-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NPD Sales Results for May 2009
- Thread starter EviLore
- Start date
SuperBonk said:
Ugh, the cycle continues. I just got finished having this conversation with Matt. Can you just look up four or five posts to see my response to this please? I'm not getting caught up in a conversation where people keep switching the argument on me.
Me: KB/M is the superior control method.
Opposition: No, they're all equal. As long as everyone uses the same input, it's fair.
Me: That's like justifying playing with controllers that have one button. It's fair, right? So why not?
Opposition: I don't really feel that controllers are worse than KB/M.
Me: While there is no strict measurement, the general consensus is that KB/M is indeed superior. The abundance of auto aim in console shooters supports this.
Opposition: As long as everyone uses the same input, it's fair.
And around and around we go! It's very frustrating to have the argument shift over and over.
dammitmattt
Banned
Opiate said:
I'm simply arguing your point that it is a POOR control input method. Not as good as mouse/keyboard != poor.
And you're right that the Wii has the potential to have the best controls, but there are still issues with getting the bounding box stuff right. Plus it requires a bit more effort.
It's just a different set of skills, but it's still entirely skill-based. The better player will always have a huge leg up over the lesser player, regardless of what control input they are using. A small bit of auto aim that lets you get in a few shots into the chest doesn't matter when a skilled player is sniping you in the head
Masklinn said:
What about my tag? It was a joke. There was never a ban bet and a mod was just playing around. I was wrong about GTA4 sales and dead-on about Mario Kart that month.
So what about a wrong prediction makes me a troll?
gtj1092 said:
Any game can sell. Every game sells at least a few copies, because someone picks it up at random, that's the entire point of shovelware. The thing is, when you compare something like The Conduit to Halo; Conduit is a well designed, if generic game in a popular genre. Halo is an event no one would dare miss.
From the standpoint of ability to sell, Wii Fit is more like Halo than The Conduit is. If the Conduit had the same marketing blitz that Halo, or Wii Fit, or RE5 or GTA4 had, and it still turned out to be a good game, it would sell similarly. Human beings are by nature communal animals, its the reason Xbox Live is so effective at selling the "game of the month". If you convince people that everyone is playing it, a number will pick it up out of curiosity, others will pick it up because its something they like that they might not have known was coming otherwise, and if its a good game, it will then sell on word of mouth. People like to tout word of mouth as the best advertising, but its advertising that is only possible if someone, you know, actually ever buys your game.
pakkit said:
Its a good thing developers didn't take that stance on the Xbox 360 back in 2005, otherwise Microsoft would be in trouble. I mean, who knew Gears of War would sell? I'm not saying that your point is wrong, its quite correct, I'm just saying that thinking leads to stagnation of the market.
pakkit said:
Like I said earlier, there are a lot of variables, the main one being the ability to reuse assets/tools/engines. A new Dead Space on Wii is going to cost comparable to the original Dead Space, because it has to use all new stuff. A sequel to GTA:VC on Wii could have reused the PS2 assets & engine, and would have just needed new tools, making it automatically significantly cheaper than GTA4. If publishers are so risk averse, why do they fund these massively expensive games unless they're going to spend the marketing money to make them successful (not GTA in this instance, but lots of HD games are sent to die, even pretty expensive ones).
It absolutely isn't Nintendo's problem, though. Reggie's quote, however delicious, was just a crowd-pleaser for the board readers. If Nintendo wanted to, they could easily just step up and announced Eternal Darkness 2, or a new IP placed in the mature market (they owe us as much, their promises for original IPs in the early Wii days included Project H.A.M.M.E.R. and Disaster). Those releases, if pushed well, would absolutely demand the attention of it's gamer market. The problem is, Nintendo has released games like that, namely Metroid Prime 3, but they did it in such a stealth manner, with the only advertising that I saw being limited to tech-savvy Wii owners, that it's consumer data was inconsequential to third-parties. Third-parties, with very little exceptions, are afraid to venture into untested waters on Nintendo platforms. The last Nintendo console to get a good amount of FPS games was the Nintendo64, and that was because 3rd parties had Rare's GoldenEye and Perfect Dark to follow.Opiate said:
Also, I'm willing to bet that Super Smash Bros. Brawl cost more than the majority of its HD counterparts. I'm merely playing Devil's Advocate here, though, as it is most certainly the exception, not the rule.
Uhh, poor controller method has nothing to do with my answer. Do you know what skill means? Because that's what you were talking about.Opiate said:
Your argument implies that you would somehow be better at Halo or Call of Duty because auto-aim makes killing people easier. I said, yeah, it probably does. But it also makes killing you easier. To say that you could compete with the best Halo players simply because you are used to no auto-aim doesn't make any sense.
I am in no way arguing that dual analog is a better control method for shooters. Please understand what the words you are typing mean before you type them. I do not like it when I'm attacked for something I didn't even say.
dammitmattt said:
Sure, I'm willing to agree to that. To someone like me -- to whom skill is paramount -- less skill dramatically reduces the appeal of a game. But again, not everyone plays for skill as exclusively as I do: many people care a lot about community, or just play to relax, or for a variety of other reasons.
If you remember where this discussion started, someone asked why anyone would buy shooters on the Wii. Here is the answer.
It's just a different set of skills, but it's still entirely skill-based. The better player will always have a huge leg up over the lesser player, regardless of what control input they are using. A small bit of auto aim that lets you get in a few shots into the chest doesn't matter when a skilled player is sniping you in the head
I definitely disagree. Let's imagine absolute auto aim for a moment, just to make my position more clear. That is, you will always shoot an opponent, no matter how far off your aim is, as long as there is at least one opponent within visual range.
You'd have a hard time arguing, I think, that this setup takes as much skill as no auto aim. A new player could come in and do very well under those conditions.
The same basic principle applies to moderate auto aim, just to a much smaller degree. From years of experience, there is no question in my mind that new players have an easier time jumping in to games with auto aim. The reason for this is that they do decently right off the bat, and this suggests that the skill curve is shallower.
And in many other, markedly less contrived cases too.Chumly said:
Things that go into making a game, in hand-waving terms:
*program
*level design/layout
*level geometry #
*models #
*textures #
*shading model #
*animation model #
*motion capture
*sound effects
*voice
*writing
*translations
*marketing
*legal/corporate overheads
*replication
*distribution
Marked with # are the items that can be made more expensive for an "equivalent game" on an HD console, or likewise items that can be made less expensive when you go the other direction.
Let's pretend for a while that Dead Space: The Actual Real Thing was a Wii game, it had all the same levels, the same campaign, the same enemies and weapons, the same audio etc, with the only difference being texture resolution and polygon counts for the characters.
How much less would it have cost to make? What's the proportion of modeling and texturing to the overall cost of making a game "with a serious effort"?
Each console has their assumed market. 3rd-parties assume that kiddy games will sell well on Nintendo platforms, so you'll be much harder pressed to find those types of games on HD platforms.justchris said:
3rd-parties also correctly assumed that the Halo crowd would follow the 360, and we see plenty of (too many, actually) FPS and action titles on Microsoft's console.
The only misstep this generation was 3rd-parties assuming that PS2 owners would take up the PS3, which turned out to be untrue and led to (in addition to quite a few exclusive-game misfires for the platform early on) a pretty stagnant PS3 market for the first 2 years.
Do you know what that goalposts sentence means or are you just using it because you've seen others use it? I ask because that response really doesn't make any sense. At all.Masklinn said:
It's ok, you can admit it. Tons of people have poor debating skills. I'm just trying to help you get better.
SuperBonk said:
you allow an automated set of undefined variables to fill in where your ability ends to make the experience more enjoyable.
halo is the mario kart of fps, and for that, it's fine.
dammitmattt said:
oh wow. if only you knew how to use the search function, you'd realize your argument was dead in the water before you even typed it.
SuperBonk said:
Are you suggesting that all games takes exactly equal skill to master, no matter the control method, as long as everyone uses the same controller?
Assuming you do agree that different games do indeed have different skill curves (is this concept even really in question?) then I submit the obvious conclusion that auto aim reduces the skill curve of any given game, making it easier for new players to do well from the get go.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
For!pakkit said:
SuperBonk said:
It's not for some people. It is for me, because I like complex games that prove challenging to master. Those are preferences.
And I believe that's all we're saying, Superbonk. The mouse and keyboard provide a control method which allows more precise aiming and through that a steeper learning curve. For people who care a great deal about precision and skill, then the KB/M are superior.
Looking back to where this conversation started, Bonk (this was on the last page), this came up in reference to the Wii Mote and FPS. Someone asked why anyone would want to play FPS on Wii. I responded, in essence, that some people prefer the control method because it offers more precision than the PS3/360 controller.
That's it.
Ok, so you've changed the argument to skill curve, that's fine. But there are still some problems.Opiate said:
First, "equal skill to master" is a nonsense statement. Those are two subjective things that there's no way to quantify. What do you mean by master? As in learn all of the mechanics? Then what is this besides an argument for increased complexity and/or difficulty?
Second, your argument is that Mouse and Keyboard is the superior input. Once again, I'm not refuting this argument, only your points for this argument. You are saying mouse and keyboard is better because the learning curve is steeper. This is because there's no auto-aim while dual analog shooters do have auto-aim. But isn't the reason for this because mouse and keyboard make it easier to aim? Following logically from this, your ideal shooter would be a dual analog shooter with no auto-aim. After all, wouldn't it take a great deal of "skill" (over a million skill-watts!) to "master" it?
Matt: I can see now what started this conversation: the post you initially responded to was very denigrating towards PS3/360 controllers. I didn't just suggest that it took less skill, but I stated that I "couldn't imagine" why anyone would want to play with them. That was the fault, and I agree that was unfair. I apologize.
SuperBonk: I'm sorry for being dismissive. I just have a personal peeve of shifting arguments (i.e. people changing the discussion slightly to suit their argument), and that topic happened to be what Matt and I had just discussed. I apologize for seeming so mean.
SuperBonk: I'm sorry for being dismissive. I just have a personal peeve of shifting arguments (i.e. people changing the discussion slightly to suit their argument), and that topic happened to be what Matt and I had just discussed. I apologize for seeming so mean.
SuperBonk said:
No, although this is an interesting discussion.
Without further stipulation (Which I will get to), my ideal wouldn't even be dual analog -- you haven't taken this far enough -- it would be a controller with exactly one button. You could do everything through a series of morse code, e.g. Dot-Dash-Dot would be "fire," or "move forward." Think how challenging that would be!
And now for the stipulation: I would argue that it is not the game taking more skill with such a controller, it is the input method which is now more challenging. The former is satisfying to master, while the latter is not.
Here's a real world example: I control a baseball bat with both my hands when I play baseball. Would it be more challenging to control the bat with just one hand? Yes. But it isn't as if the game of baseball just became more challenging, it's that I increased the challenge by playing with a frustrating, comparatively ineffective control method.
Increasing challenge by increasing the skill curve of the actual game is something I find satisfying. Increasing the difficulty by insisting on a less effective control method is not satisfying. These are personal preferences again, SuperBonk, but in this instance I think you'll find most people agree with my viewpoint, even if they aren't all skill obsessed like me.
Zuhzuhzombie!!
Member
Any numbers for Raiden Fighters Aces?
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
Is someone actually arguing that console controls are actually "good"? :lol
The shit people settle for is amazing.
Pretty graphics don't make a game that much more expensive. Just look at the small developer PC scene (Zeno Clash comes to mind). What makes games more expensive are things like presentation, intense geometry and detailed environments, increase in staff in order to meet strict deadlines, features (such as single player and multiplayer modes), etc.
It's one thing if you just merely update the textures and add a bit more polygons. But it's completely another if you completely overhaul everything.
The shit people settle for is amazing.
bcn-ron said:
Pretty graphics don't make a game that much more expensive. Just look at the small developer PC scene (Zeno Clash comes to mind). What makes games more expensive are things like presentation, intense geometry and detailed environments, increase in staff in order to meet strict deadlines, features (such as single player and multiplayer modes), etc.
It's one thing if you just merely update the textures and add a bit more polygons. But it's completely another if you completely overhaul everything.
Flying_Phoenix said:
I think Matt is right on this one.
If you call KB/M "Exceptional," then I think "Good" is a reasonable descriptor for a PS3/360 controller.
No one seems to be arguing that the Console controller is as effective as the KB/M combo. But many would argue (and I would agree) that it isn't so much worse that it's unplayable for most people. It's noticeably less effective, but not so much less effective that the difference is prohibitive for many people.
B-Rad Lascelle
Banned
This doesn't look like a Sales Age conversation.
For what it's worth, look for The Conduit to follow in the footsteps of MadWorld.
At least Sega has another Mario & Sonic go to the Olympics title on tap for the fall to sell several million copies and refuel their coffers.
For what it's worth, look for The Conduit to follow in the footsteps of MadWorld.
At least Sega has another Mario & Sonic go to the Olympics title on tap for the fall to sell several million copies and refuel their coffers.
Fair enough. The added stipulations of game vs. input challenge, which increase and decrease satisfaction respectively, make your argument flow logically. This is the argument I was expecting (though not in the same words) and is a large part of the reason that keyboard and mouse is regarded as the superior control method by any "sane" individual. As for myself, I'm looking forward to Nunchuck + Wiimote with Wii motion plus.Opiate said:
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
Opiate said:
Not to come off as a PC elitist or as a troll but to me "Good" means something that is preferable above being significantly satisfied. I'll call console controllers "Passable" for FPS controls but not really much else. Just my opinion though.
B-Rad Lascelle said:
It probably will because SEGA has terrible marketing.
Are we only talking about FPS games? Because then, I'd agree.Opiate said:
3rd person games, or games centered around exploration or platforming, tend to work better on gamepads. You have more precision for player control (WASD is archaic, at best), and precision with mouselook becomes secondary.
This is why I think Wii control offers a great compromise, with the superior analog control for movement, and a mouselike method for precision aiming.
Also, there has been the argument that bad controls, or imprecise controls need to be mastered, making the game more for gamers. We have Monster Hunter, or survival horror games, that have often relied on much more imprecise movement compared to their more action oriented counterparts. I reject that idea though. I'm interested in Monster Hunter because it's still a great game, but there would be no danger in making it's controls better (the Wii version offers analog camera control, at last). And horror games shouldn't be horrific because you're fighting the controller. If you want to scare someone, give them as much control as possible, and STILL scare them by making enemies unpredictable, intelligent, and hard to avoid. Tank controls are on the way out.
Count me in between those who can't stand precision aiming with the dual analog setup. Okay, I still do use it because I hate the keyboard part of keyboard+mouse even more (I know I'm pretty hard to satisfy), but I'd really love some IR pointer on PS360 action/shooters :/
sequence, I kept moaning about how imprecise and frustrating aiming felt (might have been my lack of skill, I don't know and I don't care that much), to the point I even thought about how I wished I could simply hook a Wiimote + nunchuk to my ps3, or at least have a similar peripheral with the same capability. I'm waiting for Sony's wands and Microsoft's Natal to fully reveal their potential, but I'm not that hopeful about their usage in action games honestly :/
By the way, Dead Space is excellent. If you haven't played it yet... do it.
Two days ago I was playing through chapter 4 of Dead Space. During thepakkit said:
asteroid shooting
By the way, Dead Space is excellent. If you haven't played it yet... do it.
Chris Remo said:
And everyone who wanted shooters last gen had an Xbox, but stupid companies put FPSs on the PS2, too. Go figure.
Chris Remo said:
I just don't know what to say. This is so obviously wrong that I'm literally floored that you would even say this. GTA is way down from last generation. Do you think those buyers disappeared? The PS2 audience that bought over 100 million-sellers in the U.S. (most of which traditional core games) just up and vanished? I seriously suggest you take some time out to review what happened last generation, think about what's happening this generation, and rethink your position on who the Wii audience is in the U.S.
Please. I'm serious. Please.
dammitmattt
Banned
donny2112 said:
GTA is way down? Why do people keep saying this? Here are some rough numbers:
GTA3 - 15+ million
GTA: VC - 18+ million
GTA: SA - 22+ million
GTA4 - 13+ million
If it continues to sell at the pace of the previous games, it will end up in the 15-18 million range when it's all said and done with. And that doesn't even include the additional content like The Lost and Damned and The Ballad of Gay Tony. That's pretty damn good, especially considering that it's not leading on the most successful platform this time around.
boiled goose
good with gravy
pakkit said:
I really felt like using a wiimote when playing gears of war 2....
the wii's lack of third perosn shooters is disturbing......
is there any way to play nunchuck + mouse
or half gamepad half mouse on a pc?
cr_blah_blah
Member
dammitmattt said:
And GTA:SA was sold to an audience of 90+ million for the last 5 years. GTA4 is at 1 year of sales to an audience of around like 54 million? I wouldn't harp on GTA sales being so way down in that crazy dramatic, awkward 'please. I'm serious. please' kind of way based on that. Wii is great, we all get it.
dammitmattt said:
Having looked at the actual numbers, I think "way" may have been too strong. "Significantly down" would probably be a better term.
PS2 San Andreas through 10 months: 5.79m
XBX San Andreas through 10 months: 0.81m
Total: 6.60m
360 GTAIV through 10 months: 3.31m
PS3 GTAIV through 10 months: 1.92m
Total: 5.23m
dammitmattt said:
And that's exactly my point. There is an audience that would buy GTA on Wii. The "entire success" of the Wii is not "with people who aren't interested in GTA and Halo."
cr_blah_blah said:
The "Please. I'm serious. Please" was for him to reevaluate what happened last gen (> 100 million-sellers on PS2, most of which were traditional games, and the PS2 didn't have the best-selling FPSs), what's happening this gen, and who the audience on the Wii actually is. It was not specifically about GTA sales, and, no, I wasn't comparing the LTD of GTA:SA to the first year of GTAIV on PS360, as shown by the above numbers.
It got shat all over because everyone (me included) wanted it to be something it couldn't be (aka Dead Space with a control scheme the original couldn't have, despite heavily downgraded graphics), and because shoehorning it into a lightgun game looked like a cheap cash-in (back then, I also wondered how much business sense it did make, with the lightgun genre already having quite a few notable entries and the 3rd person action genre being about as empty as the mall in Dead Rising Wii).AniHawk said:
After finally playing Dead Space (I bought it ~3 months ago but only started it last week), I changed my mind about Extraction: the original has a pretty linear structure (you basically follow a path and sometimes explore the few nearby rooms that aren't locked), surprisingly similar to what a lightgun game would be. So, if it turns out as good as it seems from E3 impressions, I might end up picking it up too.
I still hope it does sell well: with the original game underperforming, what would a spinoff do on another platform that most DS players don't own?
charlequin
Banned
bcn-ron said:
That's where your example falls down, though. The difference between Wii assets and PS360 assets isn't tweaking a setting downwards on the resolution meter; it's the difference of a much longer pipeline, with a range of content like normal maps, additional animations, etc. being created for Dead Space: HD that wouldn't exist for Dead Space: SD.
Flying_Phoenix said:
I don't think it's particularly difficult to argue that there's a subgenre of shooters, say, which are particularly suited to the dual-analog controller step. KB/M leans strongly towards full, quick control -- nimble characters who can completely pivot on a dime and aim at many dissimilar locations in quick succession. But if one accepts that certain games might benefit from slower, more methodical control, they would fit well to dual-analog's limitations -- and might even "feel" better on dual-analog since players wouldn't be "used" to being able to move arbitrarily fast.
Jocchan said:
Well yeah, I think everyone had the expectation of a very basic, RE:UC-type game. The little I played offered branching paths and more control over your character than arcadey lightgun games (which means you can be attacked from the left or right too). It was pretty intense (especially one fight in the dark). I saw someone else fighting off enemies while he was trying to solve a puzzle that would get the elevator working again and it looked cool.
I have to get the 360 game, but my backlog is pretty huge.
This is exactly what I was expecting, and UC bored me to death (I beat the RE0 part, but never bothered to pick the game up again).AniHawk said:
Sounds good, thanks for sharing this.AniHawk said:
So is mine, damn. This is why I'm trying to keep my purchases to a minimum... but offers showing up here and there always end up tempting me and making me bite.AniHawk said:
However, I strongly suggest to play it. It's a really good game, and you can find it for cheap about everywhere (actually, this is true in Europe, I have no idea about the US).
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
charlequin said:
I agree if you were talking about games with shooter elements that would be superior (Metal Gear comes to mind) then I agree with you. But I'm strictly talking about traditional shooters.
Randy Lanzarote
Member
Do you not think that comparing to GTAIII would've been a better comparison? After all by the time the GTA:SA came out the PS2s LTD was significantly higher than the PS360 was when GTA4 came out.
dammitmattt
Banned
donny2112 said:
So given the userbase differences, GTA4 is actually selling to a much larger percentage of the user base. Are you sure that you still want to say it's "significantly" down?
I think the more worrying thing about GTA4, in comparison to GTA:SA, is just how it has sold. The shape of the curve, if you will.
It isn't just that it has sold less overall than GTA:SA did in the same time frame. We also know that GTA4 sold more up front, which means (because it has sold less overall) that its legs have been significantly shorter.
It isn't just that it has sold less overall than GTA:SA did in the same time frame. We also know that GTA4 sold more up front, which means (because it has sold less overall) that its legs have been significantly shorter.
vanguardian1
poor, homeless and tasteless
Some of the GTA/Sandbox games and Wii comments have made me realize something odd. The only upcoming "sandbox" game for Wii I'm aware of happens to have the name "Final Fantasy" in the title.
Is it me, or does that feel very, very wierd?
Is it me, or does that feel very, very wierd?
Starchasing
Member
AniHawk said:
no... you dont look at sales from a relative perspective.... it doesnt matter if you sold to 2% or 10% of the installed base... that might be ok in a secondary analysis...
the main thing is
i spent x millon dollars
i got back y million dollars