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

Forums - Sales - VGChartz way overtracked Zack & Wiki - Z&W was a commercial failure

NJ5 on 28 January 2009
jammy2211 said:

 Most of that seems to be from Okami stuff albeit there was Z&W articles too.

However, if a Capcom vice president at doing something I can't remember the title of says Zack and Wiki made a loss, then it did. If he says it sold below expectations, then it did.

 The past is history, maybe the 'sources' people are citing were incorrect, maybe it was misinterpreted, or maybe just Capcom spin to impress investors goodness knows. The one thing I think you can be sure of is that a Capcom Rep isn't going to say a game was a failure (It made a loss...) if it wasn't. Investors don't like that, yanno?

EDIT: He's the second Capcom guy to say this now btw... after the guy talking about the Dead Rising Port. Capcom being honest or CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE WIIIIII DUN DUN DDEEEEER.

So how do you explain this link saying Okami "didn't make money" while Mr. Svensson says it was "moderately successful"?

No one is making conspiracy theories here, just trying to figure out what's right and wrong amidst all the contradictory information.

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

Around the Network
Star Scream on 28 January 2009

Found this quote from Sven:

"Lastly, Okami Wii is not on track to outsell the PS2 version. The worldwide Okami Wii number might get to the US Okami PS2 number at some point though. "

Ouch, that's harsh...



Gamerace on 28 January 2009

I think Sven may be slightly talking out of his arse but it's clear Zack & Wiki hasn't sold enough to be considered 'successful' by Capcom and a sequel is extremely unlikely. Too bad.

However, if Viewtiful Joe didn't make money why did it get ported to PS2, get a sequel and a fighter spin off???



 

jammy2211 on 28 January 2009
NJ5 said:
jammy2211 said:

 Most of that seems to be from Okami stuff albeit there was Z&W articles too.

However, if a Capcom vice president at doing something I can't remember the title of says Zack and Wiki made a loss, then it did. If he says it sold below expectations, then it did.

 The past is history, maybe the 'sources' people are citing were incorrect, maybe it was misinterpreted, or maybe just Capcom spin to impress investors goodness knows. The one thing I think you can be sure of is that a Capcom Rep isn't going to say a game was a failure (It made a loss...) if it wasn't. Investors don't like that, yanno?

EDIT: He's the second Capcom guy to say this now btw... after the guy talking about the Dead Rising Port. Capcom being honest or CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE WIIIIII DUN DUN DDEEEEER.

So how do you explain this link saying Okami "didn't make money" while Mr. Svensson says it was "moderately successful"?

No one is making conspiracy theories here, just trying to figure out what's right and wrong amidst all the contradictory information.

 

I'd imagine the first guy is talking about the investment lost from the PS2 version, and Sven is refering to the comparitive success of bringing an already finished product to the Wii, for much less cost. They are two different quotes from different people you know, right?

 Sven said himself, Zack and Wiki made a loss. It amazes me people on here seem to want to debate two quotes from Capcom employees within the space of a day that say that.

 



Arius Dion on 28 January 2009

The funny thing that kills me is, if they decided to put this game out exclusively on any console I wonder the kind of sales they would receive. And to use this as a "benchmark" or proof that third party games don't sell is utterly ridiculous. A dying genre with a niche art style was expected to sell millions upon millions of units? This without any marketing and a Wii install base less than half of what it is now? And this is the basis for "original games don't sell" Seems like a cop out and a half assed reason to bitch about.



Bet between Slimbeast and Arius Dion about Wii sales 2009:


If the Wii sells less than 20 million in 2009 (as defined by VGC sales between week ending 3d Jan 2009 to week ending 4th Jan 2010) Slimebeast wins and get to control Arius Dion's sig for 1 month.

If the Wii sells more than 20 million in 2009 (as defined above) Arius Dion wins and gets to control Slimebeast's sig for 1 month.

Around the Network
mike_intellivision on 28 January 2009
nordlead said:
And just so people know, I'm not denying that VGChartz may be overtracking. I just have this strong feeling that Sven just likes to talk without really knowing what he is talking about.

 

We all know that VGChartz is not as accurate on software sales (as it is on hardware) -- especially after a title has been in the marketplace for a while. But to be honest, there is no really definitive source of public data for this, unless it is provided by publishers.

I do find some things interesting. A lot of these errors seem to occur with Capcom titles (remember the RE IV Wii controversy). Capcom can't seem to settle on a strategy (or a story). And you have a Senior VP responding on message boards (who just over three years ago was working on the editorial side of Next Gen).

http://www.edge-online.com/features/christian-svensson

http://stars.ign.com/objects/142/14219704.html

I wonder what its stock prices are doing? I would be dumping my Capcom stock (if I had any).

 

Mike from Morgantown

 

 



      


I am Mario.


I like to jump around, and would lead a fairly serene and aimless existence if it weren't for my friends always getting into trouble. I love to help out, even when it puts me at risk. I seem to make friends with people who just can't stay out of trouble.

Wii Friend Code: 1624 6601 1126 1492

NNID: Mike_INTV
Viper1 on 28 January 2009
jammy2211 said:
NJ5 said:
jammy2211 said:

 Most of that seems to be from Okami stuff albeit there was Z&W articles too.

However, if a Capcom vice president at doing something I can't remember the title of says Zack and Wiki made a loss, then it did. If he says it sold below expectations, then it did.

 The past is history, maybe the 'sources' people are citing were incorrect, maybe it was misinterpreted, or maybe just Capcom spin to impress investors goodness knows. The one thing I think you can be sure of is that a Capcom Rep isn't going to say a game was a failure (It made a loss...) if it wasn't. Investors don't like that, yanno?

EDIT: He's the second Capcom guy to say this now btw... after the guy talking about the Dead Rising Port. Capcom being honest or CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE WIIIIII DUN DUN DDEEEEER.

So how do you explain this link saying Okami "didn't make money" while Mr. Svensson says it was "moderately successful"?

No one is making conspiracy theories here, just trying to figure out what's right and wrong amidst all the contradictory information.

 

I'd imagine the first guy is talking about the investment lost from the PS2 version, and Sven is refering to the comparitive success of bringing an already finished product to the Wii, for much less cost. They are two different quotes from different people you know, right?

 Sven said himself, Zack and Wiki made a loss. It amazes me people on here seem to want to debate two quotes from Capcom employees within the space of a day that say that.

 

Who was the other employee and in what official capacity did he make the statement and do you have a link?

 



The rEVOLution is not being televised

thetonestarr on 28 January 2009
jammy2211 said:
Why are people trying to suggest Sven would be lying or making up figures?

 

Because Capcom's own reported figures contradict what Sven's been saying.



 SW-5120-1900-6153

jammy2211 on 28 January 2009
Arius Dion said:
The funny thing that kills me is, if they decided to put this game out exclusively on any console I wonder the kind of sales they would receive. And to use this as a "benchmark" or proof that third party games don't sell is utterly ridiculous. A dying genre with a niche art style was expected to sell millions upon millions of units? This without any marketing and a Wii install base less than half of what it is now? And this is the basis for "original games don't sell" Seems like a cop out and a half assed reason to bitch about.

 It does always make me smile inside when people call the game a nishe project which couldn't possibly sell! and then suggest Capcom didn't do enough to market it. Marketing isn't cheap, and marketing a nishe project is never going to happen for a company on the scale of Capcom.

 I don't think anyone has suggest this as a benchmark for Wii third party sales or anything. More just interesting comparing it to VGChartz sales and drives home a bit of realism in my opinion, not all Wii projects are going to make money, it's not as cheap safe investment as it's made out to be etc.

 



Rhonin the wizard on 28 January 2009
Star Scream said:
Found this quote from Sven:

"Lastly, Okami Wii is not on track to outsell the PS2 version. The worldwide Okami Wii number might get to the US Okami PS2 number at some point though. "

Ouch, that's harsh...

According to this as of March 2007 the PS2 version sold 270,000 units. And from Capcom's financial report for the first half of fiscal year ending March 31, 2009, the Wii version sold 300,000 units.