Video Game Sales Figures

[no.1gamer]

I just don't understand what the market share of your favorite console has to do with anything. Why is everyone bragging about your console of choice's sales #s? I don't care how many Xbox units M$ has sold, the Gamecube is still better!

I mean lets say that Halo 2 is released for the Xbox and sells millions upon millions of copies. Now lets say that Nintendo releases Metroid Prime 2 and only manages to sell 4 copies. I would still rather have Metroid Prime 2. So what if I have 1 of the 4 copies that were made! It will still be a better game!

If all along this console war Nintendo were only able to sell 12 Gamecubes I would still rather have one of these than an Xbox, which has sold several million. So what if I have 1 of only 12 Gamecubes sold?

Obviously these scenarios are ridiculous. But do you see where I'm going with this? Unless you are employed by a video game company or have a sizeable amount of stock in one I don't see how this information is relevant to gamers. I just can't see how your console's market share can give you bragging rights. So I would seriously like to know why you guys keep bringing up this topic. Will you please explain to me what this has to do with anything?

[Tracer1]

<div class=\"smallfont\">I just don't understand what the market share of your favorite console has to do with anything. Why is everyone bragging about your console of choice's sales #s? I don't care how many Xbox units M$ has sold, the Gamecube is still better!

I mean lets say that Halo 2 is released for the Xbox and sells millions upon millions of copies. Now lets say that Nintendo releases Metroid Prime 2 and only manages to sell 4 copies. I would still rather have Metroid Prime 2. So what if I have 1 of the 4 copies that were made! It will still be a better game!

If all along this console war Nintendo were only able to sell 12 Gamecubes I would still rather have one of these than an Xbox, which has sold several million. So what if I have 1 of only 12 Gamecubes sold?

Obviously these scenarios are ridiculous. But do you see where I'm going with this? Unless you are employed by a video game company or have a sizeable amount of stock in one I don't see how this information is relevant to gamers. I just can't see how your console's market share can give you bragging rights. So I would seriously like to know why you guys keep bringing up this topic. Will you please explain to me what this has to do with anything?</div>
It's because... you're in a SYSTEM WARS forum. ;)

[Whaxx]

<div class=\"smallfont\">I just don't understand what the market share of your favorite console has to do with anything. Why is everyone bragging about your console of choice's sales #s? I don't care how many Xbox units M$ has sold, the Gamecube is still better!

I mean lets say that Halo 2 is released for the Xbox and sells millions upon millions of copies. Now lets say that Nintendo releases Metroid Prime 2 and only manages to sell 4 copies. I would still rather have Metroid Prime 2. So what if I have 1 of the 4 copies that were made! It will still be a better game!

If all along this console war Nintendo were only able to sell 12 Gamecubes I would still rather have one of these than an Xbox, which has sold several million. So what if I have 1 of only 12 Gamecubes sold?

Obviously these scenarios are ridiculous. But do you see where I'm going with this? Unless you are employed by a video game company or have a sizeable amount of stock in one I don't see how this information is relevant to gamers. I just can't see how your console's market share can give you bragging rights. So I would seriously like to know why you guys keep bringing up this topic. Will you please explain to me what this has to do with anything?</div>

I agree that sales of games and such are totally irrealivant and they don't change the way the game plays or the way you think about the game, in fact quite a few times when someone posted up a thread about sales, I barked at them saying that saying basically that we're not the ones who should worry about sales, the companies who make the games and the maker of the consoles are.
However, I would Never, ever,ever EVER pick MP2 over Halo 2 :D

[shogun]

Ah, nothing like a sales debate to bring out the most moronic fanboy. It's funny that people bring up XBox vs GC sales as if who's in second is the most important thing ever, yet they will revert back to the whole "sales don't matter" tag whenever someone mentions PS2's huge lead over both of them.

I also noticed that for all the delight the XBox fanboys have in calling GC and PS2 owners sheep, they seem really desperate to avoid having the least popular system...

[The Prince of Darkness]

<div class=\"smallfont\">I just don't understand what the market share of your favorite console has to do with anything. Why is everyone bragging about your console of choice's sales #s? I don't care how many Xbox units M$ has sold, the Gamecube is still better!

I mean lets say that Halo 2 is released for the Xbox and sells millions upon millions of copies. Now lets say that Nintendo releases Metroid Prime 2 and only manages to sell 4 copies. I would still rather have Metroid Prime 2. So what if I have 1 of the 4 copies that were made! It will still be a better game!

If all along this console war Nintendo were only able to sell 12 Gamecubes I would still rather have one of these than an Xbox, which has sold several million. So what if I have 1 of only 12 Gamecubes sold?

Obviously these scenarios are ridiculous. But do you see where I'm going with this? Unless you are employed by a video game company or have a sizeable amount of stock in one I don't see how this information is relevant to gamers. I just can't see how your console's market share can give you bragging rights. So I would seriously like to know why you guys keep bringing up this topic. Will you please explain to me what this has to do with anything?</div>

Sales figures and review scores are concrete. Everything else that we argue about here is purely opinion. There has to be a winner every now and then around here. Btw---Gamecubes are for girls. That is why Nintendo made it look like a cute little purse.

[sjsharky]

<div class=\"smallfont\"><div class=\"smallfont\"></div>
It's because... you're in a SYSTEM WARS forum. ;)</div>

I concur. Maybe you should check out the GC forum, g@mer. Then again, what for, no one else is.

[Spastic Colon Powell]

<div class=\"smallfont\">Ah, nothing like a sales debate to bring out the most moronic fanboy. It's funny that people bring up XBox vs GC sales as if who's in second is the most important thing ever, yet they will revert back to the whole "sales don't matter" tag whenever someone mentions PS2's huge lead over both of them.

I also noticed that for all the delight the XBox fanboys have in calling GC and PS2 owners sheep, they seem really desperate to avoid having the least popular system...</div>


...the pot calling the kettle black methinks....

[trebor]

Sales figures and review scores are concrete. Everything else that we argue about here is purely opinion. There has to be a winner every now and then around here. Btw---Gamecubes are for girls. That is why Nintendo made it look like a cute little purse.

I absolutly agree - sales and review scores are a tangible thing to argue about. Whereas arguing over opinions is totally pointless. That's why I avoid arguments that are completely based on opinions, because they are so subjective.

Also, Xbox's are for horny teenage boys, who's best chance of interacting with hot, jiggly chicks is in a pixelated format.

[The Prince of Darkness]

<div class=\"smallfont\">I absolutly agree - sales and review scores are a tangible thing to argue about. Whereas arguing over opinions is totally pointless. That's why I avoid arguments that are completely based on opinions, because they are so subjective.

Also, Xbox's are for horny teenage boys, who's best chance of interacting with hot, jiggly chicks is in a pixelated format.</div>

I knew it. You always come running when I call the Gamecube a purse. So...whatcha playing...Viewtiful Joe?

[trebor]

I knew it. You always come running when I call the Gamecube a purse. So...whatcha playing...Viewtiful Joe?

Hey...I gotta' be consistant.

I've actually been playing Rebel Strike, for the last week - flawed "on-foot" missions and all. I still love it, despite it's weak points.

I'm one of the few who haven't gotten into Viewtiful Joe - the demo practically gave me seizures with the staple "Capcom crazy crap happening on the screen all the time" graphics. Although, I'm thinking I'll probably have to give it another chance, with all the glowing reviews and praise from the System Wars regulars.

How about you?

[The Prince of Darkness]

<div class=\"smallfont\">Hey...I gotta' be consistant.

I've actually been playing Rebel Strike, for the last week - flawed "on-foot" missions and all. I still love it, despite it's weak points.

I'm one of the few who haven't gotten into Viewtiful Joe - the demo practically gave me seizures with the staple "Capcom crazy crap happening on the screen all the time" graphics. Although, I'm thinking I'll probably have to give it another chance, with all the glowing reviews and praise from the System Wars regulars.

How about you?</div>

Well right now I am alternating between ESPN Hoops and Crimson Skies. Crimson Skies is one of those games that I was not really expecting much from because of the delays, but it is way better than I could have hoped. It seems like the devs are finally realizing that these Xbox games have to play as good as they look because Crimson Skies is a blast(I have yet to even try multiplayer). Then tomorrow I am actually picking up Top Spin, so my free time is shot.

[trebor]

Well right now I am alternating between ESPN Hoops and Crimson Skies. Crimson Skies is one of those games that I was not really expecting much from because of the delays, but it is way better than I could have hoped. It seems like the devs are finally realizing that these Xbox games have to play as good as they look because Crimson Skies is a blast(I have yet to even try multiplayer). Then tomorrow I am actually picking up Top Spin, so my free time is shot.

I'm actually interested in Crimson Skies - it is one of the two Xbox games released this year that has me somewhat reconsidering my stance on the Xbox. KotOR is the other one. But Crimson Skies has me especially interested because of it's Xbox exclusivity.

What with Crimson Skies, KotOR and Deus Ex 2, I'm seriously considering joining the "dark side".

[Tappy_Tibbons]

Man, sales schmales but I will say that sales DO matter. If any company in the WORLD was responsible for Xbox besides MS it would have probably already folded. Of course PS2 has such a drastic lead it will not be caught but at least we have an equally large company fighting and keeping up their standards...and no GC doesn't have a prayer. Sorry, but GC just isn't moving in the right direction as far as MY cash in concerned.

[mass]

I just don't understand what the market share of your favorite console has to do with anything. Why is everyone bragging about your console of choice's sales #s? I don't care how many Xbox units M$ has sold, the Gamecube is still better!

I mean lets say that Halo 2 is released for the Xbox and sells millions upon millions of copies. Now lets say that Nintendo releases Metroid Prime 2 and only manages to sell 4 copies. I would still rather have Metroid Prime 2. So what if I have 1 of the 4 copies that were made! It will still be a better game!

If all along this console war Nintendo were only able to sell 12 Gamecubes I would still rather have one of these than an Xbox, which has sold several million. So what if I have 1 of only 12 Gamecubes sold?

Obviously these scenarios are ridiculous. But do you see where I'm going with this? Unless you are employed by a video game company or have a sizeable amount of stock in one I don't see how this information is relevant to gamers. I just can't see how your console's market share can give you bragging rights. So I would seriously like to know why you guys keep bringing up this topic. Will you please explain to me what this has to do with anything?

Grab a clue, buy one if you have to. If you were considering purchasing an n-gage, wouldn't you want to know if it's selling well or not. Would you plunk over $300, now just $200 for a system that might not be around in a year because the sales were so bad?

If you want a plentiful supply of software and a constant stream of games coming out for that system, I got news for you, you don't buy the system with the lowest installed base and the system where third party titles tank. The DC might have been a great system, but this system did one of the quickest swan dives around and landed head first from a 10 meter diving board into a pool with no water. And why, the hardware didn't sell and what software did sell was all first party.

If you can't sell enough copies of a particular title to cover your various expenses, you have to move on, you have no choice. The problem for nintendo and the gc right now, is simple, it's third party troubles. In NA you combine the lowest installed base with owners who don't favor third parties and you've got a recipe for disaster for those third party companies who wind up not supporting you. Contrast that with the xbox, where popular third party titles like Madden, NBA Street, ETM, Splinter Cell, sold in far greater quantities on the xbox than the cube.

If all nintendo gc owners are going to buy this year is Zelda WW , Mario Party 5, and Mario Kart DD, then where does that leave all the other titles out there. Sega cannot recoup their expenses from Billy Hatcher with only 17,000 in sales from its first month. So a promising new franchise from Sega designed exclusively for the gamecube is tanking. What are the odds that next time, Sega will look to diversify and spread out its risks. The gc gets so few third party exclusives as it is, that those that don't sell well, make it even more difficult for a publisher to bring over an exclusive to the cube.

Sales ultimately drive what software does and doesn't get released. This may come as a big shock to you, but publishers are in this business to make money and barring that, hopefully covering their expenses.

[no.1gamer]

I guess I'm seeing what some of you are trying to explain here. Prince of Darkness gave the best explanation in that sales #s are the only factual verification that can be brought up to defend your console of choice. Even review scores are highly debatable. But it just seems to me that from a gamer's standpoint sales don't really matter.

massimodo:

Well you have once again proved yourself to be an ignorant GCN hater! You did make one logical point about a system not selling at all, therefore being phased out of the market prematurely. Unfortunately this was the only reasonable claim that you made. And this scenario (regardless of your irrational accusations) definitely does not apply to the Gamecube. I can't imagine that it costs very much money for a 3rd party to port a title from the PS2 to the GCN. Despite the fact that the Cube (and yes your beloved Xbox also) sell only a fraction of the copies the PS2 does, it is still worthwhile to do so.

"The gc gets so few third party exclusives as it is…"

It amuses me that you mention 4 Xbox 3rd party games none of which are exclusive. Yes, those 4 games are a HUGE advantage that the Xbox has over the GCN……oh wait……I can play ALL of those games on my Cube! In fact the term "third party exclusive" is almost an oxymoron! Most 3rd party games make their way over to the PC at least and sometimes to another console or 2. I'm reminded of one of your flagship games by the name of Splinter Cell. And the reason that 3rd party titles on the Xbox are "popular" is because that's all the games that the console has. So while I can play all of the multiplatform titles that have on your Xbox, I also have the critically acclaimed 1st and 2nd party titles strait from the big N! Every month I look at the sales chart in my Nintendo Power magazine, and there are at least a dozen 3rd party titles in the top 20. That's not too shabby for 3rd parties considering they must compete against the critically acclaimed Nintendo 1st and 2nd party lineup.

[The Prince of Darkness]

<div class=\"smallfont\">I guess I'm seeing what some of you are trying to explain here. Prince of Darkness gave the best explanation in that sales #s are the only factual verification that can be brought up to defend your console of choice. Even review scores are highly debatable. But it just seems to me that from a gamer's standpoint sales don't really matter.

massimodo:

Well you have once again proved yourself to be an ignorant GCN hater! You did make one logical point about a system not selling at all, therefore being phased out of the market prematurely. Unfortunately this was the only reasonable claim that you made. And this scenario (regardless of your irrational accusations) definitely does not apply to the Gamecube. I can't imagine that it costs very much money for a 3rd party to port a title from the PS2 to the GCN. Despite the fact that the Cube (and yes your beloved Xbox also) sell only a fraction of the copies the PS2 does, it is still worthwhile to do so.

"The gc gets so few third party exclusives as it is…"

It amuses me that you mention 4 Xbox 3rd party games none of which are exclusive. Yes, those 4 games are a HUGE advantage that the Xbox has over the GCN……oh wait……I can play ALL of those games on my Cube! In fact the term "third party exclusive" is almost an oxymoron! Most 3rd party games make their way over to the PC at least and sometimes to another console or 2. I'm reminded of one of your flagship games by the name of Splinter Cell. And the reason that 3rd party titles on the Xbox are "popular" is because that's all the games that the console has. So while I can play all of the multiplatform titles that have on your Xbox, I also have the critically acclaimed 1st and 2nd party titles strait from the big N! Every month I look at the sales chart in my Nintendo Power magazine, and there are at least a dozen 3rd party titles in the top 20. That's not too shabby for 3rd parties considering they must compete against the critically acclaimed Nintendo 1st and 2nd party lineup.</div>

I thought that I would be mr. nice guy and provide a buffer for the awful whipping that you are going to take from Mass here shortly. There are three categories, if you will, of games that can come out on a console. You have your first and second party exclusives. You have your third party multiplatform games. Finally, you have your third party titles that are in fact exclusive to a particular system, so that term is totally legit. I think what Mass is trying to point out to you is that third party multiplat titles sell like ass on the GC, and third party exclusives also sell like ass on the GC. Of course there are a few exceptions like Sonic and Soul Caliber, but in general it is a losing proposition. Take Sega for example---they bring out multiplat for GC and no one buys them, so why on Earth would they want to take a chance with a game like Billy Hatcher and make it exclusive to GC when people will not buy it. They would be better served to put the title out on all three consoles or just on PS2 and Xbox where the game has a chance to sell. Where does that leave the GC you ask? With those same acclaimed first and second party games and that is all. As far as those multiplat titles that he brought up about the Xbox---he just did that to illustrate the point that in general titles that are released on both the Cube and the Box sell better on the Box so why bother releasing them on the Cube.

[Angel, Forsaken]

<div class=\"smallfont\"><div class=\"smallfont\"></div>

Take Sega for example---they bring out multiplat for GC and no one buys them, so why on Earth would they want to take a chance with a game like Billy Hatcher and make it exclusive to GC when people will not buy it. They would be better served to put the title out on all three consoles or just on PS2 and Xbox where the game has a chance to sell. Where does that leave the GC you ask?</div> Please... Sega's games have flopped ten times worse on the Xbox than the Cube simply because Sega has released more high profile games on the Box. PDO was one of the biggest dissapointments of the year as far as sells are concerned.

And as far as Bill Hatcher goes, do you really believe it would sale better on the Xbox? The supieror Vodoo Vince has already been labeled a flop and Blinx was a disaster. These games had new intresting gameplay design's ( that may or may not work ). Billy Hatcher rolls an egg around. So again I ask the question, would Billy Hatcher sell better on the Xbox?

[The Prince of Darkness]

<div class=\"smallfont\"><div class=\"smallfont\"></div> Please... Sega's games have flopped ten times worse on the Xbox than the Cube simply because Sega has released more high profile games on the Box. PDO was one of the biggest dissapointments of the year as far as sells are concerned.

And as far as Bill Hatcher goes, do you really believe it would sale better on the Xbox? The supieror Vodoo Vince has already been labeled a flop and Blinx was a disaster. These games had new intresting gameplay design's ( that may or may not work ). Billy Hatcher rolls an egg around. So again I ask the question, would Billy Hatcher sell better on the Xbox?</div>

I just used Sega to illustrate a point about the futility of third party sales on GC. Really, Sega games are having a hard time selling on all the consoles. I never meant to imply that Billy Hatcher would sell on Xbox. What I meant to imply is that next time Sega would probably opt to release it on all three platforms. The fact that matters most is that when you look at the lists of top sellers and top rentals you notice a trend about games that are released on both Xbox and GC. Generally, they sell better on the Xbox. Hell, the only game that I can recall seeing that did better on the Cube was Soul Caliber 2, and that barely outsold the Xbox version.

[mass]

massimodo:

Well you have once again proved yourself to be an ignorant GCN hater! You did make one logical point about a system not selling at all, therefore being phased out of the market prematurely. Unfortunately this was the only reasonable claim that you made. And this scenario (regardless of your irrational accusations) definitely does not apply to the Gamecube. I can't imagine that it costs very much money for a 3rd party to port a title from the PS2 to the GCN. Despite the fact that the Cube (and yes your beloved Xbox also) sell only a fraction of the copies the PS2 does, it is still worthwhile to do so.

&quot;The gc gets so few third party exclusives as it is…&quot;

It amuses me that you mention 4 Xbox 3rd party games none of which are exclusive. Yes, those 4 games are a HUGE advantage that the Xbox has over the GCN……oh wait……I can play ALL of those games on my Cube! In fact the term &quot;third party exclusive&quot; is almost an oxymoron! Most 3rd party games make their way over to the PC at least and sometimes to another console or 2. I'm reminded of one of your flagship games by the name of Splinter Cell. And the reason that 3rd party titles on the Xbox are &quot;popular&quot; is because that's all the games that the console has. So while I can play all of the multiplatform titles that have on your Xbox, I also have the critically acclaimed 1st and 2nd party titles strait from the big N! Every month I look at the sales chart in my Nintendo Power magazine, and there are at least a dozen 3rd party titles in the top 20. That's not too shabby for 3rd parties considering they must compete against the critically acclaimed Nintendo 1st and 2nd party lineup.

Nintendo Power magazine is your bible for accurate info, apparently. Saints preserve us. You're hopeless.

Oh, clueless one. Aside from "port" costs, publishers also incur marketing costs as well, what do you think, they get those glossy mag ads in EGM for free. There are general and admin costs, there's a lot more involved than you think in putting together a simple port. If a publisher goes, we need so many thousand units of sales to justify putting the game out on the system and their sales guys tell me, based on their laat title on the gc, that they don't have a hope in hell of achieving those sales, then guess what, it gets scrapped.

Atari did pretty well with ETM on the cube, but it trailed the xbox and ps2 quite badly. You'd think they sold enough on the cube to insure Driver 3 coming to the gc. Well, you'd be wrong. Again.

[mass]

&lt;div class=\&quot;smallfont\&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt; Please... Sega's games have flopped ten times worse on the Xbox than the Cube simply because Sega has released more high profile games on the Box. PDO was one of the biggest dissapointments of the year as far as sells are concerned.

And as far as Bill Hatcher goes, do you really believe it would sale better on the Xbox? The supieror Vodoo Vince has already been labeled a flop and Blinx was a disaster. These games had new intresting gameplay design's ( that may or may not work ). Billy Hatcher rolls an egg around. So again I ask the question, would Billy Hatcher sell better on the Xbox?

First off, do you any idea at all as to how many copies PDO has actually sold in North America. You're flapping your gums but nothing's coming out. PDO and this is a while back had sold somewhere in the area of 70k to 90k. These figures might be disappointing, but labelling it a sales flop is just so much twaddle.

You want flop, Sega Soccer Slam for the cube, sales under 20k and then Sega ported to both the xbox and ps2 to recoup costs.

Lastly and not least, and let's the end this whole sega debate. What occurred initially with sega during its transition to a third party software developer is no longer the case now. At first, Sega consisted of various independent development studios such as AM2, Smilebit, Wow, etc. that were allowed to choose their platform of choice. In the case of Smilebit, they chose the xbox and put out PDO, GV, and JSRF. That's all changed and Sega is more centrally controlled now.

So, you're not going to see a lot of Sega xbox exclusive games in the future. Sega exclusive games have tanked on all the platforms. For the ps2, Shinobi and Gungrave didn't exactly light up any charts. Sega will target games for a system exclusively if their games meet their target expectations. On the gc, sonic sells, Billy Hatcher doesn't. Maybe gc owners will discover BH, but I doubt it. So, the good news if you want to call it that, is expect more sonic.

[Gadfly2317]

<div class=\"smallfont\">

So, you're not going to see a lot of Sega xbox exclusive games in the future. Sega exclusive games have tanked on all the platforms. For the ps2, Shinobi and Gungrave didn't exactly light up any charts. Sega will target games for a system exclusively if their games meet their target expectations. On the gc, sonic sells, Billy Hatcher doesn't. Maybe gc owners will discover BH, but I doubt it. So, the good news if you want to call it that, is expect more sonic.</div>


That was interesting info on Sega's business structure, and on how different titles ended up on different systems.

It just doesn't seem like Sega exclusives have tanked on all systesms. Certainly Monkey Ball did well enough on GC to warrant an exclusive sequel. And Sonic has done well (I've never played a sonic game, so I have no idea why.)

And Gamecube was one of the only systems on which Capcom met its sales goals. I don't think its inherently third parties that are the problem on GC. Part of the problem is porting things 9 months later and still expecting any gamer to care (like Hitman II). Released at the same time (actual GOOD games), they do well on the 'Cube (Soul Calibur II). I expect Prince of Persia will do well on 'Cube.

And Gamer is definitely right when he says the third party advantage on Xbox over Cube is that simplly put, there are more Grade A exclusives to compete against on 'Cube. Third Parties are filling in for the weaknesses in the xbox exclusive line-up.

[no.1gamer]

Well mass your information regarding the porting of games is the most ridiculous load of nonsense I've heard in a while.

"publishers also incur marketing costs as well, what do you think, they get those glossy mag ads in EGM for free."

Where exactly does the extra marketing cost come from mass? Please explain this to me. The only difference between an exclusive and multiplatform advertisement is the small logo at the bottom of the page or the end of the commercial. Then you also must realize that by adding that little logo the ad will then be acknowledged by that entire console's user base. So when an Xbox game is ported to the GCN the advertisement essentially becomes half as expensive.

No mass it does NOT cost very much money to port a game over to another console.

"You want flop, Sega Soccer Slam for the cube, sales under 20k and then Sega ported to both the Xbox and ps2 to recoup costs."

I heard Rockstar wasn't happy with the sales of the Grand Theft Auto series on the PS2 (sarcasm) so they decided to port it over to the Xbox. Honestly what does porting a game over to another system have to do with sales? Oh they also ported Splinter Cell to the GCN because they weren't happy with the sales on the Xbox. Which by the way was kind of pathetic for M$ that their #2 flagship game went multiplatform.

If I get board I can find several 3rd party titles that sold far better on the GCN than the Xbox. Just as I was saying that in the top 20 game sales every month for the GCN usually over a dozen or so are 3rd party games. This is a fact mass, it comes strait from Nintendo Power magazine every month. Please stop humiliating yourself by taking cheap shots like "Nintendo Power magazine is your bible!" I never claimed that the editors of this magazine are all-knowing. I merely stated some FACTS that are printed in it. Facts that contradict the false statements you are making in your posts massimodo.

Just because Gamecube owners have something better than average multiplatform titles (unlike Xbots) to buy doesn't mean 3rd party games don't sell. Obviously the 1st and 2nd party games sell more copies however 3rd party developers do just fine.

[mass]

Well mass your information regarding the porting of games is the most ridiculous load of nonsense I've heard in a while.

&quot;publishers also incur marketing costs as well, what do you think, they get those glossy mag ads in EGM for free.&quot;

Where exactly does the extra marketing cost come from mass? Please explain this to me. The only difference between an exclusive and multiplatform advertisement is the small logo at the bottom of the page or the end of the commercial. Then you also must realize that by adding that little logo the ad will then be acknowledged by that entire console's user base. So when an Xbox game is ported to the GCN the advertisement essentially becomes half as expensive.

No mass it does NOT cost very much money to port a game over to another console.

&quot;You want flop, Sega Soccer Slam for the cube, sales under 20k and then Sega ported to both the Xbox and ps2 to recoup costs.&quot;

I heard Rockstar wasn't happy with the sales of the Grand Theft Auto series on the PS2 (sarcasm) so they decided to port it over to the Xbox. Honestly what does porting a game over to another system have to do with sales? Oh they also ported Splinter Cell to the GCN because they weren't happy with the sales on the Xbox. Which by the way was kind of pathetic for M$ that their #2 flagship game went multiplatform.

If I get board I can find several 3rd party titles that sold far better on the GCN than the Xbox. Just as I was saying that in the top 20 game sales every month for the GCN usually over a dozen or so are 3rd party games. This is a fact mass, it comes strait from Nintendo Power magazine every month. Please stop humiliating yourself by taking cheap shots like &quot;Nintendo Power magazine is your bible!&quot; I never claimed that the editors of this magazine are all-knowing. I merely stated some FACTS that are printed in it. Facts that contradict the false statements you are making in your posts massimodo.

Just because Gamecube owners have something better than average multiplatform titles (unlike Xbots) to buy doesn't mean 3rd party games don't sell. Obviously the 1st and 2nd party games sell more copies however 3rd party developers do just fine.

You're too stupid to even discuss things with. Does nintendo power actually list sales figures or just sales rankings? A game can be in the top 10 for a specific system and still sell like total ass.

A port is a title that already exists and is brought over to a system, get it now, or is still too tough. When Eidos released HItman 2 for the cube, they had a specific marketing campaign for the cube version. When Ubisoft released Splinter Cell they began a new hype campaign for the ps2 and cube versions. On the multiplatform side, a company allocates their marketing budgets, they don't go, oh, what's the cost of printing a gamecube logo on a 2 page advert. That's not how it works, you frickin' noob. When a company is putting their ad budget they decide among other factors how many possible nintendo related sites to target for instance if the game in question has a cube version.

As for the porting process, once again, you're clueless. Are you aware that the team responsible for the ps2 port of Splinter Cell was twice as large as the team that created the xbox version. Not all ports are simple processes, especially not when that game was created to run on specific hardware. EA attempted all sorts of fixes for the gamecube version of SSX3 because of the gc controller but wound up having to cut tricks. That type of thing goes on all the time, and costs developers time and money to implement.

Cube-boy, go out there in the real world, work for a while and see how major corporartions work before you talk. Man, you know absolutely nothing about how businesses operate, how they expense and allocate their budgets.

Nintendo Power, oh, vay. :rolleyes:

[mass]

That was interesting info on Sega's business structure, and on how different titles ended up on different systems.

It just doesn't seem like Sega exclusives have tanked on all systesms. Certainly Monkey Ball did well enough on GC to warrant an exclusive sequel. And Sonic has done well (I've never played a sonic game, so I have no idea why.)

And Gamecube was one of the only systems on which Capcom met its sales goals. I don't think its inherently third parties that are the problem on GC. Part of the problem is porting things 9 months later and still expecting any gamer to care (like Hitman II). Released at the same time (actual GOOD games), they do well on the 'Cube (Soul Calibur II). I expect Prince of Persia will do well on 'Cube.

And Gamer is definitely right when he says the third party advantage on Xbox over Cube is that simplly put, there are more Grade A exclusives to compete against on 'Cube. Third Parties are filling in for the weaknesses in the xbox exclusive line-up.

You can't lump Soul Calibur II as a typical nintendo third party title. The inclusion of link affected gc sales greatly. A lot of multiplatform owners probably bought the gc version because of that. I bought a pre-owned gc copy of SC2 because of Link myself.

Splinter Cell sold poorly on the gc, while the ps2 version racked up some solid sales stats. Ubisoft is the publisher, like it is for POP, XIII, and BG&E. If the gc versions stiff, then don't be suprised if Ubisoft re-evaluates their take on gc development, especially if Nintendo announces an early successor to the gc in 2004. As an mp owner I see very little reason to pick up mp titles on the cube. With the xbox version, I don't have to worry about chewing up space on those puny mem cards, the graphics and sound are typically better, load times are comparable, and control issues are usually not a factor against the xbox version versus the gc.

I think you're terrifically niave stating there are more grade A exclusives on the cube to compete against. Like what, Kirby's Air Ride, Wario World, Mario Golf, Mario Party 5, Rebel Strike?! These aren't even Grade B exclusives. Hell, I'd even say that Air Ride and Wario World stink. Zelda WW, F-Zero, and Mario Kart DD are about the only Grade A exclusives I see from Nintendo this year. The quality of nintendo first party is definitely on the decline and its showing up in the sales totals as well. If there's one system out this year that definitely needs the third parties to come in and pick up the slack, it isn't the ps2 or xbox, it's the gamecube. You guys are living in the past. Wake up and smell the coffee.

[trebor]

You can't lump Soul Calibur II as a typical nintendo third party title. The inclusion of link affected gc sales greatly. A lot of multiplatform owners probably bought the gc version because of that. I bought a pre-owned gc copy of SC2 because of Link myself.

I love how N-Haters, like you, write SC2's success on the Gamecube because "it had Link." For one thing, it was one of the few multiplats to be released simultaneously with the other two platforms. For another thing, the Cube was in dire need of a good quality fighting game. Don't write off those factors.

Splinter Cell sold poorly on the gc, while the ps2 version racked up some solid sales stats. Ubisoft is the publisher, like it is for POP, XIII, and BG&amp;E. If the gc versions stiff, then don't be suprised if Ubisoft re-evaluates their take on gc development, especially if Nintendo announces an early successor to the gc in 2004. As an mp owner I see very little reason to pick up mp titles on the cube. With the xbox version, I don't have to worry about chewing up space on those puny mem cards, the graphics and sound are typically better, load times are comparable, and control issues are usually not a factor against the xbox version versus the gc.

One thing about Hitman 2, which was Ubisoft, that I noticed that prevented me from buying it was the memory requirements. Explain to me why Hitman 2 required an entire Memory Card 59 for 1 save? Seriously, I had it in my hands, ready to purchase, and then I noticed that I would have to buy an additional memory card just to play it. Sorry, but, that is just lazy programming.

I think you're terrifically niave stating there are more grade A exclusives on the cube to compete against. Like what, Kirby's Air Ride, Wario World, Mario Golf, Mario Party 5, Rebel Strike?! These aren't even Grade B exclusives. Hell, I'd even say that Air Ride and Wario World stink. Zelda WW, F-Zero, and Mario Kart DD are about the only Grade A exclusives I see from Nintendo this year. The quality of nintendo first party is definitely on the decline and its showing up in the sales totals as well. If there's one system out this year that definitely needs the third parties to come in and pick up the slack, it isn't the ps2 or xbox, it's the gamecube. You guys are living in the past. Wake up and smell the coffee.

Rebel Strike might be flawed, but it is still a great game, IMO. But aside from that, what, praytell, 1st party Micro$oft titles have been released this year? If they have released any Zelda WW or Mario Kart DD calibur titles, why haven't I heard of any of them.

[no.1gamer]

<div class=\"smallfont\">You're too stupid to even discuss things with. Does nintendo power actually list sales figures or just sales rankings? A game can be in the top 10 for a specific system and still sell like total ass.

A port is a title that already exists and is brought over to a system, get it now, or is still too tough. When Eidos released HItman 2 for the cube, they had a specific marketing campaign for the cube version. When Ubisoft released Splinter Cell they began a new hype campaign for the ps2 and cube versions. On the multiplatform side, a company allocates their marketing budgets, they don't go, oh, what's the cost of printing a gamecube logo on a 2 page advert. That's not how it works, you frickin' noob. When a company is putting their ad budget they decide among other factors how many possible nintendo related sites to target for instance if the game in question has a cube version.

As for the porting process, once again, you're clueless. Are you aware that the team responsible for the ps2 port of Splinter Cell was twice as large as the team that created the xbox version. Not all ports are simple processes, especially not when that game was created to run on specific hardware. EA attempted all sorts of fixes for the gamecube version of SSX3 because of the gc controller but wound up having to cut tricks. That type of thing goes on all the time, and costs developers time and money to implement.

Cube-boy, go out there in the real world, work for a while and see how major corporartions work before you talk. Man, you know absolutely nothing about how businesses operate, how they expense and allocate their budgets.

Nintendo Power, oh, vay. :rolleyes:</div>


The marketing applies to every platform the game is sold for. It is a win win situation when a company advertises for a game that appears on multiple platforms. A port does NOT cost very much money to produce. A company does not have to sell many copies to justify the expenses.

If your information about Splinter Cell and SSX3 are true (which I'm assuming you just made up and are stating as a fact), it's still only a fraction of the total development cost. The PS2 port of Splinter Cell came out mere months after the Xbox version. That would explain why so many designers were required to rush it through development.

And as a matter of fact I do work for a very large global company and have a good view of how businesses operate.

Now will you please stop avoiding the topic. You're supposed to be convincing me 3rd party games do not sell well on the Gamecube. Perhaps it's because games such as Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 and Super Monkey Ball 1 and 2 were brought to your attention. Are you trying to sidestep Sega as a 3rd party for the GCN because their games sell better on the GCN than the Xbox? Or how about Capcom’s RE series? Why would Capcom keep RE exclusive to the GCN if they don’t sell? I’m pretty sure that these are all Gamecube exclusives despite the fact that you claim the GCN doesn’t have very many.

[Angel, Forsaken]

<div class=\"smallfont\">First off, do you any idea at all as to how many copies PDO has actually sold in North America. You're flapping your gums but nothing's coming out. PDO and this is a while back had sold somewhere in the area of 70k to 90k. These figures might be disappointing, but labelling it a sales flop is just so much twaddle.

You want flop, Sega Soccer Slam for the cube, sales under 20k and then Sega ported to both the xbox and ps2 to recoup costs.

On the gc, sonic sells, Billy Hatcher doesn't. Maybe gc owners will discover BH, but I doubt it. So, the good news if you want to call it that, is expect more sonic.</div>
1. Intresting you say my gums are flapping, while you can provide no information. " Um... a long time back, I think PDO sold, like 20k to 90k copies... Or something."

Some retailers have dropped the prices of PDO to $9.99. Considering Sega backed up PDO with millions of dollars in advertising, 200,000 units would be considered a flop. Eternal Darkness was considered a huge flop, and it sold nearly 300,000 units.

I twaddle? Your whole post is bullsh!t.

2. Can you provide information on how well Soccer Slam sold on the other consoles? Come back when you can make a point junior. If Slam sold 100,000 copies, or even 50,000 copies on the Xbox, you win on this point. But something tells me you have no idea what your talking about... As usual.

3. At least something sells for Sega on the Cube... Can't really say the same for the Xbox. Oh, except ESPN football, but that'll end when Madden goes live.

But Prince of Darkness is right, Sega games should be selling much better across all platforms. It's a shame really.

[mass]

1. Intresting you say my gums are flapping, while you can provide no information. &quot; Um... a long time back, I think PDO sold, like 20k to 90k copies... Or something.&quot;

Some retailers have dropped the prices of PDO to $9.99. Considering Sega backed up PDO with millions of dollars in advertising, 200,000 units would be considered a flop. Eternal Darkness was considered a huge flop, and it sold nearly 300,000 units.

I twaddle? Your whole post is bullsh!t.

2. Can you provide information on how well Soccer Slam sold on the other consoles? Come back when you can make a point junior. If Slam sold 100,000 copies, or even 50,000 copies on the Xbox, you win on this point. But something tells me you have no idea what your talking about... As usual.

3. At least something sells for Sega on the Cube... Can't really say the same for the Xbox. Oh, except ESPN football, but that'll end when Madden goes live.

But Prince of Darkness is right, Sega games should be selling much better across all platforms. It's a shame really.

Oh, go away, tool time boy. How do you know what sega spent on their advertising budget and how do you know the number of titles sega needed to sell at $50 to break even, so slinging bs that 200k units would be a flop is just so much drivel. You're so full of bs boy, that its running down the cracks of your mouth.

I have no idea what your point is with soccer slam, and I doubt you do, either.

Let's see as xbox haters are always pointing out, less than 10% of xbox owners are online, so what difference does it make whether or not madden goes live. As bugs would have it, what a maroon.

[Zilla Man]

Gamer, if ignorance is bliss, then you must be in heaven right now!

Since you're intent on not listening to what Massi's saying, so now I'll take a (probably futile) shot at enlightening you.

A port does NOT cost very much money to produce. A company does not have to sell many copies to justify the expenses.

And as a matter of fact I do work for a very large global company and have a good view of how businesses operate.

Well it sure as hell can't be a videogame company, because your previous statement is totally wrong. Ports do cost money! It varies according to game and platform but they do. It's not simply a matter of copying the game from one media form to another ala the PC and Mac. Each game usually must be started from scratch or the source code rewritten. This takes time and programmers. Programmers take money. If the game doesn't sell well on a particular platform you can bet your ass that that company's gonna think twice about doing more games on that platform. And if you think I'm just making this up, please read my Vivendi Universal Questions and Comments Thread (especially Trebor's Post). The answers to those questions will be coming straight from the horse's mouth so to speak.

And Massi was right when he mentioned advertising costs. It's not as simple as slapping on a Gamecube logo in an ad simply for the fact that most of Nintendo's hardware sales are purchased by parents for their kids ; you guys are the exception. The PS2 and X-box players/purchasers tend to skew higher. Even Nintendo CEO George Harrison acknowledged that.

Are you trying to sidestep Sega as a 3rd party for the GCN because their games sell better on the GCN than the Xbox? Or how about Capcom’s RE series? Why would Capcom keep RE exclusive to the GCN if they don’t sell? I’m pretty sure that these are all Gamecube exclusives despite the fact that you claim the GCN doesn’t have very many.

God, you're so misinformed...you're deflating your own argument.

The RE remakes were indeed originally announced as Nintendo exclusives. But when the first one and RE:0 fell below sales expectations, Capcom backpedalled and then stated that only RE4 was to be exclusive to the Cube. I'm sure Slade or somebody can provide the link. This is old news. The fact is they didn't sell nearly as well as Capcom or Nintendo expected. That's the main reason Capcom cancelled so many titles and laid off a lot of employees earlier this year: the N gamble didn't quite pay off. That's why you've got RE Outbreak and Survivor appearing on PS2. And don't be surprised if RE:0 and the Remake show up on the Xbox or PS2.

Regarding your "information" from Nintendo Power: I think Massi put it best... A game can be in the top 10 for a specific system and still sell like total ass.

And Nint. Power only includes the top ten for the Cube, not other platforms! Let me put it another way. Suppose M$ puts out an ad regarding Grabbed By The Ghoulies that says, "The #1 Game with the word "Ghoulies" in the title in America!" Well, they'd be right. Unfotunately, that doesn't mean it's #1 in software sales overall. :rolleyes: The Cube has such a small installed user base that what would be considered a "flop" on the PS2, would be a "hit" on the Cube. It's all relative. This is what Mass was saying but you either just didn't get it or chose to ignore him.

And, Gamer, you're also forgetting Nintendo's higher liscensing fee charges and lower residual payments. M$ and Sony are mouch more generous in the way they treat companies that make games for their systems. This is a BIG factor to 3rd party developers.

[dafunkdoc]

Accept it, all of you are full of hot air. You are doing a great job of letting your fanboyism shine. How about some facts people instead of pulling your best from your rear. Sorry I have nothing to add, but there is not a solid point to this thread. Until then.

[Twelve]

<div class=\"smallfont\"><div class=\"smallfont\"></div>
It's because... you're in a SYSTEM WARS forum. ;)</div>

Every now and then, you gotta remind folks of that.

12

[slade]

<div class=\"smallfont\">
The RE remakes were indeed originally announced as Nintendo exclusives. But when the first one and RE:0 fell below sales expectations, Capcom backpedalled and then stated that only RE4 was to be exclusive to the Cube. I'm sure Slade or somebody can provide the link. This is old news. The fact is they didn't sell nearly as well as Capcom or Nintendo expected. That's the main reason Capcom cancelled so many titles and laid off a lot of employees earlier this year: the N gamble didn't quite pay off. That's why you've got RE Outbreak and Survivor appearing on PS2. And don't be surprised if RE:0 and the Remake show up on the Xbox or PS2.
</div>

Actually, the first one never fell below sales expectations. In fact, it did better then Capcom expected it to do. RE0 was about 20 percent below their expectations but it hadn't been released in Europe when they made the announcement.

Of all three consoles, Capcom actually sold the most software on GC; PS2 and X-box sales fell below their expectations. You got me as to why they announced that they would be increasing PS2 and X-box support this quarter. I chalk it up to one of those quirky Japanese decisions only this time, they didn't quite stick to it as X-box still has little to no good titles from them and their best game this quarter went to the GC.

[Gadfly2317]

<div class=\"smallfont\">

Well it sure as hell can't be a videogame company, because your previous statement is totally wrong. Ports do cost money! </div>


Of course it costs money to do a port. But, there is no way it costs anywhere near what it costs to develop the original game in the first place. I don't have time to go quote hunting right now, and I don't remembere who said it, but I've seen interviews with more than one game developer who mentioned that doing ports doesn't cost them that much. So of course, they wouldn't have to sell as much.

Thing is, a lot of gamers own multi-systems, and if a game is really anticipated, a lot of people will get it. It only stands to reason that it will sell a bit poorer when it is released months later on other systems, but that doesn't mean there's some money to be made. When its released way later, the hype is generally over, the game is old news, and a lot of people will have played it already at a friends house if it is a big hit.

On Massi's thing whining about poor sales of Sega Soccer Slam and conveniently ignoring all the other Sega games that sold well on Gamecube: At launch, weren't there something like 50 different soccer titles for the 'cube (exxageration, but there were a lot.) And since when has soccer been a big selling sport in America? And when it hit Europe, what do you think they were buying, realistic soccer, or cartoon soccer? Geesh, Massi's been sounding pretty intelligent in this thread and he has to go and blow it with the stupid Soccer Slam gibe at GC.

[trebor]

Of course it costs money to do a port. But, there is no way it costs anywhere near what it costs to develop the original game in the first place. I don't have time to go quote hunting right now, and I don't remembere who said it, but I've seen interviews with more than one game developer who mentioned that doing ports doesn't cost them that much. So of course, they wouldn't have to sell as much.


I'm glad you brought this point up, because I was going to if nobody else did.

Common sense would dictate that porting a game is far less expensive then developing a game from the ground up. If you factor in things like pre-production planning, writing, voice acting, graphics for packaging, soundtrack, etc. all of which cost serious $$$, being able to reuse those elements is cheaper then how much they initially cost.

So really, in essence, with a port all the cost comes from the programmers instead of the writers, artists, musicians, etc., etc., and the programmers.

Duh.

[Angel, Forsaken]

<div class=\"smallfont\">Oh, go away, tool time boy. How do you know what sega spent on their advertising budget and how do you know the number of titles sega needed to sell at $50 to break even, so slinging bs that 200k units would be a flop is just so much drivel. You're so full of bs boy, that its running down the cracks of your mouth.

I have no idea what your point is with soccer slam, and I doubt you do, either.

Let's see as xbox haters are always pointing out, less than 10% of xbox owners are online, so what difference does it make whether or not madden goes live. As bugs would have it, what a maroon.</div>
1. Point is, you have no idea either. But I can do the math. A PDO commercial running on Comedy Central three to four times a day = a lot of money spent on advertising. Maybe M$ floated the bill, maybe not. Having an argument with you reminds me of The Game... Except he was a little more entertaining.

2. Sigh... Let me put it simply so you can understand, how did Soccer Slam sell on the Xbox?

3. You totally avoided the issue here. Kinda reminds me of someone who just got banned recently... I said nothing about Xbox live moron. I simply stated that when Madden goes Live, ESPN football will lose its egde in the Xbox market. Take a couple of reading and comp classes and come back when your a little more educated junior.

[mass]

On Massi's thing whining about poor sales of Sega Soccer Slam and conveniently ignoring all the other Sega games that sold well on Gamecube: At launch, weren't there something like 50 different soccer titles for the 'cube (exxageration, but there were a lot.) And since when has soccer been a big selling sport in America? And when it hit Europe, what do you think they were buying, realistic soccer, or cartoon soccer? Geesh, Massi's been sounding pretty intelligent in this thread and he has to go and blow it with the stupid Soccer Slam gibe at GC.

Whining?! I used Soccer Slam as an example of a game that was a complete sales flop, no qualifiers needed as opposed to PDO which had disappointing sales relatively speaking, but it's not a game that I consider a sales flop. SSS is the worst selling Sega game on the cube that I've seen, despite the good reviews.

Whether a game is a flop or not can only be accurately determined by the company in question. Every company when they release a product has sales projections and break-even points. Sales the company considers acceptable to justify the creation of the product. Supporting three systems is a burden for many publishers. We have not had a situation where three systems have stuck around this long.

Generally speaking, in the north american market, I expect if a publisher is going to drop a system it'll be the cube. Capcom is a japanese company so, sales in Japan also have to be factored in. RE games sell well in japan. That's a very big series over there. Ubisoft is already favoring the ps2 with its lineup of upcoming games. Both POP and BG&E will debut on the ps2 first. BG&E's new release date schedule, incidentally will have the ps2 version out on Nov. 11, the xbox version on Nov. 18, and the gc version Dec.2.

Now, that you have your shiny new xbox, I have a feeling if you pick the game up, it'll be for the dreaded black and green beast. These type of staggered release dates do nothing to help the nintendo cause, wouldn't you say.

[shogun]

<div class=\"smallfont\"><div class=\"smallfont\"></div>


...the pot calling the kettle black methinks....</div>

About what? You have any evidence that I care about sales/what is popular? You're welcome to dig in the archives as much as you like, but I have a feeling you aren't going to find anything.