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

Forums - Sales Discussion - Nintendo Wii owners, it's time to acknowledge third party failures

Khuutra said:
BMaker11 said:
Khuutra said:
BMaker11 said:

Nope, it would just break even

Right, yes, I misspoke. But at that rate, if it takes one million sold in order to break even, then they get $16 per copy sold, right?

I already see where you're going with this. SMG was an "expensive" game. Ninty makes $16 per game. Now imagine some of the other games. They probably cost less to make, so at $16 a unit, it would take less to make profit.

Thing is though, with your hypothetical, if 1st party Nintendo is only making $16 on their games, what would 3rd parties make on a game per unit on the Wii, $2?

Now, now, don't skip ahead of me, that's not what I'm doing. Nintendo undoubtedly makes more than third parties. But let's take that $16 and do something interesting with it.

We can pretend that HD console third parties pay licensing fees low enough that they make the same amount per unit sold as Nintendo does - they don't, not even close, but we're going to pretend they do. Let's say, in this world where Nintendo gets $16 per copy of Super Mario Galaxy, that HD 3rd parties get the same amount.

Now, is this fair? Or, at least, if it's unfair, is it unfair in favor of the HD consoles?

It's unfair because your hypothetical is just fallicious. We know HD 3rd party games make less money per unit than an in-house Nintendo game. Hell, they make less per unit than a Sony/M$ game. It's apples and oranges. What you should be comparing is 3rd party Wii vs 3rd party HD

Edit: I have an exam that I have to leave for right now

 



Around the Network
BMaker11 said:
Khuutra said:

Now, now, don't skip ahead of me, that's not what I'm doing. Nintendo undoubtedly makes more than third parties. But let's take that $16 and do something interesting with it.

We can pretend that HD console third parties pay licensing fees low enough that they make the same amount per unit sold as Nintendo does - they don't, not even close, but we're going to pretend they do. Let's say, in this world where Nintendo gets $16 per copy of Super Mario Galaxy, that HD 3rd parties get the same amount.

Now, is this fair? Or, at least, if it's unfair, is it unfair in favor of the HD consoles?

It's unfair because your hypothetical is just fallicious. We know HD 3rd party games make less money per unit than an in-house Nintendo game. Hell, they make less per unit than a Sony/M$ game. It's apples and oranges. What you should be comparing is 3rd party Wii vs 3rd party HD

It's not apples and oranges. The only question is how much it takes to be profitable.

Can I say HD third parties make as much as Nintendo per unit sold? I know it's not true: I said it's not true. I'm trying to make a point that assumes HD console owners make more money than you think they do.

Can I assume this sixteen dollars, since it means fewer copies would need to be sold for HD third parties to turn a profit?



Khuutra said:
While he's away, is there any chance anyone can find me the production budgets of Metal Gear Solid 4 or Killzone 2? Ad budgets would be aces, but I don't need them to prove this point.

If anybody's got any idea, just stick 'em on my wall.

 

 

I can't give you concrete numbers, but I've heard that MGS4 was atleast $45 million and I've heard everything between $60 million and $100 million for KZ2.



All right, BMaker, I'll see your messages whenever we're both back.

M-T, I think you probably see where I'm going with this.



Doesn't the red letter icon on the left of this thread just mean that it's popular? There are many other threads that stay red even though there are no new posts in them I haven't read.



Around the Network
wfz said:
Doesn't the red letter icon on the left of this thread just mean that it's popular? There are many other threads that stay red even though there are no new posts in them I haven't read.

There's some kind of phantom post - new pages always start a post early, and they're blank. I don't know what it means, but I suspect voodoo.



Khuutra said:

All right, BMaker, I'll see your messages whenever we're both back.

M-T, I think you probably see where I'm going with this.


Yeah. Yeah, I think I do.

Zlejedi said:
nintendo_fanboy said:
Zlejedi said:
RolStoppable said:
Zlejedi said:
mike_intellivision said:
This is why Rol is unstoppable!

For those who do not understand, people have to defend every time a Wii game does not sell -- but the same is not said for PS3 and Xbox 360 releases.

Mike from Morgantown

Maybe that's becouse Wii fanatics like to wave the flag that it outsells PS3 and X360 combined and whenever third party developer release annual results all those Wii fanatics are always crying they lose money becouse they release on HD systems.

But somehow when a game comparable to what is available on HD consoles comes and all dust settles on the sales it fails to reach any serious numbers unless it is collection of minigames or music game.

If Wii is so amazing 3rd party core game platform then why has CoD 5 WaW sold 3 times less than PS3 version - platform with less than half userbase.

That's easy to explain. The demographics who are interested in FPS games are much more concentrated on the PS3 than on the Wii. This also allowed CoD4 on the PS3 to outsell the bestselling FPS on the PS2 despite an even huger disparity in userbase than PS3 vs. Wii. Now would you doubt that the PS2 was a good platform for third party core games because of this?

Ok so let's ignore COD now let's look at the list - let's remove minigames and casual stuff getting to core games what we see highest is Resident Evil 4 at 1.84M - hardly what one would call amazing third party sales.

The point is Wii can sell tons of minigames, music stuff etc but it cannot sell hardcore game genres better than PS3 or X360 becouse it has much diffrent structure of userbase.

 

You are funny. Resident Evil 4 is the second port of the same game within a few years, and the original can be played on the same console as the port. The game sells 1.84M nonetheless and you call this "hardly amazing"? This is beyond amazing actually, especially considering that it outsold the original version.

And it is one way to look at the sales charts and saying that there isn't anything that sold good, but might I ask, what should have sold good in your opinion? There is no first-tier third party attempt that sold lower than the expectations were, if you ask me.

 

It's beyond amazing that no other core game was able to outsell second rehash of RE for the Wii. And shows how big problem really is. And well actually second bolded part shows also why core gamers don't like Wii I can't even think about anything else than Zelda, Okami or Fire Emblem which I would like to play there at all :)

 

Fine, It seems I was able to prove you wrong and you are even admitting it. If you compare your statement in your latest response with your original statement in your first post I cited (I bolded both) you see the contradiction. But I write it down for you anyways.

You first claimed that hardcore games comparable to the ones on PS360 don't sell on the Wii, but in the end you said that there aren't any of those games anyway on the Wii. This is not the Wii's fault however, it is the one of the third parties. This year this is going to change though since the shift of resources will be remarkable.

 

 

And on a completely different note, I like what you are doing Khuutra

 



Currently Playing: Skies of Arcadia Legends (GC), Dragon Quest IV (DS)

Last Game beaten: The Rub Rabbits(DS)

Khuutra said:
BMaker11 said:
Khuutra said:

Now, now, don't skip ahead of me, that's not what I'm doing. Nintendo undoubtedly makes more than third parties. But let's take that $16 and do something interesting with it.

We can pretend that HD console third parties pay licensing fees low enough that they make the same amount per unit sold as Nintendo does - they don't, not even close, but we're going to pretend they do. Let's say, in this world where Nintendo gets $16 per copy of Super Mario Galaxy, that HD 3rd parties get the same amount.

Now, is this fair? Or, at least, if it's unfair, is it unfair in favor of the HD consoles?

It's unfair because your hypothetical is just fallicious. We know HD 3rd party games make less money per unit than an in-house Nintendo game. Hell, they make less per unit than a Sony/M$ game. It's apples and oranges. What you should be comparing is 3rd party Wii vs 3rd party HD

It's not apples and oranges. The only question is how much it takes to be profitable.

Can I say HD third parties make as much as Nintendo per unit sold? I know it's not true: I said it's not true. I'm trying to make a point that assumes HD console owners make more money than you think they do.

Can I assume this sixteen dollars, since it means fewer copies would need to be sold for HD third parties to turn a profit?

By HD console owners, I'm hoping you mean HD game developers because I mean, how can I (an owner of HD consoles) make more money than I think I do lol.

Anyway, I don't think you can "assume $16 per unit" because we know for a fact that for the most 3rd party games need to sell more than 1st party games in order to turn profit. We know for a fact that HD 3rd party games need to sell more than Wii 3rd party games in order to turn profit.

The main differences here are that 3rd party games have been generally successful on the HD consoles, and not so much on the Wii. So while the HD consoles do in fact need to sell more than the Wii, comparatively, they don't have a problem doing so. Wii 3rd party games I'm sure have some amount that needs to be met to make profit, but I'm sure 250-300k isn't it. Especially because the per unit revenue they make is much less than that of 1st party games

 



Darn...now it's showing up red for me too.

Hmm...it seems Khuutra may have to dumb down his argument even further.



Proud member of the Mega Mario Movement

 

Warrior of Light