Topic: New North American (NPD) Sales Thread

[cubiot]

"Trust me it would have to decline a whole hell of a lot before Nintendo starts losing money. Despite media and fan blathering, the GameCube is still a successful venture. Nintendo makes money on it, the Gamecube. It's just not as successful as it could have been."

Do you have any numbers to back this up?
Do you know what percentage of Nintendo's profits come from the gamecube sales, versus the GBA?
I am also curious as to what percentage of profit comes from software. This is strictly hypothetical but what If Nintendo were to go third party, and sell profitable software on the the PS2, would they be further ahead.?

"Because the service for the Dreamcast isn't here now. I highly doubt MS will keep Xbox Live up in the next generation, especially since there are all defensive about backwards compatibility, since it is such a drain on their revenue."

Again, this is purely speculation on your part, and we know how you hate speculation when it comes to Nintendo. I also dont see the dreamcast reference as relevent at all. The X-box is already much more a success that the dreamcast.

"Denied as in it is broadband-only and I have 56k. This may come as a shock to you but not everybody in the world has access to broadband. "

Why would anyone want to play online with a slow connection anyways?
I really don't believe that 56k users are the target market, simple as that.

The x-box wants to be the machine with the most tech, or at least the most percieved tech. Catering to 56k modem users just doesn't fit the profile.

[soundwave5]

I don't see MS abandoning XBox Live any time soon. Broadband installation is simply growing. A broader Sony Network is likely coming for PS3/PSP, so I doubt MS takes their foot off that pedal.

MSN for Microsoft was unprofitable for 8 straight years until it finally turned a profit last year, but MS never pulled the plug. The fact is they make such ridiculous profits off their software division, that losses like that honestly are just PR embarrassments more than anything else.

I think online gaming is a niche right now, but it's a growing niche. By next generation it will become more mainstream and probably even able to generate profit. I suspect Nintendo is also working on an online solution for the Revolution.  

[couchmonkey]

Cubiot: Someone once made an interesting point that's stuck with me: would Nintendo sell as many games on PS2 as it does on GameCube?

I'm sure a few games like Mario Kart would sell just as well or even better on the PS2, but, looking at Sega, going third party has not been a big success.  Looking back to an earlier part of this thread, Sonic Adventure 2 is the only game that has come close to selling a million copies in America since Sega ditched the Dreamcast.  I don't know how that compares to the Dreamcast sales, but it's not that great in general.

Now, having said that, I think Sega's strategy for going third-party was pretty bad.  Nintendo could probably do better, but I still think it's smart to ask if PS2 or Xbox owners will buy as many Nintendo games as Nintendo owners do.  Not to mention lost profits from hardware accessories like Wavebirds and memory cards.

[vudu]

I find it really odd that Mega Man Anniversary Collection on GC outsold PS2, what with the reversed control scheme, and all.  It doesn't make the game unplayable, but it takes a while to "relearn" the games.

I'm also really surprised by the really low Viewtiful Joe sales on PS2.  I even saw some commercials for the game, which I never saw when the GC version came out.  I know this is the North American Sales Thread, but does anyone know how well the game sold in Japan vs. the GC counterpart?

Mario, I'd be interested in seeing the sales figures for Xbox's other top sellers.  I'm sure there's nowhere near as high as Halo's, but I wonder just how big they are.

[ruby_onix]

Quote
Do you have any numbers to back this up?
Do you know what percentage of Nintendo's profits come from the gamecube sales, versus the GBA?

Here's a general rule of thumb.

The most recent "installed base" and "tie ratio" numbers mentioned in this thread (from July) are:

Cumulative Installed Base
PS2: 24,433,000
Xbox: 9,367,000
GCN: 7,672,000
GBA: 22,579,000

LTD Tie Ratios
PS2: 8.52
Xbox: 7.01
GCN: 6.68
GBA: 3.67

On a modern console game, the hardware maker earns about $10 from royalties. I think the GBA earns less than that, and "greatest hits" titles also earn less, but $10 is just a convenient ballpark number.

So looking at the tie ratios, Sony has made $85 on every PS2. But Sony typically sells their hardware (both PSone and PS2) at roughly a $50 loss (Sony will never give us an exact number on that, but it's "heavily rumored"). So Sony has essentially only made $35 on every PS2.

Microsoft has made $70 per-XBox in royalties, but they're said to lose $100 on the hardware, so they're down $30 for every XBox.

Nintendo has said that at the time of price drops, they lose "single digit" (less that $10) money on the hardware. The rest of the time, they're making small amounts of money on it, so lets just say they're breaking even. So Nintendo makes $67 on each GameCube.

The GBA (like the Cube and the N64) isn't sold at a loss, so it gets $37.

So, multiplied by the "installed base" numbers, the PS2 has earned $855 million in America. The XBox has lost $281 million. The GameCube has earned $514 million. And the GBA has earned $835 million.

These are clearly rough numbers, but you can see how Nintendo earns a fortune on their console hardware, and how the handheld market (although earning Nintendo another fortune) is not as "lucrative" as everyone seems to think, right?


About a year or two ago, Rick Powers got his hands on a detailed financial rundown, and he couldn't tell us the specifics (because the report costs several thousand dollars), but he said that (on a purely "hardware" level) the GBA and PS2 were earning roughly the same amount of money, and that the GameCube was earning more than either of them.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Resident Evil Remake?
Resident Evil Zero?

[DEO3]

Quote
Originally posted by: ruby_onix

Quote
Do you have any numbers to back this up?
Do you know what percentage of Nintendo's profits come from the gamecube sales, versus the GBA?

Here's a general rule of thumb.

The most recent "installed base" and "tie ratio" numbers mentioned in this thread (from July) are:

Cumulative Installed Base
PS2: 24,433,000
Xbox: 9,367,000
GCN: 7,672,000
GBA: 22,579,000

LTD Tie Ratios
PS2: 8.52
Xbox: 7.01
GCN: 6.68
GBA: 3.67

On a modern console game, the hardware maker earns about $10 from royalties. I think the GBA earns less than that, and "greatest hits" titles also earn less, but $10 is just a convenient ballpark number.

So looking at the tie ratios, Sony has made $85 on every PS2. But Sony typically sells their hardware (both PSone and PS2) at roughly a $50 loss (Sony will never give us an exact number on that, but it's "heavily rumored"). So Sony has essentially only made $35 on every PS2.

Microsoft has made $70 per-XBox in royalties, but they're said to lose $100 on the hardware, so they're down $30 for every XBox.

Nintendo has said that at the time of price drops, they lose "single digit" (less that $10) money on the hardware. The rest of the time, they're making small amounts of money on it, so lets just say they're breaking even. So Nintendo makes $67 on each GameCube.

The GBA (like the Cube and the N64) isn't sold at a loss, so it gets $37.

So, multiplied by the "installed base" numbers, the PS2 has earned $855 million in America. The XBox has lost $281 million. The GameCube has earned $514 million. And the GBA has earned $835 million.

These are clearly rough numbers, but you can see how Nintendo earns a fortune on their console hardware, and how the handheld market (although earning Nintendo another fortune) is not as "lucrative" as everyone seems to think, right?


About a year or two ago, Rick Powers got his hands on a detailed financial rundown, and he couldn't tell us the specifics (because the report costs several thousand dollars), but he said that (on a purely "hardware" level) the GBA and PS2 were earning roughly the same amount of money, and that the GameCube was earning more than either of them.

Wow, I never knew before that Sony and Nintendo sold thier systems at a loss as well, and that they simply make back the money they lose on the hardware by collecting royalties on games. In that case Nintendo must do very well, since something like seven of the top ten best sellers on the Gamecube were developed in house at Nintendo (meaning they make a lot more than just $10 on each of those games sold).  

[Deguello]

"Again, this is purely speculation on your part, and we know how you hate speculation when it comes to Nintendo. I also dont see the dreamcast reference as relevent at all. The X-box is already much more a success that the dreamcast."

It's a logical assumption.  If you are confused, I mean the Xbox Live Service for the Xbox.  If they continue it in some form for the XboXenonDoomsday whatever (I'm sure they'll try to make a profit next time) great.  But That's not what I am saying.  trust me, 6 months after the Xbox2's debut, Xbox Live will be shut down.  What would be their reason to keep it up?  And as soon as they do, some of their supposed best games will become instantly broken, since online features are such a core factor.

"Why would anyone want to play online with a slow connection anyways?
I really don't believe that 56k users are the target market, simple as that.

The x-box wants to be the machine with the most tech, or at least the most percieved tech. Catering to 56k modem users just doesn't fit the profile."

Why anyone would want to is immaterial.  The simple fact is they, at least from my perspective, are blowing billions into a feature that most people can't even use.  You asked how I could be denied.  I am being denied for 2 reasons.  A) they charge for the service, and I'm not too keen on paying for a game I already bought, and B) Their service is broadband only, which means even if I wanted to pay for it, I can't.

[Rancid Planet]

Quote
Originally posted by: kingvudu

I'm also really surprised by the really low Viewtiful Joe sales on PS2.

I was just in a conversation about that in another forum not too long ago. I'll add something here that I forgot to mention there.

The VJ sales on the PS2 should have been expected to be low. Sure it was a great game but several people that own a GCN also own a PS2 so they probably already had the game for the cube to start with and were just like me...pissed at the PS2 version's extra features.

Heck, VJ was probably a favorite among those who have both a PS2 AND GCN. My reasoning being that anyone who owns a PS2 alongside a GCN more than likely isn't one of those fanboys of Nintendo who only buy the first party stuff. (Hence, helping to kill off the system they claim to love so much. Show some 3rd party love people!) So they probably recognized that VJ would be a great game back when it was an exclusive to the cube and picked it up.  

[Mario]

Other best selling Xbox games compared to Halo

HALO - 3,616,009
Splinter Cell - 1,462,813
Project Gotham Racing - 1,179,664
Grand Theft Auto Double Pack - 1,129,738
Ghost Recon - 950,939
Dead Or Alive 3 - 871,642
Star Wars: Knights of the old Republic - 799,464
Rainbow Six 3 - 679,851
Mech Assualt - 650,041
Fable - 604,084
NFL Fever 2002 - 588,939
Amped: Snowboarding - 539,372
Fusion Frenzy - 521,558
Ninja Gaiden - 500,450
Splinter Cell: Pandora - 476,912
Brute Force - 463,295
Project GOtham Racing 2 - 417,194
Oddworld: Munch - 409,065
Counter Strike - 376,056
Crimson Skies - 354,650

Also, for Professional:

Resident Evil Zero: 423,489
Resident Evil: 467,300
Resident Evil 2: 35,613
Resident Evil 3: 48,318
Resident Evil Code Veronica X: 32,079

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Do these numbers and the Nintendo numbers in the previous page account for North Amerikan sales or global sales?

[Mario]

North American only.

[cubiot]

" trust me, 6 months after the Xbox2's debut, Xbox Live will be shut down. What would be their reason to keep it up? And as soon as they do, some of their supposed best games will become instantly broken, since online features are such a core factor."

Who cares. 99% of x-box users won't give a darn by that point because they will be playing x-box 2 games on the new service. I haven't touched my N64 sice the day I recieved my cube, and I believe the same scenerio will apply here.
You keep assuming that most x-box users are similar to yourself, when in reality there core gamer market is much different than you (from what I can tell, no offence) and the typical Nintendo gamer.

"Why anyone would want to is immaterial. The simple fact is they, at least from my perspective, are blowing billions into a feature that most people can't even use."

Again, I really don't think this concers them. They are after a certain type of gamer,.  If they wanted to set up the system for 56k they easily could have, they chose not to.

"You asked how I could be denied. I am being denied for 2 reasons. A) they charge for the service, and I'm not too keen on paying for a game I already bought, and B) Their service is broadband only, which means even if I wanted to pay for it, I can't. "

this is not the same as being denied. You simply have made the choice not to use the service. When the next Nintendo console comes out, you will:
1) have to pay for it
2) go to a store to get it

So if your local wallmart doesn't have it and you have no money are you being denied as well?

"It's a logical assumption. If you are confused"

Are you not a moderator? Can you please try to refrain from attempts at belittling me when I disagree with you. Lets keep this civil. Thanks.

[Mario]

Quote
I haven't touched my N64 sice the day I recieved my cube

Really? Did your N64 games magically become less fun? I don't really understand that.. I have my N64 sitting next to my GCN and I play it at least once a week.

[Deguello]

"this is not the same as being denied. You simply have made the choice not to use the service. "

Yes It IS the same.  I cannot choose at all concerning Xbox Live.  I don't have broadband.  I cannot GET Broadband.  I HAVE NO CHOICE IN THE MATTER.  If I wanted it I would be denied.

"When the next Nintendo console comes out, you will:
1) have to pay for it
2) go to a store to get it

So if your local wallmart doesn't have it and you have no money are you being denied as well?"

Flawed analogy.  The Console is a product, not a service.  Even if my local store doesn't have it,  I have other options, like having it shipped or *SHOCK* going to another store.  I have no options with xbox Live.   And if I wanted it, I would be told I cannot use it., since they don't let people with 56k on it.  you can claim that they are "targeting" someone else.  But If I wanted it, I would be turned down.

[nitsu niflheim]

That I totally agree.  MS thought they were doing a great thing by going Broadband only, but the majority of the households do not have access to broandband, the only way I can get it to pass out the ass for cable internet or to get satellite DSL, which isn't cheap.  MS shot themselves in the foot by going BB only and limiting thier service to people who are lucky enough to be in an area(s) that offer broadband internet.  Also online only games have a major flaw that I don't like, you have to be online to play, you can't play offline, I mean just look at the new PStwo, you can't even play Final Fantasy XI on it because the HDD isn't compatible with the system, and that is an online only game.

[KDR_11k]

Just a thought: Does Microsoft actively prevent narrowband users from joining or do they simply assume that the ethernet port cannot be connected to a modem? In the latter case you could use a connection sharing on your PC and tell the XBox it connects through a router. You'd be the HPB in every game but still.

[ruby_onix]

AFAIK, even if you do have broadband, but it's not good broadband and your speed isn't fast enough, XBox Live will essentially boot you from the system. Supposedly, it won't even let you connect to other people if you're too far apart, and your ping rate is too slow.

If you don't have a "good" connection to someone, that person simply doesn't exist to you, and you don't exist to them.

(I don't have XBox Live or anything, but that's just how I heard it worked. So don't blame me if I'm wrong.)

[cubiot]

"(I don't have XBox Live or anything, but that's just how I heard it worked. So don't blame me if I'm wrong.)"

Why comment on something you don't have then? I have never had a problem on live with connection.

[Renny]

Exactly. See how they make it transparent to the end user?

I've had some problems though. Sometimes the connection to a host just goes bad during a game. Such is cable internet....

[KDR_11k]

I hate it how english and german use the terms "opaque" and "transparent" (bzw. ihre jeweiligen Übersetzungen) in completely opposite ways. In german if something is transparent the user can see under its hood and if something is opaque it hides its internals from the users. Always takes me a few secs to realize it's the other way around in english.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
In german if something is transparent the user can see under its hood and if something is opaque it hides its internals from the users. Always takes me a few secs to realize it's the other way around in english.

From my understanding, that's how it is supposed to be in English as well.  I'm not aware of any context where they're reversed.

[AMac2002]

Quote
Originally posted by: nitsu niflheim Also online only games have a major flaw that I don't like, you have to be online to play, you can't play offline, I mean just look at the new PStwo, you can't even play Final Fantasy XI on it because the HDD isn't compatible with the system, and that is an online only game.

Well, it's not really a flaw, it's essential to the game, it's not just some random whim the developers got. The point is that everyone is a real person. They're not intending to block out people, it's just the way the game is supposed to be played.

[AMac2002]

Quote
Originally posted by: cubiot
"(I don't have XBox Live or anything, but that's just how I heard it worked. So don't blame me if I'm wrong.)"

Why comment on something you don't have then? I have never had a problem on live with connection.

Same here, I've never been randomly kicked off Xbox Live...

[KDR_11k]

Professional: I've always seen "totally transparent to the user" used as meaning "The user only sees the result and doesn't have to worry about the details".