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

Forums - Sales Discussion - Japan First Day Sales 12/10 (Tales of Graces and other games)

c0rd on 12 December 2009
mibuokami said:
Gosh why is there so much anarchy over the first day sale of game when the data can and often have proven themselve to be incorrect and adjusted at the week-end tally.

At least wait for the first week of data to come in before everyone goes off the deep end!

I didn't know that ever happened. How often are we talking about, here?



Around the Network
Majin-Tenshinhan on 12 December 2009
c0rd said:
mibuokami said:
Gosh why is there so much anarchy over the first day sale of game when the data can and often have proven themselve to be incorrect and adjusted at the week-end tally.

At least wait for the first week of data to come in before everyone goes off the deep end!

I didn't know that ever happened. How often are we talking about, here?

I'm not sure of first-day sales, but I remember MadWorld and The Conduit being quite adjusted very shortly after their releases. Of course, that wasn't Japan sales.



kopstudent89 on 12 December 2009

Japanese sales are much more accurate because there are already 3 major trackers there that cover Japan weekly



mibuokami on 12 December 2009
c0rd said:
mibuokami said:
Gosh why is there so much anarchy over the first day sale of game when the data can and often have proven themselve to be incorrect and adjusted at the week-end tally.

At least wait for the first week of data to come in before everyone goes off the deep end!

I didn't know that ever happened. How often are we talking about, here?

We've seen cases where the initial sale was was more than the weekly sale and in some cases the number simply did not add up. I'm pretty sure either The Source or IoI explained that numbers can be adjusted throughout the week as more data is collected.




jarrod on 12 December 2009
trestres said:
The Source said devs get more revenue/unit when working on the HD consoles. That's my source, that's The Source.

Because MSRPs are higher, not because Nintendo's royalties are.



Around the Network
mrstickball on 12 December 2009
jarrod said:
trestres said:
The Source said devs get more revenue/unit when working on the HD consoles. That's my source, that's The Source.

Because MSRPs are higher, not because Nintendo's royalties are.

Actually....

As far as I've seen (and I'll need to find the source), Nintendo's royalties are higher in relation to the MSRP than Sony and Microsoft. In essence, Nintendo charges the same royalties for a $50 MSRP game than what Sony does for a $60 MSRP game (and Microsoft charges less than either for the same $60 game).

I'll have to find the source. But at any rate, the major reason is as stated - that extra $10 goes to the developers/publishers, and not one of the Big 3.

*edit*

Really interesting royalty information: Nintendo charged $31 per game between cart & royalty during the N64 era versus just $10.50 for Sony and the PS1. Of course, this has changed considerably, but its very interesting nontheless.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2003/08/01/346319/index.htm



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Torillian on 12 December 2009
jarrod said:
trestres said:
The Source said devs get more revenue/unit when working on the HD consoles. That's my source, that's The Source.

Because MSRPs are higher, not because Nintendo's royalties are.

I did read somewhere a developer mentioning how Nintendo charges the most royalties, and this isn't specific to Nintendo but the market leader always charges more because it's assumed you'll get more sales on their console than you could otherwise.  Would be difficult for me to find the source though.



...

jarrod on 12 December 2009
mrstickball said:
jarrod said:
trestres said:
The Source said devs g et more revenue/unit when working on the HD consoles. That's my source, that's The Source.

Because MSRPs are higher, not because Nintendo's royalties are.

Actually....

As far as I've seen (and I'll need to find the source), Nintendo's royalties are higher in relation to the MSRP than Sony and Microsoft. In essence, Nintendo charges the same royalties for a $50 MSRP game than what Sony does for a $60 MSRP game (and Microsoft charges less than either for the same $60 game).

I'll have to find the source. But at any rate, the major reason is as stated - that extra $10 goes to the developers/publishers, and not one of the Big 3.

That's doesn't actually contradict what I said.  Royalty take on the 3 is pretty much consistent (likely $8-10 per unit, scaled less for budget tiers), but 360/PS3 allow for higher MSRPs (supposedly due to higher overhead costs for HD R&D).   



jarrod on 12 December 2009
Torillian said:
jarrod said:
trestres said:
The Source said devs get more revenue/unit when working on the HD consoles. That's my source, that's The Source.

Because MSRPs are higher, not because Nintendo's royalties are.

I did read somewhere a developer mentioning how Nintendo charges the most royalties, and this isn't specific to Nintendo but the market leader always charges more because it's assumed you'll get more sales on their console than you could otherwise.  Would be difficult for me to find the source though.

You're likely thinking that NIS quote, but that's in regards to DS vs PSP.  In which case, there are material costs in play (optical vs rom).