-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NPD Sales Results For December 2010 [Up5: Some Kinect/Move Data]
- Thread starter EviLore
- Start date
Stumpokapow said:
An even more important point. And this goes directly back in to the same feedback loop I described before. People on GAF often decry shareholder interests: shareholders are shortsighted and don't see the true artistic genius that Microsoft or Sony or whomever is trying to bring forth, or so the argument goes.
The problem is that shareholders aren't just some parasitic entity. The reason they exist is that they gave a gigantic influx of capital to these firms at one point by buying shares. If a company does not wish to be beholden to my personal interests, then don't go public and don't accept my purchase of 1 billion shares of their stock. Once they allow me to do that, though -- they suddenly have enormous quantities of my (and other shareholders') money.
So if you don't want Sony (or Microsoft or whomever) to be beholden to the interests of shareholders, then you should tell Sony or Microsoft to return the money. Just buy up all the shares. The reason they aren't doing that: because they can't realistically afford to. They need that money to fund the Playstation and Xbox. Nintendo needs the money to fund the 3DS, and so forth. So again, I see two moral choices.
1) Accept shareholder investment capital. You now have lots more cash flow to work with, but you also now owe it to your investors to pay attention to their needs. They gave you a whole lot of money, after all. It does not mean you have to bow to every whim, but ignoring them entirely is wrong.
2) Do not accept shareholder investment capital. You get to make all your own choices, but good luck beating the big boys when they have billions of dollars to work with and you don't. It happens, but it's rare: more likely you're lucky to maintain a small clientele. Extremely few private firms become international corporate conglomerates a la Sony.
What is not okay, however, is taking billions of dollars from investors, and then telling them to butt out when they would like a say in the direction of the company. Imagine this scenario: you loan your friend 2,000 dollars. Typically people do this under the assumption that your friend is paying off student loans or getting out of debt in some fashion and requires immediate assistance. If I did that and my friend went and blew it all at a casino, I'd be pissed, and I'd have a right to be pissed. What he did was wrong. Shareholder investment is the same concept writ large.
If you do not like how public firms work -- if you reject the notion of C corporations and S Corporations or even reject the entire concept of incorporation entirely -- then you are essentially rejecting the entire foundation of modern business. I'm not going to say you're wrong, but that's a much bigger discussion that's far outside the scope of this thread.
As it stands, however, this is how every major business works. Including Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, EA, ActivisionBlizzard, Ubisoft, and Take 2. If you reject these principles, you're essentially shaking your fist at "the man" for keeping you down. If you do not reject these principles, then it stands to reason that it is immoral for CEOs to disregard shareholders (since they gave them lots of money), and in turn, it is immoral for studios to ignore CEOs (since the CEOs, in turn, gave the studios lots of money).
If you don't want to be told what to do, then don't borrow money from other people and go it alone.
Gamecocks625
Member
Opiate said:
Excellent explanation. I'd give you a tag but I'm not you.
Celsior said:
The motion plus base has had steady growth, because WSR has had steady sales. Nintendo also included it with the hardware for a while now so the base is pretty big. I think the reason you don't see many motion plus games from third parties is that you don't see many third party Wii games at all.
In a few ways Nintendo has pushed motion plus more than they pushed the balance board. The Wii Remote plus replacing the Wii remote it a big push for it too.
CadetMahoney
Member
hmmm, i'm just wondering if that would've been a "troll-worthy" prediction if it had been said back in mid 2010.Opus Angelorum said:
Megadragon15
Member
Nice stealth edit.CadetMahoney said:
CadetMahoney
Member
It could've been ban-worthy, maybe in the GT5 thread. You never know about these things. As for being trolled I think that would've been pretty much guaranteed. Not many ppl thought two kinect games would each outsell GT5, heck even Kinect was a big underdog with Move seen on equal terms (or more) and now everything is topsy turvy.
Four_Chamber
Member
apana said:
That's even better than Alberto's paraphrase
Jeels said:
NA wise the kinect is a front loaded release while the move could (if sucefull) be compared with a sleeper hit.
The real winner will be the one who have longer legs.
Play and technology wise i still think the move have much more potention. It will all depends on the software.
Megadragon15
Member
This seems like wishful thinking.Tmac said:
_Alkaline_
Member
Tmac said:
Uh....good luck with this.
Megadragon15 said:
Not at all. Explain why them.
Front loaded = Lots of marketing = lots of initial sales (can lead to a long lasting success or not)
Sleeper hit (the way sony vision Move to be) = something that is released with little marketing and due to its quality increase their sales over time due to mouth to mouth buzz. - That's Sony strategy for move, not necessarily what will happen.
The Winner is obviously the one who have longer legs.
Them i posted a personal opinion and stated that. I PERSONALY think move is a better technology. Any problem with that?
_Alkaline_
Member
nvm
Maybe thats how it souded but problem is, i wasnt defending anything, just trying to analise different market approachs. Sony intended to lay low with move release, while MS went for a high profile launch.
Both are valid market approachs and both worked in the past with different products. Noone is a sure hit and only time will tell which company did the right bet with their new product.
Both are valid market approachs and both worked in the past with different products. Noone is a sure hit and only time will tell which company did the right bet with their new product.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Baki said:
That's not really accurate. Our last number is 4.1 Move controllers shipped worldwide. We don't know how it has shipped or sold since then, and since we don't know the average number of controllers people have purchased, we have no idea of knowing the effective install base.
If the average is, for example, 1.5 move controllers per person, then that'd be 2.73 million install base on 4.1 million. At 2.5, that's 1.64 million. Imagine trying to tell Wii sales by number of Wiimotes sold.
Psychotext
Member
Surely the one that sells the most / has the best attach rate is the winner?Tmac said:
I could sell 20 million of something in two months, with 50 million games... and you could sell 5 million over the next 5 years, with 10 million games. What you're selling would have the longer legs, but it wouldn't be more of a success (assuming the same profit margin on both).
_Alkaline_
Member
shinshero said:
I thought Baki said that?
Megadragon15
Member
Maybe shinshero is Baki's alternate?_Alkaline_ said:
Edit: Or what Baki said above
Tmac said:
What is your evidence that the Move is a higher quality product? Other than "I personally think it is."
I can give evidence that it isn't: it's getting clobbered in the market place right now by Kinect. You seem convinced that this is an illusion -- that conusmers are, in essence, being fooled -- but that eventually consumers will wake up and realize their mistake and start buying the "better" product.
I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm asking for you to provide evidence that you're right.
boiled goose
good with gravy
People act as if Sony decided not to advertise and Microsoft decided to advertise and the fact that microsoft decided to do it resulted in the better sales of kinect.
Sony is not stupid. Marketing people determine how much more sales some advertising will get you and then you decide how much to advertise. For kinect it is clear that people at microsoft believed that more advertising would result in much more sales. for move, the people at sony probably determined that much more advertising would have resulted in only marginally better sales. advertising is an investment. companies decide if the investment is worth it or not.
why would advertising for kinect result in more sales than advertising for move? kinect seems different and exciting. move seems like a (maybe improved?) wiimote. the gaming media and developers are equally aware of both devices, so advertising is not affecting them, yet there is much more enthusiasm for kinect.
Sony is not stupid. Marketing people determine how much more sales some advertising will get you and then you decide how much to advertise. For kinect it is clear that people at microsoft believed that more advertising would result in much more sales. for move, the people at sony probably determined that much more advertising would have resulted in only marginally better sales. advertising is an investment. companies decide if the investment is worth it or not.
why would advertising for kinect result in more sales than advertising for move? kinect seems different and exciting. move seems like a (maybe improved?) wiimote. the gaming media and developers are equally aware of both devices, so advertising is not affecting them, yet there is much more enthusiasm for kinect.
_Alkaline_
Member
slade said:
Correct. Brand loyalty is essentially a myth in this industry.
amtentori said:
AFAIK, Sony hasn't revealed how much advertising they spent on Move. Anecdotally, I saw as many ads on TV for Move as I did for Kinect. It wasn't as if Sony didn't advertise the hell out of Move... they did, MS just went a bit further with Kinect on cereal boxes and half racks of pepsi.
jedimike said:
Right. I'm just saying that, given the software sales data, that should hush the people who keep trying to compare Move and Kinect sales apples-to-apples. Some were trying to twist the numbers to their own ends.
_Alkaline_ said:
If your only talking about mainstream audiences, sure.
boiled goose
good with gravy
slade said:
a pretty naive view. ( and subtle trolling) brand name matters. nintendo was not a good brand at the end of the cube era, for that reason they tried to separate Wii from nintendo as much as possible. if sony's next console is the ps4, the associations people have with the playstation brand will matter.
_Alkaline_ said:
Brand loyalty is not a guarantee for success by a longshot, but to say that brand associations dont matter is naive.
why is the DS the 3DS?
why was the ps2 the playstation 2?
why was the snes the super nintendo?
why was the Wii not the nintendo 5?
Brand associations matter, and they can be both positive or negative for different people.
that does not mean that your entire current audience will carry over.
plagiarize
Banned
The famous man picked up the green cup. It was hot.ShockingAlberto said:
plagiarize
Banned
and their advertising was better too.jedimike said:
i doubt it cost them much to get on Oprah and Ellen relatively speaking.
Opiate said:
I clear stated that it was a personal opinion, therefore theres no evidence to proove anything.
Getting clobbered in the market had nothing to do with a product quality. History tells us that a lot of high quality products had poor sales. Sales doesnt means something is good neither is true that a good product will always have good sales.
jonnybryce
Member
Aren't apples being compared to oranges? Microsoft positioned Kinect as a console launch and treated it as such. Sony treats Move like an alternate control scheme for those who want it. I don't think Sony is shocked at their results, they know what they put into this and what Microsoft did differently. If Sony wanted Move to be a bigger hit they would have done a lot more. I feel like it's doing what they want it to - satisfy gamers who want some casual/hardcore motion action and allow PS3 to check off "It only does motion."
Tmac said:
So then, couldn't this argument be made for literally any losing product? Honest question. The Gamecube. Ngage. Walkman MP3 players. The Kin.
Let's say I believe one or all of these is a high quality product. From there, I can say, "As people learn how great it is, things will change." Obviously I can't say that about all these now, as their time has come and passed. I mean saying this during their time.
Of course it has something to do with it. It isn't an absolute correlation, but I would strongly suggest that products people like tend to be purchased more than products people don't. Especially in the entertainment industry, where the "quality" is defined by having fun with something, rather than something more objective and specific (i.e. there is not much wiggle room in what is a quality medicine and what is not).
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Given Sony's marketing lately it was probably a wise choice.amtentori said:
ShockingAlberto
Member
I'm going to go watch Scanners to remind myself how good I have it.apana said: