As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
We're funding a new Acquisitions Incorporated series on Kickstarter right now! Check it out at https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/pennyarcade/acquisitions-incorporated-the-series-2

Video Game Sales Thread: December thread over, go use the new one

15859606264

Posts

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=22256
    LucasArts's Star Wars: The Force Unleashed sold 5.7 units worldwide across all platforms since releasing in September, making it the fastest-selling Star Wars game in history.

    Several versions of the title were shipped, with LucasArts developing editions for PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360; Krome Studios for PlayStation 2, PlayStation Portable, and Wii; n-Space for DS; and Universomo for iPod Touch, iPhone, N-Gage, and other mobiles.

    The non-mobile releases immediately established The Force Unleashed as the fastest-selling Star Wars game in history, moving over 1.5 million copies globally in just its first five days of sale.

    The title's demo also received a record number of downloads on Xbox 360, with over one million gamers grabbing the trial in just eight days. Likewise, the PlayStation 3 version was the most downloaded game demo for the PlayStation Network.

    The Force Unleashed also recently won the second annual Video Game Writing Award from the Writers Guild of America, an award seeking to "encourage storytelling excellence in video games, improve the status of writers, and foster uniform standards within the gaming industry."

    The overall Star Wars brand was so successful in 2008, Lucasfilm says its toy and product line experienced its strongest holiday sales in the 31 years since the theatrical debut of the first Star Wars movie, despite the currently challenging retail economy.

    According to consumer research firm The NPD Group, the brand's toy retail sales in 2008 exceeded $450 million, and Star Wars: The Clone Wars was the single most popular licensed toy property last year.

    The brand is also celebrating the success of 14 different Star Wars titles appearing on the New York Times best seller list (including a Star Wars: The Force Unleashed novelization). The Star Wars: The Clone Wars cartoon also scored as the most-watched series debut in Cartoon Network History, and the StarWars.com site saw a 30 percent jump in traffic.
    Darn.

    Couscous on
  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Well well, look who came crawling back to Cheap and Shitty Movie Tie-In Games after loudly divorcing themselves from them a couple years back.
    EA has made the unsurprising announcement that it's to publish a game to coincide with one of the summer's biggest movies, G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra.

    Made in collaboration with Hasbro, G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra will be making its first public appearance at next week's Toy Fair in New York. The game, which is scheduled for Xbox 360, PS3, PSP, PS2, Wii and DS, features a unique story that carries on from the film's conclusion, and is to include 12 unique characters and single screen co-op.

    "G.I. Joe has been an icon of action for 45 years," said Hasbro's Mark Blecher, "EA has tapped the legacy of the G.I. JOE vs. COBRA saga to create an amazing interactive experience inspired by the movie, comic books, animated series and iconography that we hope will resonate with millions of fans."

    http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/953/953288p1.html

    Yup, looks like EA may have to re-evil out of economic necessity.

    cloudeagle on
    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • darleysamdarleysam On my way to UKRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    5.7 units? Damn!


    edit: yes, let's all mock EA for trying something good and then being bumraped because of it. They deserve criticism.

    darleysam on
    forumsig.png
  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    darleysam wrote: »
    5.7 units? Damn!


    edit: yes, let's all mock EA for trying something good and then being bumraped because of it. They deserve criticism.

    I wasn't mocking them for trying something good, I was all aboard the "EA does new stuff!" bandwagon. In fact I think it's extremely sad that their poor economic performance has pretty much forced them to go back to quick and dirty licensed stuff.

    cloudeagle on
    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • darleysamdarleysam On my way to UKRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Yeah, sorry, I just read your tone as rather sneery towards them. Apologies!

    darleysam on
    forumsig.png
  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    S'all right.

    To show my support for EA's strategy of creativity, I will now createa Henry Hatsworth thread.

    cloudeagle on
    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • Unco-ordinatedUnco-ordinated NZRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    darleysam wrote: »
    5.7 units? Damn!


    edit: yes, let's all mock EA for trying something good and then being bumraped because of it. They deserve criticism.

    I wasn't mocking them for trying something good, I was all aboard the "EA does new stuff!" bandwagon. In fact I think it's extremely sad that their poor economic performance has pretty much forced them to go back to quick and dirty licensed stuff.

    Just because it's licensed doesn't mean it's 'evil' or 'dirty'. Batman: Arkham Asylum, Chronicles of Riddick and Ghostbusters are licensed games and they're some of my more anticipated games this year.

    The thing that makes them 'evil' is if they barely even try to make the game good, rushing development and throwing it out on the market whenever the movie comes out. If EA's willing to cancel The Dark fucking Knight then they obviously do care about their games quality.

    Unco-ordinated on
    Steam ID - LiquidSolid170 | PSN ID - LiquidSolid
  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    JCRooks wrote: »

    Hmm, I guess when you take a look at it that way, the recession is already making its effects known. If not in previous sales, but in slashing costs, fewer dev teams, consolidation, and more. And I think we all agree that this is arguably a good thing.
    What? Remember when I posted all the publisher's financials and outside of Activision and Ubisoft there was mostly losses for the Western companies? All that data was from before the crisis started. As I recall, you were pretty sanguine about the industry back then.

    So let's review. Evidence that the recession has not had a negative effect: Industry revenue was up 20%(!) for the year and December sales were up 9%. Those are both against strong years/months last year.

    Evidence that the recession has had a negative effect: Some companies are losing money and laying people off.

    To me it's pretty easy to see that some companies are losing money despite the lack of negative effect from the recession. To each their own, I guess.

    lowlylowlycook on
    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • darleysamdarleysam On my way to UKRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    S'all right.

    To show my support for EA's strategy of creativity, I will now createa Henry Hatsworth thread.

    I would've settled for a tidy jig, but mine is not the place to make requests.

    darleysam on
    forumsig.png
  • LunkerLunker Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    S'all right.

    To show my support for EA's strategy of creativity, I will now createa Henry Hatsworth thread.

    Do it—I will join in the loving. MTV Multiplayer's blog just posted some new screens and details, though they might be mildly spoilery.

    Lunker on
    Tweet my Face: @heyitslunker | Save money at CheapAssGamer (not an affiliate link)
  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    darleysam wrote: »
    5.7 units? Damn!


    edit: yes, let's all mock EA for trying something good and then being bumraped because of it. They deserve criticism.

    I wasn't mocking them for trying something good, I was all aboard the "EA does new stuff!" bandwagon. In fact I think it's extremely sad that their poor economic performance has pretty much forced them to go back to quick and dirty licensed stuff.

    Just because it's licensed doesn't mean it's 'evil' or 'dirty'. Batman: Arkham Asylum, Chronicles of Riddick and Ghostbusters are licensed games and they're some of my more anticipated games this year.

    The thing that makes them 'evil' is if they barely even try to make the game good, rushing development and throwing it out on the market whenever the movie comes out. If EA's willing to cancel The Dark fucking Knight then they obviously do care about their games quality.

    All the above games you cited aren't published by EA. Some of EA's proud achievements include Catwoman and Superman Returns which were rushed and thrown out in the market. And EA canceled The Dark Knight before their financial situation became dire. So dire that a cheap, shitty yet potentially profitable game becomes more attractive.

    Sure, it might not suck, but considering very few of EA's movie games in the past have not sucked (other than the Harry Potter series), I'm not getting my hopes up.

    Edit: Ah, thanks Lunker! I was wondering what the plot was.

    cloudeagle on
    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • JCRooksJCRooks Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    JCRooks wrote: »

    Hmm, I guess when you take a look at it that way, the recession is already making its effects known. If not in previous sales, but in slashing costs, fewer dev teams, consolidation, and more. And I think we all agree that this is arguably a good thing.
    What? Remember when I posted all the publisher's financials and outside of Activision and Ubisoft there was mostly losses for the Western companies? All that data was from before the crisis started. As I recall, you were pretty sanguine about the industry back then.
    Exactly, and I still am. I talked about this in the post after my reply to you (which you seem to have ignored, huh). Compared to others (like retail, travel, auto, etc.), the games industry is in a pretty good state. Sure, things may not be very good for many companies, but at least many of them are still growing ... just not as much as they expected to. This is in stark contrast to many other companies which have shrunk significantly year over year.

    In short, there's plenty to be optimistic. But at the same time, it's dangerous to completely ignore the state of the surrounding economy. And that's why even Nintendo is making statements like being "fiscally conservative" and "financially responsible" when they lower expectations for the coming year. That's all.
    So let's review. Evidence that the recession has not had a negative effect: Industry revenue was up 20%(!) for the year and December sales were up 9%. Those are both against strong years/months last year.

    Evidence that the recession has had a negative effect: Some companies are losing money and laying people off.

    To me it's pretty easy to see that some companies are losing money despite the lack of negative effect from the recession. To each their own, I guess.
    As I said before, if you want to be stubborn (ignoring all the other points that have been made), go for it! It's pretty clear to many of us here that the recession is having an undue effect on the industry if many, often subtle, ways. If it helps, I'll continue to post articles that point that fact out for you. :)

    JCRooks on
    Xbox LIVE, Steam, Twitter, etc. ...
    Gamertag: Rooks
    - Don't add me, I'm at/near the friend limit :)

    Steam: JC_Rooks

    Twitter: http://twitter.com/JiunweiC

    I work on this: http://www.xbox.com
  • ArcSynArcSyn Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Rule for new thread: no talk about the effects or non effects of the recession on the games industry.. :D

    ArcSyn on
    4dm3dwuxq302.png
  • JCRooksJCRooks Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    ArcSyn wrote: »
    Rule for new thread: no talk about the effects or non effects of the recession on the games industry.. :D

    Does it count if quarterly reports talk about it? Or would I need to bleep out any mention of "down economy" or the R-word? :)

    Activision-Blizzard is scheduled to report earnings around 1 PM PST. It'll be very interesting to see what they report. They are undoubtedly one of the better off game companies, due in no small part to WoW's success. Hopefully they'll be able to beat estimates and give us some upbeat information for once!

    JCRooks on
    Xbox LIVE, Steam, Twitter, etc. ...
    Gamertag: Rooks
    - Don't add me, I'm at/near the friend limit :)

    Steam: JC_Rooks

    Twitter: http://twitter.com/JiunweiC

    I work on this: http://www.xbox.com
  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Maybe it would be better if you called it something else... How about 'raisins'?
    ArcSyn wrote: »
    Rule for new thread: no talk about the effects or non effects of the raisins on the games industry.. :D

    See? Much better.

    Santa Claustrophobia on
  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    JCRooks wrote: »
    ArcSyn wrote: »
    Rule for new thread: no talk about the effects or non effects of the recession on the games industry.. :D

    Does it count if quarterly reports talk about it? Or would I need to bleep out any mention of "down economy" or the R-word? :)

    Activision-Blizzard is scheduled to report earnings around 1 PM PST. It'll be very interesting to see what they report. They are undoubtedly one of the better off game companies, due in no small part to WoW's success. Hopefully they'll be able to beat estimates and give us some upbeat information for once!

    I don't know, I've heard rumblings that their profits aren't as great as expected.

    Speaking of which, should I even bother asking who's going to make the next thread? We're about to hit 100, after all.

    Edit: Upped the ante with another stupid title change.

    cloudeagle on
    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • spamfilterspamfilter Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I think we can reach a happy middle ground here.

    On the one hand, raisins undoubtedly had and continue to have an negative impact on the industry.

    On the other hand, many of the problems of the industry are self-inflicted, and many of these companies would be in trouble even in a good economy, and to blame it on raisins would be letting the makers of some really bad decisions off the hook too easily.

    spamfilter on
  • JCRooksJCRooks Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    spamfilter wrote: »
    I think we can reach a happy middle ground here.

    On the one hand, raisins undoubtedly had and continue to have an negative impact on the industry.

    On the other hand, many of the problems of the industry are self-inflicted, and many of these companies would be in trouble even in a good economy, and to blame it on raisins would be letting the makers of some really bad decisions off the hook too easily.

    Works for me!

    I never liked raisins anyway. :)

    JCRooks on
    Xbox LIVE, Steam, Twitter, etc. ...
    Gamertag: Rooks
    - Don't add me, I'm at/near the friend limit :)

    Steam: JC_Rooks

    Twitter: http://twitter.com/JiunweiC

    I work on this: http://www.xbox.com
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/euro-development-jobs-moved-to-us-confirms-ncsoft
    NCsoft has confirmed to GamesIndustry.biz that development positions in the UK are to be moved to North America.

    Some 55 development staff were axed in Brighton today, leaving the remaining team to concentrate on European sales and marketing.


    "The European office is transitioning to have a stronger focus in marketing and sales, with many of the existing disciplines being consolidated in our studios on the US West Coast and our headquarters in Seattle," said a spokesperson for the company.


    "Additionally, we are transitioning to an embedded quality assurance model in which the QA staff works in our studios directly with the development teams, providing support throughout the entire development process.”

    The publisher said that as many as 90 employees across the group will be affected by the changes.

    Some development and community roles may be recreated in Seattle and California said NCsoft, and there is also a possibility that the sales and marketing team in the UK will grow.

    "In order to solidify and streamline company operations across all NCsoft West territories, we are implementing some structural changes which will impact 70 to 90 employees," detailed the company. "We are working with these employees to determine the best fit for approximately 80 alternate positions within the company."
    D:

    Couscous on
  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I just love that term. Axed. It carries with it this notion of some dead weight just being chopped off quickly and cleanly. It also sort of carries with it the notion of being executed, like by the headsman's axe.

    slash000 on
  • ChewyWafflesChewyWaffles Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    How the hell'd they manage a loss?

    http://www.gamespot.com/news/6204549.html
    Today, the biggest third-party publisher of them all, Activsion Blizzard, weighed in with an earnings announcement which is both good and bad. On one hand, the company's record $2.3 billion in October-December net revenue beat the $2.15 billion a Thomson Reuters survey of analysts had predicted. On the other, the company posted a $72 million loss during a quarter when it launched new entries in its three biggest franchises: Guitar Hero World Tour (October 26), Call of Duty: World at War (November 10), and World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King (November 13).

    Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick played down the loss with a back-handed dig at staff-cut-beset competitors. "We won't be distracted by layoffs and restructuring and things that other companies are going to be distracted with," Kotick told Reuters. "We don't respond to managing our operating expenses because there's a financial crisis, we do it all the time."

    Despite Kotick's upbeat tone, the markets reacted swiftly and negatively. In after hours trading, Activision Blizzards stock was down over 5 percent, trading at $9 as of press time.

    ChewyWaffles on
    mwf2sig.jpg
  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    How the hell'd they manage a loss?

    http://www.gamespot.com/news/6204549.html
    Today, the biggest third-party publisher of them all, Activsion Blizzard, weighed in with an earnings announcement which is both good and bad. On one hand, the company's record $2.3 billion in October-December net revenue beat the $2.15 billion a Thomson Reuters survey of analysts had predicted. On the other, the company posted a $72 million loss during a quarter when it launched new entries in its three biggest franchises: Guitar Hero World Tour (October 26), Call of Duty: World at War (November 10), and World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King (November 13).

    Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick played down the loss with a back-handed dig at staff-cut-beset competitors. "We won't be distracted by layoffs and restructuring and things that other companies are going to be distracted with," Kotick told Reuters. "We don't respond to managing our operating expenses because there's a financial crisis, we do it all the time."

    Despite Kotick's upbeat tone, the markets reacted swiftly and negatively. In after hours trading, Activision Blizzards stock was down over 5 percent, trading at $9 as of press time.

    Apparently it has to do with some accounting tricks.

    lowlylowlycook on
    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • ChewyWafflesChewyWaffles Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Kinda wondered about that.

    ChewyWaffles on
    mwf2sig.jpg
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    "We don't respond to managing our operating expenses because there's a financial crisis, we do it all the time."
    This does not feel me with confidence.

    Couscous on
  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Kinda wondered about that.
    [strike]
    I don't really have the expertise to follow their deferred income or whatever accounting.

    One thing to keep in mind is that this quarter had $300 in income from WoW. If they make a 40% profit (which shouldn't be too far off and a bit conservative) that's $120 million in operating earnings from just that.
    [/strike]
    [IMPORTANT EDIT] This was me being stupid and looking the Sept quarter.

    lowlylowlycook on
    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Kinda wondered about that.

    I don't really have the expertise to follow their deferred income or whatever accounting.

    One thing to keep in mind is that this quarter had $300 in income from WoW. If they make a 40% profit (which shouldn't be too far off and a bit conservative) that's $120 million in operating earnings from just that.

    ...which were completely eaten up and then some by whatever the hell else Activision was doing.

    Seriously, what the fuck? Wasn't Activision + Blizzard making monster profits just a couple quarters ago? And their loss came despite the fact that they launched their biggest hits. I'm gobsmacked. Unless there's some major accounting jiggerypokery going on, that's just awful.

    Also, their CEO sounds like a true douchebag.

    cloudeagle on
    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • chasmchasm Ill-tempered Texan Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Maybe it would be better if you called it something else... How about 'raisins'?
    ArcSyn wrote: »
    Rule for new thread: no talk about the effects or non effects of the raisins on the games industry.. :D

    See? Much better.

    If you just made the reference I think you made, I love you.

    chasm on
    steam_sig.png
    XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Kinda wondered about that.

    I don't really have the expertise to follow their deferred income or whatever accounting.

    One thing to keep in mind is that this quarter had $300 in income from WoW. If they make a 40% profit (which shouldn't be too far off and a bit conservative) that's $120 million in operating earnings from just that.

    ...which were completely eaten up and then some by whatever the hell else Activision was doing.

    Seriously, what the fuck? Wasn't Activision + Blizzard making monster profits just a couple quarters ago? And their loss came despite the fact that they launched their biggest hits. I'm gobsmacked. Unless there's some major accounting jiggerypokery going on, that's just awful.

    Also, their CEO sounds like a true douchebag.
    [strike]
    Activision Blizzard's non-GAAP operating income was $122 million.
    Yeah, so if you take what they call their non-GAAP operating income as gospel, even then they basically broke even except for WoW.[/strike]

    [IMPORTANT EDIT] This was me being stupid and looking at the quarter ending in Sept.

    lowlylowlycook on
    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • TyrantCowTyrantCow Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    "We don't respond to managing our operating expenses because there's a financial crisis, we do it all the time."
    This does not feel me with confidence.

    I believe he's saying "We manage our operating expenses regardless of the national financial situation"

    edit- oh shi-- you were felt by confidence?

    TyrantCow on
  • spamfilterspamfilter Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    If Activision can't turn a profit. Everyone is screwed.

    spamfilter on
  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Kinda wondered about that.

    I don't really have the expertise to follow their deferred income or whatever accounting.

    One thing to keep in mind is that this quarter had $300 in income from WoW. If they make a 40% profit (which shouldn't be too far off and a bit conservative) that's $120 million in operating earnings from just that.

    ...which were completely eaten up and then some by whatever the hell else Activision was doing.

    Seriously, what the fuck? Wasn't Activision + Blizzard making monster profits just a couple quarters ago? And their loss came despite the fact that they launched their biggest hits. I'm gobsmacked. Unless there's some major accounting jiggerypokery going on, that's just awful.

    Also, their CEO sounds like a true douchebag.
    Activision Blizzard's non-GAAP operating income was $122 million.
    Yeah, so if you take what they call their non-GAAP operating income as gospel, even then they basically broke even except for WoW.

    GAAP, according to a Google search, stands for Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

    So apparently, if you play crazy math games with the figures, spin them till they puke, and sprinkle pixie dust on them, they made a profit.

    Yeah, I'm not buying it.

    Edit:
    GAAP earnings vs. adjusted earnings
    Companies report their earnings according to GAAP, or generally accepted accounting principles, which is the common set of accounting principles that all companies are expected to follow.

    To get a clearer picture of core operating earnings, some companies also report adjusted, or non-GAAP, earnings. They do this by adding back charges and subtracting gains. Non-recurring gains are subtracted from GAAP earnings, while non-recurring charges are added.

    The companies that report adjusted earnings will usually have a nice section of the earnings press release called something like "Reconciliation of GAAP net income (loss) to adjusted net income."

    The good news is that we're getting closer to true operating earnings; the bad news is that all companies use different methods to get there. As a result, there's usually a disclaimer in the earnings report -- something like "Adjusted net income per share does not have any standardized meaning prescribed by GAAP." As always, investors should exercise caution when taking the company's numbers at face value. More on that shortly.

    Importantly, the "consensus analyst estimate" number is almost always based on some sort of core operating earnings, since analysts typically build their financial models excluding extraordinary charges.

    So what are these mysterious "adjustments"? In a nutshell, they are not part of the day-to-day operating expenses of a company and are therefore "adjusted," or either backed out of or added to GAAP earnings. To add to the confusion, adjustments and non-GAAP earnings are called by different names.

    Different names for adjustments:

    * Non-recurring charges/gains
    * One-time items
    * Extraordinary items
    * Adjustments

    http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2007/09/05/foolish-fundamentals-gaap.aspx

    cloudeagle on
    Switch: 3947-4890-9293
  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Has Ubisoft reported yet?

    lowlylowlycook on
    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • JCRooksJCRooks Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    It's important to note that Activision-Blizzard actually beat Wall Street expectations for the past quarter:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINN1137804120090211?rpc=44&sp=true
    Excluding items, it posted a profit of 31 cents a share, beating the average analyst estimate of 29 cents a share, according to Reuters Estimates. The company was formed through the merger of Activision with Blizzard, the games unit of France's Vivendi SA. The deal closed last July.

    Adjusted revenue in the quarter was $2.3 billion -- above its previous forecast -- and topped the $2.15 billion Wall Street estimate.

    I'm not sure why they posted a loss, but it seems like that was actually expected by them and by analysts. My guess is that they have a lot of costs at the moment, specifically leading up to the release of Starcraft 2 and Diablo III.

    The important thing to note is that they went lower than expected on their '09 forecasts. In other words, they expect to make less money this year than they originally thought. That is why their stock is currently being beat up at the moment.

    Why? My guess is raisins.

    EDIT:
    Another article to check out:
    UPDATE: Activision Beats The Street, Guidance Lousy* (ATVI)
    http://www.businessinsider.com/activision-beats-the-street-gaming-industry-saved-2009-2

    JCRooks on
    Xbox LIVE, Steam, Twitter, etc. ...
    Gamertag: Rooks
    - Don't add me, I'm at/near the friend limit :)

    Steam: JC_Rooks

    Twitter: http://twitter.com/JiunweiC

    I work on this: http://www.xbox.com
  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    JCRooks wrote: »
    I'm not sure why they posted a loss, but it seems like that was actually expected by them and by analysts. My guess is that they have a lot of costs at the moment, specifically leading up to the release of Starcraft 2 and Diablo III.

    As I understand it, they don't book expenses for games until they launch the game, excepting costs that come before the game is viable. So I doubt SC or Diablo have anything to do with it.

    lowlylowlycook on
    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • RingoRingo He/Him a distinct lack of substanceRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Jumping back a few pages:
    Hedgethorn wrote: »
    When you have a marketing campaign like Dead Space's, a million copies moved probably isn't enough to make a profit.
    What do you get for a year's worth of marketing? For its videogame "Dead Space," hitting stores this week, Electronic Arts unleashed TV, in-cinema, a Web site, a six-part animated comic book series and other elements to support the futuristic sci-fi horror epic.

    In return, the company hopes to see major sales, especially with videogame reviewers calling the title "a masterpiece of gaming" and a "front-runner for the best game of the year."...

    TV launched earlier this month, via Heat, San Francisco, with 30-second spots on South Park, Adult Swim and Monday Night Football. Creative is running in-cinema in 2,000 theaters prior to trailers before R-rated movies.

    Comic books, both in print and animated online, developer diaries (via Deep Focus, New York) and a Web site, www.Deadspace.ea.com, bulked up the marketing. A new DVD, Dead Space Downfall, is an animated feature film being released Oct. 28.

    I found this interesting, because my first thought was, "EA Advertised Dead Space?" And it turns out that they did, and they didn't. Their mass market campaign aired during South Park, Adult Swim, and Monday Night Football - all of which are cable shows. It makes me wonder what the growing disparity is for the HD consoles and their games and if they're going to continue a trend to price themselves out of certain markets.

    Ringo on
    Sterica wrote: »
    I know my last visit to my grandpa on his deathbed was to find out how the whole Nazi werewolf thing turned out.
    Edcrab's Exigency RPG
  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Yeah, so apparently I'm an idiot and got those numbers for the quarter ending in Sept. I was confused because for most US companies Q3 is the Oct-Dec quarter and it was the latest one on their website. I'll have to wait until they upload the Q4 info before I can guesstimate how Activision is doing apart from WoW.

    [edit]
    Revenues related to the sale of World of Warcraft boxed software, including the sale of expansion packs and other ancillary revenues, is deferred and recognized ratably over the estimated customer life beginning upon activation of the software and delivery of the services.

    The launch of WotLK and this accounting probably explain a lot of deferred income.

    So that would mean that their Non-Gaap profits have a lot to do with WoW, just not with subscriptions.

    lowlylowlycook on
    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • JCRooksJCRooks Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    JCRooks wrote: »
    I'm not sure why they posted a loss, but it seems like that was actually expected by them and by analysts. My guess is that they have a lot of costs at the moment, specifically leading up to the release of Starcraft 2 and Diablo III.

    As I understand it, they don't book expenses for games until they launch the game, excepting costs that come before the game is viable. So I doubt SC or Diablo have anything to do with it.

    It's interesting to note that depending on the website/blog that you visit, they have very different headlines:

    Activision Blizzard Shrugs Off Recession, Reports $5 Billion In Revenue
    http://kotaku.com/5151500/activision-blizzard-shrugs-off-recession-reports-5-billion-in-revenue

    Activision Blizzard loses $72m in Q4 '08; outlook misses '09 expectations
    http://www.joystiq.com/2009/02/11/activision-blizzard-loses-72m-in-q4-08-outlook-misses-09-expe/

    UPDATE: Activision Beats The Street, Guidance Lousy* (ATVI)
    http://www.businessinsider.com/activision-beats-the-street-gaming-industry-saved-2009-2

    Activision's 'Focus' Drives Revenue Past Estimates
    http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=22247

    And so on.

    It just goes to show that a lot of video game "journalists" aren't very business savvy when it comes to financial reports, when they're all reporting and spinning things differently.

    JCRooks on
    Xbox LIVE, Steam, Twitter, etc. ...
    Gamertag: Rooks
    - Don't add me, I'm at/near the friend limit :)

    Steam: JC_Rooks

    Twitter: http://twitter.com/JiunweiC

    I work on this: http://www.xbox.com
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Activision-Blizzard-Reports-prnews-14329958.html
    -------------  -------------  ----------  ----------
                             Quarter Ended  Quarter Ended  Year Ended  Year Ended
                               December       December      December    December
                                  31,            31,          31,         31,
                                 2008           2007         2008        2007
    
        Activision &
         Blizzard Net
         Revenues
    
          MMOG                        22%            62%         41%         77%
          ----                        --             --          --          --
    
          PC                           3%             6%          4%          7%
          ---                          -              -           -           -
    
          Console                     66%            23%         47%         12%
          -------                     --             --          --          --
            Sony
             PlayStation
              3                       11%             2%          9%          2%
            Sony
             PlayStation
              2                       14%             9%         10%          5%
            Microsoft
             Xbox 360                 19%             7%         13%          3%
            Nintendo
             Wii                      22%             5%         15%          2%
    
          Hand-held                    9%             9%          8%          4%
          ---------                    -              -           -           -
            Sony
             PlayStation
             Portable                  1%             3%          1%          2%
            Nintendo
             Dual Screen               8%             5%          7%          2%
            Nintendo
             Game Boy
             Advance                   0%             1%          0%          0%
    
           --                        ---            ---         ---         ---
          Total
           Activision &
           Blizzard net
           revenues                  100%           100%        100%        100%
          -------------              ---            ---         ---         ---
    
    
    
    I know it looks like crap, but is should be readable. MMO games make up a fifth of their revenue.

    Couscous on
  • spamfilterspamfilter Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    That's not just game journalists. All the journalists who report on financial news are clueless.

    spamfilter on
  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    PS2 is still stronger than PS3 in moving software?

    Crazy times.

    lowlylowlycook on
    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
Sign In or Register to comment.