It seems like everyone here really hated Nintendo's E3 this year. I sure am glad I like Smash Brothers and Mario Party cause I really enjoyed the Direct. Seems like the general public is excited about the Switch lineup at least.
The point it that games sell hardware. Nice well marketed hardware sells hardware. Perceived winners of conferences don't sell hardware. That's just for shareholders. the press and hardcore enthusiasts.It was bad considering the expectations a lot of us had for their E3. The first half of the year was very quiet for them (unless you were dying for Wii U ports) and a lot of people expected this E3 to really be a big moment to find out what their internal teams have been working on. Not a single internal team project was revealed. They also chose to spend 25 minutes talking about Smash Bros. Most of the press outlets I checked out did not have positive things to say about that. Even Nintendo centric youtube channels were critical.
Most consumers don't even know what E3 is, but they do know what Paladins is? okay
In the lead up prediction threads, I said that all I really cared about this year was Smash, and anything else announced would be icing on the cake. Turns out I liked the icing, but DAMN was that cake satisfying even without it.It seems like everyone here really hated Nintendo's E3 this year. I sure am glad I like Smash Brothers and Mario Party cause I really enjoyed the Direct. Seems like the general public is excited about the Switch lineup at least.
It varied by model (including Pro and X), $150-300 iirc.
This is the second big trade in deal GS did for Switch this year too, the first was back in March timed with the Smash reveal. That was $50 extra on any PS4 or XB1 model traded in towards a Switch.
It was bad considering the expectations a lot of us had for their E3
Eh, meaningless without numbers is different than outright saying it's meaningless.
Yeah, that was the bulk of it undoubtedly. I think the tiers were:The overwhelming lion share that is base PS4 and Xbone S were indeed $250 which is unheard of trade in value and actually represented a $70 PROFIT to the customers on the One S (Target was selling them new for $199 + $20 Giftcard that week). I'm honestly stunned Gamestop didn't sell out of Switches the first day or two of the promotion. I bolted to the store with an old S the first day and fully expected to be turned away due to no stock. I returned the Switch on the spot for full value and bought an X.
Smash is amazing, people are going to be playing it for half a decade. ResetEra is like this bizarro world that always contrasts with what I see offline. The idea that Switch was going to tank after an E3 with Smash Brothers, Mario Party, Pokemon and Fortnite is crazy to me. I think from a market perspective, Nintendo nailed it.In the lead up prediction threads, I said that all I really cared about this year was Smash, and anything else announced would be icing on the cake. Turns out I liked the icing, but DAMN was that cake satisfying even without it.
Man, this is getting weird, the console on the top spot means it sold the most, that alone is not meaningless, it won't tell us much about the numbers sure but it is not meaningless for sure.Not really... Who wins the month is literally meaningless. How much each one sold each month is meaningful.
You can figure out who won the month if you have the numbers, but at that point what is the actual meaning behind who won the month? There is none, you know how each of them sold, you know how each one is performing relative to its own forecast/expectations and history. There is absolutely no meaning to be gleaned from who sold more in any given month.
It is, most definitely, meaningless.
Basically, he's saying the order gives you little indication of whether or not something is doing well. PS4 could sell the most in a month where all 3 consoles do poorly, or it can sell the most in a month where all 3 do amazing. It's not a completely meaningless metric but it doesn't give you any indication on whether or not any of the platforms are doing well or not.Man, this is getting weird, the console on the top spot means it sold the most, that alone is not meaningless, it won't tell us much about the numbers sure but it is not meaningless for sure.
There was widespread disappointment with Nintendo's E3 this year. I'm sure this isn't the first you've heard of this.
Some people seem to be spinning this post E3 sales bump as proof that Nintendo's E3 really wasn't bad. This entire discussion originated from a Gamestop executive saying the Switch got a sales bump after E3. Other retail employees have shown up in this thread to say all the consoles got a sales bump after E3, because that's just what happens with all the media coverage at that time of year.
Man, this is getting weird, the console on the top spot means it sold the most, that alone is not meaningless, it won't tell us much about the numbers sure but it is not meaningless for sure.
Basically, he's saying the order gives you little indication of whether or not something is doing well. PS4 could sell the most in a month where all 3 consoles do poorly, or it can sell the most in a month where all 3 do amazing. It's not a completely meaningless metric but it doesn't give you any indication on whether or not any of the platforms are doing well or not.
It all goes back to how this all started, saying it's meaningless if it's behind PS4 which I disagree with obviously.But what does it matter which console sold the most in any given month in a year? Sure, I'll give you yearly or even quarterly sales comparisons, but comparing individual months between platforms in wildly different places in their lifetimes (and wildly different ways of monetizing their install base) tells you literally nothing.
Well, I guess not literally nothing. It tells you who sold more, yeah. But "who sold more" in a single month is what I'm saying is meaningless. Again (more extraordinarily unreasonable hypotheticals), if Nintendo sold 800k Switches in June and Sony sold 795k PS4s, what exactly does "who sold more" say about those two? Or if Nintendo sells 300k Switches in November and Sony sells 150k PS4s? The comparison between the two is meaningless, the actual numbers are the only things that hold meaning.
It all goes back to how this all started, saying it's meaningless if it's behind PS4 which I disagree with obviously.
obviously, lol
I guess a whole lot of people had inflated expectations then, including shareholders who have dropped the price of their stock a whole lot over the past two weeks.Then it was only bad because of inflated expectations on your behalf rather than on an objective view of everything.
Shareholders don't care about sales?The point it that games sell hardware. Nice well marketed hardware sells hardware. Perceived winners of conferences don't sell hardware. That's just for shareholders. the press and hardcore enthusiasts.
But not a single one of those things was a surprise. Everyone already expected all of those things. Expecting more than that wasn't expecting too much. It was just expecting something beyond the minimum.well there you have it
the reality is they shadow dropped one of the biggest games going right now, detailed their new Pokemon game (a potential 10+ million seller) which is set to release in November, detailed their new Smash game (a potential, let's say, 7+ million seller with 10+ upside) which is set to release in December, and announced a new Mario Party game (potential multi-million seller) which is set to release in October
We're just running in circles by now I think., sure we can drop it.Yes, saying it's behind PS4 is indeed meaningless. Saying it's behind PS4 by X or Y is much more meaningful, as it gives you a frame of reference to determine how the platform is doing overall.
Just saying it's behind PS4 is meaningless because that could just as easily mean it's 1 unit behind or 100,000 units behind. The numbers hold all of the meaning, not the ranking.
EDIT: I have a feeling we're just arguing semantics at this point, I'll drop it.
But not a single one of those things was a surprise. Everyone already expected all of those things. Expecting more than that wasn't expecting too much. It was just expecting something beyond the minimum.
Pretty much, yesI guess a whole lot of people had inflated expectations then, including shareholders who have dropped the price of their stock a whole lot over the past two weeks.
2*0 = 0Doesn't really mean much.
1 doubled = 2.
GameStop is still probably gonna liquidate within the next 5 years. Thankfully to some, unfortunately for others.
There was widespread disappointment with Nintendo's E3 this year. I'm sure this isn't the first you've heard of this.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Also what thread relating to console isn't a disguised doom and gloom thread? (Not all of them are but a lot of them are).If you are going to make a doom and gloom thread about the stock market.. ect.. ect.
Thank you for saying so briefly what I've been trying to say on this forum for weeks now.Smash is amazing, people are going to be playing it for half a decade. ResetEra is like this bizarro world that always contrasts with what I see offline. The idea that Switch was going to tank after an E3 with Smash Brothers, Mario Party, Pokemon and Fortnite is crazy to me. I think from a market perspective, Nintendo nailed it.
They're missing that one big Metroid Prime type game for the message board crowd...but that wont impact their sales much, if any in the long run.
Stock price is almost entirely independent of sales in a given month.
Don't know why people don't understand this.
The point it that games sell hardware. Nice well marketed hardware sells hardware. Perceived winners of conferences don't sell hardware. That's just for shareholders. the press and hardcore enthusiasts.
How can you possibly have taken that from my post? I don't even...
Sigh... stock reflects shareholders faith in company, not consumers.
The thing is that many people have been questioning Nintendo's ability to hit fy18 targets after E3 showing and probably this is why shares dropped. We only learnt about the gamestop sales incease now. If this ends up being a broader phenomenon also reflected in the NPD reports then shares value will probably go up again.Consumers buying products is what makes companies successful. Selling stock right before a sales spike doesn't seem like the mark of a very shrewd investor, especially when those units sold are going to translate into more software sales down the line.
Sure, there's a lot of potential reasons why shareholders might sell stock when a company is experiencing a sales boom (the most obvious being a failure to predict or react to that sales boom), but acting as if that's the default state of things, and therefore needs no specific reason or explanation, seems odd, to say the least.
Widespread amongst people who watch E3. Giant Bomb called it a disaster. Arlo, a popular Nintendo YouTuber said it was not good. Other sites had negative takes.Yes really. If you are refering to here and a few places on the internet as widespread E3 disappointment that will affect millions of users and their perception of the hardware I can't take you seriously.
Widespread has to actually tangibly mean widespread throughout the consumer base.
Widespread amongst people who watch E3. Giant Bomb called it a disaster. Arlo, a popular Nintendo YouTuber said it was not good. Other sites had negative takes.
Nintendo's own YouTube video for the E3 Direct has a 5-1 like to dislike ratio. You may think that's not that bad, but their previous Direct has a 22-1 like to dislike ratio, to give you some perspective.
Widespread amongst people who watch E3. Giant Bomb called it a disaster. Arlo, a popular Nintendo YouTuber said it was not good. Other sites had negative takes.
Nintendo's own YouTube video for the E3 Direct has a 5-1 like to dislike ratio. You may think that's not that bad, but their previous Direct has a 22-1 like to dislike ratio, to give you some perspective.
Dude if you don't know how the stock market works then just don't post.Consumers buying products is what makes companies successful. Selling stock right before a sales spike doesn't seem like the mark of a very shrewd investor, especially when those units sold are going to translate into more software sales down the line.
Sure, there's a lot of potential reasons why shareholders might sell stock when a company is experiencing a sales boom (the most obvious being a failure to predict or react to that sales boom), but acting as if that's the default state of things, and therefore needs no specific reason or explanation, seems odd, to say the least.
Widespread amongst people who watch E3. Giant Bomb called it a disaster. Arlo, a popular Nintendo YouTuber said it was not good. Other sites had negative takes.
Nintendo's own YouTube video for the E3 Direct has a 5-1 like to dislike ratio. You may think that's not that bad, but their previous Direct has a 22-1 like to dislike ratio, to give you some perspective.
Are youtubers really a good example to use here? If so, then we have to factor in the vast amount of popular youtubers that loved the Direct right?Widespread amongst people who watch E3. Giant Bomb called it a disaster. Arlo, a popular Nintendo YouTuber said it was not good. Other sites had negative takes.
Nintendo's own YouTube video for the E3 Direct has a 5-1 like to dislike ratio. You may think that's not that bad, but their previous Direct has a 22-1 like to dislike ratio, to give you some perspective.
Are youtubers really a good example to use here? If so, then we have to factor in the vast amount of popular youtubers that loved the Direct right?
These people seem pretty happy, many of them have well over 100k followers.