees, and the retailers cut. I purposely left out the cost of ads to illustrate a point. Most likely the company is not going to sell enough copies to break even without some sort of advertising campaign. The only way a developer could get away with no ad campaign, is if the game is just groundbreaking. Then word of mouth could possibly bail them out, but thats still not guaranteed. Sega made plenty of innovative games with groundbreaking groundplay that bombed and some of those games had a modest ad campaign. My point is how can a developer expect to even break even if they have to no ad campaign at all. And by ad campaign, I mean some sort of significant TV campaign. With the exception of Sega's Sports lineup, most 3rd parties that have complained of poor GC sales have no sort of TV ad campaign. They can't get away with this on X-box because MS is bending over backwards loosing billions to get the X-box exposure. Nintendo should do something similar as MickeyD suggested....although I don't think they can afford to match MS in scale because of monetary reasons.""


I must repeat this, but you cannot waste money.  No matter how small the amount, in business, you cannot waste money unless it will guarantee you a positive result or at least something very good can come of it.  
Let's say a third party company wants to release a port of a mature game they first produced on the PS2 to the GCN.  Looking at the charts and demographics, they know the GCN is not a mature (games-wise) system.   The games that really sell are mostly E rated games (Sunshine, Pikmin, Luigi's Mansion, sports games,etc)  From then on, you have to make predictions.  Is the game going to sell on GCN?  No, a probable chance exists it is not going to sell (unless the game is phenomonal, but pretend it is your average mature game).  
So they start an ad campaign to promote awareness of this title on the GCN.  However, they cannot spend much money on the ad campaign as it is a port, and companies do not want to spend much on a port unless it is drastically changed.  Usually, a video game company's budget agenda is more reserved for that company's bigger titles.  Back to the argument, the budget the company spends on that port leaves out TV spots.  TV spots cost too much, especially on prime time.  A few 30-second spots?  Practically a waste of money.  You are really relying on luck then and hoping many people are watching when the commercial airs.  But sadly, it will get ignored if not enough commericials enforce awareness for your game.  Want an example? Look at Eternal Darkness.  A few spots and it sold a little below decent.  Maybe bad if you factor in its production costs and the time it took to develop it, as Nintendo had to keep funding it all throughout those years.  
On to the point, they start a small ad campaign.  They put out banner advertisements on the internet and even spots in a gaming magazine.  But it is more than likely those ads will get swamped by bigger ads or ads of bigger games.  Games are advertised in an overzealous manner on the internet and in gaming magazines.  Look at an issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly.  That magazine is, figuratively, half-composed of advertisements.  The ad they put gaming magazine is soon forgotten by most readers if it is not used in an overzealous manner, which I highly doubt it is if you take in the budget for the port.   The port's ads will get swamped by other ads.  People will acknowledge the ad, but more than likely forget about it when another ad pops up on their screen telling about some other game.  You have to hammer it into their heads using both ad appeal and money to show that ad over and over again.  Take the site of Gamespot for example.  Out of all the ads on that site, I only remember the Tenchi one as of recently.  That ad was used in an overzealous manner and it was quite appealing.  If I ever saw an ad for the port of the mature game I am talking about on a site somewhere, chances are I'd forget it, even if it was appealing, because other banners, such as the Tenchi one, are competing with it for the consumer's attention and the consumer's wallet.  Some win due to its flashy appeal and the many times it has shown up on the said consumer's monitor.
Let's focus more on appeal, shall we?  Let's just say I make one of my habitual visits over to Planet Gamecube.  I click on forums, and I eventually lay witness to a small pop-up ad and an ad imbedded on the page.  The small pop-up ad is of the port we are talking about.  I look at it, pass a couple thoughts about it through my head, and click X on the pop-up, thus eradicating it from my monitor.  I see the imbedded ad, one for The Real Cancun.  It shows two girls in a bikini dancing in front of what looks to be boisterous men.  Obviously, it has sex appeal to it.  Can you guess which ad I forgot about and which ad sticks in my mind?  I bet you can.  
So that is why at times, companies do not bother to advertise, especially for ports.  It is a waste of money usually.  They hope to break even and obtain a decent amount of profit by recognization or word-of-mouth.  Ports do have the advantage of word-of-mouth through desire for people who wanted the original version after seeing their friends who have the original version or any other possible scenarios such as that.              


""Thats goes without saying Ninja X. You MUST make good business decisions. Producing a subpar game with minimal adverstising is not a good business decision. Giving GC owners an inferior version of a game six months after the original was released and not advertising its NOT a good business decision. If they aren't going to develop a superb game with a great advertising campaign, then they are going to lose money and they should lose money. You can't produce a half ass game with no ad campaign on console A, produce a superb game with a great ad campaign on console B, then state we can no longer support console A because of poor games sales. Thats flawed logic. You would setting yourself up to fail. Of course you would lose money if you are going to run your business this way. Thats like a parent giving one child $5000 to start a business and the one child $500 to do the same thing. Sure the child with the $500 could theoritically make the more successful business, but the likelyhood is that the child with $5000 will be more successful. If you are going to test the waters you are going to have to risk some money, because thats the only way to stand a chance of making any money. As far as the Gamecube user base, that's a myth pure an simple. Most kids have a Playstation, most Gamecube owners are adults that grew up on NES and SNES. Sony actually outsells Nintendo in the "kiddie" market 2 to 1.""


Companies are testing waters, even with those half-assed games, to see if they can break even on the Cube.  Than they start with the big games.  That is good business logic.  Half-assed games sold well on PS2, so why cannot it sell at least decent on the GCN considering the GCN's user base?  Not everybody who owns a GCN is alert on which games are developed in a shoddy manner and which is not.   However, some games barely sell on the GCN.  Rather, what does sell?  Mario, Metroid, Pikmin, Super Smash Bros., Wave Race, Resident Evil, Sonic Adventure, Zelda, possibly Super Monkey Ball.  Which company develops most of the games I just listed?  That is why most third-parties say they have to compete with Nintendo to sell their games.  When the port of the mature game we used earlier comes out the same day as The Wind Waker, and a customer walks in a game store with $50 dollars and sees the two latest games on GCN are these two games, which one is he more likely to buy?  The Wind Waker has the dignified Zelda name and a good advertising campaign behind it.  The port has a small ad campaign that our said customer does not recall of and the port does not have the same level of recognization as the Zelda series to him.  That is why most third-party companies do not test waters with a high-profile game.  That fear always exist that it might not sell well due to competing with Nintendo's stellar first-party titles or it might flop with the limited userbase of the GCN compared to the PS2.  
Please show me an actual chart or demographic that states most GCN owners are adults.  I say most GCN owners are teenagers due to some study Nintendo did years back and the people in my school.  None of the people I know own a GCN only.  They all own a Xbox or PS2.  Only a few carry GCN with them along with their other console(s) for Mario, Zelda, and Resident Evil.

One quote strikes me:
""If you are going to test the waters you are going to have to risk some money, because thats the only way to stand a chance of making any money.""

Tell that to the Japanese game companies who are not doing well due to the Japanese economy.  Tell that to the game companies who are merging to relieve financial woes.  Not during these trying times can the companies risk money.  No, not now.        
I got some killaz on my payroll.

Offline Dirk Temporo

  • Score: -1
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #81 on: April 19, 2003, 12:29:23 PM »
How strange. The Software ETC. here carries all kinds of GCN things and they absolutely love every system. Is there an Electronics Boutique in your area? Because if there is, you might want to try there.
"You've had your dream old man. It's time to wake up!"
-Travis Touchdown

Offline Darc Requiem

  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #82 on: April 19, 2003, 02:28:46 PM »
Well Ninja X, lets just agree to disagree. I truly see what your are saying about companies wanting to playing it safe with GC. I can see why they'd want to do so. My problem is with how they are playing it safe, if they are giving us half ass games they aren't gonna make much if any money at all. They will most likely lose money. My definition of playing it safe is releasing a high quality title in an already established genre with a modest advertising campaign. For example, something in the platform genre. Also releasing the title at a time that gives it a chance to sell. Just like I wouldn't advise release a title next to a GTA or Final Fantasy game on PS2, you shouldn't release a title next to a Nintendo title on GC. I mean that is, in my opinion, what truly affected RE0 sales...it was released right around the time Metroid Prime was. That  factor combined with the recent release of the RE Remake and the anticipation for a new Metroid title caused lower than expected sales. I mean from a business standpoint, now would be the time to promote your GC titles. There is a lull in the release of Nintendo titles take advantage of it. This is what helped Blood Roar, Sonic Adventure 2 Battle, and Burnout 1 sell on GC last year. They were released in weak genres when there was a lull in between major Nintendo releases. I'm not saying spend more money of GC than you would on PS2, I'm saying take the money you do spend on GC and use it wisely.

Darc Requiem
"Fiery words fuel debate and debate yields understanding."

Offline Hostile Creation

  • Hydra-Wata
  • Score: 2
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #83 on: April 19, 2003, 03:16:48 PM »
I don't mind.  I seldom buy 3rd party games anyway, and I have had little trouble getting the ones I have.
HC: Honourary Aussie<BR>Originally posted by: ThePerm<BR>
YOUR IWATA AVATAR LOOKS LIKE A REAL HOSTILE CREATION!!!!!<BR><BR>only someone with leoperd print sheets could produce such an image!!!<BR>

Offline Ninja X

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #84 on: April 21, 2003, 07:40:05 AM »
Darc Requiem

Indeed, I say let's agree to disagree.  We both have different views of business.  I still say money cannot be squandered or risked, especially in these times.  Businesses need to satisfy investors and keep a good amount of money in their treasury to survive.  No video game company, besides EA, has as much money as Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft.  The smartest decisions possible must be made in order to make money, and statistics show GCN does not bestow third-parties generally with much money for most games they release.  Worse yet, some companies actually lose money releasing one of their games on the GCN. The PS2 market has the same thing happening, but the chance for success for a third-party game is much higher compared to the Cube.  Companies test GCN waters with an average game to see how well they fare and what games do sell on the GCN.  Sega released Skies of Arcadia with very little graphical updates, showing Sega did not spend much money on the port at all.  Why did they do it?  According to Overworks, one of the reasons was to see whether GCN was suitable for the Skies of Arcadia sequel.  Also, that release date thing...I know a reason exists why some games come out in busy seasons (i.e. RE0) but I know for sure a company cannot delay a game just so that game can come out in the right season where it does not have to face much competition.  So many games came out for the PS2 that were literally unheard of around GTA: Vice City.  It was obviously not a right time for those games to come out.  So I cannot name the reason why, but I know for sure companies cannot delay a game due to a busy season.  Probably business reasons.    
I got some killaz on my payroll.

Offline Bink

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #85 on: April 21, 2003, 02:10:49 PM »
I know its like come on, my blockbuster had like 15 copies of Def Jam Vendetta for ps2, but ONE for GC thats crap
The Legend of Zelda is the greatest game series of all time.

Offline MickeyD

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #86 on: April 21, 2003, 06:46:02 PM »
I noticed alot lately at blockbuster the only new games they seem to get anymore for cube are exclusives. If it's mulitplatform they only seem to get the ps2 and xbox verisons and in the rare ocassion they have a cube verison they have only one copy like Def Jam Vendetta and Dead to Rights. Sony and Mircosoft are paying them off. It's ridiculous how much they are paying people off i called Electronics Boutique the other day and the rep said this is Electronics Boutique your mircosoft xbox gaming center, this is brian how may I help you. That just pissed me off and when I went in there xbox stuff was all over the place around the front counter and the employes had those those tags you where around your neck saying xbox all over them.  For a place that sells games for all platforms it seemed hard to prove that it wasn"t an xbox only store. It's not fair and it's ridiculous how xbox is buying it's way into this market. I don't have a problem with xbox as a whole I think it's a good console but not as good as cube and I hate to think it was a piece of crap cause it would sell regardless since mircosoft blows so much money. Why doesn't nintendo cozy up to retailers. Thats the biggest problem they have is they don't advertise enough in retail stores especially in small game only stores like EB and Gamestop. In less your Walmart nintendo could seem to careless, heck even there they don't advertise enough. Gamestop and these other places are just as important. Nintendo is hated by these retailers because they are so hard to deal with. Well I got news for nintendo they can't do that anymore cause they are not number one anymore. I know lately they have been trying to gain third party support  but retailers need to be in the equation too cause it's something there missing and the problems with third parties and retailers are all linked. Third parties complain about low sales because retailers won't carry there games cause nintendo is more concerned about there games and they use minimal advertising. Some times I wish I was Nintendo's director of marketing cause I guarantee we would probably be in a much closer race with microsoft or at least beating them.

Offline Beave

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #87 on: April 21, 2003, 08:04:42 PM »
I know exactly what you are talking about. I live in Australia and i think the same is happening down here. In civic video there wasnt even one gamecube game, but plenty of xbox and of course PS2 games and even snes games!

I still haven't purchased a GC, but rather waiting to see how it performs - a bit of a catch 22 i suppose. With the bundle promotion (free game) and even seeing it for Aus $200 (half the prive of XBOX and PS2), i was thinking about getting one really soon. However, today when i looked in K- mart, they didnt even stock any. They had some games but the shelves where half filled and it looked as if it had been abanded.

I went to Big W and although they had it they didnt have the bundle.
I saw on megagames that the gamecube only has a 5% marketshare. I am left wondering how bad the state of gamecube is and if Nintendo know that they have a lot of catching up to do.

I wish that the days of the SNES will return.

Offline thecubedcanuck

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #88 on: April 22, 2003, 02:19:41 AM »
Quote

Sony and Mircosoft are paying them off. It's ridiculous how much they are paying people off


LMAO, lets try to get a grip here and touch back down on the landing strip called reality.

Quote

i called Electronics Boutique the other day and the rep said this is Electronics Boutique your mircosoft xbox gaming center, this is brian how may I help you.


its called a PROMOTION, they do the same thing with Sony and Nintendo as well.

Quote

It's not fair and it's ridiculous how xbox is buying it's way into this market.


Its perfectly fair and perfectly legal in the form it occurs, its called common business practice in North America. You however seem a little to paranoid and are a little misinformed when it comes to just how money plays a role here. Ever here the phrase the rich keep getting richer? Where do you think this comes from.

Quote

Some times I wish I was Nintendo's director of marketing cause I guarantee we would probably be in a much closer race with microsoft or at least beating them.


After reading your entire rant, I highly doubt it.
Having sex when your 90 is like shooting pool with a piece of rope

Offline Ninja X

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #89 on: April 22, 2003, 08:06:59 AM »
MickeyD

Nintendo's marketing is...how can I put it gently...suckful.  Compared to Sony and Microsoft, their marketing division gets blown away.  I still stand by my statement that Nintendo should just fire their whole marketing board and hire a new one, but I doubt we'll see that anytime soon.
I got some killaz on my payroll.

Offline MickeyD

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #90 on: April 22, 2003, 08:09:27 AM »
Listen wheter or not its fair or not or common business practice I'm not going to argue. But it's obvious they pay them or give them some incentive to promote them. The point I'm trying to make is Nintendo truly lacks the understanding of just how important retailers are. Every once in awhile EB may answer the phone and say you can reserve Legend of Zelda or something like that but even you have to admit Nintendo's support of game retailers and advertising is awful compared to Microsoft and Sony. I mean if you were a casual gamer and didn't know alot about games and went into a retailer you probably wouldn't even know Gamecube existed. As far as your comment about me not being a good director I can gurantee wouldn"t be any worse off. At least I would be trying to build stronger relationships with retailers and trying to promote the cube more. I'd like to see what your strategy would be I'm sure it wouldn't be too far off from mine. I'm also willing to bet alot of nintendo fans would do similar things as well to get the word out for nintendo. I know Nintendo can't afford to advertise like Sony or Microsoft but they do have some money to blow and they need to try a little harder. It's not like it would be hard for them to recover the cost because they make profit off of Gamecube and not lose money like Microsoft. So I defintely doesn't hurt to sell more Gamecubes.

Offline MickeyD

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #91 on: April 22, 2003, 08:19:36 AM »
Quote

Originally posted by: thecubedcanuck
Quote

Sony and Mircosoft are paying them off. It's ridiculous how much they are paying people off


LMAO, lets try to get a grip here and touch back down on the landing strip called reality.

Quote

i called Electronics Boutique the other day and the rep said this is Electronics Boutique your mircosoft xbox gaming center, this is brian how may I help you.


its called a PROMOTION, they do the same thing with Sony and Nintendo as well.

Quote

It's not fair and it's ridiculous how xbox is buying it's way into this market.


Its perfectly fair and perfectly legal in the form it occurs, its called common business practice in North America. You however seem a little to paranoid and are a little misinformed when it comes to just how money plays a role here. Ever here the phrase the rich keep getting richer? Where do you think this comes from.

Quote

Some times I wish I was Nintendo's director of marketing cause I guarantee we would probably be in a much closer race with microsoft or at least beating them.


After reading your entire rant, I highly doubt it.



Offline MickeyD

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
No wonder M titles aren't selling
« Reply #92 on: April 22, 2003, 08:38:11 AM »
Listen I know perfectly well how money works and I know Microsofts tactics are pefectly legal in this matter. However, windows is another story. But it still does make me mad when I know that it doesn't matter how good a product Nintendo has xbox can make a complete piece of junkif they want to and advertise the hell out of it and still win. Try putting yourself in the shoes of the little guys for once especially if you have a competeing product to windows. Every one knows Mircosoft monopolizes that market and they give incentives to other companies to package their computers with windows. But do you really think someone should dominate that much? It's not good for the consumer because there's a lack of choice and really microsoft if they wanted to could make little to know effort to make their product that much better. I'm sure many of you notice that windows new verisons are not exactly drastically different or all that much better. If Mircosoft had stiffer competition that would give them more incentive to make a better product but they have literally no competition.  About your comment on praise the rich for getting richer I suppose your refering to the fruits of having a capitalist ecomony where any man can make money, but do you really thing Microsoft needs to be that much richer. Really when you think about their complete control over one market where they are pretty much the only product it's closer to communism then capitalism. I know that may be too extreme to say that but I don't feel thats to off base from the truth and I'm sure many would agree with me.