These numbers do not include todays numbers, which would make a large difference in the totals. We probably sold 20 PS2s today, 10 XBoxes and 5 GCs. Other stores are probably around that, too.
For software:
Metroid Prime:
1: 3121
2: 2135
3: 2556
Resident Evil: Zero
1: 638
2: 418
3: 575
Splinter Cell:
1: 1777
2: 1316
3: 1560
Ghost Recon:
1: 1255
2: 1164
3: 1340
Mech Assault:
1: 1121
2: 1053
3: 1057
Unreal Championship:
1: 1172
2: 1028
3: 981
Halo:
1: 2635
2: 2687
3: 2784
NFL 2K3 (XBox):
1: 438
2: 307
3: 356
MGS: Substance:
1: 592
2: 526
3: 560
Shenmue II:
1: 244
2: 203
3: 232
GTA: Vice City:
1: 11210
2: 7496
3: 7587
Shinobi:
1: 470
2: 346
3: 462
Crazy Taxi:
1: 3481
2: 2697
3: 2946
Read the forum for explanations. Data right up to “Black Friday”.
As I’ve said before, I think it is only a matter of time before Nintendo bows out of this race in one way or another-- assuming the conventional “the market can only support two consoles” wisdom is true.
What I found most amusing: how awesome is Metroid Prime? So awesome, it’s solidly outsold by the year-old Halo in 2 of 3 regions in its first week of release!
Standard disclaimers: this is only Best Buy, etc etc etc.
One corollary to that observation-- whichever MS employee had the idea of buying Bungie should be getting the biggest fucking promotion ever right about now. Halo has been absolutely huge for the Xbox. It is a system seller if there ever was one, and for most people, it’s the “only title worth buying”. At least, until Splinter Cell, Live!, and MechAssault were released.
RE: made up numbers. Anything is possible, I guess, but these numbers are consistent with the past TRSTS sales data we’ve seen in the spreadsheets I posted.
I don’t understand people repeating this like a mantra. I’m no economist but there are two points you forget:
the market evolves, the console market is really bigger than it was in the previous generation (I’m talking worldwide) ;
the only question is do they make money, you can be #2 and loosing money, you can be #3 and be profitable, in any market.
The console market is not different from any other. If you believe “there can be only two” then why don’t you believe “no US console can be succesful”?
I would have to say the console market is certainly different from the majority of hardware and media markets. The media is specific to the console hardware - you can’t play a Gamecube game on the Xbox or the PS2, etc. How many competing companies would there be if DVDs or CDs were specific to one company’s players and not universally compatible across all players? The closest analogy to the console market is the PC market - your software only works on one OS (ignoring emulation here).
The revenue issues come up because every console manufacturer has to finance a run-up for their next generation console. They have to take a loss on R&D and production costs for their consoles, which they gain back later through software (at least they hope they do). Sega did not.
Sure, you can be #3 and do that, but if #1 is a guaranteed hit, and #2 has deep pockets that they’ll bleed just to gain market share, it’s not always enough to be profitable. Because you need to start that next gen console going.
Now specifically speaking of Nintendo, I have no idea what their pockets are like. From GBA game sales, I’d imagine they’re in fair shape but that’s just a guess.
Nintendo has something like 7 to 9 billion in cash socked away and they’re profitable with Gamecube and Game Boy Advance. They’re the only hardware maker not taking a loss on their console sales and are selling plenty of games for their own machines which offsets the costs of producing it, unlike Microsoft who have had a lot of trouble selling anything other than Halo under the Microsoft banner. Nintendo’s not going anywhere.
Yeah, I don’t think Nintendo’s going anywhere, but I do wonder if they’re going to make another console? They can’t be happy with Gamecube sales. And while they may not be losing money on the sale of the hardware, I wonder if the cost of marketing the Gamecube is factored in?
I could see Nintendo evolving Gamecube technology into their next generation hand-held. The mini-DVDs are the right size for a hand-held.
They will almost certainly make another console. They’re doing fine with Gamecube worldwide. They don’t look at just the US. With the release of Zelda on the horizon in Japan as well as the debut of Resident Evil 0, the Gamecube is selling at the same rate as the PS2. Check the latest figures if you don’t believe me. http://www.evilavatar.com/EA/News/M42149/ Obviously, it probably won’t last, but the GC has been selling about 15,000 units the past month or so in a week in Japan while the Xbox sold 1,500. Given that there isn’t that big a difference between MS and Nintendo here in the US in weekly sales, the Gamecube is likely to be solidly in second place worldwide come January. It’ll only get better if Zelda ships on time in February.
Doubtful. They’re supposed to be working on a system using N64 tech. Nintendo isn’t dumb. They don’t make the handheld to sell at a loss. They make money on those systems. Why should they take that big a jump from Game Boy Advance when it would make better sense to put in that lighting everyone’s bitching about but costs a lot of money to add? Game Boy has always been a low cost item. They want to get you in for $60-$70 at most and then sell you the games for $30 or more. You can’t do that with Gamecube hardware in there now. In six or seven years, when it’s time for the next-next Game Boy, then yeah.
“They will almost certainly make another console. They’re doing fine with Gamecube worldwide.”
Are they doing fine with third-parties? Are third-parties happy with game sales on the Gamecube? That’s what I would be concerned about if I were Nintendo.
Why would they be concerned, Mark? Have you followed the console industry for the last 15 years? Are you aware of what games sell best on Nintendo consoles? Yes, you guessed it, they’re Nintendo made games. Third parties are mostly fluff unless they create exclusive titles for your system and that takes money from the console maker (usually) for that to happen. Grand Theft Auto III would be on all the consoles if Sony hadn’t bought an exclusive. Third parties are the extra revenue you get for licensing fees and not a whole lot more. To make them into something that sells your system, it takes a lot of money, something Nintendo has, in order to buy them into your system. Capcom hasn’t kept Resident Evil exclusive out of the goodness of their heart.
So Nintendo doesn’t have to worry, because their game production is higher than it’s ever been and the quality is largely consistent with past efforts. This is the company that said they want quality games, not piles of games on their system when N64 launched. They talked about the “Dream Team” of N64 developers. With Gamecube, they’ve loosened up a bit and gotten more third parties involved than ever before. They’re getting a Final Fantasy game and Microsoft is not. That right there says a lot more about the current state of support than any other single title ever could.
But in the end, Nintendo could sell consoles with just their exclusive games on them if they really wanted. No one bought a Gamecube to play Burnout or Madden or Crazy Taxi. They got it to play Metroid Prime, Super Mario Sunshine, Pikmin, Super Smash Brothers Melee or to get Zelda when it arrives. That’s why Nintendo isn’t going anywhere and it’s why the Gamecube won’t be their last console. They sell the system at cost or slightly above to make sure they’re not losing money on the hardware and then they sell piles of games for their own system so they get you coming and going. Read Game Over by David Sheff for insight into why Nintendo isn’t a company you should overlook or dismiss. If Xbox 2 flops, they may even be here long after Microsoft throws in the towel.
Are they doing fine with third-parties? Are third-parties happy with game sales on the Gamecube? That’s what I would be concerned about if I were Nintendo.
A couple data points here
Sega announced they won’t be making any more sports games for GC. Sports games historically sell better than the vast majority of other console titles, based on the TRST data. It is very odd to drop one of the best selling genre of games in my opinion.
based on the TRST data, the median sales figure for all GC games is ~20k units-- which means half of all GC games have sold less than 20k copies to date. That’s profoundly bad, and much worse than Xbox or PS2.
While the Gamecube is for sure running last, their numbers aren’t as bad as they appear once you add them all up. Also helps a little that the Gamecube bundle is actually charging you for the game (39.96 to be exact), while the Xbox bundle is the same price as the Xbox alone. Playstation 2, of course, is making out the best thoug. Since they aren’t bundling at all, they get the console sale and most likely a game sale on top of it.
All this talk about Nintendo makes it sound like they’re about to bury all that dough in a booby trapped hole like Oak Island, set fire to their headquarters, commit mass suicide, and destroy the source code.
Dave’s summary is the only one that doesn’t seem to come right from a Microsoft FUD manual.
I understand that there are a lot of knowledgeable people here who know the industry, but the speculation about Nintendo just packing it in and running home to mommy in tears just doesn’t make sense.
Did SEGA actually announce that there wouldn’t be any more sports titles for the Gamecube? Last I heard they were only considering it. Or did someone change the meaning of “data point” to “something I just made up”?
All this talk about Nintendo makes it sound like they’re about to bury all that dough in a booby trapped hole like Oak Island, set fire to their headquarters, commit mass suicide, and destroy the source code.
At the risk of being modded -1 offtopic, I just found a really cool link that debunks the whole Oak Island thing pretty convincingly.
Dave’s summary is the only one that doesn’t seem to come right from a Microsoft FUD manual.
Yeah, his comes from a Nintendo FUD manual.
The difference between me and Dave is this: while I think the Xbox should “win” on technical merits, I’m perfectly willing to criticize what I don’t like about the system, or the games. Ever heard Dave say anything even vaguely negative about his pet console? I don’t think so.
