Those God of War Asia sales are crazy. Is China doing the heavy lifting do we think?
Horizon is also very high, no?
Those God of War Asia sales are crazy. Is China doing the heavy lifting do we think?
Tbf the Nintendo hack was data from past game archives they saved in some old file, which old partners leaked them if I remember correctly. These recent leaks are stuff planned for the future, which is more deadly.Also the huge breach of Nintendo a few years back, most of which hasn't even leaked out yet! Really goes to show how many corps under-invest in their cybersecurity, which clever hackers are able to exploit time and again.
I do appreciate the deep dive into such an opaque and needlessly-secretive industry though. It's ridiculous how these sales numbers have remained a mystery until now. The games industry should mirror the box office in terms of transparency.
*** Hidden text: cannot be quoted. ***
Interesting to see how much getting added to a subscription impacts games sales.
It is, but I was less surprised by that given that Horizon sold more than double God of War in terms of physical Japan sales.Horizon is also very high, no?
There's an even better slide later that compares the revenue loss in a year 2 title. Its 70% cannibilisation, in year 2!
Imagine the cannibilisation rate at launch.
My prior estimates from Halo/Gears/Forza UK/US sales estimates pointed to a roughly 70-80% cannibilisation rate.
It also seems like PS Studios used HFW and Rift Apart as a test to see how PS+ economics would work.
I respect the CEO of Embracer, Lars Wingefors, for being honest with me in saying that Nintendo is the only one who can pull this off.The way Nintendo manage to sell huge numbers of their games without discounts is something that Sony can't even dream about.
Where did he say that? It's true but it's funny to openly admit to such.I respect the CEO of Embracer, Lars Wingefors, for being honest with me in saying that Nintendo is the only one who can pull this off.
Pavloving gamers to accept that on other systems will be the most difficult challenge of our gaming timesI respect the CEO of Embracer, Lars Wingefors, for being honest with me in saying that Nintendo is the only one who can pull this off.
It's a very casual-leaning IP from what I've seen. Anecdotically I also regularly see far more Aloy cosplays than any other PS character.Horizon truly is Sony's unsung hero. Pretty much the fourth pillar alongside TLoU, Spidey and GoW, yet it's treated like a second-tier franchise by the internet at large.
There's an even better slide later that compares the revenue loss in a year 2 title. Its 70% cannibilisation, in year 2!
Imagine the cannibilisation rate at launch.
My prior estimates from Halo/Gears/Forza UK/US sales estimates pointed to a roughly 70-80% cannibilisation rate.
It also seems like PS Studios used HFW and Rift Apart as a test to see how PS+ economics would work.
Where did he say that? It's true but it's funny to openly admit to such.
Wasn't Aloy in Genshin? That might have helped a littleHorizon is also very high, no?
More evidence to support my public thesis that subscription services like Xbox Game Pass are 1 ) revenue negative to the industry and 2) likely loss-making
My math suggests that you can't not lose money unless it's some long-lived game with ongoing monetization. And even then, it's still revenue-negative vs. an upfront fee.Subscription models for old content and relatively inexpensive or devalued titles seems to be the best route. I have no idea how day one releases that cost $200m+ in dev costs and then require marketing could possibly become a norm with the current size of the industry. Sony has been vocal about not being able to do a gamepass type model. It seemed obvious why though I will admit MS so blatantly lying about gamepasses effect on sales definitely got me off my first thought of this not being a way forward.
MS will be interesting to watch. I really wonder what the gaming department financials look like when not buried with a bunch of other stuff.
That's like respecting some one for telling you the sky is blue.I respect the CEO of Embracer, Lars Wingefors, for being honest with me in saying that Nintendo is the only one who can pull this off.
A few more numbers as of Jan 2020:
Astro Bot VR (1.04m)
Everybody's Golf VR (460k)
Medievil Remake (504k)
Mod edit: we have a thread that goes over this data and doesn't host leaked pictures here
PlayStation's Cumulative Lifetime Weekly Sales Report - Week Ending January 12th, 2020 (PS4 Hardware and Software Units + Bundles)
Thanks to @MegaXZero for writing this out Data as of January 2020 Details Disc Retail, Bundled, and Digital Disc and Bundled sales are as of: SIEA: January 11, 2020 SIEE: January 12, 2020 SIEJA: January 12, 2020 Digital is as of: January 19, 2020 PS4 Install Base as of January 19, 2020...www.installbaseforum.com
I don't know too many CEOs who openly admit a competitor is much better than them. Do you?The gap between Nintendo and other platforms holders is bigger than I thought. Seems like they also made a good call on
how to engage with the subscription model and making sure that the audience knows what type of content you can't expect over there.
That's like respecting some one for telling you the sky is blue.
Not hating but i would consider this to be common knowledge in the industry.
What? BB sold over 7x Astrobot?This perfectly explains why Team Asobi is the studio Sony kept around from JS. They sold more of a VR title than the rest of Japan Studio sold flat screen games with less marketing
With subscription you can attract a consumer that would not pay $70 for a game.My math suggests that you can't not lose money unless it's some long-lived game with ongoing monetization. And even then, it's still revenue-negative vs. an upfront fee.
Game economics are not movie economics. A $10 Netflix subscription needed to out-monetize a $5 Blockbuster rental. Game Pass needs to out-monetize a $70 unit sale. And the platforms make $21 on those sales - equivalent to about 2 months of a GP sub.
What? BB sold over 7x Astrobot?
You have missed all the pointsWith subscription you can attract a consumer that would not pay $70 for a game.
In the end of the day there's no mistery, you need to gain for subscriptions more than your cost to develop and add games to the service.
It's not impossible to do that.
Maybe I did, you said you can't not lose money, how come?You have missed all the points
It's produced by Japan Studio. And the production division responsible was let go.Bloodborne is a Fromsoft game.
Maybe I did, you said you can't not lose money, how come?
Phil Spencer does it all the time and he is actually competing with Nintendo on that platform holder level. No disrespect to Embracer but they aren't really on Nintendo level, so what else would they say ? Of course the company that is platform holders an publishes Mario, Pokemon and co. can do stuff other publishers can't.I don't know too many CEOs who openly admit a competitor is much better than them. Do you?
Ok, I understand your logic and I agree that if a particularly game can sell 5-10 million units and isn't focused on MTX, standalone sales will gave more money than put on a subscription service.Here is some simple envelope math
A developer spends $200 million-$300 million to developing a game that it thinks will sell 5m-10m copies lifetime.
Average play time is about 25 hours. So the total engagement on 5m-10m units is about 125m to 250m hours. Given the 200 to 300 development cost, the development cost per hour equivalent is $1-$3 per hour. 250m in Dec costs and 10 units sold at 25 hours of playtime is about $1 cost per engagement hour.
Now, let’s say that new game comes to market at $70
Users are paying about $2.80 per hour of engagement
Xbox is only charging you $10 a month for Game Pass. They also said they make about another five dollars per month in additional monetization from higher than average engagement. I think the average user plays about 40 hours a month. So $15 per month in Aru divided by 40 hours is less than $.40 per hour of engagement in monetization
So, a AAA title that at the high-end sells 10 million units and costs at the low end $250 million has a higher per hour cost than revenue generated under the subscription model
Without knowing the budgets for Death Stranding, $178 million are certainly a poor numbers for a triple A game.They really wasted something excellent with Evolution Studios. Driveclub pulled weight and is still impressive now. Death Stranding on the PS4 alone did excellently, so a lot of the early assumptions on the early performance leaning toward bad gets washed away. Bloodborne's numbers are good and make the way it's regarded for a port more reasonable compared to the earlier known number at around 2 million or so units. It seems that sales for this generations' software is generally abysmal relative to the market space, competition, and rapidly growing install base. Maybe the tails are decent at least.
They didn't bother localized the game to Japanese, that's what.I'm kind of surprised MLB sold the worst in Japan/Asia.
But the point of this type of service is to attract and keep subscribers securing a recurrent revenue, so you can in an individualized analysis lose money in a X or Y game, but globally your subscription business is turning profits.
Considering the speed of turn around inclusive of establishing the studio in that development period, the fact that the engine was already developed (Decima), the dev team being under 100 people, and the style of game with the use of motion capture/scanning, it seems doubtful that the development costs came close to a conventional release in the triple AAA bracket- this leaving aside Director's Cut and PC release contributions adding to the totals. To top it off, its brought in more than nearly half of PS's other first party PS4 titles in a portion of the time.Without knowing the budgets for Death Stranding, $178 million are certainly a poor numbers for a triple A game.
Here is probably the global bogeyHow? Give me a realisitcs, representative example with math instead of some broad strokes “build a big base of users, like Netflix”
I use the AAA numbers because they are widely known.
Embracer has some pretty good disclosure as an an and AA studio. A pretty good return on investment is about 2X your total investment on a decent game. That’s development cost plus marketing. So if a game made only $50 million in sales, it typically had a total cost of $25 million.
So, again, if a smaller AA game sells 2 million units, with 25 hours of average gameplay that’s 50m hours of engagement. And at a $25 million development cost, that drops the cost per engagement hour to $0.50.
That’s still higher monetization than Xbox.
It's produced by Japan Studio. And the production division responsible was let go.
Look at Aqua's comprehensive PSN list from 2020 on page 1 though, Astrobot sold fewer units than most JP Studio titles digitally: BB, Knack 1-2, Mingol 7, TLG, SOTC, Gravity Rush 1-2, etc. The sales we're seeing here don't vindicate things in the way you're suggesting at all.
My math suggests that you can't not lose money unless it's some long-lived game with ongoing monetization. And even then, it's still revenue-negative vs. an upfront fee.
Game economics are not movie economics. A $10 Netflix subscription needed to out-monetize a $5 Blockbuster rental. Game Pass needs to out-monetize a $70 unit sale. And the platforms make $21 on those sales - equivalent to about 2 months of a GP sub.
Feel like companies outside of Nintendo are still afraid to go whole hog on 2D even though there is a market for it, if contracted.Little Big Planet 3 has some respectable numbers. It is essentially on par with Kirby/Donkey Kong on the Nintendo side which is good for a platformer that doesn't have Mario in it.
The drop from LBP3 to Sackboy is an OOF, though. Dropping the creative part really hurt it.
TLOU1 remaster was sold for lot less per unit on average.
iirc, TLOUR had a ton of bundles early on in the PS4's life.
Worth noting that TLoU Remastered launched with an MSRP 10 dollars lower than the typical PS4 title. The price change came shortly before launch and they ended up issuing refunds for preorders. Additional factor affecting the numbers from the get-go.That was way later ,yes. At the beginning it wasn't. Also, it was heavily bundled too. So, some calling a TLOU 2 a flop sales wise is a bit disingenuous
I respect the CEO of Embracer, Lars Wingefors, for being honest with me in saying that Nintendo is the only one who can pull this off.
Bloodborne is a Fromsoft game.
The numbers don't support that though, Astrobomb isn't exactly a commercial wunderkund looking at these numbers and most other Japan Studio titles (both internal and external) likely outsold it.That doesn’t really matter in context to what I said. In terms of what was salvageable from JS, Team Asobi was the only viable development team. Sony doesn’t get another Bloodborne or Team Ico game regardless of who the producers were on it. The primary development teams are not part of SIE
It's produced by Japan Studio. And the production division responsible was let go.
Look at Aqua's comprehensive PSN list from 2020 on page 1 though, Astrobot sold fewer units than most JP Studio titles digitally: BB, Knack 1-2, Mingol 7, TLG, SOTC, Gravity Rush 1-2, etc. The sales we're seeing here don't vindicate things in the way you're suggesting at all.
This perfectly explains why Team Asobi is the studio Sony kept around from JS. They sold more of a VR title than the rest of Japan Studio sold flat screen games with less marketing
BB is collaborative work between Fromsoft and Japan Studio. Cmon there. I know many love saying JP Studio did nothing but taking away their effort as well is just not the way to go.
The numbers don't support that though, Astrobomb isn't exactly a commercial wunderkund looking at these numbers and most other Japan Studio titles (both internal and external) likely outsold it.
Honestly, until Team Asobi has a traditional release I find this to be a pointless comparison.
Lets be honest, you can call Japan Studios involvement whatever the fuck you want. If BB is the best they could do and that was in collaboration with From who have made tons of games in that style solo, that's not a complement to their necessity.
Then again, people have lots of opinions for this division who imo at least commercially, hadn't done fucking anything to justify their necessity. Granted I wouldn't have closed their doors but that's cause I think strategically me and Sony diverge. Not cause Japan Studios were adequate in their operation. Far from.
I don't give A F on Japan Studio being close down. Because Sony has closed it down and it has lead to many newer studio that provide same experience of IP that Sony has left behind.
I just don't like the act of saying that Japan Studio is just failure company when they certainly has been more successful than whatever Media Molecule has done for years and yet they are still running. We call many of Japan Studio previous release as flop when Japan Studio is one of the reason why Vita keep chugging in Japan. Their release of Soul Sacrifice, Freedom Wars all helped Vita stabilize in Japan when Sony entire dev team abandon the machine and even tried to kill Vita by making its exclusive into PS4 cross platform title.
Japan Studio simply unable to cope with the focus Sony going for which is A Okay. But to diminish everything they have done is just shitty take.
This seems to have answered my question. I guess they have a separate tally for "players" so it appears that the sell-through numbers are actually legit sell-through.I had to look up the difference between net sales and net income since I mix them up sometimes. Basically it is this:
Net sales = gross sales - (returns + allowances + discounts)
Net income = (net sales + other income sources) - all expenses
So the Net Sales figure is not telling us the full picture in terms of profit, but gives us a clear picture for revenue.
Anyways, the data here is pretty valuable, but it is a shame it was obtained in a nefarious manner. I want to know though if the sell-through figure includes free downloads from PSN because I received Uncharted 4 and Bloodborne from PS+ as part of the monthly "free" games. I wonder if they would track that as a "purchase" because I downloaded.
Uncharted 4 was players because they added the game to PS service
Uncharted 4: A Thief's End Has Been Played By Over 37 Million People
A taste for adventurewww.pushsquare.com
The 33 million figure was for Spider-Man 1/Remastered/MM right before the release of the PC Ports : https://blog.playstation.com/2022/06/02/marvels-spider-man-series-is-coming-to-pc/
God Of War was 23M as of March 2022~ from the FY end report when they wanted to boast about how many copies the PC version of the game which launched in Jan 2022 boosted the game's total sales.
So yeah, none of those are 30+ million sellers. Plus there's all the sales figures for older games which never got updated or smaller games which we never got any numbers.
Break-even:
- Major production under license "Spider-Man" - 5M
- Large production "TLOU II" 4M
- Intermediate production "Death Stranding" - 2.5M
- Small production "Ratchet & Clank Rift Appart/Returnal" - 500k-1.5M
On the condition of course of making sales with a price of $40-70.
The problem with Days Gone is that it achieved sales mostly at low prices and late.
For Sony, having a Metacritic of ~70 and a timid start do not allow them to launch a sequel.
Death Stranding has several advantages over Days Gone:
- Japanese game
-Kojima
- Correct start (thanks to the fanbase who are always ready even to buy Kojima's bath water)
- A better metacritic
- Unique universe
Well, I can't give a representative example because the info for gamepass is unknow. Phil Spencer says is profitable, but of course we can't get that as gospel.How? Give me a realisitcs, representative example with math instead of some broad strokes “build a big base of users, like Netflix”
I use the AAA numbers because they are widely known.
Embracer has some pretty good disclosure as an an and AA studio. A pretty good return on investment is about 2X your total investment on a decent game. That’s development cost plus marketing. So if a game made only $50 million in sales, it typically had a total cost of $25 million.
So, again, if a smaller AA game sells 2 million units, with 25 hours of average gameplay that’s 50m hours of engagement. And at a $25 million development cost, that drops the cost per engagement hour to $0.50.
That’s still higher monetization than Xbox.