-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Media Create Sales: Week 44, 2018 (Oct 29 - Nov 04)
- Thread starter Chris1964
- Start date
The main difference is that Nintendo is asking people to pay for something people used to get for free. ALso, cut the crap with your passive aggressive tone. No one is being "foolish" here, we're just discussing. Is it possible to have a cordial discussion even if we disagree?
And Sony are asking people to pay for something that used to be free. Huh? Have you thought this through?
I'm sure the online subscription has impacted Splatoon 2 to a degree. But it's not to the point that I get the gloom being presented. Its still going to cross 4m and there is not that many Switch's out there. To maintain > 50% attach rate was never going to happen.
Ever green doesn't mean "will never see lower sales ever"
Ever green doesn't mean "will never see lower sales ever"
The PSN was free when the PS4 released? I genuinely didn't know. I never owned a playstation.
I think the line of thinking that zakatana and co use is that since the Switch had a year and change of free online before it became premium then that is worse than say the PS4/Xbox One which were premium right from launch because... well I don't quite get it but yeah that's what it is. I think.
Edit: beaten lol.
Hang in there, Dark Souls! What is undead may never die! May thine legs be strong enough to convince Namco to release DS2 on switch soon!
No gloom on my side. I said from the first page that the game was still selling well and would continue to do so in 2019. But I also said it lost some steam, and that the paid online could explain that in some ways.
Thanks, but it lacks more recent data
That's the kind of numbers I was thinking about.
It's not a concern yet (if it had maintained a 30% attach rate that would have meant 25k additional sales) but if it's a trend that continues until its final LTD is reached, it might cost anywhere between a few hundreds thousands to one million sales.
Nintendo probably get much more money by having a paid online worldwide but that might be a shame for Splatoon 2 final numbers.
It's not unealthy nor misplaced to point out a small slowdown trend to what is one of the biggest IP in gaming and a game we expect to break the all time top 10 in Japan.
Now with the evergrowing Switch install base that might end up above 20M, even a 15-20% attach rate for the remaining 15M hardware sales would put it at >5M retail so no doom and gloom there.
PSN used to be free. It's not on the PS4.
It used to be free to play online on the Switch. It's not anymore.
I'm not seeing a huge difference here, except that the Switch online plan costs a lot less than PSN...
No, its was there from day 1 on PS4. It was (and still is) free on PS3 and Vita. But yeah, they didnt add it to the PS4 later on like Switch did with the Switch. It was however known very early on that this would happen.
I kinda love that the Japanese market is consolidating itself around two main platforms thanks to Sony and Nintendo moving to a single platform each.
I imagine it's great for developers.
I imagine it's great for developers.
From a customer point of view there's a huge difference, you're asking someone to pay for something that was free for one and half a year on a hardware and games he already owned VS paying for a service on a new hardware and games he didn't own before.
The end result might look the same at first glance but they're not similar at all, it's like if you were used to drive on a road with your car for free but suddenly you have to pay for it VS a new "shiny" paid road being open.
Now I'm not talking about pricepoint, quality of service or if it's a good thing or not, that's not the topic.
To be fair, this is how free trials work. They're free until they're over.
I'm sure it's effecting online-centric games to an extent, as any paywall will, but I don't think Nintendo should be too concerned about Splatoon here. It's still selling great.
Then I stick to what I said. Something that was free on day 1 is now behind a paywall, a year and a half after; I do not think that it compares with a PS3/PS$ situation. The fact that the service is cheap helps, the fact that it is very underwhelming does not help.
I hope we'll eventually get the numbers regarding the proportion of subscribers. My anecdotal experience playing Splatoon 2 is that the user base has significantly shrink, and this is consistent with the numerous report of players being increasingly matched with people from other regions, which used to rarely happen before.
Switch is entering holiday mode. Many evergreen games are increasing their sales. FighterZ is also increasing which bodes well to repeat a similar performance to XenoVerse 2 (similarly for FIFA).
If Switch would have a big holiday season, I can totally see Neko Tomo approaching 100k units.
Correlation =/= causation
I agree that the drop is suspect BUT there are many factors to consider at the same time. New games released, for example. Also, we must look at also how other games kept performing at the same time.
If Switch would have a big holiday season, I can totally see Neko Tomo approaching 100k units.
Correlation =/= causation
I agree that the drop is suspect BUT there are many factors to consider at the same time. New games released, for example. Also, we must look at also how other games kept performing at the same time.
so Did Sony and Microsoft when they made their own paywall, so what is the point of that logic line?
Considering Smash and Poke coming hard. I had hard time seeing 3ds title doing any good in terms of legs there. Switch and all its bundle is so going to take all spotlight.
Wait for the next batch of rumors about the next monster hunter game
I'm not convinced.
I just think the audience for Mario Kart is bigger and more casual. Switch has appeal beyond the WiiU. Splatoon 2 is more saturated. Mario Kart has higher ceiling.
Mario Kart being good at local multi is part of the higher ceiling.
I would need evidence to deconvolute saturation to show the effect of paid online. For example, increase in used copies suddenly appearing.
It was said from the Day1 of the Switch announce.
Online would be behind a paywall, and Nintendo gave us 1 year of Free online. Also the 1 year free become 1 year and half.
They didn't made this stealthly and you just wak up one morning with SUDDENLY a paying wall. It was announced since the beggining.
Mass market users don't check videogames news on internet or Nintendo Direct, they might have heard of it but it's not like Nintendo run billboards or TV ads to say it (rightfully so) and everyone had multiple occasions to remember it.
I'm not sure how Nintendo warned users exactly, especially for those playing online games as the date got closer, but the end result is what it is, they put themselves between a rock and hard place and there was no ideal way to handle that.
It's pointed out on the box of any game with online, and mentioned on the eshop page for any game with online. I'm sure it caught some people off guard but Nintendo did a pretty good job of letting people know the online was a free trial. I'd say it was handled pretty well in the end.
But this wasn't.a surprise. We knew this was coming before the switch launched. It's not like anyone was bamboozled here. Nintendo gave you a paid service for free for close to two years.
The ps4 launched with paid online. The ps3 was free. There were a ton of ps3 ports released on the ps4 that required paid online. The same games that were free to play online on the ps3. There's not as much of a difference as you think.
And according to you this won't be an issue for yet to be released games since we never got to play those online for free. Right?
Huh? I was constantly matched with Japanese people when I played when online was free. I think that's always been common. My anecdotal evidence vs yours
They made plenty of PSAs about Online having a cost and it says on the back of the case of online enabled games. so yeah they was plenty of warning.
People didn't used to buy Splatoon 2 because they bought a Switch. They bought the system so they could play games like Splatoon 2. NSO being the main cause for the drop would only make sense if Switch overall HW and SW numbers were down, but as far as we can see the baseline has remained steady throughout the year.
I think I've outlined as much as possible what could be the outlook of a casual not informed videogame consumer, there are details to add here and there which alleviate or not the problem but it still stands.
I imagine it's the case for games being released from now but since when did they do that? Did Splatoon 2 / Mario Kart 8D had that right from their release? Was it added to later shipments as we got closer to the start of paid online? If so when? And what iconography did they use?
I remember DS/WII games having the odd red "Nintendo Wifi connection" logo in front of the box when it had paid DLC, what did they use this time?
Less of a problem for sure but still one regardless, talking about potential future buyers of let's say Animal Crossing it's not a stretch to think that some may not be aware yet that they will have to pay for online subscription when they didn't have to on previous entries, it's an additional cost they will have to go through on top of the hardware/game, they might even think they're fine with the mobile entry even if it's a lesser experience.
Once again don't make this post bigger than it is, I'm trying to look at the big picture and how that might slightly affect sales of Nintendo big evergreen titles.
Erm... I had to look for the info for like 30s before finding it, it's there it's not hidden but it's not like your average consumer will look at everything that's written in typo 6 at the bottom left of the box.
Mind you're linking a western box so it's not really relevant and might be entirely different on the japanese one.
I imagine it's the case for games being released from now but since when did they do that? Did Splatoon 2 / Mario Kart 8D had that right from their release? Was it added to later shipments as we got closer to the start of paid online? If so when? And what iconography did they use?
I remember DS/WII games having the odd red "Nintendo Wifi connection" logo in front of the box when it had paid DLC, what did they use this time?
Less of a problem for sure but still one regardless, talking about potential future buyers of let's say Animal Crossing it's not a stretch to think that some may not be aware yet that they will have to pay for online subscription when they didn't have to on previous entries, it's an additional cost they will have to go through on top of the hardware/game, they might even think they're fine with the mobile entry even if it's a lesser experience.
Once again don't make this post bigger than it is, I'm trying to look at the big picture and how that might slightly affect sales of Nintendo big evergreen titles.
Erm... I had to look for the info for like 30s before finding it, it's there it's not hidden but it's not like your average consumer will look at everything that's written in typo 6 at the bottom left of the box.
Mind you're linking a western box so it's not really relevant and might be entirely different on the japanese one.
All online games from launch have the memo in the back that a sub will eventually be required. The eshop gives this message and has done so since launch as well.
There had been several announcements of this both on Switch News (on console) and via email for Nintendo accounts.
And to be honest, no one cares if this service now costs a few dollars. The only "concerned" people I met here at era and some other niche gaming forums. Its just a non-issue for the mainstream.
In hindsight, I feel like keeping basic online functionality free would have made a lot of sense for a device like the Switch. Especially if they want the kids market. More expensive device + more expensive games + online subscription adds up for the kids that only wanna play Pokémon.
Told you this was just a port and would not sell. HA
Edit : I'm surprised they didn't try a promo "buy Pokemon get 6 months of free NSO"
They probably think the low price does not make the sub a hurdle
Nintendo is not capable of providing anything other than the most basic online functionalities. It those are free, they can't charge on anything. Nobody subscribe for free NES games.
Must say that I didn't see coming the Switch bump, but I assume it's partly due to the holiday on the 3rd ?
Don't see things holding up next week but it'll go back up in furious force for Pokémon's week.
Don't see things holding up next week but it'll go back up in furious force for Pokémon's week.
Isn't online an incentive for Pokemon ?
Of course it would make even more sense for smash...
The Pokemon and Smash bundles include 3 months of free NSO.
And it might not be? i can't read Japanese, so i can't really say. also it's in a big off colored box. so it brings attention to your eye.
but at the end of the day this is moot. we're gonna feel how we feel and it'll play out how it plays out.
I mean we literally just had confirmation that more people bought a year long subscription than they projected when they started the online, so it's not really doing anything to them in the long run. As long as more and more desirable evergreens remain online, it's a matter of wearing down the stragglers.
Let's Go has very limited online features compared to previous entries in the series, so it be strange to have a bundle with NSO, especially when Splatoon 2 and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe are already on the market.
OK, i thought the online experience would be meaty with Let's go, I didn't pay attention cause I've never been into Pokemon. My bad !
Hard to imagine both Spiderman and Black Ops IV have over 100K digitally already.