By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales Discussion - Global Hardware 29 June 2019

zorg1000 said:
Alby_da_Wolf said:

Sure, but NS is a hybrid, so it caters for home console gamers too, this could maybe negatively affect some sales, so that its sales, pushed by being also a portable, are very high anyway is more noteworthy than if it were just a portable.

It also being a home console does not negate its portable aspect.

True, but it makes it possible that a share of both its current owners and potential buyers be identifiable mainly as home console gamers, so at least part of this share would likely follow home users buying patterns. Being a hybrid, though, changes the game: while minorities of NS gamers will identify themselves as pure or almost pure portable or home gamers, the majority probably went beyond this as soon as they started enjoying the wider benefits of the hybrid concept. But this is surely more true for people that already bought it, while part of future buyers could arrive to it later, so they would follow the buying pattern of the category they belonged too before fully embracing the hybrid philosophy.



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW! 
 


Around the Network
Alby_da_Wolf said:
zorg1000 said:

It also being a home console does not negate its portable aspect.

True, but it makes it possible that a share of both its current owners and potential buyers be identifiable mainly as home console gamers, so at least part of this share would likely follow home users buying patterns. Being a hybrid, though, changes the game: while minorities of NS gamers will identify themselves as pure or almost pure portable or home gamers, the majority probably went beyond this as soon as they started enjoying the wider benefits of the hybrid concept.

Yes but we have already seen this pattern happen with Switch.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Mar1217 said:
Uuuuuh ! That's what I like to see :3

It even won in Europe too :O
Since we also an increase in Japan for next week's numbers then I guess it won't go down much which is great to start the summer !

Replicant said:
RolStoppable said:

The sentence you highlighted clearly states why the games would get ignored, so it's not rocket science for AAA publishers to figure out what they would have to improve.

Given what your response was, you are either convinced that there is no money to be made on Switch or you hope that you don't have to give a clear answer to that question.

Please stop trying to make it sound like I'm saying that there's no money to be made on Switch. I'm saying that the claim about "3rd parties hating Nintendo" is ridiculous. As I said initially, if there's money to be made, 3rd parties will come as we've seen with e.g. Activision (Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy, Crash Team Racing Nitro-Fueled, Spyro: Reignited Trilogy), Bandai Namco (Digimon Story: Cyber Sleuth, Digimon Survive, Dragon Ball FighterZ), Capcom (Mega Man 11, Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney Trilogy), Epic (Fortnite), Sega (Sonic Mania, Team Sonic Racing, Puyo Puyo Tetris), Square Enix (Octopath Traveler, Dragon Quest XI S), Take-Two (Civilization VI), Ubisoft (Mario + Rabbids Kingdom Battle, Just Dance), and Warner (Scribblenauts Showdown, Lego City Undercover).

You claim that Switch owners ignore the 3rd party "loot box riddled" AAA titles but still complain that publishers aren't bringing them to Switch. You're basically calling 3rd parties biased against Nintendo for not wanting to change their business model regarding AAA titles. That's entitlement in its purest form.

I think he was more suggesting that companies like EA who are focused on Live services shit like Anthem have spent a great deal of the last 5 years trying to convince gamers that what we want to be playing is online social interaction always online ever changing type games with no single player element whatsoever, so then the Switch rolls around with Mario Ody and Breath of the Wild which are basically 2 massive middle fingers to the idea that a massive single player game can't be amazing and isn't exactly what millions of gamers are willing to throw money at, there was a time when the attach rate of breath of the wild was greater than 1:1 because while people couldn't get the system to play it... everyone wanted what is one of the best and biggest single player games of all times.

It would be better for companies like EA to keep their fans away from systems where options other than always online yearly purchased trash was in the minority alongside games which came out 2 years ago and are still pumping out great gameplay all this time, heck even in terms of online shooters, if you bought Splatoon 2 around Switch launch you could still be playing that game today and enjoying new free map and weapon packs which have been steadily dropping into the game over the last 24 months, it completely goes against a call of duty or battlefield where you could buy the game two years ago but if you didn't buy the season pass you would be completely outta the loop in terms of what type of game people have today.... if the servers for online were still even up given that when a sequel appears often those older titles are shut down and forgotten.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

Mar1217 said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Nope, that's in 2 months... with the Lite models: Yellow (SS 1-3), Turquoise (Super Sayan Blue/SSGSS) and Grey (Ultra Instinct)

Nope. it indeed got into Super Saiyan, but now it is waiting to go Ultra Instinct mode with Lite ^^

That wasn't Super Saiyan, that was only a Kaio-ken X3 ^^



Chrkeller said:
Good for Nintendo. The Switch is a great piece of hardware, my favorite Nintendo hardware since the SNES. I am curious how long Nintendo can keep the momentum. With Astral Chain, Daemon, FE, LM3, Pokemon... I suspect Nintendo is only getting started. As for Microsoft, the Xbox One has been massively disappointing for me, I went as far as to sell mine. I loved the 360 and original Xbox, but this generation MS has done a terrible job at delivering exclusive content. My favorite 3 One games were Ori (Indie), MCC (collection of old games) and Rare Replay (collection of old games).

Yeah I also really liked the original Xbox and the 360, (the latter being one of my top 5 consoles of all time) but the Xbone completely failed to attract me. Not only did it lack exclusives, but franchises like Halo and Gears took an uninteresting direction on it, and in my humble opinion the quality of AAA third party games has really fallen this gen compared to last as it feels like most of them are out of ideas and just creating the most safe, focus-tested games they can, as opposed to last gen where we had a ton of exciting new IPs.

Hopefully they learn their lessons and Scarlet is more appealing.

KrspaceT said:
Beyond the third party behavior we continue to mock, I wonder if there are still people shouting at how the Switch is doomed or not? I mean if they wanted to they could probably shout 'POKEMON SWORD AND SHIELD CONTROVERSY WILL SINK THE SWITCH!' or something

(Worst that will do is basically be the Switch's Age of Ultron, something that does well but with a notable gap of 'what could have been without it' that there is internal reaction and response, FYI)

Most of the "Switch/Nintendo is doomed" talk died off in late 2017 when it became clear to anyone with any common sense that the system was a smash hit. You do still get the occasional post from the usual suspects about how it'll die once PS5/Scarlet release or how they'll be no more games after this year, but that's to be expected. The doom brigade have for the most part been driven underground by Switch's success. They'll emerge again once it's successor is unveiled. 



Around the Network
Ganoncrotch said: 

1: I think he was more suggesting that companies like EA who are focused on Live services shit like Anthem have spent a great deal of the last 5 years trying to convince gamers that what we want to be playing is online social interaction always online ever changing type games with no single player element whatsoever,

2: so then the Switch rolls around with Mario Ody and Breath of the Wild which are basically 2 massive middle fingers to the idea that a massive single player game can't be amazing and isn't exactly what millions of gamers are willing to throw money at, there was a time when the attach rate of breath of the wild was greater than 1:1 because while people couldn't get the system to play it... everyone wanted what is one of the best and biggest single player games of all times.

1+2: It would be better for companies like EA to keep their fans away from systems where options other than always online yearly purchased trash was in the minority alongside games which came out 2 years ago and are still pumping out great gameplay all this time, heck even in terms of online shooters, if you bought Splatoon 2 around Switch launch you could still be playing that game today and enjoying new free map and weapon packs which have been steadily dropping into the game over the last 24 months,

3: it completely goes against a call of duty or battlefield where you could buy the game two years ago but if you didn't buy the season pass you would be completely outta the loop in terms of what type of game people have today.... if the servers for online were still even up given that when a sequel appears often those older titles are shut down and forgotten.

1: Anthem is not the best example as nobody wanted to play that game. Even though EA and Bioware promised a 10 year journey of new content, Anthem was quickly abandoned by gamers and most likely by Bioware as well. This is not a first for EA though as Mass Effect: Andromeda, Star Wars: Battlefront 2 and Battlefield V failed to meet expectations as well. That you and Rol claim that publishers are biased against Nintendo because Nintendo owners are the only ones who'd say no to loot box riddled games is kinda dumb (VGC being a Nintendo hivemind, I'm not that surprised though). Have you not been following gaming news for the past 2 years? EA has been heavily criticized for their monetization in e.g. Star Wars: Battlefront 2 and is now under criminal investigation in Europe and the US for promoting gambling. EA's stock value has decreased 38% in just a year.

2: I agree. 10 days ago, I voted for Breath of the Wild as the greatest launch title of all time. God of War, Spider-Man, Horizon: Zero Dawn, Uncharted 4, etc. are also massive middle fingers to the idea that a massive single player game can't be amazing. But that didn't stop publishers from releasing their multiplayer games on e.g. the PS4. Again, you and Rol's logic is flawed (I wonder why).

3: It's scary to find myself defending games that I haven't had any interest in since iterations released in 2005 (Battlefield 2) and 2009 (COD: Modern Warfare 2), respectively. But Battlefield V's maps are indeed added for free and all maps in this year's COD: Modern Warfare will be free as well.



Nice SMM2 boost, do you we have an idea of the first week sales for the game apart from Japan?



Signature goes here!

TruckOSaurus said:
Nice SMM2 boost, do you we have an idea of the first week sales for the game apart from Japan?

Not yet but at the end of the month Nintendo will give out updated shipment numbers for the quarter ending June 30 so we will find out what the initial global shipments were and sometimes they will mention sell through for recent games.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Switch coming through with the big sales!!! Very Nice! Can't wait to see what kind of numbers it does this year!!!! PS4 doing steady still....not good/great but steady. XB1.....is just really man sad smh......



The absence of evidence is NOT the evidence of absence...

PSN: StlUzumaki23

Replicant said:
Ganoncrotch said: 

1: I think he was more suggesting that companies like EA who are focused on Live services shit like Anthem have spent a great deal of the last 5 years trying to convince gamers that what we want to be playing is online social interaction always online ever changing type games with no single player element whatsoever,

2: so then the Switch rolls around with Mario Ody and Breath of the Wild which are basically 2 massive middle fingers to the idea that a massive single player game can't be amazing and isn't exactly what millions of gamers are willing to throw money at, there was a time when the attach rate of breath of the wild was greater than 1:1 because while people couldn't get the system to play it... everyone wanted what is one of the best and biggest single player games of all times.

1+2: It would be better for companies like EA to keep their fans away from systems where options other than always online yearly purchased trash was in the minority alongside games which came out 2 years ago and are still pumping out great gameplay all this time, heck even in terms of online shooters, if you bought Splatoon 2 around Switch launch you could still be playing that game today and enjoying new free map and weapon packs which have been steadily dropping into the game over the last 24 months,

3: it completely goes against a call of duty or battlefield where you could buy the game two years ago but if you didn't buy the season pass you would be completely outta the loop in terms of what type of game people have today.... if the servers for online were still even up given that when a sequel appears often those older titles are shut down and forgotten.

1: Anthem is not the best example as nobody wanted to play that game. Even though EA and Bioware promised a 10 year journey of new content, Anthem was quickly abandoned by gamers and most likely by Bioware as well. This is not a first for EA though as Mass Effect: Andromeda, Star Wars: Battlefront 2 and Battlefield V failed to meet expectations as well. That you and Rol claim that publishers are biased against Nintendo because Nintendo owners are the only ones who'd say no to loot box riddled games is kinda dumb (VGC being a Nintendo hivemind, I'm not that surprised though). Have you not been following gaming news for the past 2 years? EA has been heavily criticized for their monetization in e.g. Star Wars: Battlefront 2 and is now under criminal investigation in Europe and the US for promoting gambling. EA's stock value has decreased 38% in just a year.

2: I agree. 10 days ago, I voted for Breath of the Wild as the greatest launch title of all time. God of War, Spider-Man, Horizon: Zero Dawn, Uncharted 4, etc. are also massive middle fingers to the idea that a massive single player game can't be amazing. But that didn't stop publishers from releasing their multiplayer games on e.g. the PS4. Again, you and Rol's logic is flawed (I wonder why).

3: It's scary to find myself defending games that I haven't had any interest in since iterations released in 2005 (Battlefield 2) and 2009 (COD: Modern Warfare 2), respectively. But Battlefield V's maps are indeed added for free and all maps in this year's COD: Modern Warfare will be free as well.

3 - Took me a few google searches to find out how that would be possible, Okay so going from the previous game where maps had an upfront cost they were released each 4 months in packs of 4 maps each, Battlefield V has a roadmap which adds 1 map per 5month cycle on average, conversely the games live services now pump out cosmetics and weapons at a far faster rate because those.... are of course sold for premium currency a la free to play model. If that modern warfare thing is yet to release and especially as it's a game from activision I would realllllly wait and see what comes of any offers of free dlc or free updates to their games because history should teach you not to trust them to not monetize the absolute shit outta games in every way they can.

1 - Anthem was indeed a complete travesty from jump, with EA going on stage and shouting GET HYPED while gamers shouted back... "why bioware, why" but that games failing wasn't due to the loot boxes being present in it, the failing was because EA took a studio known for single player RPG glory and threw them a handful of scuffed ideas about what the game was to be, up until 9 months prior to launch the fact that you can or cannot fly freely in the game was still completely up in the air and came and left the table on a per management meeting basis, the game failed because there was a complete lack of communication within the 2 studios who were making it along with the management team relying on the fact that Bioware had previously finished off a product in shambles using "Bioware magic" rather than actually managing the project in a meaningful way, the games story was cut to ribbons to make a "finished product" which didn't in any way live up to the hype packages that EA were on stage multiple times pointing to and screaming for people to get hyped for.... but also the game had loot boxes so I guess that's why it failed huh? Because your logic isn't flawed in the slightest!

As for following game news for the last 2 years being a counter to the fact that EA's stock has fallen and a sword is over the head of lootboxes from a court point of view.... yes the Stock has gone down because people are getting out before that sword comes down and severs that monitization head, however regarding how popular lootbox's/gambling mechanics are in titles right now the last figures I can find directly for live services were from 2017 year end which was 1billion+ from services and less than 600m from game sales, which means for every 60dollar game sold they actually take in 100dollars worth of micro transactions and that figure Forbes was predicting would only increase at the time, again, stock prices are down now but also as I said there is a massive sword hanging over their heads about controls to be put in place on a billion dollars of revenue which you will see them fight tooth and nail for because they will have to make that somewhere and having gambling in games with a 3+ rating is by far the easiest way of doing that.

2 - The games you mentioned all dropped around 3-4 years into the PS4 life cycle, by which stage massive amounts of work had been done already bringing a (horrific) Star Wars Battlefront as well as other titles laden with live services to the platform, having already mastered the game engines on the platform as well as the lesser work required for yearly sequels of said franchises then it's fairly easy to see why a company would of course bring a Fifa 20XX and Call of duty X Black Ops Y to the system, because half the work is done and yearly additions are rarely built from the ground up full games when it comes to titles in the same consoles lifecycle.

- If I see a reply with so much as a hint that any part of the above post is based on the fact that "I like the Nintendo Switch" I won't be replying to you on here again, because it's boring if I'm honest, Switch is a great machine, as is the PS4, the X1 is a system which should never have been released and anyone buying it today I think would be better off hiring a taxi to drive them in circles for 2 hours and drop them off back at home to play their ps4/switch, that said, my "loyalty" to platforms is based on which one is best at any one time, X360 was one of the greatest consoles of all times and had imo the greatest leap in tech and best library for any machine (I had to go through multiples of the thing because of RROD, but MS handled that great and it never cost me a cent), the WiiU was a travesty which again... like the X1 should never have been released. I like good games on good machines, if they come from Sony, Ms, Nintendo or your mother, I don't care.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive