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

Forums - Sales Discussion - Famitsu Sales: Week 30, 2020 (Jul 20 - Jul 26)

Tagged games:

RolStoppable said:

2020 surpasses 3m YTD in week 30, a bar that 2019 didn't clear until week 46. If 2020 is flat from here on out, it will finish with sales of ~5.85m; that's more than half of what the PS4 sold lifetime in a single year.

As for current PS4 sales, that looks more like Sony not caring one bit about the supply chain than anything else. If there were no supply constraints, then the PS4 could sell 6-10k units per week, but such a baseline doesn't add up to anything significant over the course of a few months (~50k extra units), so that's why it likely wasn't worth an effort on Sony's part.

Week 2019 Weekly 2019 Cumulative 2020 Weekly 2020 Cumulative Difference Weekly Difference Cumulative
1 225.698 225.698 284.827 284.827 59.129 59.129
2 83.136 308.834 116.301 401.128 33.165 92.294
3 71.672 380.506 96.458 497.586 24.786 117.080
4 51.556 432.062 67.987 565.573 16.431 133.511
5 66.448 498.510 75.922 641.495 9.474 142.985
6 61.042 559.552 100.961 741.456 39.919 181.904
7 64.313 623.865 80.312 821.948 15.999 198.083
8 49.139 673.004 41.490 863.258 -7.649 190.254
9 66.453 739.457 53.098 916.356 -13.355 176.899
10 67.624 807.081 50.585 967.941 -17.039 160.860
11 55.478 862.559 57.274 1.025.215 1.796 162.656
12 56.812 919.371 392.576 1.417.791 335.764 498.420
13 49.852 969.223 282.561 1.700.352 232.709 731.129
14 46.850 1.016.073 154.640 1.854.992 107.790 838.919
15 54.101 1.070.174 25.313 1.880.305 -28.788 810.131
16 40.338 1.110.512 27.874 1.908.179 -12.464 797.667
17 42.108 1.152.620 107.104 2.015.284 64.996 862.664
18 41.735 1.194.355 78.731 2.094.015 36.996 899.660
19 41.736 1.236.091 78.731 2.172.746 36.995 936.655
20 32.564 1.268.655 38.380 2.211.126 5.816 942.471
21 25.936 1.294.591 52.557 2.263.683 26.621 969.092
22 33.154 1.327.745 107.593 2.371.276 74.439 1.043.531
23 33.590 1.361.335 68.192 2.439.468 34.602 1.078.133
24 34.321 1.395.656 55.187 2.494.655 20.866 1.098.999
25 29.058 1.424.714 78.428 2.573.083 49.370 1.148.369
26 59.184 1.483.898 93.799 2.666.882 34.615 1.182.984
27 75.481 1.559.379 52.250 2.719.132 -23.231 1.159.753
28 55.823 1.615.202 96.879 2.816.011 41.056 1.200.809
29 45.596 1.660.798 113.197 2.929.208 67.601 1.268.410
30 42.689 1.703.487 125.231 3.054.439 82.542 1.350.952
31 36.613 1.740.100
32 46.338 1.786.438
33 46.339 1.832.777
34 30.072 1.862.849
35 90.553 1.953.402
36 77.392 2.030.794
37 51.619 2.082.413
38 239.740 2.322.153
39 196.489 2.518.642
40 89.137 2.607.779
41 56.680 2.664.459
42 54.067 2.718.526
43 69.438 2.787.964
44 119.397 2.907.361
45 88.772 2.996.133
46 180.136 3.176.269
47 179.992 3.356.261
48 186.763 3.543.024
49 188.501 3.731.525
50 236.625 3.968.150
51 291.485 4.259.614
52 234.268 4.493.885

If we scale sales proportionally to last year, switch could very well sell 8mil+ and the funny thing is the only thing stopping it is how many units Ninty can produce



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

Around the Network
Farsala said:
curl-6 said:

This feels cruel at this point but Switch to PS4 hardware ratio for this week is 87:1

What will you do when PS4 sales are 0? You can't have a ratio with 0!

To infinity and beyond!

Also Capcom not putting MH on switch is Capcom's loss honestly. They don't know how to do business if they do that



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

Link_Nines.XBC said:
tbone51 said:
Updated!!! 19 Weeks

PokeSmash - 6546k vs ACNH - 5280k

Gap-1266k

First 25 weeks (PokeSmash vs ACNH)

W1: 2603k - 1880k
W2: 827k - 728k
W3: 700k - 423k
W4: 456k - 293k
W5: 498k - 286k
W6: 351k - 284k
W7: 289k - 260k
W8: 234k - 195k
W9: 105k - 130k
W10: 84k - 102k
W11: 66k - 102k
W12: 50k - 98k
W13: 47k - 77k
W14: 48k - 74k
W15: 38k - 70k
W16: 45k - 53k
W17: 40k - 56k
W18: 33k - 72k
W19: 29k - 94k
W20: 26k -
W21: 25k
W22: 33k
W23: 18k
W24: 17k

Simply insane, AC is just in another level.

What’s crazy about this is after w16 I was like ok maybe AC won’t get close after all but it was still cool to compare and now the gap has shortened since then. Looking at at least W20-W24 the gap could potentially shrink down 1mil since Obon coming up and AC has the bundles.



curl-6 said:
Otter said:

This was supported by wildly cheaper specs and production values though. Capcom was able to essentially keep production costs at PS2 levels for another decade. I think a Switch exclusive entry would be a pretty ambitious endeavour even though its portable, which I imagine would make them favour just porting World which is definitely possible. Although maybe more likely is that they will produce somewhat of a remix, using many assets from world but smaller, bitsized areas with new and original content. 

Capcom have repeatedly ruled out a port of World, (they get asked at just about every investor meeting) but I think you're onto something; a remix of sorts using repurposed World assets would actually be the best solution. That said, when it comes to the Switch they seem to have an irrational aversion to supporting it properly.

It'd be great if they did a Switch port of World as long as it ran decently, but yeah obviously that isn't going to happen. World's success in the west means Capcom doesn't need to drop PS/Xbox in exchange for Nintendo. But still it would make financial sense for them to have a team making a ground up Switch version of the next game while they make the PS5/XBS version.

A Switch version of the next game would cost a lot less than the other version and add many millions to their sales. Japan alone would probably rack up 4 or 5 million sales on the Switch. It could realistically be a 10+ million seller on Switch alone thanks Japan domination, and since they are already making the game a lot of code could be copied to the Switch version, just with different assets made from the ground up for the Switch, and then obviously changing the code in whatever ways needed to optimize for the Switch. It'd probably be an extra 10+ million sales for at most 50% extra effort. Though knowing third parties these days, they'd rather just be lazy than make more money.



Slownenberg said:
curl-6 said:

Capcom have repeatedly ruled out a port of World, (they get asked at just about every investor meeting) but I think you're onto something; a remix of sorts using repurposed World assets would actually be the best solution. That said, when it comes to the Switch they seem to have an irrational aversion to supporting it properly.

It'd be great if they did a Switch port of World as long as it ran decently, but yeah obviously that isn't going to happen. World's success in the west means Capcom doesn't need to drop PS/Xbox in exchange for Nintendo. But still it would make financial sense for them to have a team making a ground up Switch version of the next game while they make the PS5/XBS version.

A Switch version of the next game would cost a lot less than the other version and add many millions to their sales. Japan alone would probably rack up 4 or 5 million sales on the Switch. It could realistically be a 10+ million seller on Switch alone thanks Japan domination, and since they are already making the game a lot of code could be copied to the Switch version, just with different assets made from the ground up for the Switch, and then obviously changing the code in whatever ways needed to optimize for the Switch. It'd probably be an extra 10+ million sales for at most 50% extra effort. Though knowing third parties these days, they'd rather just be lazy than make more money.

aways Japanese week sales have Mh discussion. Why? Capcom helped Switch elaboration. Capcom has great sales on the Nintendo Platform ( the best selling SF to the date is on Nintendo platform, Megaman, good sales of Monster Hunter and Resident Evil). The great Capcom series have good sales. Nintendo Switch is a major platform now. 

It's nonsensical and Capcom lost a ton of money not make an MH game for Nintendo Switch. Maybe 150-300 Millions of dollar. If Capcom has an agreement with Sony that agreement has to be something that exceeds that amount. If not, it was extremely dumb and poorly planned. 

Monster Hunter World was only possible thanks to sales of the series on the Nintendo console.



Around the Network
Train wreck said:
Wyrdness said:

What actually gives what Rol posted some ground is ironically not MH itself but what happened with SFV as that game has a contractual agreement to keep it off other non PC platforms as SFIV was heavily favoured on the Xbox platform because of Live so such a case as the rumour he's referring to is possible.

To respond to an earlier post where someone mentioned about sales even that's not the case because MHW's sales are across 3 platforms when you break down the performance per platform the portables still perform comparable to what MHW did per platform for example from Capcom's own numbers: http://www.capcom.co.jp/ir/english/finance/million.html

MHF - 4.9m
MHG - 4.3m
MH4U - 4.2m
MH4 - 4.1m
MHFU - 3.9m
MHGU - 3.6m

What's interesting here is MHW did 15m across 3 platforms but Iceborne expansion in comparison did 5m across the same 3 platforms where as in the portable side of things the userbase are more dedicated as seen with the consistent numbers for reference 80% of MHF went to MHFU, over 100% of MH4 numbers transferred to MH4U, 90% of MHG to MHGU and so on.

No context at all.  MHW and its 15 million is not comparable to Iceborne and its 5 million.  The 15 million for Monster Hunter World is after 24 months on the market, MHWI's 5 million is after six.  So if you feel that MHWI's sales will remain at 5 million for the next 18 months, then you have a point but you know that is not happening and that sales of that game, and the original, are higher than the 15 and 5 respectively anyway (as we will see in their upcoming earnings report).  Capcom would be stupid to break those type numbers to sell less as a Switch exclusive.

The best apple to apple comparison is that after 6 months, MHW did 8.3 million (2 consoles), after 6 months MHWI did 5 million (3 consoles) which is a 60% retention

It is Monster Hunter Stories 2.



Train wreck said:

No context at all.  MHW and its 15 million is not comparable to Iceborne and its 5 million.  The 15 million for Monster Hunter World is after 24 months on the market, MHWI's 5 million is after six.  So if you feel that MHWI's sales will remain at 5 million for the next 18 months, then you have a point but you know that is not happening and that sales of that game, and the original, are higher than the 15 and 5 respectively anyway (as we will see in their upcoming earnings report).  Capcom would be stupid to break those type numbers to sell less as a Switch exclusive.

The best apple to apple comparison is that after 6 months, MHW did 8.3 million (2 consoles), after 6 months MHWI did 5 million (3 consoles) which is a 60% retention

MH and Iceborne comparison comes about in comparing how the expansion approach compares to prior installments having an expanded version, in the case of the portables the majority of the userbase followed onto the expanded versions at a rate of 80% being the lowest to some even 100% while in in MHW only a third has so far followed through in total in acquiring the expansion and this is across three platforms it's not what anyone thinks it's going by current numbers for reference if each platform sold equally that means from 5m only 1.7m have continued on. Now compare that to something like MH4 where 100% followed through of the 4.1m of even the lowest in MHF to MHFU which is 80 in 3.9m, Iceborne sold 5m after six months on 3 platforms but MH4U was already pass 3m in under one meaning on a platform by platform basis that's 1.7m in six to 3m plus in one.

The context is someone cited sales but numbers as seen in the portable side are not only consistent but comparable to each platform it retains a certain demographic that the home platforms don't reach as well and still at this point remains untapped.



Marth said:
New Monster Hunter on Switch is never going to happen.
Capcom has shown already what kind of games they are willing to bring to the Switch.

Yup. And, unfortunately, its likely not gonna be that many.

Even if Switch users pass all of these game "tests" and buy whatever lackadaisical ports Capcom brings, Capcom is likely not going do anything more than that on Switch. Its a shame. There are opportunities to bring new entries of popular franchises on Switch (i.e., Ace Attorney, Okami, Viewtiful Joe, etc.). Heck, a sequel to Tatsunoko vs. Capcom would be cool since Switch isn't even getting SFV: Champion's Edition or MvC.

To the big third party developers from Japan, here's what I am asking: What are you waiting for to consider providing more Switch support?

The Switch is dominating Japan (and likely continue to do so even with the PS5 launching this year), selling well elsewhere, and has had some decent third party success, especially when most of the support are late (or last-gen) ports. Sure, the majority of the software sales are from Nintendo's first party offerings, and its likely not going to change, but that doesn't mean a new entry from Monster Hunter, Ace Attorney, Professor Layton, and others are unwarranted on Switch.



Kai_Mao said:
Marth said:
New Monster Hunter on Switch is never going to happen.
Capcom has shown already what kind of games they are willing to bring to the Switch.

Yup. And, unfortunately, its likely not gonna be that many.

Even if Switch users pass all of these game "tests" and buy whatever lackadaisical ports Capcom brings, Capcom is likely not going do anything more than that on Switch. Its a shame. There are opportunities to bring new entries of popular franchises on Switch (i.e., Ace Attorney, Okami, Viewtiful Joe, etc.). Heck, a sequel to Tatsunoko vs. Capcom would be cool since Switch isn't even getting SFV: Champion's Edition or MvC.

To the big third party developers from Japan, here's what I am asking: What are you waiting for to consider providing more Switch support?

The Switch is dominating Japan (and likely continue to do so even with the PS5 launching this year), selling well elsewhere, and has had some decent third party success, especially when most of the support are late (or last-gen) ports. Sure, the majority of the software sales are from Nintendo's first party offerings, and its likely not going to change, but that doesn't mean a new entry from Monster Hunter, Ace Attorney, Professor Layton, and others are unwarranted on Switch.

Yeah, talking in general globally here, but when you consider something as old as Skyrim that's available on everything else for way less money still has sold over 1 million copies on the Switch while being priced at $60 that should be a huge green flag to all third party devs that Switch owners will buy up millions of games if third parties just bothered building AAA games for the Switch. And specifically for popular games in Japan like MH it just makes no business sense to not have the game on the Switch built for the Switch. They're literally missing out on many millions of sales with that one game.



Slownenberg said:
Kai_Mao said:

Yup. And, unfortunately, its likely not gonna be that many.

Even if Switch users pass all of these game "tests" and buy whatever lackadaisical ports Capcom brings, Capcom is likely not going do anything more than that on Switch. Its a shame. There are opportunities to bring new entries of popular franchises on Switch (i.e., Ace Attorney, Okami, Viewtiful Joe, etc.). Heck, a sequel to Tatsunoko vs. Capcom would be cool since Switch isn't even getting SFV: Champion's Edition or MvC.

To the big third party developers from Japan, here's what I am asking: What are you waiting for to consider providing more Switch support?

The Switch is dominating Japan (and likely continue to do so even with the PS5 launching this year), selling well elsewhere, and has had some decent third party success, especially when most of the support are late (or last-gen) ports. Sure, the majority of the software sales are from Nintendo's first party offerings, and its likely not going to change, but that doesn't mean a new entry from Monster Hunter, Ace Attorney, Professor Layton, and others are unwarranted on Switch.

Yeah, talking in general globally here, but when you consider something as old as Skyrim that's available on everything else for way less money still has sold over 1 million copies on the Switch while being priced at $60 that should be a huge green flag to all third party devs that Switch owners will buy up millions of games if third parties just bothered building AAA games for the Switch. And specifically for popular games in Japan like MH it just makes no business sense to not have the game on the Switch built for the Switch. They're literally missing out on many millions of sales with that one game.

And that’s the thing. AA-AAA doesn’t necessarily mean games like FFVIIR or RDR2. If a quality action game like Astral Chain or a quality JRPG like DQXIS can sell well on Switch, why can’t a new MH or Capcom Vs. game do the same? Hell, USFII apparently sold well on Switch, and it had a mediocre 3D side mode as “new” content. Even if Switch sold 100 million, Capcom is more likely to stick with PS5 only for SF6.