-
A small post regarding transcribing source, especially twitter. Please make sure to read the thread here.
-
⭐ Install Base Badges ⭐
Install Base introduces its brand-new Badge system. Check out the details here!
-
📰Sales Design Gazette: A Video Game Sales Magazine #001📰
Check out the first release of Sales Design Gazette: A Video Game Sales Magazine at the thread here!
Circana (NPD) August 2023: #1 Madden #2 Armored Core VI: Fires of Rubicon ; PS5 #1 Units (Up YOY) + Revenue, XBS #2 Units + Revenue
At the end of the day, like Aostia said, it isn't a big deal. They don't really need to reach that elusive goal to make the PS5 a very big success.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Yeah, there's not much more to read into it than that, something hasn't panned out. It's not 100% what it could be, but we know it's something. And the reason why they'd bother despite the strength of the platform could quite simply be that they want to avoid downgrading an ambitious forecast.
I'd almost give credence to the idea that, with new Nintendo hardware thought to be incoming some time in 2024, they want to get as many PS5s into as many homes as they can while Switch is at a momentary weakness in hardware adoption relative to that massive #1 streak it had for 3+ years. If Sony believes they were caught on the back foot with the arrival of Switch and Nintendo is launching new hardware in a position of strength rather than weakness, they would rather have PS5s in homes so they can sell them Portals to offer a portable gaming experience rather than have their consumers enticed by a competitor's platform offering (and thus getting potentially less of their software dollars). So in essence, it could also potentially be as simple as SIE trying to diminish a competitor's appeal and prevent multi-homing as much as possible by getting as much of their addressable market now while the getting is good.
They expected demand to carry out well in to 2023 @ $500 but that didn't happen. But this is normal in console cycle, eventually people who were willing to pay $500 will be less as time goes by. Sony had to cut price by bigger amount in previous gens to move consoles in 3rd year.
When they increased the price in August 2022, there was massive pent-up demand, every single console was sold immediately. That was a form of surge pricing, just like what Tesla did when they increased prices post covid.
Once that pent up demand was fulfilled after about 7 months, they started doing price promotions to keep demand up, which is what you SHOULD do once pent up demand is fulfilled.
This is basic economics.
It'll be like Switch 2018. Analysts going crazy because Nintendo didn't reach that very high 20M bar. And when they did the next year, nobody cared anymore.
Price increase had nothing to do with demand.
Of course it did. Yes, it was done because of currency fluctuations (and maybe component inflation), but would Sony have done it if PS5s were not selling out? I dont believe so.
Even in the US with the extremely strong dollar at the time, they did the forced bundles to extract more money from this pent-up demand.
Did Microsoft increase the price because Xbox was selling out too?
They also did the forced bundles with Forza on the Series X, so yes.
And according the the leaked emails, they didnt raise prices in Europe because they wanted a PR win.
I am not sure I follow you, so tell me which part of my reasoning you disagree with :
Sony/MS sold their new consoles at a loss at launch
-> because of COVID and high demand these platforms suffered from shortages, especially the PS5 and Series X
-> to reduce the loss per unit sold, Sony offered its PS5 through bundles (Ratchet, HFW, GoW)
-> they eventually increased the price of the PS5 except in the US where Xbox remains competitive
-> Xbox discussed whether they should follow a similar strategy but decided the PR win was worth the loss in money
-> they introduced the Forza bundle, same strategy as Sony before
-> they eventually increased the price of Xbox in some territories
-> As supply increased, Sony was able to sell the PS5 to a large number of customers through the unbundled models.
Price increased in Europe and not in USA where Series X faced the biggest supply problems so no. And high demand being reason for Sony strategy is based on nothing, it didn't happen before with sell out consoles and there was no reason happen now just a few months before PS5 production goes up a lot.
I agree with most of that except:
They did not increase price in US because the dollar appreciated massively/was stronger than the euro around that time, but even there they did forced bundles to improve margins.
Once pent up demand is fulfilled, they were forced to unbundle or to discount the bundles, like we saw with the GOW bundle.
Post automatically merged:
Forcing a 560$ bundle with Forza is a (hidden) price hike, especially when most of your consumers are getting that game with Gamepass anyway.
That’s why I said I can’t wait for the battle of October. That’s going to be an extremely interesting month lol.
Will it though? Its really just mario vs spider-man
So it will probably be PS5 > Switch > Xbox in units
To be fair Mario v Spider-Man is pretty interesting.
I expect mario to easily outsell it. I don’t think it will move as many consoles though
It will be Mario vs Spidey and Mario OLED vs PS5 discount i suppose.
??? They increased the price not because of pent up demand. They increase it because they want to rack more benjamins. There is no correlation between demand and the price hike. Especially when US which is the bulk of its sales does not receive any price increase there. While the rest of the world suffer the price hike.
I will use Indonesia for this case:
Literally 3 months ago. PS5 still cost 10.5m IDR= around 680 bucks. Fast forward now, PS5 have drop to 6.7m IDR= 430 bucks.
There is no scenario where Sony does not do such aggressive price cut unless the demand is slowing down more than their estimation.
In the end though, even if PS5 failed to hit that 25m. I don't think there is a single reason for Sony to panic considering how absurdly high that goal is except maybe seeing some of their stock price falling due to them unable to hit the goal they set themselves.
PS5 simply have set themselves on very strong position for this current gen and there is nothing Xbox can do to come close to it anymore this gen.
It will be:
Mario without digital at $60 vs. Spiderman with digital at $70
Plus
Spiderman launch effect vs. Mario OLED model, Switch MK8 bundle and Switch Lite ACNH bundle.
So I think both could go either way.
in "chart" numbers Spiderman will destroy mario lol
as you listed it costs 10 bucks more and will include digital: no story here
when companies will release PR numbers/financial meetings numbers it could go differently
maybe
Wonder definitely won't have as big of an opening as Tears of the Kingdom or Scarlet/Violet, but I can easily see it sitting right under those two games as the 3rd biggest Nintendo launch ever.
i would normally agree, but i disagree
SMBW has alot going for it that a 10mil FW sell thru could be possible. i see 6mil as the floor and 10mil as the upper limit but still doable. that said SMBW couldhave the biggest op quarter of all time thanks to OCt and holiday launch (exclusive record)
Wonder has everything going for it to be a massive MASSIVE seller.
Great reception of Mario movie, the big Q3 game, mario (duh!), huge install base that still buy games regularly and engage with the console, plenty of hype overall.
Idk if it will surpass TOTK month a half of 18m units but its doing 7m+ (and i can see it surpassing that, who knows, maybe 10m FW? but i guess mario is more about the huge legs + potential Switch 2 upgrade/sales) at least on release plus stupid amount of legs because of all the aforementioned reasons
Great reception of Mario movie, the big Q3 game, mario (duh!), huge install base that still buy games regularly and engage with the console, plenty of hype overall.
Idk if it will surpass TOTK month a half of 18m units but its doing 7m+ (and i can see it surpassing that, who knows, maybe 10m FW? but i guess mario is more about the huge legs + potential Switch 2 upgrade/sales) at least on release plus stupid amount of legs because of all the aforementioned reasons
Wonder isn't gonna have a 10m opening so chances are low
If it's 8 million, isn't that higher than anything else besides Zelda and Poke S/V? That is still something to annouce right? Or only if it's record breaking it's worth it?
All i could find is that Odyssey sold 1.1m in 5 days in US and 511k in 3 days in Japan, can i assume similar sales from euope to japan? let's say 500k and another 400k from other regions... say 2.5m first week
Granted, there was like 8-9m of switch at the time which is a massive attach rate.
- Pronouns
- he/him
Nintendo PR have only been if they match or improve the previous local or WW record. It can happen they decide to change how they report it and they do it with every 6/8m+ WW or 2.5+m Japan seller but that would be a surprise.
They announced back then the 3 day sellthrough for Super Mario Odyssey, which was 2M.
Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora is easily the most interesting game this Q4 sales-wise for me.
I'm seeing very little buzz for the game, but it's a huge budget title based on the wildly successful film franchise (and it's not like I saw tons of buzz for Avatar 2 before it came out and again did well over two billion)
I'm seeing very little buzz for the game, but it's a huge budget title based on the wildly successful film franchise (and it's not like I saw tons of buzz for Avatar 2 before it came out and again did well over two billion)
- Pronouns
- he/him
New Super Mario Bros Wii is still the biggest launch ever for Mario, it sold 10.5M units in it’s first quarter.
3D Mario only surpassed 2D Mario once, with Odyssey
- Pronouns
- he/him
hey Super Mario 3D World beat NSMBU on the Wii U lol (and it was close on the 3DS)
There will be no fight whatsoever, Spider-Man will confortably take the NPD #1 spot. No digital for Mario kills any chance it might have.
However, I wouldn't be surprised if it charts higher than SM2 in November or most probably December.
Mario vs Spider-Man + Switch vs PS5 vs Xbox isn’t the only thing I’m looking at in October. I’m also looking at critic scores that month. This is one of those battles that really can initially go one way, BUT end another. Those headlines in the short-term vs the long-term outcome will also be interesting lol.
Fun times ahead.
Fun times ahead.
There was a lot of buzz for Avatar 2. Maybe not in nerd circles dominated with superhero talk or whatever but it was pretty obvious Avatar 2 was going to be a huge success. If not for what happened in China, it would have likely grossed far more than it did as it is. If anything, the narrative surrounding it has been one the most manufactured attempts at forcing an opinion I've seen, with everyone going on about "cultural impact" from a myopic American point of view. Meanwhile the movie clearly had a massive impact across the world, but it seems to most Americans obsessed with consumerism, that means merchandise and memes or something.
As for the game, it'll likely do fine, but they clearly don't get why the Avatar movies were successful in the first place. I don't see the game reaching its potential. Avatar is essentially classic fantasy. Outsider learning a new way of life (power fantasy and discovery), a new vibrant world (sense of wonder), taking down clear bad guys who are destroying an old way of life (anti-imperialism), boy meets girl (romance heavy) etc. It's those old tropes but pulled off excellently through great direction. The game basically has one of these things, and does it in one of the most boring ways it seems like.
They put you in the shoes of an actual Na'vi, and the world doesn't feel as beautiful or as inspiring as the film world. There's not going to be any sense of discovery here. They needed to go the human to Avatar route again, or ideally, put us behind the eyes of a young Na'vi (talking like a 16 or 17 year old). On top of that, the protagonist legit doesn't even feel like Na'vi. It's pretty clear Na'vi take inspiration from various tribes, and there is a mish-mash of influence in their writing. It's a delicate balance of strength and vulnerability and very different sensibilities than modern people, which the Avatar movies mostly pull off. Meanwhile the protagonist of the game legit sounds like some modern white woman I've seen in numerous other games; one dimensional badass basically. I fully expect the writing to be crap in that department. These writers aren't going to pull off a character like Neytiri and that is obvious.
It doesn't hit the same vibes at all. An Avatar game done properly would be much bigger than whatever Frontiers of Pandora will end up as. Much like Hogwarts Legacy, I don't see this making the most of the IP from a quality standpoint, but unlike Hogwarts Legacy, I don't see it realizing the sales potential. Hogwarts still got the core idea right (student at Hogwarts investigating some kind of mystery/issue). It just lacked in execution with certain things and the writing/storytelling was weak.
Frontiers of Pandora would be like if Hogwarts Legacy had you play as a 25 years old non-student who is investigating Hogwarts. Sure, it'd be successful, but you already screwed up the foundation. That's what the Avatar game feels like. They messed up the core of the game. There's no salvaging that, and if anything, Avatar much more than an IP like Harry Potter, has an uphill battle with the core gaming audience.