Quantcast
Locked: 3rd party sales math games!

Forums - Sales Discussion - 3rd party sales math games!

HappySqurriel said: Why force it to be only on both consoles? Do third party sales not count if they are exclusive? America: (Wii) Rayman Raving Rabbids - Ubisoft - 375,250 (Wii) Red Steel - Ubisoft - 335,500 (PS3) Madden NFL 07 - EA - 335,250 (Wii) Madden NFL 07 - EA - 311,250 (Wii) Super Monkey Ball: Banana Blitz - Sega - 267,250 (Wii) Call of Duty 3 - Activision - 251,250 (PS3) Call of Duty 3 - Activision - 212,000 (Wii) Marvel: Ultimate Alliance - 207750 (PS3) Need for Speed: Carbon - EA - 185,500
You missed Wii Marvel: Ultimate Alliance - 207750



 

 

Buy it and pray to the gods of Sigs: Naznatips!

Around the Network

I name this thread: The desperation of Kwaad!



I'm a mod, come to me if there's mod'n to do. 

Chrizum is the best thing to happen to the internet, Period.

Serves me right for challenging his sales predictions!

Bet with dsisister44: Red Steel 2 will sell 1 million within it's first 365 days of sales.

robjoh said: You missed Wii Marvel: Ultimate Alliance - 207750
Thanks Updated List: America: (Wii) Rayman Raving Rabbids - Ubisoft - 375,250 (Wii) Red Steel - Ubisoft - 335,500 (PS3) Madden NFL 07 - EA - 335,250 (Wii) Madden NFL 07 - EA - 311,250 (Wii) Super Monkey Ball: Banana Blitz - Sega - 267,250 (Wii) Call of Duty 3 - Activision - 251,250 (PS3) Call of Duty 3 - Activision - 212,000 (Wii) Marvel: Ultimate Alliance - Activision - 207750 (PS3) Need for Speed: Carbon - EA - 185,500 (Wii) Trauma Center: Second Opinion - Atlus - 172,000 (PS3) Fight Night Round 3 - EA - 168,250 (PS3) Marvel: Ultimate Alliance - Activision - 160,000 (Wii) Dragonball Z: Budokai Tenkaichi 2 - Atari - 134,500 (Wii) Need for Speed: Carbon - EA - 128,250 (Wii) Tony Hawk Downhill Jam - Activision - 123,500 (Wii) Elebits - Konami - 114,250 (PS3) Tiger Woods PGA Tour 07 - EA - 113,000 (PS3) NBA 2K7 - Take 2 - 111,500 (PS3) Tony Hawk Project 8 - Activision -112,000 (PS3) Ridge Racer 7 - Namco - 98,500 (Wii) Rampage: Total Destruction - Midway - 95,500 (Wii) Sonic and the Secret Rings - Sega - 88,500 (PS3) Blazing Angels: Squadrons of WWII - Ubisoft - 76,000 (PS3) Full Auto 2: Battlelines - Sega - 75,500 (Wii ) Super Swing Golf - Tecmo - 69,250 (Wii) Rapala Trophies: Pro Tournament Fishing - Activision - 68,750 (Wii) Metal Slug Anthology - SNK - 64,750 (PS3) Virtua Fighter 5 - Sega - 56,750 (PS3) Major League Baseball 2K7 - Take 2 - 34,750 (PS3) Sonic the Hedgehog - Sega -33,250 Edit: Known MIA: Splinter Cell DA Far Cry



Another way to look at it : If you had the same new-game budget for each console, you could buy 20% more games for the Wii than you could for PS3/360. :) Btw, didn't Madden 07 for Wii use the PS2 port? If so, wouldn't that reduce the cost as well?



Nobody is crazy enough to accuse me of being sane.

Nope, it was built from the ground up to ensure precise controlls and Xbox+ like graphics.



THE NETHERLANDS

Around the Network

According to Namco Bandai Holdings Inc. president Takeo Takasu you have to sell 500,000 units of a ps3 game in order to turn a profit. And that's the threshold, not the point at which your rolling in the dough. These are the people behind Ridge Racer and Gundam Musou. I'm sure they're already dissappointed by the sales of each. But WAIT! Here is where the article gets interesting. Takasu says games for the ps3 on average cost 8.6 million to produce. So using his 500,000 unit figure game developers make on average $17.20 per game.(Not even close to Kwaad's $39 projection) So where does the rest of the money go? I suggest that Kwaad's assumption that Sony's $8 royalty is wrong. Let's do the math. Nintendo likes royalties like anyone else. But remember they make a profit on the system, so their business model isn't designed to recoup cost of hardware off royalty fees. Sony's is. That's right Sony uses the royalties to recoup cost on hardware sales, nothing we didn't know there, but that allows us to calculate the theshold in which they see a return. Hypothetically if Sony is losing 100 dollars on the ps3 at an 8 dollar royalty the attach rate for the system to break even has to reach 12.5. That isn't going to happen, not ever, the ps2 didn't come close to it. And the bigger kicker in my opinion is that they are losing MORE then a 100 bucks a system. Let's pick a more comfortable number: the attach rate of 5. In order to break even on a system that loses you a 100 bucks with an attach rate of 5 your royalty has to be........$20.00, and if they are losing 150 dollars then the royalty has to be 30 bucks. Huge difference. Now add it together $30 royalty, $17.20 developer's cut, $6 store cut(based on the standard 10%) = $53.20 I can imagine the rest of the cost being accounted for through manufacturing/shipping and such. to make it to $60. Now I don't know if this formula is right(I'm making the assumption that marketing is either included in the budget or marked as overhead cost), but it's what I can surmise from what we know, until at least Kwaad can actually account for his royalty figures. Here is the link: Namco speaks on ps3 budget costs



fooflexible said: According to Namco Bandai Holdings Inc. president Takeo Takasu you have to sell 500,000 units of a ps3 game in order to turn a profit. And that's the threshold, not the point at which your rolling in the dough. These are the people behind Ridge Racer and Gundam Musou. I'm sure they're already dissappointed by the sales of each. But WAIT! Here is where the article gets interesting. Takasu says games for the ps3 on average cost 8.6 million to produce. So using his 500,000 unit figure game developers make on average $17.20 per game.(Not even close to Kwaad's $39 projection) So where does the rest of the money go? I suggest that Kwaad's assumption that Sony's $8 royalty is wrong. Let's do the math. Nintendo likes royalties like anyone else. But remember they make a profit on the system, so their business model isn't designed to recoup cost of hardware off royalty fees. Sony's is. That's right Sony uses the royalties to recoup cost on hardware sales, nothing we didn't know there, but that allows us to calculate the theshold in which they see a return. Hypothetically if Sony is losing 100 dollars on the ps3 at an 8 dollar royalty the attach rate for the system to break even has to reach 12.5. That isn't going to happen, not ever, the ps2 didn't come close to it. And the bigger kicker in my opinion is that they are losing MORE then a 100 bucks a system. Let's pick a more comfortable number: the attach rate of 5. In order to break even on a system that loses you a 100 bucks with an attach rate of 5 your royalty has to be........$20.00, and if they are losing 150 dollars then the royalty has to be 30 bucks. Huge difference. Now add it together $30 royalty, $17.20 developer's cut, $6 store cut(based on 10%) = $53.20 I can imagine the rest of the cost being accounted for through manufacturing/shipping and such. to make it to $60. Now I don't know if this formula is right(especially since I'm unsure of how marketing cost fits in), but it's what I can surmise from what we know, until at least Kwaad can actually account for his royalty figures. Here is the link: Namco speaks on ps3 budget costs
Kwaads $8 figure (probably) comes from the reported royalties that were paid on PS2, XBox and Gamecube games. You could assume that the higher price point ($60) includes a higher royalty fee (say $12) ... I also expect that the average development cost he listed does not include marketing costs which can be anywhere from $2 Million to $25 Million ...



Another problem... Kwaad claims "profit per unit sold." Not even close. That's *revenue* per unit sold. Revenue != profit.



StarcraftManiac said: Nope, it was built from the ground up to ensure precise controlls and Xbox+ like graphics.
If that's the case then why was it reffered to as a PS2 port graphically in several reviews? If you've seen some info somewhere saying otherwise, I'd love to read it. :)



Nobody is crazy enough to accuse me of being sane.

vanguardian1 said: StarcraftManiac said: Nope, it was built from the ground up to ensure precise controlls and Xbox+ like graphics. If that's the case then why was it reffered to as a PS2 port graphically in several reviews? If you've seen some info somewhere saying otherwise, I'd love to read it. :)
It was definately built ground up. And most reviews said that it was looking pretty good, but not nearly as good as the ps3/360 versions. If somebody said it looked like the PS2 game, it was probably an exaggeration.



I'm a mod, come to me if there's mod'n to do. 

Chrizum is the best thing to happen to the internet, Period.

Serves me right for challenging his sales predictions!

Bet with dsisister44: Red Steel 2 will sell 1 million within it's first 365 days of sales.