NSMB was $35 at release. Nintendo has never, to my knowledge, released a DS game over 35. (unless it included some hardware/periph perhaps)
I guess I'm just used to paying the Square Enix tax.
Also I didn't notice the comparison math was already done. :P
As for whether NSMB Wii will sell more than Galaxy or not...I think it's partly about getting the word out. Personally I don't think it will sell as well as Galaxy, though I doubt it'll be too far behind. Install base is definitely a big factor there, but this is the perfect timing to boost it as well with a price cut.
He later added, "We have a real culture of thrift. The goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks into Activision about 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games."
If that sounds like it would create a corporate culture that isn't all sunshine and hugs, then it's "mission accomplished" for Kotick. The executive said that he has tried to instill into the company culture "skepticism, pessimism, and fear" of the global economic downturn, adding, "We are very good at keeping people focused on the deep depression."
o_O Is this guy really that dumb?
I read that whole spiel as "I'm an asshole who takes the fun out of games and rapes them for profit over and over again, and if you work in my company by GOD you better be focused on PROFIT and NOTHING ELSE or I will fire your ass so hard you won't know what hit you."
In other words, he's a nut, and his company is doomed to eventual mediocrity and failure.
Cameron_Talley on
Switch Friend Code: SW-4598-4278-8875
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
NSMB was $35 at release. Nintendo has never, to my knowledge, released a DS game over 35. (unless it included some hardware/periph perhaps)
I guess I'm just used to paying the Square Enix tax.
Also I didn't notice the comparison math was already done. :P
As for whether NSMB Wii will sell more than Galaxy or not...I think it's partly about getting the word out. Personally I don't think it will sell as well as Galaxy, though I doubt it'll be too far behind. Install base is definitely a big factor there, but this is the perfect timing to boost it as well with a price cut.
I think it will sell far more. 2D Mario is far more accessible to the average person than the 3d platforming in SMG.
I think it will sell far more. 2D Mario is far more accessible to the average person than the 3d platforming in SMG.
Of course it'll do well and I want it myself. I just get a weird vibe from the idea of NSMB Wii. It's sort of a sequel, so if any of the masses didn't enjoy the DS game they might not be picking it up. Additionally as a sequel, people who didn't play the first may be hesitant (this is a dumb attitude for this sort of game but it'll happen all the same). It's also full price for a "2D game" and you know how well those sell (Wario Land Shake It). People accept handheld 2D and cheap 2D, but I don't know about this.
I'm going to have to echo UncleSporky's sentiment. If I were a Wii owner, I wouldn't be picking up NSMB Wii because I didn't enjoy the DS version and I expect it to have a similar gameplay style...and I am a huge Mario fan (pretty sure NSMB was the only one I didn't love).
Not that any of this matters, Wii Fit Plus is coming and I can just imagine the sales for that.
EDIT: And also full price for a 2D game...yeah, no dice. If it were exceptionally long, say the length of SMB3 or something, that would be one thing. If it's that long, great, probably well worth it. But NSMB was so short.
Well then again it has four player local play if you have friends, which can be a total game-changer. I played Halo in college even though I would otherwise never give it a second thought.
Then again, it's not online.
Not that any of this matters, Wii Fit Plus is coming and I can just imagine the sales for that.
The first one sold so well, and this for $20? It's practically a guaranteed sale, I'd think. I don't even use the original anymore but that's impulse buy. The videos look like it has some great improvements too.
NSMB Wii is supposedly balls hard. My only complaint about NSMB is the rather lax difficulty. (and maybe a bit to much waa-waa in the music, but that's a minor complaint.
No need to dust off your spectacles -- Crysis on the iPhone has been achieved. Just last week we took a peek at the graphical enhancements on the iPhone 3GS, but this demonstration didn't rely on the factory goods from Apple. Instead, a recent OTOY demonstration put to use some of AMD's newest GPU technology in order to play back one of the leading-edge 3D titles on a smartphone. In short, OTOY renders the game on remote servers and then sends information to a recipient; needless to say, an HDTV displayed all sorts of artifacts, but on a screen that's just a few inches large, those flaws become invisible. So, is this really the killer app to supplant Apple's own App Store for gaming on the iPhone? We get the feeling OTOY needs at least few clean-cut commercials with little-known underground music before they can bank on that.
It's not actually OnLive doing the service, but the same concept is at work: Handle all the 3D and processing remotely, and only use the local machine for the video and controls. My question is: Weren't we questioning the capability of such a service considering the input lag from your house to the server? How much worse is it going to be going over the airwaves? And would AT&T even allow such a thing when they won't even let you Google Voice over their 3G network?
With Burnout Paradise, it's silly to expect local play.
I mean seriously, look at all the shit that game's handling while not even dropping a frame (something that's crucial in racing games!). Expecting it to render split screen while I'm on one end of Paradise City and someone else is on the other end...I mean, come on now, really?
This is 2D Mario. Quite a bit easier to handle! And platformers/beat-'em-ups have always had a really cool local element to them.
If local-play doesn't return by next gen, it will be a sad day. I can understand some problems with power limitations, but local play should just be scaled down. Hopefully the next gen machines will be powerful enough to handle local 4 player again. Sure, Perfect Dark ran about 0.25fps with 4 people and explosions, but that didn't keep us from playing it!
It was all you had. It certainly keeps people from playing today.
And the mass majority of things are just more fun online, where you have your own screen (I loathe splitscreen with a burning passion...luckily games like NSMB Wii and beat-'em-ups don't utilize it).
The problem with online though is that everyone needs their own console and TV. I can't have a party with people over and play a game locally unless they want to bring some consoles and TVs. Plus, we don't all own the same console so it makes it a bit hard to play games as they don't cross-console play yet.
That doesn't mean it shouldn't be an option. Sometimes you want friends over to have drinks while just messing around with the game, something that can't be done over an internet connection.
On the opposite side of the spectrum, friends going off to different colleges have no recourse for regular NSMB sessions. Games should have both options.
Gamasutra's NPD analysis is up. Still reading it but this is interesting:
Are those the price of each system sold or just figures gathered by recording what price each store is selling systems at? I'm guessing the former, since that would actually be useful (unlike the latter).
Yeah, in the US the retail prices don't vary by retailer much since the margins are already slim at the MSRP. So this is the average selling price.
Here is the same for software: link to the article itself.
Ignoring the fact Japan is handheld land anyways, I think this is a large portion of we're seeing so many japanese developers jump ship to the DS/PSP. Development costs are just way too high versus the amount of actual profitibility. People were complaining about not having a new SMT game in HD, but knowing how niche Atlus titles tend to be, I'd be floored if we actually see an HD title from them. We've already seen a lot of smaller developers go under this gen as it is.
The problem with online though is that everyone needs their own console and TV. I can't have a party with people over and play a game locally unless they want to bring some consoles and TVs. Plus, we don't all own the same console so it makes it a bit hard to play games as they don't cross-console play yet.
And they likely never will.
I don't see this as a problem, though. If you and your friend were genuinely interested in playing your game together, online, I imagine you'd have the proper system and the proper game.
After that, if you had your friends over, why would you even want to play your game locally? You play it all the time online. Use that time for something other than video games.
EDIT: And naturally this is smarter on the business side of things. Not only are you not devoting time to a feature that only a fraction of your user-base would bother with, you're also potentially selling four copies instead of one.
I don't think Halo or Rock Band would have sold nearly as well if they were limited to online-only multiplayer. Both are massively popular as local multiplayer games you can play with your buddies and party.
But, as it is with all internet debates, it's all opinion and how each person lives and who their friends are. So yeah, some will prefer online, and others local. Ideally, both being offered would be the best, but developers have limited time and resources. I would love to play some 4 player L4D with my friends, but since I got a Wii, and he got a 360, that is an impossibility. I place a higher importance on Nintendo games, and he likes his HD quality visuals.
A lot of it has to do with the times we live in as well. Pretty much everything can be done through electronic means rather than physical. Society is simply becoming more and more impersonal, and even our leisure activities (like gaming) reflect that. Hell, I can't remember the last time I ever even talked to a friend on the phone versus just texting or IMing them.
What I always find funny about this are the people that want to cling to these older methods, yet they were all for the advent of online play. Not a mention of Sega or the Dreamcast goes by without saying how "ahead of the game" they were with their online play, and a lot of these people are the same ones who will decry a lack of local multiplayer.
No need to dust off your spectacles -- Crysis on the iPhone has been achieved. Just last week we took a peek at the graphical enhancements on the iPhone 3GS, but this demonstration didn't rely on the factory goods from Apple. Instead, a recent OTOY demonstration put to use some of AMD's newest GPU technology in order to play back one of the leading-edge 3D titles on a smartphone. In short, OTOY renders the game on remote servers and then sends information to a recipient; needless to say, an HDTV displayed all sorts of artifacts, but on a screen that's just a few inches large, those flaws become invisible. So, is this really the killer app to supplant Apple's own App Store for gaming on the iPhone? We get the feeling OTOY needs at least few clean-cut commercials with little-known underground music before they can bank on that.
It's not actually OnLive doing the service, but the same concept is at work: Handle all the 3D and processing remotely, and only use the local machine for the video and controls. My question is: Weren't we questioning the capability of such a service considering the input lag from your house to the server? How much worse is it going to be going over the airwaves? And would AT&T even allow such a thing when they won't even let you Google Voice over their 3G network?
To me the bandwidth thing isn't even the problem. The problem is on the server side, where you have to have the equivalent processing power of a Crysis PC for EVERY PERSON CONNECTING TO THE SERVICE, unless you want to start having limited Crysis Slots or something like that.
No need to dust off your spectacles -- Crysis on the iPhone has been achieved. Just last week we took a peek at the graphical enhancements on the iPhone 3GS, but this demonstration didn't rely on the factory goods from Apple. Instead, a recent OTOY demonstration put to use some of AMD's newest GPU technology in order to play back one of the leading-edge 3D titles on a smartphone. In short, OTOY renders the game on remote servers and then sends information to a recipient; needless to say, an HDTV displayed all sorts of artifacts, but on a screen that's just a few inches large, those flaws become invisible. So, is this really the killer app to supplant Apple's own App Store for gaming on the iPhone? We get the feeling OTOY needs at least few clean-cut commercials with little-known underground music before they can bank on that.
It's not actually OnLive doing the service, but the same concept is at work: Handle all the 3D and processing remotely, and only use the local machine for the video and controls. My question is: Weren't we questioning the capability of such a service considering the input lag from your house to the server? How much worse is it going to be going over the airwaves? And would AT&T even allow such a thing when they won't even let you Google Voice over their 3G network?
To me the bandwidth thing isn't even the problem. The problem is on the server side, where you have to have the equivalent processing power of a Crysis PC for EVERY PERSON CONNECTING TO THE SERVICE, unless you want to start having limited Crysis Slots or something like that.
My understanding of the OnLive technology is that it isn't literally 1 computer = 1 instance, they've got a bunch of very powerful servers running VMs. So depending on the userbase, at any moment a given server can be handling 20 people playing Crysis or 80 people playing Team Fortress 2 or 5000 people playing Peggle (or more likely some combination thereof). There are still major server-side issues to deal with, sure, but I don't think it's quite as bad as "well, we have 5,000 PCs that can play Crysis and we just had our 5,001st sign-up, get Dell on the phone and have 'em send us another computer STAT!"
DeathPrawn on
Signature not found.
0
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
So, I just found out that German sales have surpassed UK a couple weeks back. Let’s see if I can dig up the info. Really puts the insignificance of the Japanese market into perspective though.
Edit: Huh, whilst looking for more solid sources it seems that the report was mistaken. Disregard.
So those who thought that Pokemon were on their way out, guess not. Pokemon Gold/Silver remakes sell 1.4 million in two days.
I can't wait till it's released here as I plan on grabbing them too. I've been wanting an updated Gold/Silver for a long time.
Itsz not something I've followed since Yellow religiously but the buzz has definitely worn off, I'd stake an unfounded claim that the people buying these games are largely people who were buying them back at Red/Blue.
They would make so much money if they made a Pokemon 3D console RPG it isn't funny. Even I'd buy a Wii for it. Of course I'd burn it afterwards.
So those who thought that Pokemon were on their way out, guess not. Pokemon Gold/Silver remakes sell 1.4 million in two days.
I can't wait till it's released here as I plan on grabbing them too. I've been wanting an updated Gold/Silver for a long time.
What's the big deal about Gold and Silver anyway?
I mean, why remake them?
I know they remade the first games for the GBA years ago.
I'm guessing it's for two reasons: Gold/Silver/Crystal are still considered by many (me included) to be the best set of games in the whole Pokemon series. Second, for just what DarkWarrior said, Nintendo knows that it means money, as we can see from sales they were right.
Plus we still have a couple of years before the next iterations are made.
Posts
I mean, 8.02 mil is pretty hard to top. Will people be as enthusiastic for a standard 2D sidescroller on a home console? Will it be $50 at release?
I think there's something significant about a 2D Mario game that clicks with the mainstream. Will it have the kinds of sales legs as Mario Kart Wii?]
Will the degree of marketing/promotional/advertising be a huge factor?
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
YES, the answer is. The real question is if SMG1+2 can outsell it.
I guess I'm just used to paying the Square Enix tax.
Also I didn't notice the comparison math was already done. :P
As for whether NSMB Wii will sell more than Galaxy or not...I think it's partly about getting the word out. Personally I don't think it will sell as well as Galaxy, though I doubt it'll be too far behind. Install base is definitely a big factor there, but this is the perfect timing to boost it as well with a price cut.
I read that whole spiel as "I'm an asshole who takes the fun out of games and rapes them for profit over and over again, and if you work in my company by GOD you better be focused on PROFIT and NOTHING ELSE or I will fire your ass so hard you won't know what hit you."
In other words, he's a nut, and his company is doomed to eventual mediocrity and failure.
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
I think it will sell far more. 2D Mario is far more accessible to the average person than the 3d platforming in SMG.
The Pipe Vault|Twitter|Steam|Backloggery|3DS:1332-7703-1083
I think 2D Mario will out-sell 3D Mario. The "casual" crowd likes 2D mario, whilst 3D mario is too complex/difficult for them.
Edit: Beat'd so hard.
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
Of course it'll do well and I want it myself. I just get a weird vibe from the idea of NSMB Wii. It's sort of a sequel, so if any of the masses didn't enjoy the DS game they might not be picking it up. Additionally as a sequel, people who didn't play the first may be hesitant (this is a dumb attitude for this sort of game but it'll happen all the same). It's also full price for a "2D game" and you know how well those sell (Wario Land Shake It). People accept handheld 2D and cheap 2D, but I don't know about this.
Not that any of this matters, Wii Fit Plus is coming and I can just imagine the sales for that.
EDIT: And also full price for a 2D game...yeah, no dice. If it were exceptionally long, say the length of SMB3 or something, that would be one thing. If it's that long, great, probably well worth it. But NSMB was so short.
Then again, it's not online.
The first one sold so well, and this for $20? It's practically a guaranteed sale, I'd think. I don't even use the original anymore but that's impulse buy. The videos look like it has some great improvements too.
I think we found the problem!
It's not actually OnLive doing the service, but the same concept is at work: Handle all the 3D and processing remotely, and only use the local machine for the video and controls. My question is: Weren't we questioning the capability of such a service considering the input lag from your house to the server? How much worse is it going to be going over the airwaves? And would AT&T even allow such a thing when they won't even let you Google Voice over their 3G network?
I'll ask the same thing constantly asked about Burnout Paradise: Why can't we have both?
I mean seriously, look at all the shit that game's handling while not even dropping a frame (something that's crucial in racing games!). Expecting it to render split screen while I'm on one end of Paradise City and someone else is on the other end...I mean, come on now, really?
This is 2D Mario. Quite a bit easier to handle! And platformers/beat-'em-ups have always had a really cool local element to them.
If local-play doesn't return by next gen, it will be a sad day. I can understand some problems with power limitations, but local play should just be scaled down. Hopefully the next gen machines will be powerful enough to handle local 4 player again. Sure, Perfect Dark ran about 0.25fps with 4 people and explosions, but that didn't keep us from playing it!
And the mass majority of things are just more fun online, where you have your own screen (I loathe splitscreen with a burning passion...luckily games like NSMB Wii and beat-'em-ups don't utilize it).
On the opposite side of the spectrum, friends going off to different colleges have no recourse for regular NSMB sessions. Games should have both options.
Ignoring the fact Japan is handheld land anyways, I think this is a large portion of we're seeing so many japanese developers jump ship to the DS/PSP. Development costs are just way too high versus the amount of actual profitibility. People were complaining about not having a new SMT game in HD, but knowing how niche Atlus titles tend to be, I'd be floored if we actually see an HD title from them. We've already seen a lot of smaller developers go under this gen as it is.
The Pipe Vault|Twitter|Steam|Backloggery|3DS:1332-7703-1083
And they likely never will.
I don't see this as a problem, though. If you and your friend were genuinely interested in playing your game together, online, I imagine you'd have the proper system and the proper game.
After that, if you had your friends over, why would you even want to play your game locally? You play it all the time online. Use that time for something other than video games.
EDIT: And naturally this is smarter on the business side of things. Not only are you not devoting time to a feature that only a fraction of your user-base would bother with, you're also potentially selling four copies instead of one.
But, as it is with all internet debates, it's all opinion and how each person lives and who their friends are. So yeah, some will prefer online, and others local. Ideally, both being offered would be the best, but developers have limited time and resources. I would love to play some 4 player L4D with my friends, but since I got a Wii, and he got a 360, that is an impossibility. I place a higher importance on Nintendo games, and he likes his HD quality visuals.
What I always find funny about this are the people that want to cling to these older methods, yet they were all for the advent of online play. Not a mention of Sega or the Dreamcast goes by without saying how "ahead of the game" they were with their online play, and a lot of these people are the same ones who will decry a lack of local multiplayer.
What did you think was going to happen?
To me the bandwidth thing isn't even the problem. The problem is on the server side, where you have to have the equivalent processing power of a Crysis PC for EVERY PERSON CONNECTING TO THE SERVICE, unless you want to start having limited Crysis Slots or something like that.
My understanding of the OnLive technology is that it isn't literally 1 computer = 1 instance, they've got a bunch of very powerful servers running VMs. So depending on the userbase, at any moment a given server can be handling 20 people playing Crysis or 80 people playing Team Fortress 2 or 5000 people playing Peggle (or more likely some combination thereof). There are still major server-side issues to deal with, sure, but I don't think it's quite as bad as "well, we have 5,000 PCs that can play Crysis and we just had our 5,001st sign-up, get Dell on the phone and have 'em send us another computer STAT!"
So those who thought that Pokemon were on their way out, guess not. Pokemon Gold/Silver remakes sell 1.4 million in two days.
I can't wait till it's released here as I plan on grabbing them too. I've been wanting an updated Gold/Silver for a long time.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Edit: Huh, whilst looking for more solid sources it seems that the report was mistaken. Disregard.
Itsz not something I've followed since Yellow religiously but the buzz has definitely worn off, I'd stake an unfounded claim that the people buying these games are largely people who were buying them back at Red/Blue.
They would make so much money if they made a Pokemon 3D console RPG it isn't funny. Even I'd buy a Wii for it. Of course I'd burn it afterwards.
What's the big deal about Gold and Silver anyway?
I mean, why remake them?
I know they remade the first games for the GBA years ago.
Crystal was better.
I'm guessing it's for two reasons: Gold/Silver/Crystal are still considered by many (me included) to be the best set of games in the whole Pokemon series. Second, for just what DarkWarrior said, Nintendo knows that it means money, as we can see from sales they were right.
Plus we still have a couple of years before the next iterations are made.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Oh, you.
Well, yes, yes they do.
There aren't many people who can get away with repackaging a game and selling it for full price.
Oh but the same Pokemon in a new box? I am on that thing!