How many titles actually sell a million plus units in a given year?

#121DBPanterAPosted 12/13/2012 10:49:10 PM
Phantom_Nook posted...
Xeeh_Bitz posted...
Gamestop didn't really start until 1994..


Because nobody sold games before Gamestop came into existence.


Funcoland says hello! Google/wiki them. They were GameStop before GameStop bought them out, and were around in the 1980s. Yes, I realize your above comment is sarcastic. People need to understand there will always be a used market. Simple as that.
---
NNID: Minny612
3DS FC: 5155-2933-9036
#122shadestreetPosted 12/13/2012 10:51:51 PM
Gamestop didn't really start until 1994..

I will ignore for a moment that every videostore was selling used games since NES. I will also ignore that despite your claim "babbages was just a small store in Texas in 1984", every moderately sized city had the equivalent of a babbages by 1990, just under a different name (mine actually, in bum-**** ohio actually was a Babbages, others saw Software Etc, Electronics Boutique, etc). Let us put that aside.

Because you are admitting at least by 1994 Gamestop "started" - so I ask you this, if you acknowledge that at least 19 years ago used games were prevelant, how exactly do you stand by the thesis that used game sales are killing the industry - is it just a long, slow, cruel death? One that is so slow, that Nintendo racked up like 200 billion in cash reservers during that time? That the number of publishers grew exponential? That there are more games released in the past 5 years than the past 20?
#123DBPanterAPosted 12/13/2012 10:57:37 PM
sejan12 posted...
It just seems like a bad business strategy for a game to only hit a profit after one or two million sales.


After 100 posts, here is your answer:

http://www.vgchartz.com/yearly/2012/Global/

56 games so far in 2012. This includes counting games that are cross platform and have sold 1 millions units on each console.

However, the 1 million mark is not the point of profit for many games. Rockstar's Max Payne 3 needed to sell 4 million to break even in 2012, it sold 2.59 million copies. With Rockstar sitting on GTA 5 and how everyone expects it to be the best thing since sliced bread, you are looking at another situation where a game developer needs to produce, or the doors will close.

In fact, Ubisoft just announced that AC:3 sold 7 million copies, and I bet they needed to get close to that number to hit profit (ever wonder how much money they spent on advertising?).

Activision and CoD: BLOPS 2: The day they announced they hit US $1 billion, their stock price fell on Wall Street. Think about that for a second. . .
---
NNID: Minny612
3DS FC: 5155-2933-9036
#124Xeeh_BitzPosted 12/13/2012 10:57:41 PM
Phantom_Nook posted...
Xeeh_Bitz posted...
Gamestop didn't really start until 1994..


Because nobody sold games before Gamestop came into existence.


Not on a mainstream retail level, no
---
To be fair, the bible has more plot holes than ME3. I wouldn't be listening either - Pies12
#125FayeLadyPosted 12/13/2012 10:58:47 PM
Reznik00 posted...
FayeLady posted...
Reznik00 posted...
Baha05 posted...
Reznik00 posted...






Then its really just as simple as making a game people will want to play longer than a week? Add some replay value to the campaign, add a multiplayer mode, add a loyalty program/stuffed animal so people will want to buy your games new. Keep your customer happy and at best you have a sale for your next game and at worst you have kept the current game off the used shelf.

Keep in mind the only ones who complain about used games sales tend to be the large publisher houses. EA, Activision, and Ubisoft are getting killed by used game sales but companies like Atlus, NISA and XSEED are doing fine? Its because the latter companies go out of their way to do things to keep their customer happy. Does it mean you never see their games on the used shelf? Of course not. But they are a rarity compared to the yearly releases that come out of Ubi/EA/Activision.


I do agree with that, the larger companies just expect you to blindly purchase their product as the holy grail, but they also have much larger dev teams.
The bolded part though sounds like an admission that used sales do in fact have an impact on companies.


I have never implied they did not. The do have an impact on sales, Any rival good will have an impact on sales. The used version of Sonic Racing has an impact on the new version and vice versa. It doest stop there, the 360 version of the same game has an effect on it as well, as do other racing games on the market. Anything that can sway a customers money from spending on a given product will have an effect on its sales.

Where we seem to disagree is that you think thats enough to blame used sales, I think its something that each publisher needs to address in their own way, and for the most part they have done so. Its just that the those that have not seem to whine the loudest.
---
If I support the game company, then I won't be supporting the blank DVD business.
#126Reznik00Posted 12/13/2012 11:03:45 PM
FayeLady posted...
Reznik00 posted...
FayeLady posted...
Reznik00 posted...
Baha05 posted...
Reznik00 posted...





.



I have never implied they did not. The do have an impact on sales, Any rival good will have an impact on sales. The used version of Sonic Racing has an impact on the new version and vice versa. It doest stop there, the 360 version of the same game has an effect on it as well, as do other racing games on the market. Anything that can sway a customers money from spending on a given product will have an effect on its sales.

Where we seem to disagree is that you think thats enough to blame used sales, I think its something that each publisher needs to address in their own way, and for the most part they have done so. Its just that the those that have not seem to whine the loudest.

Not so much that it's enough to blame sales, but rather include them in a bigger pie cut, so to speak. And that is a good argument that I am happy to agree with. Why can't people talk through something like this instead of trolling?
---
Hello Misinformed Zombie Fodder!
#127Reznik00Posted 12/13/2012 11:05:50 PM
No I don't think rentals are bad
No I don't think used games are bad
No I don't think GS should go out of business ( though you won't find me there)
And I don't know how trustworthy NeoGaf is, but here is a list from 2006-today of studios that have closed :

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=459131

Some I know, most I don't...but the ones I know made damn good games.
---
Hello Misinformed Zombie Fodder!
#128DBPanterAPosted 12/13/2012 11:07:43 PM
shadestreet posted...
Granted I am being borderline douche in using my penchant for expensive timepieces to drive the point home, but I think you are also in the wrong for dismissing anyone who cannot buy videogames with reckless abandon as "needing a job".

Paying 60 dollars for a videogame when you are a college student is tough. Paying 60 dollars as a single parent to make your child happy at Christmas is tough. This is not an inexpensive hobby, and if you remove the ability of resale, the market would act accordingly, just like it would in any other product - iPad, watch, car, house.

What would happen in this completely implausible scenario where resale of games is essentially nothing at all - I had a long response written detailing but just deleted - the market would play out and in the end developers would take fewer risks as consumers rarely make "splurge" purchases, prices would fall, etc, you should be able to think this through so I won't waste time typing.


I see where you are going with your thought process, and I do agree with the notion of "get a job" may be a bit much. However, one thing that has been brought up in this thread without directly mentioning it is that the video game industry is an industry predicated on making money. It is not cheap, I bought NES games in the 80's for US $50, so the prices today don't seem bad.

However, this is entertainment, pure and simple. Video games are not a necessity, just like going to the movies, going to a concert, a sporting event, vacation, etc. If the cost of games is an issue, I feel people need to reassess their personal decisions and what exactly is important in their lives. I honestly picked up a second job simply for my "video game" funds so I don't have to worry about dropping money with ease (no credit card debt, pay my bills, etc.). I enjoy games, but I also do not spend money recklessly and save for things I want that are not necessities (such as video games). I understand that there are those that are struggling, but I will always say if it is important, find ways to fund your entertainment, and if not, find other ways to be entertained.
---
NNID: Minny612
3DS FC: 5155-2933-9036
#129shadestreetPosted 12/13/2012 11:09:23 PM
I work in a buyer/seller environment and when a vendor comes by wanting a sell, I point to his overstocked product on my shelf and say "sorry, everyone is getting it cheaper this way so I have no reason to purchase anymore", that makes for the quality of his product to go down eventually.

And why is his product overstocked? Because they overestimated demand, didn't deliver enough value perception to customer, ignored market feedback, were not price competitive - any number of those and a few more. The market** will speak, and that vendor will likely go out business as punishment for not being better at providing value. End of story.

Same for game publishers. I have no qualms if Capcom takes a financial hit because of the travesty that was RE6. That is an example where a high number of copies were returned (with good reason), Capcom had to answer back by pre-emptive price cuts (20 off less than 6 weeks after release - other games in that time like Borderlands 2 still at full price).

Those games being sold back is not the issue. I had "achievement whore" friends who bought a game, sold it back in a week, and bought another used game frequently. None of this was a problem until achievements came around interestingly enough, but that's the truth. Good or bad, ALL GAMES get traded in long before they should. This is why the new price comes down so much quicker now too.

I don't get it - your logic is, that because of achievements, games are getting returned quicker? Because people only buy games temporarily for achievements? Then resell? If that is true think about it:

Scenario 1 (Reselling allowed) - Your friend buys game at 60, gets his achievements, resells. Guy #2 buys used game. Publisher makes $60, GS makes $50, other publisher may make money from 2 person in the store with chance to get up-sell.

Scenario 2 (no resell) - Your friend doesn't buy game at 60 because he knows he can't resell. Guy #2 buys used game for $60. Publisher makes $60. GS makes 9, other publisher may money from 1 person in the store with chance to get up-sell.

What am I missing?
#130DBPanterAPosted 12/13/2012 11:13:29 PM
Here is an article from the LA times from 2 years ago on the price breakdown on where the $60 goes. . . I know earlier in this thread folks talked about digital, and that's great, but physically making a game is not a huge burden to cost (I do download a lot of games personally).

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/02/anatomy-of-a-60-dollar-video-game.html
---
NNID: Minny612
3DS FC: 5155-2933-9036